Cultivar Differences in Yield and Physiological Response of Winter Wheat after Exposed to Drought Stress at Jointing Stage
FENG Fu, HUANG Gui-rong, WANG Ya-jing, ZHANG Xin-ying, WANG Tao, ZHONG Xiu-li
2020, 41(01):
43-50.
doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-6362.2020.01.005
Asbtract
(
407 )
PDF (454KB)
(
605
)
References |
Related Articles |
Metrics
Drought stress occurring at jointing stage has been restricted winter wheat production severely. This study explored the genotypic difference in physiological response to drought, aiming at providing informative guidance for selection and breeding of drought tolerant cultivars. Five cultivars, which were planted in larger areas in different regions of the North China Plain, and one stress sensitive cultivar were selected as materials. Pot cultivation and rain-shelter were adopted to carry out the experiment. In terms of grain yield, as well as stomatal traits, cellular membrane stability, and osmoregulation traits, genotypic difference in drought tolerance along with the drought response pathways after suffering drought stress at jointing stage were compared and analyzed. Under well-watered condition, winter wheat cultivars Jinmai 47, Luohan 2, and Shijiazhuang yielded higher, while Yuami 18 and Yanmai 20 yielded lower, with Zhengmai 9023 moderately yielding. Encountering drought stress at jointing stage, Jinmai 47, Luohan 2, and Yumai 18 yielded higher, in comparison, Shijiazhuang 8 and Yanmai 20 yielded lower, with Zhengmai 9023 moderately yielding. Being evaluated drought tolerance in term of yield after suffering from drought stress, Jinmai 47, Luohan 2, and Yumai 18 were cultivars of higher drought tolerance, while Shijiazhuang 8 and Yanmai 20, lower drought tolerance, and Zhengmai 9023, moderate drought tolerance. The 3 drought tolerant cultivars markedly differed in the key pathways of physiological responses to drought stress. Compared with lower drought tolerant cultivars, Shijiazhuang 8 and Yanmai 20, after exposed to drought stress at jointing stage, Yumai 18 showed significantly lower stomatal conductance, indicating its higher stomatal regulation ability; Luohan 2 had lower cellular osmotic potential, indicating its higher osmotic adjustment capability; Luohan 2 also had lower membrane ion leakage, showing stronger membrane stability; Jinmai 47 showed no significant difference from the lower drought tolerant cultivars in stomatal regulation, osmotic adjustment, and membrane stability. The significant difference among cultivars in the critical pathways of physiological response to drought stress suggested that drought tolerance of wheat cultivars can not be scientifically evaluated through sole physiological index, but through multiple indices.