Abstract
A number of physiological traits have been proposed as selection criteria for late drought resistance and grain yield improvement in wheat. To characterize them in terms of late drought resistance, 64 bread wheat genotypes were evaluated for canopy temperature difference (CTD), leaf senescence rate (LSR), SPAD chlorophyll value, initial fluorescence (Fo), maximum fluorescence (Fm), variable fluorescence (Fv), maximum quantum efficiency of PSII (Fv/Fm), leaf ash content, and grain ash content in two field experiments conducted in irrigated and late drought conditions during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 seasons in Erzurum, Turkey. The experiments were conducted in an 8 x 8 lattice design with two replicates. Significant variation was observed among the genotypes for all the traits. Late drought decreased the grain yield, CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, Fv/Fm, and leaf ash content but increased LSR and grain ash content. The drought sensitivity of the genotypes was determined by a ranking method based on 25 traits measured in the late drought conditions. According to the rank-sum (RS) values of the genotypes, four genotypes were defined as resistant, 15 genotypes as medium resistant, 34 genotypes as medium sensitive, and 11 genotypes as sensitive. Resistant genotypes M?fitbey and Dağdaş 94 produced the highest grain yields in late drought conditions and appeared to be promising parents for the breeding of resistant cultivars. RS was negatively correlated with CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, and Fv/Fm, while it was positively correlated with LSR. For screening late drought-resistant genotypes, 15 days post anthesis (15DPA) is the optimum time for Fv, CTD, and SPAD measurements. The stepwise multiple linear regression analysis indicated that the Fv15DPA, Fv25DPA, CTD15DPA, and SPAD15DPA could explain 75.2% of the total variation in RS. Therefore, the Fv15DPA, Fv25DPA, CTD15DPA, and SPAD15DPA traits can be used as selection criteria as a combination for the classifying of wheat genotypes in terms of late drought resistance.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 13
Claim · model-written summary
Genotypes varied significantly for all measured traits.
- Taxon
- bread wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Material
- genotypese1
- Outcome
- variatione1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“Significant variation was observed among the genotypes for all the traits”
Claim · model-written summary
Late drought decreased grain yield.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Late droughte1
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Comparator
- irrigatede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“Late drought decreased the grain yield, CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, Fv/Fm, and leaf ash content”
e2“irrigated and late drought conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Late drought decreased CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv and Fv/Fm.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Late droughte1
- Outcome
- CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, Fv/Fme1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Comparator
- irrigatede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“Late drought decreased the grain yield, CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, Fv/Fm, and leaf ash content”
e2“irrigated and late drought conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Late drought decreased leaf ash content.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Late droughte1
- Outcome
- leaf ash contente1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Comparator
- irrigatede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“Late drought decreased the grain yield, CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, Fv/Fm, and leaf ash content”
e2“irrigated and late drought conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Late drought increased leaf senescence rate.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Late droughte2
- Outcome
- LSRe1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Comparator
- irrigatede3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“increased LSR and grain ash content”
e2“Late drought decreased the grain yield, CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, Fv/Fm, and leaf ash content but increased LSR and grain ash content”
e3“irrigated and late drought conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Late drought increased grain ash content.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Late droughte1
- Outcome
- grain ash contente1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Comparator
- irrigatede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“Late drought decreased the grain yield, CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, Fv/Fm, and leaf ash content but increased LSR and grain ash content”
e2“irrigated and late drought conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Rank-sum classified four resistant, 15 medium resistant, 34 medium sensitive, and 11 sensitive genotypes.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- resistante1
- Value
- four genotypese1
- Qualifier
- 15 genotypes as medium resistant, 34 genotypes as medium sensitive, and 11 genotypes as sensitivee1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“four genotypes were defined as resistant, 15 genotypes as medium resistant, 34 genotypes as medium sensitive, and 11 genotypes as sensitive”
Claim · model-written summary
Resistant M?fitbey and Dağdaş 94 produced the highest grain yields under late drought and were promising breeding parents.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- M?fitbey and Dağdaş 94e1
- Treatment
- late drought conditionse1
- Outcome
- grain yieldse1
- Direction
- higheste1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“Resistant genotypes M?fitbey and Dağdaş 94 produced the highest grain yields in late drought conditions and appeared to be promising parents for the breeding of resistant cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Rank-sum values correlated negatively with CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv and Fv/Fm.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- genotypese0
- Outcome
- RSe1
- Direction
- negatively correlatede1
- Qualifier
- CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, and Fv/Fme1
Not reportedOrgan / stage
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“RS was negatively correlated with CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, and Fv/Fm”
Claim · model-written summary
Rank-sum values correlated positively with LSR.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- genotypese0
- Outcome
- RSe2
- Direction
- positively correlatede1
- Qualifier
- LSRe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“it was positively correlated with LSR”
e2“RS was negatively correlated with CTD, SPAD, Fm, Fv, and Fv/Fm, while it was positively correlated with LSR”
Claim · model-written summary
Fv, CTD and SPAD measurements at 15 days post anthesis were identified as optimal for screening drought resistance.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Organ / stage
- post anthesise1
- Outcome
- optimum time for Fv, CTD, and SPAD measurementse1
- Value
- 15 dayse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“For screening late drought-resistant genotypes, 15 days post anthesis (15DPA) is the optimum time for Fv, CTD, and SPAD measurements”
Claim · model-written summary
Fv15DPA, Fv25DPA, CTD15DPA and SPAD15DPA explained 75.2% of rank-sum variation.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- total variation in RSe1
- Value
- 75.2%e1
- Qualifier
- Fv15DPA, Fv25DPA, CTD15DPA, and SPAD15DPAe1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“the Fv15DPA, Fv25DPA, CTD15DPA, and SPAD15DPA could explain 75.2% of the total variation in RS”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend the four combined traits as selection criteria for classifying late drought resistance.
- Taxon
- bread wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- selection criteriae1
- Qualifier
- Fv15DPA, Fv25DPA, CTD15DPA, and SPAD15DPAe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bread wheat genotypes”
e1“the Fv15DPA, Fv25DPA, CTD15DPA, and SPAD15DPA traits can be used as selection criteria as a combination for the classifying of wheat genotypes in terms of late drought resistance”
The same questions in other papers
drought · quality: postharvest · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →drought · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →drought · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
344 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
427 papers more in this group
See all 431 papers →drought · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
536 papers in the same direction as this paper · 95 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
628 papers more in this group
See all 632 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.