Record Details

Response to soil salinity of two chickpea varieties differing in drought tolerance

MELSpace

View Archive Info
 
 
Field Value
 
Title Response to soil salinity of two chickpea varieties differing in drought tolerance
 
Creator Katerji, Nader
 
Contributor van Hoorn, J.W.
Hamdy, Atef
Mastrorilli, Marcello
Oweis, Theib
Malhotra, Rajinder
 
Subject osmotic adjustment
crop water stress
crop water use efficiency
 
Description Two chickpea varieties, differing in drought tolerance, were grown in lysimeters filled with clay, and were irrigated with waters of three different salinity levels. Under non-saline conditions, both varieties, slightly differing in pre-dawn leaf water potential during the growth period, gave almost the same yield.

Salinity had a slight effect on the leaf water potential and the osmotic adjustment. Both were slightly higher for the drought tolerant variety, but much lower in comparison with sugar beet, tomato and lentil. The drought tolerant variety showed an earlier senescence in leaf and dry matter development and flowering which were accelerated by salinity. The drought sensitive variety, however, showed under slightly saline conditions (ECe=2.5 dS/m) from 135 days after sowing onwards a different behaviour by the growth of new leaves and flowers, a delay in senescence, leading to the same yield as under non-saline conditions. Under saline conditions (ECe=3.8 dS/m) the drought sensitive variety showed the same yield reduction of about 70% as the drought tolerant variety.
 
Date 2022-04-12T23:04:55Z
2022-04-12T23:04:55Z
 
Type Journal Article
 
Identifier https://mel.cgiar.org/dspace/limited
Nader Katerji, J. W. van Hoorn, Atef Hamdy, Marcello Mastrorilli, Theib Oweis, Rajinder Malhotra. (4/9/2001). Response to soil salinity of two chickpea varieties differing in drought tolerance. Agricultural Water Management, 50 (2), pp. 83-96.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/67340
Timeless limited access
 
Language en
 
Format PDF
 
Publisher Elsevier
 
Source Agricultural Water Management;50,(2001) Pagination 83-96