Effect of saline water irrigations on physiological, biochemical and yield attributes of dual purpose pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) varieties

GOVIND MAKARANA; ASHWANI KUMAR; R K YADAV; RAKESH KUMAR; POOJA G SONI; CHARU LATA; PARVENDER SHEORAN

doi:10.56093/ijas.v89i4.88847

Authors

GOVIND MAKARANA Ph D Scholar, ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal 132 001
ASHWANI KUMAR Scientist, ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001, India
R K YADAV Principal Scientist, ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001, India
RAKESH KUMAR Principal Scientist, ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001, India
POOJA G SONI Ph D Scholar, ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001, India
CHARU LATA Senior Research Fellow, ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001, India
PARVENDER SHEORAN Principal Scientist, ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal 132 001,

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v89i4.88847

Keywords:

Pearl millet, Physiological attributes, Saline water, Yield

Abstract

A split-plot experiment with four replicates on performance of dual purpose pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.) under different saline water irrigation was conducted during kharif 2015 at ICAR-CSSRI experimental farm, Nain, Panipat. The experiment was conducted with 4 main-plot treatment consisting of different levels of saline irrigation water [ Normal(~0.6 dS/m) and three levels of saline irrigation (ECiw 3, 6 and 9 dSm-1)] and two sub-plot treatments of varieties [ICMV-15111 and AVKB-19]. AVKB-19 variety was found robust and more stable than ICMV 15111 in terms of physiological attributes (relative water content, membrane injury and chlorophyll content) at all three periodic observations taken at 50 days after sowing (at 1st cut), 30 days and 60 days after 1st cut. Among biochemical attributes, total soluble sugars, proline, epicuticular wax content increased with increasing stress levels where as protein content decreased with increasing level of salinity stress. AVKB-19 variety accumulated significantly higher osmolyte content than ICMV-15111. Irrespective of salinity treatments, Na+ content (shoot and root) was recorded gradually high with ICMV-15111 than AVKB 19 at all study stages. AVKB 19 variety presented significantly higher shoot and root K+ content than ICMV 15111. Data on green fodder yield showed significant differences between two cultivars across different saline water levels. The AVKB-19 variety produced significantly higher mean green fodder yield (27.96 t/ha) as compared to ICMV-15111(25.51 t/ha). The AVKB-19 resulted into significantly maximum DM yield at the 1st as well as in 2nd cut (5.67 and 5.09 t/ha) over ICMV-15111. AVKB-19 variety produced significantly higher (16.26%) grain yield of 1.93 t/ha as compared to 1.66 t/ha in ICMV-15111. The magnitude of reduction (%) with increasing salinity over good quality irrigation water was observed 10.14, 20.74 and 37.33 with 3.0, 6.0 and 9.0 dS/m salinity water, respectively. Results concluded that AVKB-19 variety of pearl millet proved superior and may be adapted as a choice for getting higher grain as well as green fodder yield with better physiological and biochemical responses under saline environment.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Agastian P, Kingsley S J and Vivekanandan M. 2000. Effect of salinity on photosynthesis and biochemical characteristics in mulberry genotypes. Photosynthetica 38(2): 287–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007266932623

Ashraf M P J C and Harris P J C. 2004. Potential biochemical indicators of salinity tolerance in plants. Plant Science 166(1): 3–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2003.10.024

Ashraf M Y and Wu L. 1994. Breeding for salinity tolerance in plants. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 13(1): 17–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689409701906

Bates L S, Waldren R P and Teare I D. 1973. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil 391: 205–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060

Bernstein L. 1975. Effects of salinity and sodicity on plant growth. Annual Review of Phytopathology 13(1): 295–312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.py.13.090175.001455

Blum A. 1988. Plant Breeding for Stress Environments. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA. pp. 1–223.

Bradford M M. 1976. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein dye binding. Analytical Biochemistry. 7: 248–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3

Central Ground Water Board. 1997. Inland groundwater salinity in India. Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India, Faridabad. Dionisio-Sese M L and Tobita S. 1998. Antioxidant responses of rice seedlings to salinity stress. Plant Science 1351: 1–9.

Ebercon A, Blum A and Jordan W R. 1977. A rapid colorimetric method for epicuticular wax contest of sorghum leaves. Crop Science, 171: 179–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1977.0011183X001700010047x

Farissi M, Mouradi M, Bouizgaren A and Ghoulam C. 2018. Variations in leaf gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence and membrane potential of Medicago sativa root cortex cells exposed to increased salinity: The role of the antioxidant potential in salt tolerance. Archives of Biological Sciences 70(3): 413–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/ABS171019001F

Flowers T J and Lauchli A. 1983. Sodium versus potassium: substitution and compartmentation. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology. New series.

Ghadiri H, Dordipour I, Bybordi M and Malakourti M J. 2005. Potential use of Caspian Sea for supplementary irrigation in North Iran. Agricultural Water Management 79: 209–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2005.04.010

Greenway H and Munns R. 1980. Mechanisms of salt tolerance in nonhalophytes. Annual review of Plant Physiology 31(1): 149–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pp.31.060180.001053

Hiscox J T and Israelstam G F. 1979. A method for the extraction of chlorophyll from leaf tissue without maceration. Canadian Journal of Botany 5712: 1332–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/b79-163

Kulkarni V N, Rai K N, Dakheel A J, Ibrahim M, Hebbara M and Vadez V. 2006. Pearl millet germplasm adapted to saline conditions. International Sorghum and Millets Newsletter 47: 103–6.

Kumar A, Sharma S K, Lata C, Sheokand S and Kulshreshtha N. 2015. Combined effect of boron and salt on polypeptide resolutions in wheat varieties differing in their tolerance. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 85: 106–12.

Kumar A, Kumar A, Lata C, and Kumar S. 2016. Eco-physiological responses of Aeluropus lagopoides (grass halophyte) and Suaeda nudiflora (non-grass halophyte) under individual and interactive sodic and salt stress. South African Journal of Botany 105: 36–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2015.12.006

Kumar A, Krishnamurthy S L, Lata C, Kumar P, Devi R, Kulshrestha N, Yadav R K and Sharma S K. 2016. Effect of dual stress (salinity and drought) on gas exchange attributes and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics in rice. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 86(6): 19–27.

Kumar A, Lata C, Krishnamurthy S L, Kumar A, Prasad K R K and Kulshreshtha N. 2017. Physiological and Biochemical Characterization of Rice Varieties under Salt and Drought Stresses. Journal of Soil Salinity and Water Quality 9(2): 167–77.

Kumari A, Kumar P, Ahmad E, Kumar R,Yadav R K, Datt Chander and Chinchmalatpure A. 2014. Fodder yield and quality of oats fodder (Avenasativa L.) as influenced by salinity of irrigation water and applied nitrogen levels. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition 31: 266–71.

Lal K, Meena R L, Gupta S K, Saxena C K, Yadav G and Singh G. 2008. Diagnosis and Management of Poor Quality Water and Salt Affected Soils. Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, India. p 311.

Lata C, Kumar A, Sharma S K, Singh J, Sheokand S, Pooja, Mann A and Rani B. 2017. Tolerance to combined boron and salt stress in wheat varieties: Biochemical and molecular characterization. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 55: 321–8.

Liu W, Schachtman D P and Zhang W. 2000. Partial deletion of a loop region in the high affinity K+ transporter HKT1 changes ionic permeability leading to increased salt tolerance. Journal of Biological Chemistry 275(36): 27924–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M002056200

Meena H N, Bhalodia P K, Jat R S and Vekaria L C. 2012. Prospects of using saline water for irrigation in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea), pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) cropping system in saline black soils of Saurashtra. Indian Journal of Agronomy 57(2): 122–6.

Misra N and Gupta A K.. 2005. Effect of salt stress on proline metabolism in two high yielding genotypes of green gram. Plant Science 169: 331–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2005.02.013

Murakeozy E P, Nagy Z, Duhaze C, Bouchereau A and Tuba Z. 2003. Seasonal changes in the levels of compatible osmolytes in three halophytic species of inland saline vegetation in Hungary. Journal of Plant Physiology 160(4): 395–401. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1078/0176-1617-00790

Nadaf S K, Al-Hinai S A, Al-Farsi S M, Al-Lawati A H, Al-Bakri A N, Ahmed M and Hussain N. 2010. Differential response of salt tolerant pearl millet genotypes to irrigation water salinity. Management of Salt-Affected Soils and Water for Sustainable Agriculture. Mushtaque A, Al-Rawahi S A and Hussain N (Eds). Sultan Qaboos University, Oman. pp 47–60.

Netondo G W, Onyango J C and Beck E. 2004. Sorghum and salinity: I. Response of growth, water relations, and ion accumulation to NaCl salinity. Crop Science 44(3): 797. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2004.0797

Parida A, Das A B and Das P. 2002. NaCl stress causes changes in photosynthetic pigments, proteins, and other metabolic components in the leaves of a true mangrove, Bruguiera parviflora, in hydroponic cultures. Journal of Plant Biology 45(1): 28–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03030429

Patel M R, Sadhu A C, Patel R M, Parmar H P and Kher HR. 2008. Cutting management in different genotypes of forage bajra during summer season. Research on Crops 9(2): 325–7.

Prado F E, Boem C, Gallardo M and Gonzalez H J A. 2000. Effect of NaCl on germination, growth and soluble sugar content in (Chenopodium quinoa) wild seeds. Botany Academy of Sciences 41: 27–34.

Qadir M, Tubeileh A, Akhtar J, Larbi A, Minhas P S and Khan M A. 2008. Productivity enhancement of salt-affected environments through crop diversification. Land Degradation and Development 19(4): 429–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.853

Radhouane L. 2013. Agronomic and physiological responses of pearl millet ecotype (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) to saline irrigation. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture 25(2): 109–16 DOI: https://doi.org/10.9755/ejfa.v25i2.7151

Rains D W. 1972. Salt transport by plants in relation to salinity. Annual Review of Plant Physiology 23(1): 367–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pp.23.060172.002055

Rengasamy P. 2006. World salinization with emphasis on Australia. Journal of Experimental Botany 57(5): 1017–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erj108

Sairam R K, Veerabhadra R K and Srivastava G C. 2002. Differential responses of wheat genotypes to long term salinity stress in relation to oxidative stress, antioxidant activity and osmolyte concentration. Plant Science 163: 1037–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9452(02)00278-9

Shani U and Dudley L M. 2001. Field studies of crop response to water and salt stress. Soil Science Society of American Journal 65: 1522–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2001.6551522x

Sharma D K and Chaudhari S K. 2012. Agronomic research in salt affected soils of India: An overview. Indian Journal of Agronomy 57(3s): 175–85.

Sharma DK and Singh A. 2015. Salinity research in India-achievements, challenges and future prospects. Water Energy International 58(6): 35–45.

Singh A, Sharma P C, Kumar A, Meena M D and Sharma D K. 2015. Salinity induced changes in chlorophyll pigments and ionic relations in bael (Aegle marmelos Correa) cultivars. Journal of Soil Salinity and Water Quality 71: 40–4.

Vijayalakshmi T, Varalaxmi Y, Jainender S, Yadav S K, Vanaja M, Jyothilakshmi N and Maheswari M. 2012. Physiological and biochemical basis of water-deficit stress tolerance in pearl millet hybrid and parents. American Journal of Plant Sciences 3(12): 1730. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2012.312211

Wang W, Vinocur B, Altman A. 2003. Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: Towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta 218: 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-003-1105-5

Weatherley P. 1950. Studies in the water relations of the cotton plant. New Phytologist 491: 81–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1950.tb05146.x

Yadav R K, Kumar A, Lal D and Batra L. 2004. Yield responses of winter (rabi) forage crops to irrigation with saline drainage water. Experimental Agriculture 40: 65–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479703001431

Yemm E W and Willis A J. 1954. The estimation of carbohydrates in plant extracts by anthrone. Biochemical Journal 573: 508. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1042/bj0570508

Yeo A R. 1983. Salinity resistance: physiologies and prices. Physiologia plantarum 58(2): 214–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1983.tb04172.x

Zhapayev R, Toderich K, Popova V, Tautenov I, Umirzakov S, Bekzhanov S and Karabayev M. 2015. Forage production and nutritional value of Sorghum and Pearl Millet on marginal lands on Priaralie. Journal of Arid Land Studies 25(3): 169–72.