Abstract
Abstract Drought has become more recurrent and causes a substantial decline in forage yields leading to strain on feed resources for livestock production. This has intensified the search for drought-tolerant forages to promote sustainable livestock production. The objective of this study was to identify drought-tolerant Urochloa grasses and to discern their morpho-physiological and yield traits to water stress as well as the relationship between these traits and indices of drought resistance. The results showed that the ecotypes, water regimes and their interaction significantly influenced all the studied morpho-physiological and yield traits. There was a significant decrease in plant height, number of leaves and tillers, dry matter yield, relative water content, photosystem II and efficiency of photosystem II with an increase in non-photochemical quenching. The principal component analysis revealed that the performance of Urochloa grass ecotypes was different under water sufficient (WS) and water deficit conditions. Drought tolerance indicators (mean productivity, geometric mean productivity, tolerance index and stress tolerance index) were most effective in identifying Urochloa ecotypes with high biomass production under both water deficient and WS conditions. Ecotypes K17, K7, Kisii, Busia and Kakamega were the most drought tolerant, Basilisk, K6, K10, K19 and Toledo were moderately tolerant whereas, CIAT6385, CIAT16449, K13, K5 and K9 were drought sensitive. The five drought-tolerant Urochloa ecotypes should be tested for sustainable biomass production under field conditions and used in breeding programmes to develop high-yielding drought-tolerant varieties.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Ecotype, water regime, and their interaction significantly influenced the studied morphophysiological and yield traits.
UrochloaNot reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the ecotypes, water regimes and their interaction significantly influenced all the studied morpho-physiological and yield traits.”
t0“Urochloa grass ecotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
Water deficit decreased plant height, leaf and tiller numbers, dry matter yield, relative water content, photosystem II, and its efficiency.
- Treatment
- water deficit conditionse1
- Outcome
- plant height, number of leaves and tillerse0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Comparator
- water sufficient (WS)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was a significant decrease in plant height, number of leaves and tillers, dry matter yield, relative water content, photosystem II and efficiency of photosystem II with an increase in non-photochemical quenching.”
e1“under water sufficient (WS) and water deficit conditions”
t0“Urochloa grass ecotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
Water deficit increased non-photochemical quenching.
- Treatment
- water deficit conditionse1
- Outcome
- non-photochemical quenchinge0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Comparator
- water sufficient (WS)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with an increase in non-photochemical quenching”
e1“under water sufficient (WS) and water deficit conditions”
t0“Urochloa grass ecotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
Urochloa ecotypes performed differently under water sufficient and deficit conditions in principal component analysis.
Verbatim
e0“The principal component analysis revealed that the performance of Urochloa grass ecotypes was different under water sufficient (WS) and water deficit conditions.”
Claim · model-written summary
Four drought tolerance indicators were most effective at identifying ecotypes with high biomass in both water regimes.
- Outcome
- identifying Urochloa ecotypes with high biomass productione0
- Qualifier
- under both water deficient and WS conditionse0
Not reportedComparatorValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drought tolerance indicators (mean productivity, geometric mean productivity, tolerance index and stress tolerance index) were most effective in identifying Urochloa ecotypes with high biomass production under both water deficient and WS conditions.”
Claim · model-written summary
K17, K7, Kisii, Busia and Kakamega were classified as most drought tolerant.
Verbatim
e0“Ecotypes K17, K7, Kisii, Busia and Kakamega were the most drought tolerant”
Claim · model-written summary
Basilisk, K6, K10, K19 and Toledo were classified as moderately drought tolerant.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Basilisk, K6, K10, K19 and Toledo were moderately tolerant”
t0“Urochloa grass ecotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
CIAT6385, CIAT16449, K13, K5 and K9 were classified as drought sensitive.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CIAT6385, CIAT16449, K13, K5 and K9 were drought sensitive”
t0“Urochloa grass ecotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
The five drought tolerant Urochloa ecotypes should be field tested and used in breeding.
- Outcome
- tested for sustainable biomass production under field conditions and used in breeding programmese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The five drought-tolerant Urochloa ecotypes should be tested for sustainable biomass production under field conditions and used in breeding programmes to develop high-yielding drought-tolerant varieties.”