Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T13:19:45.352Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparative assessment of water use efficiency in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) grown in containers and in the field under water-limited conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

K. B. Hebbar ,
V. R. Sashidhar ,
M. Udayakumar ,
R. Devendra  and
R. C. Nageswara Rao
K. B. Hebbar
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Physiology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK Campus, Bangalore 560 065, India
V. R. Sashidhar
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Physiology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK Campus, Bangalore 560 065, India
M. Udayakumar
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Physiology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK Campus, Bangalore 560 065, India
R. Devendra
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Physiology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK Campus, Bangalore 560 065, India
R. C. Nageswara Rao
Affiliation:
International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT)PatancheruPO 502 324Andhra PradeshIndia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Water use efficiency (WUE) was measured on fourteen genotypes of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) grown in containers under adequately irrigated and water-limited conditions. The genotypes used similar amounts of water but produced different quantities of dry matter. WUE accounted for > 92% of the variation in dry matter production under both irrigated and water-limited conditions. There was a significant increase in WUE under water-limited conditions. Four genotypes selected from the container experiment as having either a high or a low WUE under non-limited or limited water input conditions were further tested under prolonged water deficit conditions in a field experiment. WUE varied significantly between genotypes and there was a positive correlation between WUE and the quantity of dry matter produced by the genotypes. The results suggested that, in three out of four genotypes, the WUE measured in the container experiment was positively correlated with the WUE estimated under field conditions.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 122 , Issue 3 , June 1994 , pp. 429 - 434
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Briggs, L. J. & Shantz, H. L. (1913). Water requirements of plants. II. A review of literature. US Department of Agriculture. Plant Industries Bulletin 285, 1–9.Google Scholar
Briggs, L. J. & Shantz, H. L. (1914). Relative water requirement of plants. Journal of Agricultural Research 3, 1–63.Google Scholar
de Wit, C. T. (1958). Transpiration and crop yields. Verslagen Land Boursk. Onderzoek 64.6. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Institute of Biological and Chemical Research on Field Crops and Herbage.Google Scholar
Downes, R. W. (1969). Differences in transpiration rates between tropical and temperate grasses under controlled conditions. Planta 88, 261–273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farquhar, G. D. & Richards, R. A. (1984). Isotopic composition of plant carbon correlates with water-use efficiency of wheat genotypes. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 11, 539–552.Google Scholar
Farquhar, G. D., Ehleringer, J. R. & Hubick, K. T. (1989). Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Molecular Biology 40, 503–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R. A. & Turner, N. C. (1978). Plant productivity in the arid and semiarid zones. Annual Review of Plant Physiology 29, 277–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, R. W. (1980). The ICRISAT Groundnut Program. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Groundnut, pp. 12–16. Patancheru, India: International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT).Google Scholar
Hubick, K. T. & Farquhar, G. D. (1987). Carbon isotope discrimination – selecting for water use efficiency. Australian Cotton Grower, 8, 66–68.Google Scholar
Hubick, K. T., Farquhar, G. D. & Shorter, R. (1986). Correlation between water-use efficiency and carbon isotope discrimination in diverse peanut (Arachis) germplasm. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 13, 803–816.Google Scholar
Jones, H. G. (1983). Plants and Microclimate: A Quantitative Approach to Environmental Plant Physiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ketring, D. L. (1984). Root diversity among peanut genotypes. Crop Science 24, 229–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, B. & Thorstenson, Y. R. (1988). Stable carbon isotope composition (δ13C), water use efficiency, and biomass productivity of Lycopersicon esculentum, Lycopersicon pennellii and the F1 hybrid. Plant Physiology 88, 213–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nageswara Rao, R. C., Williams, J. H., Wadia, K. D. R., Hubick, K. T. & Farquhar, G. D. (1993). Crop growth, water-use efficiency and carbon isotope discrimination in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L) genotypes under end of season drought conditions. Annals of Applied Biology 122, 357–367.Google Scholar
Ravishankar, H. M. (1988). Water use efficiency (WUE) and gas exchange characteristics in selected C3 and C4 species – an assessment under similar water-limited conditions. MSc thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences Bangalore.Google Scholar
Ritchie, J. T. (1973). Influence of soil water status and meteorological conditions on evaporation from a corn canopy. Agronomy Journal 65, 893–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shashikumar, M. R. (1983). Field WUE in genotypes of cowpea. MSc thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore.Google Scholar
Tanner, C. B. & Sinclair, T. R. (1983). Efficient water use crop in production: research or research. In Limitations to Efficient Water Use in Crop Production (Eds Taylor, H. M., Jordan, W. R. & Sinclair, T. R.), pp. 1–27. Madison, USA: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Teare, I. D., Kanemasu, E. T., Powers, W. L. & Jacobs, H. S. (1973). Water-use efficiency and its relation to crop canopy area, stomatal regulation, and root distribution. Agronomy Journal 65, 207–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, N. C. (1986). Crop water deficits: a decade of progress. Advances in Agronomy 39, 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uma, S. (1987). Transpiration quotient (TQ) and water use efficiency in different C3 and C4 species and its relationship with biomass and productivity under moisture stress conditions. MSc thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore.Google Scholar
Wright, G. C, Hubick, K. T. & Farquhar, G. D. (1988). Discrimination in carbon isotopes of leaves correlates with water-use efficiency of field-grown peanut cultivars. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 15, 815–825.Google Scholar
Wright, G. C, Nageswara Rao, R. C. & Farquhar, G. D. (1994). Water-use efficiency and carbon isotope discrimination in peanut under water deficit conditions. Crop Science 34, 92–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar