Genotypic differences in leaf area maintenance contribute to differences in recovery from water stress in soybean
R. J. Lawn A C and A. A. Likoswe BA Tropical Crop Science Unit, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld 4811, and CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Davies Laboratory, Townsville, Qld 4814, Australia.
B School of Marine and Tropical Biology, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia, and Grain and Legume Development Project, PO Box 1034, Lilongwe, Malawi (now deceased).
C Corresponding author. Email: robert.lawn@jcu.edu.au; bob.lawn@csiro.au
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 59(12) 1075-1085 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR08177
Submitted: 23 May 2008 Accepted: 17 October 2008 Published: 10 November 2008
Abstract
Genotypic effects on leaf survival during water deficit stress and subsequent recovery were evaluated using soybean plants grown in tall cylinders in the glasshouse. An initial experiment sought to verify reported genotypic differences in leaf area maintenance under severe water deficit stress. A second experiment sought to test the hypothesis that these putative differences might affect recovery after stress was relieved. Two shoot genotypes, G2120 and cv. Valder, reported to have high and low leaf area retention, respectively, were used in both experiments. In order to preclude the possibility that the reported differences between G2120 and Valder were related to root rather than shoot traits, each shoot was grafted at the cotyledonary stage onto 2 non-self root genotypes, cv. Leichhardt and PI416937. Leichhardt has an apparently normal root, while PI416937 has been reported to be ‘extensively fibrous-rooted’. In the first experiment, water was withheld at the first trifoliolate leaf stage and the plants subjected to terminal water deficit stress. Consistent with the previous report, leaf area was maintained for longer into the stress by the G2120 shoots, with rapid loss of lower leaves not starting until c. 90% of plant-available water (PAW) had been depleted, compared with c. 80% for Valder. The Valder leaves also showed more ‘firing’ damage, with large patches of dead leaf tissue on the retained leaves. Also consistent with the previous report, leaf epidermal conductance to water vapour was lower in G2120 than in Valder. There were no apparent root effects. In the second experiment, water was again withheld at the first trifoliolate leaf stage, and treatments were re-watered when 80%, 85%, 90%, and 95% of the estimated PAW was extracted. Again, G2120 shoots showed better leaf area maintenance during the drying cycle, and less firing damage. When the plants were re-watered, the re-growth of G2120 generally exceeded that of Valder at all levels of PAW depletion. The differences in recovery between G2120 and Valder shoots were sufficient to have agronomic relevance, and confirmed the hypothesis that leaf area retention can affect recovery after severe water deficit stress. Root effects were relatively small. During the drying cycle, leaflet growth was marginally enhanced by Leichhardt relative to PI416937 roots. After re-watering, there was stronger recovery of plants with PI416937 roots, especially those with G2120 shoots. The basis of the differences between the root genotypes is not known but the stronger recovery of PI416937 may reflect its putative ‘extensively fibrous’ nature.
Additional keywords: drought resistance, physiological traits, varietal improvement.
Acknowledgments
The research reported here was conducted by AL in partial fulfilment of a MSc degree awarded by James Cook University. The provision of a scholarship and research funding to AL by the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations is acknowledged.
Barrs HD, Weatherley PE
(1962) A re-examination of the relative turgidity technique for estimating water deficit in leaves. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 15, 413–428.
Bezdicek DF,
Magee BH, Schillinger JA
(1972) Improved reciprocal grafting technique for soybeans (Glycine max L.). Agronomy Journal 64, 558.
Blum A
(2005) Drought resistance, water-use efficiency, and yield potential—are they compatible, dissonant, or mutually exclusive? Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 56, 1159–1168.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cardwell VB, Polson DE
(1972) Response of Chippewa 64 soybean scions to root of different genotypes. Crop Science 12, 217–219.
Hufstetler VE,
Boerma HR,
Carter TE, Earl HJ
(2007) Genotypic variation for three physiological traits affecting drought tolerance in soybean. Crop Science 47, 25–35.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
James AT,
Lawn RJ, Cooper M
(2008a) Genotypic variation for drought stress response traits in soybean. I. Genotypic variation in soybean and wild Glycine spp. for epidermal conductance, osmotic potential, and relative water content. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 59, 656–669.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
James AT,
Lawn RJ, Cooper M
(2008b) Genotypic variation for drought stress response traits in soybean. II. Inter-relations between epidermal conductance, osmotic potential, and relative water content and plant survival. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 59, 670–678.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
James AT,
Lawn RJ, Cooper M
(2008c) Genotypic variation for drought stress response traits in soybean. III. Broad-sense heritability of epidermal conductance, osmotic potential, and relative water content. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 59, 679–689.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lawn RJ
(1982a) Response of four grain legumes to water stress in south-eastern Queensland. I. Physiological response mechanisms. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 33, 481–496.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lawn RJ
(1982b) Response of four grain legumes to water stress in south-eastern Queensland. III. Dry matter production, yield and water use efficiency. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 33, 511–521.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lawn RJ, Bushby HVA
(1982) Effect of root, shoot, and Rhizobium strain on nitrogen fixation in four Asiatic Vigna species. New Phytologist 92, 425–434.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lawn RJ,
Byth DE, Mungomery VE
(1977) Response of soybeans to planting date in south-eastern Queensland. III. Agronomic and physiological response of cultivars to planting arrangement. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 28, 63–79.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lawn RJ,
Fischer KS, Brun WA
(1974) Symbiotic nitrogen fixation in soybeans II. Interrelationship between carbon and nitrogen assimilation. Crop Science 14, 17–22.
|
CAS |
Likoswe AA, Lawn RJ
(2008) Response to terminal water deficit stress of cowpea, pigeonpea, and soybean in pure stand and in competition. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 59, 27–57.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ludlow MM, Muchow RC
(1990) A critical evaluation of traits for improving crop yields in water-limited environments. Advances in Agronomy 43, 107–153.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Morgan JM
(1984) Osmoregulation and water stress in higher plants. Annual Review of Plant Physiology 35, 299–319.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Morgan JM
(1992) Adaptation to water deficits in three grain legume species. Mechanisms of turgor maintenance. Field Crops Research 29, 91–106.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Muchow RC
(1985) Canopy development in grain legumes grown under different soil water regimes in a semi-arid tropical environment. Field Crops Research 11, 99–109.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pajé MCM,
Ludlow MM, Lawn RJ
(1988) Variation among soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) accessions in epidermal conductance of leaves. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 39, 363–373.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pantalone VR,
Burton JW, Carter TE
(1996) Soybean fibrous root heritability and genotypic correlations with agronomic and seed quality traits. Crop Science 36, 1120–1125.
Pantalone VR,
Rebetzke GJ,
Burton JW,
Carter TE, Israel DW
(1999) Soybean PI 416937 root system contributes to biomass accumulation in reciprocal grafts. Agronomy Journal 91, 840–844.
Rose IA
(1987) Sowing-date responses of early maturing indeterminate soybean genotypes in northern New South Wales. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 27, 135–140.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rose IA,
McWhirter KS, Spurway RA
(1992) Identification of drought tolerance in early maturing indeterminate soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 43, 645–657.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sinclair TR, Ludlow MM
(1986) Influence of soil water supply on the plant water balance of four tropical grain legumes. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 13, 329–341.
Sullivan TP, Brun WA
(1975) Effect of root genotype on shoot water relations in soybeans. Crop Science 15, 319–322.
Summerfield RJ,
Lawn RJ,
Qi A,
Ellis RH, Roberts EH , et al.
(1993) Towards the reliable prediction of time to flowering in six annual crops. II. Soybean (Glycine max). Experimental Agriculture 29, 253–289.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Turner NC
(1981) Techniques and experimental approaches for the measurements of plant water status. Plant and Soil 58, 339–366.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Turner NC
(1986) Crop water deficits: A decade of progress. Advances in Agronomy 39, 1–51.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
