KOREAN JOURNAL OF CROP SCIENCE (한국작물학회지)

The Korean Society of Crop Science (한국작물학회)
권호 표지

Relationship between Drought-Tolerance and Physiological Parameters in Korean Barley Genotypes

보리 품종의 한발저항성과 생리적 지표와의 상관

  • 이변우 (서울대학교 식물생산과학부) ;
  • 부금동 (서울대학교 식물생산과학부) ;
  • 백남천 (서울대학교 식물생산과학부) ;
  • 김정곤 (농촌진흥청 작물시험장)
  • Published : 2003.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Thirty-six barley varieties including Korean modern and local varieties were tested for drought-tolerance in the field of plastic rain shelter, Drought treatment was initiated at initial tillering stage (March 27, 2002) by withholding irrigation and lasted until harvest. Soil water potential maintained at around -0.05㎫ in the control plot and varied from -0.05㎫ (at the initial stage of drought treatment) to -0.29㎫ in the drought treatment plot. At forty days after drought treatment, relative water content (RWC), osmotic potential (OP), osmotic adjustment (OA), and $^{13}\textrm{C}$ discrimination ($\Delta$) were measured and then plants were sampled for leaf area index (LAI) and dry weight (DW). Barley was harvested at maturity for determining DW, grain yield, 1000 grains weight and number of spikelet. The tested varieties revealed wide spectrum of drought tolerance. Dongbori-1, Chalbori, Changyeongjaerae, Samdobori and Weolseong 87-31 showed strong drought-tolerance while Songhagbori and Suwonmaeg360 showed weak drought-tolerance. The drought injury indexes (drought/control ratio) of DW and yield revealed significant positive correlation with leaf RWC in drought treatment plot and $\Delta$ in the control plot, but obvious negative correlation with leaf OP and OA under drought condition. In addition, all the drought indexes of OP, $\Delta$ and RWC showed obvious positive correlation with the drought injury indexes of DW, 1000 grain weight and yield. Thus, OP and RWC under drought condition and $\Delta$ under well-watered condition would be used as the evaluation criteria for drought- tolerance of barley genotypes. However, further investigation is needed for the relationship between $\Delta$ and drought-tolerance as the other reports were not consistent with our result.

본 실험은 한국 재배종과 재래 수집종을 포함하는 36개 보리 품종을 공시하여 비가림 플라스틱 하우스의 포장 조건에서 실시하였다 대조구는 전 생유기간에 걸쳐서 토양 수분 포텐셜이 -0.05㎫이 유지되도록 관개를 하였고, 한발 처리구는 월동 후 재생기부터 수확기까지 곤개를 하지 않았다. 한발 처리구의 토양 수분 포텐셜은 최저 -0.29㎫까지 저하하였고 처리기간 중 평균은 -0.15㎫이었다. 처리에에 따른 생장, 수량 및 수량구성요소, 잎의 상대수분함량(RWC), 삼투포텐설(OP), 삼투조정(OA), $^{13}\textrm{C}$ discrimination(A), 등의 변화를 조사하여 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 1. 공시한 품종 중 한발 처리에 따른 건물 중과 수량 저하 가 작아서 한발 저항성이 강한 품종은 동보리1호. 찰보리, 창영재래, 삼도보리, 월성87-31 등이었으며, 상록보리 , 송학보리, 수원맥360 등은 한발저항성이 낮았다. 2. 건물중 및 수량의 한발피해지수(한발처리구/대조구 비)와 한발조건하 RWC와는 높은 정의 상관이, 한발조건하 OP 및 OA는 매우 높은 부의 상관관계가 있었으며, 대조구의 $\Delta$와는 유의한 정의 상관관계가 있었다. 3. OP $\Delta$ 및 RWC의 한발지수(한발처리구/대조구 비)는 건물중, 천립중 및 수량의 한발피해지수와 매우 높은 정의 상관 관계를 나타내었다. 4. 이상의 결과를 종합해 보면 한발 저항성이 큰 품종은 삼투 조정능력이 커서 잎의 수분함량을 높게 유지하는 특성을 가지고 있어서 한발 처리 조건에서 OP와 RWC는 보리의 한발저항성 선발지표로 이용될 수 있을 것으로 판단되었다. 그러나 $\Delta$와 한발 저항성간의 관계에 대해서는 보다 구체적인 연구가 필요한 것으로 생각된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Agueda, G., M. Isaura, and A. Luis. 1999. Barley yield in water stressconditions. The influence of precocity, osmotic adjustment andstomatal conductance. Fietd Crops Research. 62 : 23-34 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(99)00002-7
  2. Araus, J.L., M. P. Reynolds, and E. Acevedo. 1993. Leaf posture, grainyield, leaf structure, and carbon isotope discrimination in wheat. Crop Sci. 33: 1273-1279 https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1993.0011183X003300060032x
  3. Asana, R.D. 1976. Physiological Appoaches to Breeding of Drought Resistant crops. I.C.A.R. Technical Bulletin (Aghc) No. 52
  4. Blum, A. 1989. Osmotic adjustment and growth of barley genotypesunder drought stress. Crop Sci. 29 : 230-233 https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1989.0011183X002900010052x
  5. Choi, W.Y., Y.W. Kwon, and J.H. Park. 1997. Grain yield and physiological responses of water stress at reproductive stage in barley.Korean J. Crop. Sci. 42(3): 263-269
  6. Condon, A.G., R. A. Richards, and G. D. Farquhar. 1987. Carbon isotope discrimination is positively correlated with grain yield and drymatter production in field-grown wheat. Crop. Sci. 27 : 996-1001 https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1987.0011183X002700050035x
  7. Condon, A.G., R. A. Richards, and G. D. Farquhar. 1993. Relationships between carbon isotope discrimination, water use efRciencyand transpiration efficiency for dryland wheat. Aust. J. Agric. Res44 : 1693-1711 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9931693
  8. Cortes, P. M., and T. R. Sinclair. 1986. Gas exchange of field-grownsoybean under drought. Agron. J. 78(3): 454-458 https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1986.00021962007800030012x
  9. Costa, F. M. G., A. T. Pham, C. Pimentel, R. O. Pereyra Rossiello, Y. Zuily-Fodil, and D. Laffray. 2000. Differences in growth and waterrelations among Phaseolus vutgaris cultivars in response toinduced drought stress. Environ. Exp. Bot. 43: 227-237 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-8472(99)00060-X
  10. Cox, W. J., and G. D. Jolliiff. 1986. Growth and yield of sunflower andsoybean under soil water deficits. Agron. J. 78 : 226-230 https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1986.00021962007800020002x
  11. Eastham, J., D. M. Oosterhuis, and S. Walker. 1984. Leaf water andturgor potential threshold values for leaf growth of wheat. Agron.J. 76: 841-847 https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1984.00021962007600050029x
  12. Farquhar, G.D., and R. A. Richards. 1984. Isotopic composition of plant carbon correlates with water use efficiency of wheat genotypes. Aust. J. PIant Physiol. 11 : 539-552 https://doi.org/10.1071/PP9840539
  13. Hubick, K.T. and G. D. Farquhar. 1989. Carbon isotope discrimination and the ratio of carbon gains to water lost in barley cultivars. PIantCell Environ. 12 : 795-804
  14. Li, D. Q., Y. Q. Zhang, Q. Zou, and B. S. Cheng. 1992. Effect of soilwater stress on water status, Photosynthesis and yield of wheat with drought resistance. Journal of Shandong Agricultural University. 23(2): 125-130
  15. Morgan, J. M. 1984. Osmoregulation and water stress in higher plants.Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 35 : 299-319 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pp.35.060184.001503
  16. Park, M.E. 1995. The effect of soil moisture stress on the growth ofbarley and grain quality. Korean J. Soc. Soil. Sci. Fert. 28(2): 165-175
  17. Romagosa, I., and J. L. Araus. 1991. Genotype-environment interaction for grain yield and 'C discrimination in barley. BarIey Genet.VI: 563-567
  18. Sayre, K.D., E. Acevedo, and R. B. Austin. 1995. Carbon isotope discrimination and grain yield of three bread wheat germplasm groups grown at different levels of water stress. Field Crops Res.41 : 45-54 https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4290(94)00105-L
  19. Shangguan, Z. R., P. Y. Chen. 1990. Effects of water stress on photosynthesis of wheat leaves and their relation to drought resistance. Acta. Bot. Boreal Occident Sin. 10 : 1-7
  20. Sivakumar, M. V. K., and R. H. Shaw. 1978. Relative evaluation of water stress indicators for soybeans. Agron. J. 70 : 619-623 https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1978.00021962007000040022x
  21. Voltas, J., I. Romagosa. P. Munoz. J. L. Araus. 1998. Mineral accumulation, carbon isotope discrimination and imdirect selection forgrain yield in two-rowed barley grown under semiarid conditions.Euro. J. Agro. 9 : 147-155 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(98)00032-X
  22. Wenkert, W., E. R. Lemon, and T. R. Sinclair. 1978. Leaf elongation and tugor pressure in field-grown soybean. Agron. J. 70 : 761-764 https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1978.00021962007000050016x
  23. Wilson, J.R., M.J. Fisher, E.D. Schulze, G.R. Dolby, and M.M. Ludlow. 1979. Comparison between pressure-volume and dew pointhygrometry techniques for determining the water relations characteristics of grass and legume leaves. Oecotogia. 41 : 77-88
  24. Wu, Y.Y. and D. Q. Li, 2001. Effects of soil water stress on osmoticadjustment and chloroplast ultrastructure of winter wheat barley.Acta Agriculturae Boreati-Sinica 16(2): 87-93
  25. Zhang, Q., H. Liu, F. Meng, S. Zhang, Z. Zhang, and G.Z. Kang. 2000.The effect of drought stress on physiologycal characters in leavesand seed-filling characteristics of new wheat cultivar Yumai 36during the late developmental stage. Scientia Agricultura Sinica33(4): 94-96
  26. Zhao, S. W., X. J. Guan, and J. S. Wu. 2001. Effects of water deficitson yield and WUE in winter wheat, Irrigation and Drainage 20(4): 56-59