Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 706–716 | Cite as

Grain Yield of Durum Wheat as Affected by Waterlogging at Tillering

  • S. PampanaEmail author
  • A. Masoni
  • I. Arduini


Waterlogging is one of the limiting factors influencing durum wheat (Triticum durum L.) production. In this paper we investigated the impact of seven waterlogging durations of 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 40, and 60 days, imposed at 3-leaf and 4-leaf growth stages, on grain yield, grain yield components, straw and root dry weight and nitrogen concentration of grain, straw, and roots of two varieties of durum wheat. Grain yield of both varieties showed a significant reduction only when waterlogging was prolonged to more than 20 days, and 40-d and 60-d waterlogging reduced grain yield by 19% and 30%. Waterlogging depressed grain yield preventing many culms from producing spikes. It slowed down spikelet formation, consequently reducing the number of spikelets per spike, and reduced floret formation per spikelet, thus reducing the number of kernels per spike.


durum wheat roots spikelet initiation tillering waterlogging 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abbate, P.E., Pontaroli, A.C., Làzaro, L., Gutheim, F. 2013. A method of screening for spike fertility in wheat. J. Agr. Sci. 151:322–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belford, R.K. 1981. Response of winter wheat to prolonged waterlogging under outdoor conditions. J. Agric. Sci. 97:557–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brisson, N., Rebiere, B., Zimmer, D., Renault, P. 2002. Response of the root system of a winter wheat crop to waterlogging. Plant Soil 243:43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brooking, I.R., Jamieson, P.D., Porter, J.R. 1995. The influence of daylength on final leaf number in spring wheat. Field Crop. Res. 41:155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cannell, R.Q., Belford, R.K., Gales, K., Dennis, C.W., Prew, R.D. 1980. Effect of waterlogging at different stages of development on the growth and yield of winter wheat. J. Sci. Food Agric. 31:117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cannell, R.Q., Belford, R.K., Gales, K., Thomson, R.J., Webster, C.P. 1984. Effects of waterlogging and drought on winter wheat and winter barley grown on a clay and a sandy loam soil. Plant Soil 80:53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collaku, A., Harrison, S.A. 2002. Losses in wheat due to waterlogging. Crop Sci. 42:444–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De San Celedonio, R.P., Abeledo, L.G., Miralles, D.J. 2014. Identifying the critical period for waterlogging on yield and its components in wheat and barley. Plant Soil 378:265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dickin, E., Bennett, S., Wright, D. 2009. Growth and yield responses of UK wheat cultivars to winter waterlogging. J. Agr. Sci. 147:127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghobadi, M.E., Ghobadi, M. 2010. Effect of anoxia on root growth and grain yield of wheat cultivars. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 70:85–88.Google Scholar
  11. Ghobadi, M.E., Ghobadi, M., Zebarjadi, A. 2011. The response of winter wheat to flooding. World Acad. of Sci., Engineering and Technol. 78:440–442.Google Scholar
  12. Hossain, M.A., Uddin, S.N. 2011. Mechanisms of waterlogging tolerance in wheat: Morphological and metabolic adaptations under hypoxia or anoxia. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 5:1094–1101.Google Scholar
  13. Hossain, M.A., Araki, H., Takahashi, T. 2011. Poor grain filling induced by waterlogging is similar to that in abnormal early ripening in wheat in Western Japan. Field Crop Res. 123:100–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Huang, B., Johnson, J.W. 1995. Root respiration and carbohydrate status of two wheat genotypes in response to hypoxia. Ann. Bot. 75:427–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jiang, D., Fan, X., Dai, T., Cao, W. 2008. Nitrogen fertiliser rate and post-anthesis waterlogging effects on carbohydrate and nitrogen dynamics in wheat. Plant Soil 304:301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kirby, E.J.M. 1990. Co-ordination of leaf emergence and leaf and spikelet primordium initiation in wheat. Field Crops Res. 25:253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Malik, A.I., Colmer, T.D., Lambers, H., Setter, T.L., Schortemeyer, M. 2002. Short-term waterlogging has long-term effects on the growth and physiology of wheat. New Phytol. 153:225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meyer, W.S., Barrs, H.D. 1988. Response of wheat to single short-term waterlogging during and after stem elongation. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 39:11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Musgrave, M.E. 1994. Waterlogging effects on yield and photosynthesis in eight winter wheat cultivars. Crop Sci. 34:1314–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Musgrave, M.E., Ding, N. 1998. Evaluating wheat cultivars for waterlogging tolerance. Crop Sci. 38:90–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rasaei, A., Ghobadi, M.E., Jalali-Honarmand, S., Ghobadi, M., Saeidi, M. 2012. Impacts of waterlogging on shoot apex development and recovery effects of nitrogen on grain yield of wheat. Eur. J. Exp. Bio. 2:1000–1007.Google Scholar
  22. Robertson, D., Zhang, H., Palta, J.A., Colmer, T., Turner, N.C. 2009. Waterlogging affects the growth, development of tillers, and yield of wheat through a severe, but transient, N deficiency. Crop Pasture Sci. 60:578–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sayre, K.D., Van Ginkel, M., Rajaram, S., Ortiz-Monasterio, I. 1994. Tolerance to waterlogging losses in spring bread wheat: effect of time of onset on expression. Annu. Wheat Newslet. 40:165–171.Google Scholar
  24. Setter, T.L., Waters, I. 2003. Review of prospects for germplasm improvement for waterlogging tolerance in wheat, barley and oats. Plant and Soil 253:1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sinclair, T.R., Jamieson, P.D. 2006. Grain number, wheat yield, and bottling beer: An analysis. Field Crop Res. 98:60–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Steel, R.G.D., Torrie, J.H., Dickey, D.A. 1997. Principles and procedures of statistics: A biometrical approach. 3rd Ed. McGraw-Hill. New York, USA.Google Scholar
  27. Whingwiri, E.E., Stern, W.R. 1982. Floret survival in wheat: Significance of the time of floret initiation relative to terminal spikelet formation. J. Agric. Sci. 98:257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Agriculture, Food and EnvironmentUniversity of PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations