Effect of Different Water Table Treatments on Cabbage in Saline Saemangeum Soil

  • M. Jamil
  • E. S. Rha
Part of the Tasks for Vegetation Sciences book series (TAVS, volume 44)

Abstract

In the Saemangeum tide embankment that will connect the cities of Gunsan and Buan a large area is specifi ed for grain and horticultural crops. However, salinity and waterlogging are two main problems of this area. In order to assess up to what extent, this area can be effi ciently utilized by growing cabbage, in the present study cabbage (Brassica olera-cea var capitata L.) was subjected to various water table treatments (20, 30, 50 and 70 cm) in Saemangeum soil (marginally saline soil, ECe 3.8 dS m-1) area. It was observed that with increasing water table treatments, relative growth rate (RGR), leaf area ratio (LAR), number of leaf, leaf area and net assimilation rate (NAR) increased signifi cantly. Signifi cant increased in the maximal quantum yield of PSII (Fv/ Fm), electron transport rate (ETR) was observed while there was no change in non-photochemical quenching coeffi cient (NPQ). Chlorophyll content (SPAD value) increased signifi cantly with the increase in water table treatments. Correlation shows that growth attributes had a signifi cant positive relationship with Fv/Fm and ETR while non signifi cant relationship was found between growth attributes and NPQ.

Keywords

Brassica oleracea capitata L. water depth salinity relative growth photochemistry 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ashraf M (2004) Some important physiological selection criteria for salt tolerance in plant. Flora 199: 361– 376.Google Scholar
  2. Ashraf M, Foolad M R (2007) Roles of Glycine betaine and proline in improving plant abiotic stress resistance. Environ. Exp. Bot. 59: 206– 216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernstein L, Ayers A D (1949) Salt tolerance of cabbage and broccoli. United States Salinity Laboratory Report to Collaborators. Riverside, CA, pp 39.Google Scholar
  4. Cramer G R, Alberico G J, Schmidt C (1994) Salt tolerance is not associated with the sodium accumulation of 2 maize hybrids. Aust J Plant Physiol 21: 675– 692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Genty B, Briantais J M, Baker N R (1989) The Relationship between the Quantum Yield of Photosynthetic Electron Transport and Quenching of Chlorophyll Fluorescence. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 99: 87– 92Google Scholar
  6. Hamada A M, El-Enany A E (1994) Effect of NaCl salinity on growth, pigment and mineral element contents, and gas exchange of broad bean and pea plants. Biol Plant 36: 75– 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hecht S S, Trushin N, Rigotty J, Carmella S G, Borukhova A, Akerkar S, Desai D, Amin S, Rivenson A (1996) Inhibitory effects of 6-phenylhexyl isothiocyanate on 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone metabolic activation and lung tumorigenesis in rats. Carcinogenesis 17: 2061– 2067.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heuer B, Plaut Z (1989) Photosynthesis and osmotic adjustment of two sugar beet cultivars grown under saline condition. J Exp Bot 40: 437– 440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hunt R (1990) Basic growth analysis: plant growth analysis for beginners. Academic, London.Google Scholar
  10. Ishikawa S, Oikawa T, Furukawa A (1991) Responses of photosynthesis, leaf conductance and growth to different salinities in 3 coastal dune plants. Ecol Res 6: 217– 226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kahlown M A, Azam M (2002) Individual and combined effect of waterlogging and salinity on crop yield in the Indus basin. Irrig Drain 51: 329– 338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kahlown M A, Iqbal M, Skogerboe G V, Rehman S U (1998) Water logging, salinity and crop yield relationships. Mona Reclamation Experimental Project, WAPDA Report No. 233.Google Scholar
  13. Kalita P K, Kanwar R S (1992) Shallow water table effects on photosynthesis and corn yield. Trans ASAE 35: 97– 104.Google Scholar
  14. Klimesova A J (1994) The effects of timing and duration of fl oods on growth of young plants of Phalaris arundinacea L. and Urtica dioica L.: an experimental study. Aquat Bot 48: 21– 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Klimesova A J (1995) Population dynamics of Phalaris arundinacea L. and Urtica dioica L. in a fl ood plain during a dry period. Wetlands Ecol Manage 3: 79– 85.Google Scholar
  16. Long S P, Baker N R (1986) Saline terrestrial environments. In: Baker N R, Long S P (eds) Photosynthesis in contrasting environments. Elsevier, New York, pp. 63– 102.Google Scholar
  17. Li C C (1964) Introduction to Experimental Statistics. McGraw Hill Book Company. New York.Google Scholar
  18. Mann C J, Wetzel R G (1999) Photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of Juncus effusus in a temperate wetland ecosystem. Aquat Bot 63: 127– 144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Munns R (2005) Genes and salt tolerance: bringing them together. New Phytol 167: 645– 663.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Osawa T (1961) Studies on the salt tolerance of vegetable crops in sand cultures. II. Leafy vegetables. J. Jpn. Soc. Hort. Sci. 30: 48– 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Reddy M P, Vora A B (1986) Changes in pigment composition. Hill reaction activity and saccharides metabolism in bajra (Penisetum typhoides S & H) leaves under NaCl salinity. Photosynthetica 20: 50– 55.Google Scholar
  22. Rhoades J D (1982) Soluble salts. In: Page A L (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties. Vol 9, 2nd edn. SSSA Monograph, ASA/CSSA/SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 167– 179.Google Scholar
  23. Seemann J R, Critchley C (1985) Effects of salt stress on the growth, ion content, stomatal behavior and photosynthetic capacity of a salt-sensitive species, Phaseolus vulgaris L. Planta 164: 151– 162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Singh M P, Pandey S K, Singh M, Ram P C, Singh B B (1990) Photosynthesis, transpiration, stomatal conductance and leaf chlorophyll content in mustard genotypes grown under sodic conditions. Photosynthetica 24: 623– 627.Google Scholar
  25. Tille P, Mueller L (1992) Einfl uss des Grundwassers auf Bodendurchlueftung und Ertrag auf einem Auentonstandort. Arch. Acker-Pfl anzenbau Bodenkd 36: 391– 401.Google Scholar
  26. Wargovich MJ (2000) Anticancer properties of fruits and vegetables. Hortic Sci 35: 573– 575.Google Scholar
  27. Zeng L, Lesch S M, Grieve C M (2003) Rice growth and yield respond to changes in water depth and salinity stress. Agric Water Manage 59: 67– 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Jamil
    • 1
  • E. S. Rha
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biotechnology and Genetic EngineeringKohat University of Science and Technology (KUST)KohatPakistan
  2. 2.College of Agriculture & Life Sciences, Sunchon National UniversitySuncheonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations