Abstract
A field experiment was carried out during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 winter growing seasons at the Experimental Farm, Kafr El-Hamam Agricultural Research Station, Zagazig, Sharkia Governorate, Egypt, to evaluate 20 wheat genotypes and cultivars under three irrigation regimes. Plants in the first regime were irrigated four times after planting irrigation (normal irrigation I1). In the second regime plants were irrigated two times after planting irrigation (I2). In the third regime plants were given one surface-irrigation 25 days after planting irrigation (I3). A wide border (7m) was made to minimize the underground water permeability surrounded each experiment. The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design with three replications. Highly significant genotype differences were registered for grain yield and its components in both seasons and combined. The interactions between genotypes and water regime treatments for grain yield and its components were highly significant for all characters in both seasons and combined except for 1000 grain weight in first season. The obtained results showed that I1 treatment gave the highest water consumptive use and applied irrigation water. Results indicated that values of water consumptive use in the first season were 520.1, 382.6 and 275.3 mm for irrigation regimes I1, I2 and I3, respectively. However, in the second season the corresponding values of the water consumptive use were 494.7, 370.9 and 263.4 mm, respectively. Genotype No. 2 gave the least value of water consumptive use, while genotype No. 13 recorded the highest water consumptive use. Water utilization efficiency (kg grains/ m3 applied water) revealed that I3 gave the highest value, whereas I1was the lowest one. The highest water utilization efficiency was registered by Genotype 8, while genotype 3 recorded the lowest value for this measurement. Drought sensitivity index (DSI) reveal that genotypes No 1, 5, 8, 10, 12, 16 and 18 were tolerant to water stress. Moderate drought stress resulted in significant increase in total soluble sugars, proline and free amino acids in the studied genotypes. Under sever stress, the above mentioned characters significantly increased in genotypes No 1, 2 and 3 compared to other tested genotypes. Therefore wheat genotypes No.1, 2 and 3 could be classified as more tolerant to moderate drought stress. Anatomical features of 5 wheat genotypes were influenced by drought stress. It has been noticed that genotype No. 20 recorded the highest reduction in anatomical characters. On the other hand, the least reduction was detected in genotype No. 1 compared to other tested genotypes. Genotype No. 1 appeared to be more tolerant to drought stress as it exhibited DSI less than unity and gave increase in total soluble sugars, proline and free amino acids with lowest reduction in leaf anatomical characteristics. The study recommend genotype No. 1 as more tolerant to drought stress with good level of yield productivity.
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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Genotypes differed significantly in grain yield and components in both seasons and combined.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES
Triticum aestivumt0 - Material
- genotypee0
- Outcome
- grain yield and its componentse0
- Direction
- differencese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Highly significant genotype differences were registered for grain yield and its components in both seasons and combined”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotype-by-water-regime interactions were highly significant for yield traits except first-season 1000 grain weight.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- genotypese0
- Treatment
- water regime treatmentse0
- Outcome
- grain yield and its componentse0
- Qualifier
- except for 1000 grain weight in first seasone0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The interactions between genotypes and water regime treatments for grain yield and its components were highly significant for all characters in both seasons and combined except for 1000 grain weight in first season”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Normal irrigation I1 gave the highest water consumptive use and applied irrigation water.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- I1 treatmente0
- Outcome
- water consumptive use and applied irrigation watere0
- Direction
- higheste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“I1 treatment gave the highest water consumptive use and applied irrigation water”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
First-season water use was 520.1 mm under I1.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- I1e0
- Outcome
- water consumptive usee0
- Value
- 520.1e0
- Qualifier
- first seasone0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water consumptive use in the first season were 520.1, 382.6 and 275.3 mm for irrigation regimes I1, I2 and I3, respectively”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
First-season water use was 382.6 mm under I2.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- I2e0
- Outcome
- water consumptive usee0
- Value
- 382.6e0
- Qualifier
- first seasone0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water consumptive use in the first season were 520.1, 382.6 and 275.3 mm for irrigation regimes I1, I2 and I3, respectively”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
First-season water use was 275.3 mm under I3.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- I3e0
- Outcome
- water consumptive usee0
- Value
- 275.3 mme0
- Qualifier
- first seasone0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water consumptive use in the first season were 520.1, 382.6 and 275.3 mm for irrigation regimes I1, I2 and I3, respectively”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-season water use was 494.7 mm under I1.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- water consumptive usee0
- Value
- 494.7e0
- Qualifier
- second seasone0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the second season the corresponding values of the water consumptive use were 494.7, 370.9 and 263.4 mm, respectively”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-season water use was 370.9 mm under I2.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- water consumptive usee0
- Value
- 370.9e0
- Qualifier
- second seasone0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the second season the corresponding values of the water consumptive use were 494.7, 370.9 and 263.4 mm, respectively”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-season water use was 263.4 mm under I3.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- water consumptive usee0
- Value
- 263.4 mme0
- Qualifier
- second seasone0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the second season the corresponding values of the water consumptive use were 494.7, 370.9 and 263.4 mm, respectively”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotype 2 used the least water, while genotype 13 used the most.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- Genotype No. 2e0
- Outcome
- water consumptive usee0
- Direction
- leaste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Genotype No. 2 gave the least value of water consumptive use, while genotype No. 13 recorded the highest water consumptive use”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
I3 had the highest water utilization efficiency and I1 the lowest.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- I3e0
- Outcome
- Water utilization efficiencye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- I1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water utilization efficiency (kg grains/ m3 applied water) revealed that I3 gave the highest value, whereas I1was the lowest one”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotype 8 had the highest water utilization efficiency.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- Genotype 8e0
- Outcome
- water utilization efficiencye0
- Direction
- higheste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest water utilization efficiency was registered by Genotype 8, while genotype 3 recorded the lowest value for this measurement”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotype 3 had the lowest water utilization efficiency.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- genotype 3e0
- Outcome
- water utilization efficiencye0
- Direction
- loweste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest water utilization efficiency was registered by Genotype 8, while genotype 3 recorded the lowest value for this measurement”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought sensitivity index classified genotypes 1, 5, 8, 10, 12, 16 and 18 as tolerant.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- genotypes No 1, 5, 8, 10, 12, 16 and 18e0
- Outcome
- tolerant to water stresse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought sensitivity index (DSI) reveal that genotypes No 1, 5, 8, 10, 12, 16 and 18 were tolerant to water stress”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Moderate drought significantly increased soluble sugars, proline and free amino acids.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Moderate drought stresse0
- Outcome
- total soluble sugars, proline and free amino acidse0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Moderate drought stress resulted in significant increase in total soluble sugars, proline and free amino acids in the studied genotypes”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Severe stress significantly increased these metabolites in genotypes 1, 2 and 3 versus other genotypes.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- genotypes No 1, 2 and 3e0
- Treatment
- sever stresse0
- Outcome
- above mentioned characterse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- other tested genotypese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under sever stress, the above mentioned characters significantly increased in genotypes No 1, 2 and 3 compared to other tested genotypes”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress influenced anatomical features in five wheat genotypes.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- 5 wheat genotypese0
- Treatment
- drought stresse0
- Outcome
- Anatomical featurese0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Anatomical features of 5 wheat genotypes were influenced by drought stress”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotype 20 had the greatest anatomical reduction.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- genotype No. 20e0
- Outcome
- anatomical characterse0
- Direction
- highest reductione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“genotype No. 20 recorded the highest reduction in anatomical characters”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotype 1 had the least anatomical reduction.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- genotype No. 1e0
- Outcome
- reductione0
- Direction
- least reductione0
- Comparator
- other tested genotypese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the least reduction was detected in genotype No. 1 compared to other tested genotypes”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend genotype 1 for drought tolerance and yield.
- Taxon
- BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPESTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- genotype No. 1e0
- Outcome
- more tolerant to drought stress with good level of yield productivitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The study recommend genotype No. 1 as more tolerant to drought stress with good level of yield productivity”
t0“BREAD WHEAT GENOTYPES”