Part of the SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science book series (BRIEFSENVIRONMENTAL)


Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is generally grown on residual soil moisture in the arid and semiarid regions of the world. Terminal drought is one of the major constraints limiting chickpea productivity, so soil water conservation to support late-season physiological activity can be very important in increasing yields. Thus far, differences found among studied chickpea genotypes in the expression of early partial closure of stomata with soil drying are small. On the other hand, distinct differences among genotypes were found in expression of partial stomatal closure under elevated vapor pressure deficit. A consequence of greater sensitivity to vapor pressure deficit is the desired shift in water use from early in the growing season to the reproductive stage and an increase in yield. Aquaporin expression appears to be important in the sensitivity to vapor pressure deficit.


Vapor Pressure Deficit Canopy Temperature Cicer Arietinum Chickpea Genotype High Vapor Pressure Deficit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ahmad F, Gaur PM, Croser J (2005) Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) In: Singh RJ, Jauhar PP (eds) Genetic resources, chromosome engineering, and crop improvement—grain legumes. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  2. Anbazhagan K, Bhatnagar-Mathur P, Vadez V et al (2015) DREB1A overexpression in transgenic chickpea alters key traits influencing plant water budget across water regimes. Plant Cell Rep 34:199–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chaumont F, Tyerman SD (2014) Aquaporins: highly regulated channels controlling plant in the field: application to grapevine. J Exp Bot 53:2249–2260Google Scholar
  4. Comstock JP (2000) Variation in hydraulic architecture and gas-exchange in two desert sub-shrubs, Hymenoclea salsola (T. & G.) and Ambrosia dumosa (Payne). Oecol 125(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. FAOSTAT, FAO Statistics Division (2014) Available at: Accessed 27 June 2016
  6. Jones HG (1999) Use of infrared thermometry for estimation of stomatal conductance as a possible aid to irrigation scheduling. Agric For Meteorol 95:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jones HG, Stoll M, Santos T et al (2002) Use of infrared thermography for monitoring stomatal closure in the field: application to grapevine. J Exp Bot 53:2249–2260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jukanti AK, Gaur PM, Gowda CLL et al (2012) Nutritional quality and health benefits of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Br J Nutr 108:S11–S26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Krishnamurthy L, Kashiwagi J, Gaur PM et al (2010) Sources of tolerance to terminal drought in the chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) minicore germplasm. Field Crop Res 119:322–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kumar J, Abbo S (2001) Genetics of flowering time in chickpea and its bearing on productivity in semiarid environments. In: Spaks DL (ed) Advances in agronomy, vol 2. Academic, New York, p 22Google Scholar
  11. Maurel C, Boursiac Y, Luu DT et al (2015) Aquaporins in plants. Physiol Rev 95:1321–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pang J, Turner NC, Khan T et al (2016) Response of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to terminal drought: leaf stomatal conductance, pod Abscisic acid concentration, and seed set. J Exp Bot doi: 10.1093/jxb/erw153
  13. Pushpavalli R, Zaman-Allah M, Turner NC et al (2014) Higher flower and seed number leads to higher yield under water stress conditions imposed during reproduction in chickpea. Funct. Plant Biol 42:162–174Google Scholar
  14. Ranathunge K, Steudle E, Lafitte R (2005) Blockage of apoplastic bypass-flow of water in rice roots by insoluble salt precipitates analogous to a Pfeffer cell. Plant Cell Environ 28(2):121–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ratnakumar P, Vadez V, Nigam SN et al (2009) Assessment of transpiration efficiency in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) under drought by lysimetric system. Plant Biol 11:124–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Reddy PS, Nitnavare RB, Sivasakthi K et al Genome wide screening and characterization of aquaporins (AQPs) genes in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in response to different developmental and abiotic stress conditions (Manuscript under communication)Google Scholar
  17. Sivasakthi K, Tharanya M, Kholová J et al Difference in plant vigour and canopy conductance genotypes also differed dependence of water transport pathways in chickpea mapping population parents and progeny (Manuscript under communication)Google Scholar
  18. Sivasakthi K, Tharanya M, Kholová J et al Genetic variability of transpiration response to soil drying in contrasting chickpea genotypes (Manuscript under communication)Google Scholar
  19. Sivasakthi K, Tharanya M, Zaman-Allah M et al Differences in hydraulic conductivity of chickpea roots (Cicer arietinum L.) relate to crop adaptation to drought environments. (Manuscript under communication)Google Scholar
  20. Soltani A, Khooie FR, Ghassemi-Golezani K et al (2000) Thresholds for chickpea leaf expansion and transpiration response to soil water deficit. Field Crop Res. 68:205–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Vadez V, Rao S, Kholova J et al (2008) Root research for drought tolerance in legumes: quo vadis? J Food Legumes 21:77–85Google Scholar
  22. Vadez V, Kholová J, Yadav RS et al (2013) Small temporal differences in water uptake among varieties of pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.] are critical for grain yield under terminal drought. Plant Soil 371:447–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vadez V, Kholova J, Medina S et al (2014) Transpiration efficiency: new insights into an old story. J Exp Bot 65(21):6141–6153. doi: 10.1093/jxb/eru040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zaman-Allah M, Jenkinson DM, Vadez V (2011a) Chickpea genotypes contrasting for seed yield under terminal drought stress in the field differ for traits related to the control of water use. Funct Plant Biol 38(4):270–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zaman-allah M, Jenkinson DM, Vadez V (2011b) A conservative pattern of water use, rather than deep or profuse rooting, is a critical for the terminal drought tolerance of chickpea. J Exp Bot 62(12):4239–4252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zimmermann HM, Steudle E (1998) Apoplastic transport across young maize roots: effect of the exodermis. Planta 206:7–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bharathidasan UniversityTiruchirappalliIndia
  2. 2.International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT)Greater HyderabadIndia
  3. 3.International Center for Maize and Wheat Improvement (CIMMYT)Mount PleasantZimbabwe
  4. 4.Bharathidasan UniversityTiruchirappalliIndia

Personalised recommendations