Volume 7, Issue 1, February 2019, Page: 1-7
Response of Maize (Zea mays L.) Hybrids to Diurnal Variation of Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) and Progressive Soil Moisture Depletion
Oumarou Abdoulaye Moussa, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Dan Dicko Dan Koulodo University of Maradi, Maradi, Niger
Seyni Boureima, Department of Science and Technology of Plant Production, Faculty of Agronomy and Environmental Sciences, Dan Dicko Dan Koulodo University of Maradi, Maradi, Niger
Hassane Bil-Assanou Issoufou, Department of Science and Technology of Plant Production, Faculty of Agronomy and Environmental Sciences, Dan Dicko Dan Koulodo University of Maradi, Maradi, Niger
Yacoubou Bakasso, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Abdou Moumouni University of Niamey, Niamey, Niger
Ali Mahamane, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Diffa, Diffa, Niger
Mahamane Saadou, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Dan Dicko Dan Koulodo University of Maradi, Maradi, Niger
Mainassara Zaman-Allah, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Dan Dicko Dan Koulodo University of Maradi, Maradi, Niger
Received: Dec. 7, 2018;       Accepted: Dec. 28, 2018;       Published: Jan. 31, 2019
DOI: 10.11648/j.jps.20190701.11      View  178      Downloads  67
Abstract
This study investigated the transpiration (TR) response to (i) diurnal changes of vapor pressure deficit (VPD) and (ii) soil dry down in four maize hybrids contrasting for yield performance under drought stress in the field. These four hybrids included a popular local variety P3K and a commercial check SC303 that were found to be drought susceptible. The experiment was carried out in pots at early vegetative stage (8-leaf stage). Results showed an increase of TR with increasing VPD but with significant variations between the hybrids tested. The two susceptible hybrids P3K and SC303 had higher TR over nearly the whole range of VPD values than the two other hybrids, with the largest variation recorded at VPD values above 6 kPa. Regarding the TR response to soil moisture depletion, normalized TR (NTR) of all genotypes reduced with soil moisture depletion for all treatments. In addition, NTR showed a significant reduction for plants that were irrigated at 3 days intervals before the experiment as compared to those irrigated daily. There was a trend of higher water extraction, as evaluated with the fraction of transpirable soil water (FTSW) threshold, in the tolerant hybrids relative to the susceptible ones for the two irrigation treatments. In addition, prior exposure to water deficit tends to lower the FTSW threshold which leads to increased water extraction capacity at lower soil moisture level. These results demonstrate that control of TR under high VPD conditions coupled with high water extraction capacity from progressively drying soil can contribute to drought tolerance in maize hybrids.
Keywords
Maize, Transpiration, VPD, Drought
To cite this article
Oumarou Abdoulaye Moussa, Seyni Boureima, Hassane Bil-Assanou Issoufou, Yacoubou Bakasso, Ali Mahamane, Mahamane Saadou, Mainassara Zaman-Allah, Response of Maize (Zea mays L.) Hybrids to Diurnal Variation of Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) and Progressive Soil Moisture Depletion, Journal of Plant Sciences. Vol. 7, No. 1, 2019, pp. 1-7. doi: 10.11648/j.jps.20190701.11
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reference
[1]
Ahmed, M., Kamran, A., Asif, M., Qadeer, U., Ahmed, Z. I., Goyal, A. 2013. Silicon priming: a potential source to impart abiotic stress tolerance in wheat: A review. Aus. J. Crop Sci. 7: 484–491.
[2]
Mashingaidze, K. (2006) Maize research and development. In: Rukuni, M., Tawonezvi, P. and Eicher, C. (eds.) Zimbabwe's agricultural revolution revisited, pp. 357-376. Harare: UZ Publications.
[3]
Weaich K., Cass A. & Bristow K. L. (1996) Preemergent growth of maize (Zea mays, L.) as a function of soil strength. Soil and Tillage Research 40, 3–23.
[4]
Cooper, M., and G. L. Hammer. 1996. Synthesis of strategies for crop improvement. Plant adaptation and crop improvement., p. 591–623.
[5]
Mitra J., 2001. Genetics and genetic improvement of drought resistance in crops plants. Current sci., 80, 758-763.
[6]
Ludlow, M. M. & Muchow, R. C. 1990. A critical evaluation of traits for improving crop yield in water limited environments. Adv. Agron. 43: 107-153.
[7]
Sheshshayee, M. S., H. Bindumadhava, A. G. Shankar, T. G. Prasad, and M. Udayakumar. 2003. Breeding strategies to exploit water use effi ciency for crop improvement. J. Plant Biol. 30: 253–268.
[8]
Zaman-Allah M, Jenkinson DM, Vadez V. 2011. A conservative pattern of water use, rather than deep or profuse rooting, is critical for the terminal drought tolerance of chickpea. Journal of Experimental Botany 62: 4239–4252.
[9]
Vadez V, Sinclair TR (2001) Leaf ureide degradation and the N2 fixation tolerance to water deficit in soybean. Journal of Experimental Botany 52 (354): 153-159.
[10]
Raju P., Zaman-Allah M., Turner NC., Rekha B.,Mandali V.Rao., and Vadez V. (2014). Higher flower and seed number leads to higher yield under water stress conditions imposed during reproduction in chickpea. Functional Plant Biology 42(2) 162-174.
[11]
Vadez V, Kholová J, Yadav RS, Hash CT (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 and Soil 371, 447–462. doi: 10.1007/s11104-013-1706-0.
[12]
Choudhary, S., T. R. Sinclair, and P. V. V. Prasad. 2013. Hydraulic conductance of intact plants of two contrasting sorghum lines, SC15 and SC1205., Funct. Plant Biol. 40: 730–738. doi: 10.1071/FP12338.
[13]
Choudhary, S., and T. R. Sinclair. 2014. Hydraulic conductance differences among sorghum genotypes to explain variation in restricted transpiration rates. Funct. Plant Biol. 41: 270–275. doi: 10.1071/FP13246.
[14]
Choudhary, S., T. R. Sinclair, C. D. Messina, and M. Cooper. 2014. Hydraulic conductance of maize hybrids differing in transpiration response, to vapor pressure deficit. Crop Sci. 54: 1147–1152. doi: 10.2135/ cropsci2013.05.0303.
[15]
Devi MJ, Sinclair TR, Vadez V. 2010. Genotypic variation in peanut for transpiration response to vapor pressure deficit. Crop Science 50 (1): 191-196.
[16]
Gholipoor, M., Prasad, P. V. V., Mutava, R. N., and Sinclair, T. R. 2010. Genetic variability of transpiration response to vapor pressure deficit among sorghum genotypes. Field Crops Res. 119: 85-90.
[17]
Seversike, T. M., S. M. Sermons, T. R. Sinclair, T. E. Carter, and T. W. Rufty. 2013. Temperature interactions with transpiration response to vapor pressure deficit among cultivated and wild soybean genotypes. Physiol. Plant. 148: 62–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2012.01693.x.
[18]
Shekoofa, A., M. Balota, and T. R. Sinclair. 2014. Limited-transpiration trait evaluated in growth chamber and field for sorghum genotypes. Environ. Exp. Bot. 99: 175–179. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2013.11.018.
[19]
Yang, Z., T. R. Sinclair, M. Zhu, C. D. Messina, M. Cooper, and G. L. Hammer. 2012. Temperature effect on transpiration response of maize plants to vapour pressure deficit. Environ. Exp. Bot. 78: 157–162. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2011.12.034.
[20]
Kholova J, Hash CT, Kakkera A, Kocova M, Vadez V. 2010. Constitutive water-conserving mechanisms are correlated with the terminal drought tolerance of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.). Journal of Experimental Botany 61 (2): 369-377.
[21]
Fletcher AL, Sinclair TR, Allen LH Jr (2007) Transpiration responses to vapor pressure deficit in well watered ‘slow-wilting’ and commercial soybean. Environmental and Experimental Botany 61, 145–151. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2007.05.004.
[22]
Gilbert ME, Zwieniecki MA, Holbrook NM (2011) Independent variation in photosynthetic capacity and stomatal conductance leads to differences in intrinsic water use efficiency in 11 soybean genotypes before and during mild drought. Journal of Experimental Botany 62, 2875–2887. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erq461.
[23]
Belko, N., Zaman-allah, M., Diop, N. N., Cisse, N., Zombre, G., Ehlers, J. D., et al. 2012. Restriction of transpiration rate under hight vapour pressure deficit and non-limiting water conditions is important for terminal drought tolerance in cowpea. Plant Biol. 15: 304-316.
[24]
Gholipoor, M., Choudhary, S., Sinclair, T. R., Messina, C. D., and Cooper, M. 2013. Transpiration response of maize hybrids to atmospheric vapor pressure deficit. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 119: 155-160.
[25]
Sadok W, Sinclair TR (2009) Genetic variability of transpiration response to vapor pressure deficit among soybean cultivars. Crop Science 49, 955–960. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2008.09.0560.
[26]
Faria, T., Silverio, D., Breia, E., Cabral, R., Abadia, J., Pereira, J. S. & Chaves, M. M. (1998). Differences in the response of carbon assimilation to summer stress (water deficits, hight light and temperature) in four Mediterranean tree species. Physiologia Plantarum 102: 419-428.
[27]
Tardieu, F; & Davies, W. J. 1993. Integration of hydraulic and chemical signaling in the control of stomatal conductance and water status of droughted plants. Plant Cell an Environment 16: 341-349.
[28]
Spollen WC, Sharp RE, Saab IN, Wu Y (1993).Regulation of cell expansion in roots and shoots at low water potentials. In: Smith JAC, Griths H, eds. Water deficits: plant responses from cell to community. Oxford: Bios, pp. 37-52.
[29]
Seyni Boureima, 2012. Amélioration variétale du sésame (sesamum indicum L.) par mutation induite: effet de la mutagenèse sur la tolérance à la sécheresse et la productivité. Thèse de doctorat (Ph.D), Ghent University (Belgique). 157 pages.
[30]
Westgate, M. E. & Boyer, J. S. 1985. Osmotic adjustment and the inhibition of leaf, root, stem and silk growth at low water potentials in maize. Planta 164: 540-549.
[31]
Saab, I. N., Sharp, R. E. & P ritchard, J. 1990. Increased endogenous abscisic acid maintains primary root growth and inhibits shoot growth of maize seedlings at low water potentials. Plant physiology 93: 1329-1336.
[32]
Wu, Y. & Cosgrove, D. J. 2000. Adaptation of roots to low water potentials by changes in cell wall extensibility and cell wall proteins. Journal of Experimental Botany 51: 1543-1553.
Browse journals by subject