Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T12:00:26.730Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic variability in cotton germplasm: predicting the agro physiological markers for high-temperature tolerance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2021

Amjad Farooq Open the ORCID record for Amjad Farooq [Opens in a new window] ,
Amir Shakeel ,
Waqas Shafqat Chattha ,
Tariq Manzoor Khan ,
Muhammad Tehseen Azhar  and
Asif Saeed
Amjad Farooq*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan Cotton Research Station, Ayub Agriculture Research Institute, Faisalabad-38000, Pakistan
Amir Shakeel*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan
Waqas Shafqat Chattha
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan
Tariq Manzoor Khan
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan
Muhammad Tehseen Azhar
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan School of Agriculture Sciences, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou-450000, China
Asif Saeed
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan
*
Author for correspondence: Amjad Farooq, E-mail: amjad.cri@gmail.com; Amir Shakeel, E-mail: dramirpbg@gmail.com
Author for correspondence: Amjad Farooq, E-mail: amjad.cri@gmail.com; Amir Shakeel, E-mail: dramirpbg@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

High temperature negatively affects cotton production worldwide. In Pakistan, cotton crop faces high temperature at peak flowering during June–July, which is a major reason for yield losses. The present study was conducted to find some agro-physiological markers for high-temperature tolerance. Fifty cotton genotypes were raised under normal sown (high-temperature stress) and late sown (optimum temperature) conditions for 2 years. Data were recorded for relative cell injury percentage (RCI), chlorophyll content (CC), canopy temperature (CT), boll retention percentage (BR), bolls per plant (BP), boll weight (BW), hundred seed weight (HSW), sympodial branches per plant (SBP), plant height (PH) and seed cotton yield (SCY). A large amount of variability was found among cotton genotypes as proved by descriptive statistics. Stable genotypes were selected based on higher SCY and yield components (BP, BW, HSW, SBP, PH and SCY) performance along with less RCI%, high CC and low CT. The results of heatmap analysis showed that the six cotton genotypes viz., FH-Noor, FH-Lalazar, FH-458, FH-466, NIAB-545 and NIAB-878 performed better under high-temperature stress. These selected genotypes can be a source for breeding high-temperature tolerance. Furthermore, the results from correlation analysis confirmed that the traits such as RCI%, CC and CT can be considered as early selection criteria due to their positive association with SCY. Whilst some other parameters such as BP, BW, BR, SBP and PH might be used as direct selection indices for SCY under high-temperature stress.

Keywords

Peak floweringselection criteriasowing dates
Type
Climate Change and Agriculture Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 159 , Issue 1-2 , January 2021 , pp. 11 - 22
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abro, S, Rajput, MT, Khan, MA, Sial, MA and Tahir, SS (2015) Screening of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) genotypes for heat tolerance. Pakistan Journal of Botany 47, 2085–2091.Google Scholar
Ali, MA, Farooq, J, Batool, A, Zahoor, A, Azeem, F, Mahmood, A and Jabran, K (2019) Cotton production in Pakistan. In Jabran, K and Chauhan, BS (eds), Cotton Production. USA: Wiley & Sons Ltd., pp. 249–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azhar, FM, Ali, Z, Akhtar, MM, Khan, AA and Trethowan, R (2009) Genetic variability of heat tolerance, and its effect on yield and fibre quality traits in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Plant Breeding 128, 356–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bibi, AC, Oosterhuis, DM and Gonias, ED (2008) Photosynthesis, quantum yield of photosystem II and membrane leakage as affected by high temperatures in cotton genotypes. Journal of Cotton Science 12, 150–159.Google Scholar
Bita, CE and Gerats, T (2013) Plant tolerance to high temperature in a changing environment, scientific fundamentals and production of heat stress-tolerant crops. Frontiers in Plant Science 4, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyer, JS (1982) Plant productivity and environment. Science (New York, N.Y.) 218, 443–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, PW (2008) Cotton Heat Stress. Tuscan, AZ: The University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Cottee, NS, Tan, DKY, Bange, MP, Cothren, JT and Campbell, LC (2010) Multi-level determination of heat tolerance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) under field conditions. Crop Science 50, 2553–2564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demirel, U, Copur, O and Gur, A (2016) Early-stage screening for heat tolerance in cotton. Plant Breeding 135, 80–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, H, Li, W, Tang, W, Li, Z, Zhang, D and Niu, Y (2006) Yield, quality and leaf senescence of cotton grown at varying sowing dates and plant densities in the Yellow River Valley of China. Field Crops Research 98, 106–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Driedonks, N, Rieu, I and Vriezen, WH (2016) Breeding for plant heat tolerance at vegetative and reproductive stages. Plant Reproduction 29, 67–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ekinci, R, Basbag, S, Karademir, E and Karademir, C (2017) The effects of high temperature stress on some agronomic characters in cotton. Pakistan Journal of Botany 49, 503–508.Google Scholar
Gormus, O and Yucel, C (2002) Different planting date and potassium fertility effects on cotton yield and fiber properties in the Cukurova region, Turkey. Field Crops Research 78, 141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodges, HF, Reddy, KR, McKinion, JM and Reddy, VR (1993) Temperature effects on cotton. Mississippi State University Experiment Station Bulletin 990.Google Scholar
Iqbal, M, Ul-Allah, S, Naeem, M, Hussain, M, Ijaz, M, Wasaya, A and Ahmad, MQ (2018) Reproductive development and seed cotton yield of Gossypium hirsutum L. as affected by genotype and planting time. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 20, 1591–1596.Google Scholar
Kakani, VG, Reddy, KR, Koti, S, Wallace, TP, Prasad, PV, Reddy, VR and Zhao, D (2005) Differences in vitro pollen germination and pollen tube growth of cotton cultivars in response to high temperature. Annals of Botany 96, 59–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karademir, E, Karademir, C, Ekinci, R, Basbag, S and Basal, H (2012) Screening cotton varieties (Gossypium hirsutum L.) for heat tolerance under field conditions. African Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 6335–6342.Google Scholar
Khan, N, Azhar, FM, Khan, AA and Ahmad, R (2014) Measurement of canopy temperature for heat tolerance in upland cotton: variability and its genetic basis. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 51, 359–365.Google Scholar
Liakatas, A, Roussopoulos, D and Whittington, WJ (1998) Controlled temperature effects on cotton yield and fibre properties. Journal of Agricultural Science 130, 463–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Z, Yuan, Y, Liu, S, Yu, X and Rao, L (2006) Screening for high-temperature tolerant cotton cultivars by testing in vitro pollen germination, pollen tube growth and boll retention. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 48, 706–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lokhande, S and Reddy, KR (2014) Quantifying temperature effects on cotton reproductive efficiency and fiber quality. Agronomy Journal 106, 1275–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohammadi, M, Karimizadeh, R, Sabaghnia, S and Shefazadeh, MK (2012) Effective application of canopy temperature for wheat genotypes screening under different water availability in warm environments. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science 18, 934–941.Google Scholar
Pakistan Meteorological Department (2009) Technical Report, No. PMD-22/2009. Climate change indicators of Pakistan. August.Google Scholar
Pearson, K (1920) Notes on history of correlation. Biometrika 13, 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purushothaman, R and Krishnamurthy, L (2014) Timing of sampling for the canopy temperature depression can be critical for the best differentiation of drought tolerance in chickpea. SAT eJournal 12, 1–9.Google Scholar
Rahman, H (2006) Environmental interaction, additive and non-additive genetic variability is involved in the expression of tissue and whole-plant heat tolerance in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L). Genetics and Molecular Biology 29, 525–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahman, H, Malik, SA and Saleem, M (2004) Heat tolerance of upland cotton during the fruiting stage evaluated using cellular membrane thermostability. Field Crop Research 85, 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, KR, Hodges, HF and McKonion, JM (1993) A temperature model for cotton phenology. Biotronics 22, 47–59.Google Scholar
Reddy, KR, Doma, PR, Mearns, LO, Boone, MYL, Hodges, HF, Richardson, AG and Kakani, VG (2002) Simulating the impacts of climate change on cotton production in the Mississippi Delta. Climate Research 3, 271–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saleem, MF, Bilal, MF, Anjum, SA, Khan, HZ, Sarwar, M and Farhad, W (2014) Planting time and N nutrition on cell membrane thermostability, Bolls’ retention and fibre traits in cotton. The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 24, 829–837.Google Scholar
Salman, M, Khan, AA, Rana, IA, Maqsood, RH and Azhar, MT (2016) Genetic architecture of relative cell injury and some yield related parameters in Gossypium hirsutum L. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 21, 246–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, K, Wijewardana, C, Gajanayake, B, Lokhande, S, Wallace, T, Jones, D and Reddy, KR (2018) Genotypic variability among cotton cultivar for heat and drought tolerance using reproductive and physiological traits. Euphytica 214, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snider, JL, Oosterhuis, DM, Skulman, BW and Kawakami, EM (2009) Heat stress-induced limitations to reproductive success in Gossypium hirsutum. Physiologia Plantarum 137, 125–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steel, RGD, Torrie, JH and Dickey, DA (1997) Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach, 3rd Edn, New York, USA: McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc.Google Scholar
Sullivan, CY (1972) Mechanism of heat and drought resistance in grain sorghum and methods of measurement. In Rao, NGP and House, LR (eds), Sorghum in Seventies. New Delhi, India: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co, pp. 246–264.Google Scholar
Taiz, L and Zeiger, E (2006) Plant Physiology. Sunderland, MA, USA: Sinauer Associates Inc. Publishers.Google Scholar
Tariq, M, Yasmeen, A, Ahmad, S, Hussain, N, Afzal, N and Hasanuzzaman, M (2017) Shedding of fruiting structures in cotton, factors, compensation and prevention. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 20, 251–262.Google Scholar
Wahid, A, Gelani, S, Ashraf, M and Foolad, MR (2007) Heat tolerance in plants: an overview. Environmental and Experimental Botany 61, 199–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wanjura, DF, Maas, SJ, Winslow, JC and Upchurch, DR (2004) Scanned and spot measured canopy temperature of cotton and corn. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 44, 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahid, KR, Ali, F, Shah, F, Younas, M, Shah, T, Shahwar, D, Hassan, W, Ahmad, Z, Qi, C, Lu, Y and Iqbal, A (2016) Response and tolerance mechanism of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) to elevated temperature stress: a review. Frontiers in Plant Science 7, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, W, Wang, Y, Shu, H, Li, J and Zhou, Z (2012) Sowing date and boll position affected boll weight, fiber quality and fiber physiological parameters in two cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) cultivars. African Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 6073–6081.Google Scholar