loading page

Evaluating genetic contribution to mitigation of barley grain yield penalty caused by soil waterlogging
  • +5
  • Ke Liu,
  • Matthew Harrison,
  • Ahmed Ibrahim,
  • S.M. Nuruzzaman Manik,
  • Peter Johnson,
  • xiaohai tian,
  • Holger Meinke,
  • Meixue Zhou
Matthew Harrison
University of Tasmania
Author Profile
Ahmed Ibrahim
University of Tasmania
Author Profile
S.M. Nuruzzaman Manik
University of Tasmania
Author Profile
Peter Johnson
University of Tasmania
Author Profile
xiaohai tian
Yangtze University
Author Profile
Holger Meinke
University of Tasmania
Author Profile
Meixue Zhou
University of Tasmania
Author Profile

Peer review status:UNDER REVIEW

28 Mar 2020Submitted to Plant, Cell & Environment
30 Mar 2020Assigned to Editor
30 Mar 2020Submission Checks Completed
04 Apr 2020Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending

Abstract

In-crop soil waterlogging caused by extreme rainfall events, high ground water tables, excessive irrigation and lateral ground water flow inhibit potential grain yields. However, the extent to which yield is influenced by the timing and duration of waterlogging relative to crop phenology is unknown. To investigate this, we conducted various waterlogging treatments on a range of modern barley genotypes varying in their waterlogging tolerance, with tolerance conferred through aerenchyma formation under oxygen deficit conditions. Results showed that yield was reduced by 35% in W1 (waterlogging at Zadoks stage (ZS) 12.5 for one month) to 52% in WL3 (waterlogging at ZS 15 for two months) due to fewer spikes/m2 and kernels/spike. Two weeks waterlogging at ear emergency stage had the greatest impact on yield (70% reduction) due to its effect on spikelet fertility and grain filling. Phenology was delayed 1-8 ZS at the end of waterlogging treatments, with the waterlogging-susceptible cultivar Franklin showing the greatest delays, and waterlogging tolerant genotypes capable of AF (Macquarie+, TAMF169) having the least delays (0-4 ZS). Genotypes with the AF QTL (Macquarie+) showed a slight and nonsignificant yield reduction compared with unwaterlogged controls and mitigated around 23% yield loss under early phenological waterlogging stress.