Statistical study of limited irrigation effects on morphological and agronomical traits in white Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

Subject Areas : New Finding in Agriculture

M. Safapour ¹ (Member of Young Research Club, Islamic Azad University, Arak Branch, Iran)
S. Khaghani ² (Scientific Member and Member of Young Research Club, Islamic Azad University, Arak Branch, Iran)
M. Amirabadi ³ (Islamic Azad University, Arak Branch, Iran)
M. Teymouri ⁴ (Member of Young Research Club, Islamic Azad University, Arak Branch, Iran)
M. Bezian ⁵ (Member of Young Research Club, Islamic Azad University, Arak Branch, Iran)

Received: 2015-12-01 Accepted : 2015-12-01 Published : 2009-07-23

Keywords: normal irrigation, limited irrigation, White bean, resistant index,

Abstract :

In order to evaluate the effect of water deficit stress (limited irrigation) on different traits of bean. Ten bean genotypes were planted in a randomized block design with three replications under non-stress and drought stress conditions (22 traits were measurement) in the Islamic Azad University of Arak. The results of stepwise regression are shown that the length of the longest pod, number of days to filling pod, number of days to Maturity, 100 weight seed and length of tap root under non-stress condition and number of seed on per plant, 100-seed weight and length of tap root under the stress condition had the most effect on the yield in white bean. Factor analysis showed in the normal condition six factors were identified that over 80% of the performance changes are justified and in the Stress conditions there are seven factors were identified that over 84% of the performance changes are justified. Geometric Mean Productivity (GMP), Stress Tolerance Index (STI) and Mean Productivity (MP) were the most suitable indicators for selecting drought resistant genotypes. Based on these indicators KS 41225، KS41147 و KS 41231 in White beans, were found as resistant genotypes.

References:

1- ابراهیمی، م. 1380.  بررسی تنوع ژنتیکی و فنوتیپی صفات لوبیا و همبستگی با عملکرد لوبیا پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد دانشکده کشاورزی کرج دانشگاه تهران.

2- امینی، ا. 1381. بررسی تنوع ژنتیکی و جغرافیایی 576 رقم لوبیا بانک ژن دانشکده کشاورزی کرج با استفاده از روشهای آماری چند متغیره، مجله علوم کشاورزی ایران. جلد 33، 605-615.

3- حبیبی، غ. 1385. بررسی تنوع فنوتیپی و ژنوتیپی صفات کمی و همبستگی آنها با عملکرد در لوبیا. مجله علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی. جلد13، شماره سوم.

4- سیاه پوش، م. ا.، نورمحمدی، ق.  و سعیدی، ع. 1382. تنوع ژنتیکی، قابلیت توراث و ضرایب همبستگی و عملکرد دانه، اجزا آن و برخی صفات مورفوفیزیولوژیک در گندم. مجله علوم زراعی ایران. شماره 2، جلد پنجم. صفحات 86-101.

5- کوچکی، ع. و بناییان اول، م. 1373. زراعت در مناطق خشک . غلات، حبوبات، گیاهان صنعتی و گیاهان علوفه ای. جهاد دانشگاهی مشهد، 166 صفحه.

6- بیضایی، ا. 1381. بررسی تنوع فنوتیپی و ژنوتیپی صفات کمی و همبستگی آنها با عملکرد لوبیا. پایان نامه فوق لیسانس. دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد کرج، 157 صفحه.

7- سمیع زاده، ح. ا. 1375. بررسی تنوع فنوتیپی و ژنوتیپی صفات کمی و همبستگی آنها با عملکرد نخود سفید. پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد کرج، 189 صفحه.

8- عزیزی، ق.، رضایی، ع.  و میبدی، م. 1376. بررسی تنوع ژنتیکی و فنوتیپی و تجزیه عامل ها برای صفات مورفولوژیک در ژنوتیپ های لویبا. دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه اصفهان، 168صفحه.

9- مرجانی، ع. 1374. بررسی تغییرات ژنوتیپی و فنوتیپی صفات کمی لوبیا و مطالعات همبستگی آنها با عملکرد از طریق تجزیه علیت. پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد. کشاورزی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی کرج، 184 صفحه.

10- یخکشی، س. 1377. بررسی و تعیین همبستگی عملکرد و اجزای آن با بعضی از صفات مهم زراعی لوبیا به روش تجزیه علیت. پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد. دانشکده علوم کشاورزی ساری. دانشگاه مازندران، 160 صفحه.

11- Abeb, A., Brick, M. A. and Kirkby, R. 1998. Comparison of selection indices to identify productive dry bean lines under diverse environmental conditions. Field Crops Res. 58:15:23.

12- Acosta, J. A. 2007. Improving Resistance to drought in common bean, in mexico. Agronomia. Mesomericana 10:1,83-90. (Abstract.(

13- Acosta-Diaz, E., Lopez, T. C., posadas, R. and Ramirez, P. 2004. Adaptation of common bean to drought stress during the reproductive stage. Terra. 22:1, 49-58.

14- Aquaah, G., Adams, M. W. and Kelly, J. D. 2002. A factor analysis of plant variables associated with architecture and seed size in dry bean.Euphytica. 60:171-177.

15- Chalyk, L.V., Balashov, T. N.  and Zuchenka, A. A. 2004. Relationship between yield in rench bean varieties and its structural components. Genetic heskie osnovy selektsii selskoknozyaist vennykh ratenii zhivotnykh. Biology bulletin. Volume 29, Number 1, 53-55.

16- Coyne, D. P. 1968. Correlation, heritability and selection of yield components in field bean Phaseolus vulgaris L. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort Sci., 93:388-396.

17- Denis, J. C. and Adams, M. W. 2007. A factor analysis of plant variables related to yield in dry beans. I. Morphological traits. Crop Sci. 18:71-78.

18- Fernandez, G. C. J. 1992. Effective selection criteria for assessing stress tolerance. PP. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Adaptation of vegetables and other food crops in temperature and water stress. AVRDC Publication. Tainan. Taiwan.

19- Fischer, R. A. and Maurer, R. 1978. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. I. Grain yield response. Aust. J. Agric. Res., 29: 897–907.

20- German, C. H. Teran. 2006. Selection for drought resistance in dry bean landraces and cultivars. Crop Sci 46:2111-2120.

21- Hayse, R. S. Singh. 2007. Response of cultivars of race urango to continual dry bean versus rotational production systems". Agron J 99:1458-1462.

22- Jefferson Luís Meirelles, Coimbra., Guidolin. Altamir Frederico and Felix. Fernando Irajá. 2003. Genetic parameters of grin yield and its components with implication in the indirect selection of black bean genotypes. De Carvalho p:1-6.

23- Joachim, b. and  Cassady, k. 2000. New wheat for a secure, sustainable future research highilights of CIMMYT wheat program 1999.

24- Khaghani, S. and Bihamta, M. 2008. Study of qualitative and quantitative traits in red bean in non-stress and drought conditions. Asian journal of plant sciences, 7(6): 563-568

25- Khaghani. S. 2009. Study of qualitative and quantitative traits in white bean. Journal of plant science research. Journal of sciences and technology of agriculture and natural resources. Year: 2009. Volume: 13, NO: 47.

26- Nazari, L. and Pakniyat, H. 2010. Assessment of drought tolerance in barley genotypes. J. Applied Sciences, 10: 151-156.

27- Neinhus. J. and Singh, S. D. 1988. Genetic of seed yield and its components in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) of middle american origin. Plant. Breed, 101:143-163.

28- Ramaltto, M. A., Deb, A. L. and Teixeira, N. C. S. 2006. Genetic and phenotypic correlations among different characters in beans. Abs. On Field Beans. Vol.12 (1): 14-17.

29- Ramiez-Vallejo. P. j. and Elly, D. 1998. traits related to drought resistance in common bean. Euphytica 99:127-136.

30- Rosales, S., Shibala, K., Gallegos, A., Lopez, T., Cereceres, O. and Kelly, I. D. 2004. Biomass distribution, maturity acceleration and yield in drought stressed common bean cultivars. Field-crops- research. 85:2-3, 2004-211

31- Rosielle, A. and Hamblin, J. 1981. Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environments, Crop Sci 21:943-946.

32- Santalla, M., Eseribano, M. R. and Ron. A. M. 1993. Correlationbetween agronomic and immature pod characters in population of  rench bean. Abs. On plant breed. Vol. 63(4):495.

33- Schoonhoven, A. Van. and Voysest, O. 1991. Common beans research for crop improvement C.A.B international in association with CIAT.

34- Shiri, M., Aliyev, R. T. and Choukan. R. 2010. Water stress effects on combining ability and gene action of yield and genetic properties of drought tolerance indices in maize. Res. J. Environ. Sci., 4: 75-84.

35- Singh, G. and Singh, M. 1994. Correlation and Path analysis in black gram (Phaseolus mungo). Indian J. Agri Sci. Vol. 64(7): 462-464.

36- Singh, O. 1982. Genetic analysis of irradiated and non irradiated diallal population in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L. ), PHD. Thesis. Hau. Nissar. ndian (abstract).

37- Szilagyi, L. 2003. Influence of drought on seed yield components in common bean, blug. J. plant phisio., special issue, 320-330.

38- Teran, H, and Singh. S. P. 2002. Comparison of sources and lines selected for drought resistance in common bean. Crop Sci.42(1): 64-70.

39- Timothy, G. R., Rayaram. S., Ginkel, M. V., Trethowan, R., Joachim, H. Braum and cassady, K. 2000. New wheat for a secure, sustainable future. Research highlights of the CIMMYT wheat program 1999-2000, 970- 648- 096- 2.