|CHEN, CHARLES - Auburn University|
|Holbrook, Carl - Corley|
|Sorensen, Ronald - Ron|
Submitted to: ASA-CSSA-SSSA Annual Meeting Abstracts
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 10/21/2012
Publication Date: 10/21/2012
Citation: Chen, C., Dang, P.M., Holbrook Jr, C.C., Lamb, M.C., Sorensen, R.B. 2012. Yield and Grade Response of Five Peanut Genotypes to Drought Stress at Different Stages. ASA-CSSA-SSSA Annual Meeting. Oct. 21-24-2012. Cinncinati, OH. http://scisoc.confex.com/scisoc/2012am/webprogram/Paper73182.html
Interpretive Summary: none required.
Technical Abstract: Drought is a major factor in reducing productivity in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). There is an urgent need to develop adaptive agricultural strategies. These include: changes in traditional irrigation management and agronomic practices, improvement of drought-related traits through direct or indirect breeding selection, and development of transgenic crops with enhanced tolerance to drought and improved water-use efficiency (WUE). The objectives of this study were to examine the main effects and interactions of five drought stress treatments (Irrigated, 30 DAP, 60 DAP, 90 DAP, and Non- Irrigated) on five peanut genotypes and to indentify the most and least drought tolerance genotypes to be used for further genetic study and breeding program. Five genotypes represent different digresses of drought tolerance of runner- type and Virginia-type peanut. The five genotypes were planted in split plot designs, with drought stress regimes as the main plot, with three replications in 2010 and 2011under rain fall control shelter. An adjusted yield to 7% moisture content and total sound matured kernel (TSMK) were used to measure yield and grade of peanut. Highly significant differences were found for genotype, treatment in both years for yield and TSMK. No interaction of genotype x treatment was detected both years for yield while the interaction was found only in 2011 for TSMK. Results from t tests indicated that the greatest differences for yield and TSMK among main effects were for genotype (ranging from 3874 to 4810 kg/ha / 0.70 to 0.76) and Treatment (from 3272 to 5236 kg/ha / 0.71 to 0.75), respectively. These results indicate that ‘C76-16’ has a consistent highest tolerance to drought stress while ‘AP-3’ has the least drought tolerance. Compared with irrigated and non-irrigated regimes, Yield and TSMK have the greatest response for the stress occurred after 60 DAP, following by 90 DAP, and 30 DAP. Therefore, ‘C76-16’ could be used as a drought tolerance parental donor in breeding program and stress after 60 DAP could be used as treatment stage for screening drought tolerance for breeding populations.