عنوان مقاله [English]
Background and Objectives
Cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) is one of the most important aromatic and medicinal plants in the world. It has a short life cycle (100-120 days) and needs little water for its growth cycle. Therefore, it is suitable for cultivation in arid and semi-arid regions of Iran. Different indices, including tolerance (TOL), mean productivity (MP), geometric mean productivity (GMP), stress tolerance index (STI), stress susceptibility index (SSI), harmonic mean (HM), yield index (YI), and yield stability index (YSI) have been employed for screening the stress tolerant genotypes. Due to the economic, medicinal, and aromatic importance of cumin, this study evaluated elite genotypes for drought tolerance in cumin in order to develop improved genetic population for farmers’ usage.
Materials and Methods
The experiment was carried out in the research field of Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, during the growing season of 2016-2017. In this study, 15 elite genotypes in cumin were evaluated using a randomized complete block design with three replications in two different environments, including normal and stress conditions. Stress treatment was cutting-off irrigation at the early flowering stage. Seed yield (ton/ha) was measured. Tolerance indices were calculated for genotypes based on the seed yield. To find suitable indices in order to determine the tolerant genotypes, the correlation coefficient between the calculated indices YP and YS was performed. To evaluate the relationship between the tolerance indices and the studied genotypes, principal components analysis (PCA) was performed. In order to use all tolerance indices simultaneously, an equation was used for estimating the stress tolerance score (STS).
The results of the correlation analysis revealed that GMP, MP, and STI indices were positively correlated with seed yield under both stress and non-stress conditions. Therefore, they can be suitable indices for determining tolerant genotypes. Principal components analysis (PCA) showed that the first and second Principal component explained 61.89% and 37.52% of the total variation, respectively. According to the bi-plot graph, genotypes No. 7, 12, 8, and 13 with high MP, GMP, and STI scores and low TOL and SSI scores had the highest tolerance to drought stress. Based on the calculated STS (stress tolerance score), genotypes No. 7, 4, 12, 8, and 13 were the most tolerant genotypes and genotypes No. 14, 10, 6, 9, and 2 were the most sensitive genotypes, respectively. These results were identical with the results of bi-plot analysis. Moreover, this equation is much easier to be used than the multivariate analysis, such as principal components analysis (PCA).
The aim of this study was the evaluation and selection of tolerant genotypes with high seed yield, and based on the results obtained from all the applied methods, it can be concluded that genotypes No. 7, 4, 12, 8, and 13 are identified as tolerant genotypes and were recommended to develop improved genetic population after being-tested in other places.
Abdolshahi, R., Safarian, A., Nazari, M., Pourseyedi, S. and Mohamadi-Nejad, G. (2013). Screening drought-tolerant genotypes in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) using different multivariate methods. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 59(5), 685-704.
Betran, F. J., Beck, D., Banziger, M. and Edmeades, G. O. (2003). Genetic analysis of inbred and hybrid grain yield under stress and non-stress environments in tropical maize. Crop Science, 43(3), 807-817.
Bettaieb, R. I., Jabri-Karoui, I., Hamrouni-Sellami, I., Bourgou, S., Limam, F. and Marzouk, B. (2012). Effect of drought on the biochemical composition and antioxidant activities of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) seeds. Industrial Crops and Products, 36(1), 238-245.
Bouslama, M. and Schapaugh, W. T. (1984). Stress tolerance in soybean. Part 1: evaluation of three screening techniques for heat and drought tolerance. Crop Science, 24(5), 933-937.
Ceccarelli, S. and Grando, S. (1991). Selection environment and environmental sensitivity in barley. Euphytica, 57(2), 157-167.
Farshadfar, E., Poursiahbidi, M. M. and Safavi, S. M. (2013). Assessment of drought tolerance in land races of bread wheat based on resistance/tolerance indices. International Journal of Advanced Biological and Biomedical Research, 1(2), 143-158.
Fernandez, G.C. (1992). Effective selection criteria for assessing plant stress tolerance. In Proceeding of the International Symposium on Adaptation of Vegetables and other Food Crops in Temperature and Water Stress, Aug. 13-16, Shanhua, Taiwan. 257-270.
Fischer, R. A. and Maurer, R. (1978). Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. Part 1: grain yield response. l, 29(5), 897-912.
Gavuzzi, P., Rizza, F., Palumbo, M., Campaline, R. G., Ricciardi, G. L. and Borghi, B. (1997). Evaluation of field and laboratory predictors of drought and heat tolerance in winter cereals. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 77(4), 523-531.
Kafi, M., Rashed Mohassel, M. H., Koocheki, A. and Nassiri, M. (2006). Cumin (Cuminum cyminum) production and processing. Enfield, New Hampshire: Science Publishers.
Khodarahmpour, Z., Choukan, R., Bihamta, M. R. and Majid-Hervan, E. (2011). Determination of the best heat stress tolerance indices in maize (Zea mays L.) inbred lines and hybrids under Khuzestan province conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 13(1), 111-121.
Liu, C., Yang, Z. and Hu, Y. G. (2015). Drought resistance of wheat alien chromosome addition lines evaluated by membership function value based on multiple traits and drought resistance index of grain yield. Field Crops Research, 179(1), 103-112.
Moghaddam, A. and Hadizade, M. H. (2002). Response of corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids and their parental lines to drought using different stress tolerance indices. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal, 18(3), 255-272. [In Farsi]
Moshatati, A., Siadat, S. A., Alami Saeid, Kh., Bakhshandeh, A. M. and Jalal-Kamali, M. R. (2013). Comparison of wheat cultivars using indices of tolerance and susceptibility to terminal heat stress in Ahvaz. Plant Productions, 36(2), 61-73. [In Farsi]
Omidi, M., Siahpoosh, M. R., Mamghani, R. and Modarresi M. (2015). Heat tolerance evaluating of wheat cultivars using physiological characteristics and stress tolerance indices in Ahvaz climatic conditions. Plant Productions, 38(1), 103-113. [In Farsi]
Rosielle, A. A. and Hamblin, J. (1981). Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and nonstress environment. Crop Science, 21(6), 943-946.
Sadeghzade Ahari, D. (2006). Evaluation for tolerance to drought stress in dry land promising durum wheat genotypes. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 8(1), 30-45. [In Farsi with English abstract]
Safari, B., Mortazavian, S.M.M., Sadat Noori, S.A. and Foghi, B. (2017). Evaluation of drought tolerance in endemic ecotypes of cumin using tolerance indices. Journal of Plant Production Research, 23(4), 185-204.
Shafazadeh, M. K., Yazdan sepas, A., Amini, A. and Ghannadha, M. R. (2004). Study of terminal drought tolerance in promising winter and facultative wheat genotypes using stress susceptibility and tolerance indices. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal, 20(1), 57-71. [In Farsi]
Sio-Se Mardeh, A., Ahmadi, A., Poustini, K. and Mohammadi, V. (2006). Evaluation of drought resistance indices under various environmental conditions. Field Crops Research, 98(2-3), 222-229.