Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-6c7dr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-17T18:14:50.874Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Physiological determinants of storage root yield in three cassava genotypes under different nitrogen supply

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2017

K. PHUNTUPAN  and
P. BANTERNG
K. PHUNTUPAN
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
P. BANTERNG*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand Plant Breeding Research Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: bporam@kku.ac.th
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Physiological traits can be used to improve the efficiency of selecting suitable genotypes to grow under nitrogen (N) limitation. The objective of the current study was to investigate the relationship between physiological characteristics and storage root yield of three cassava genotypes under three rates of N fertilizer. The experiments were conducted from 2014 to 2016 at farm fields in Thailand. A split-plot randomized complete block design with four replications was used. Three different rates of N fertilizer, i.e., 46·9, 90·0 and 133·2 kg N/ha and three cassava genotypes, Rayong 9, Rayong 11 and Kasetsart 50, were used. Kasetsart 50 had the highest mean performance for most crop traits. Growth rate of stem (SGR), storage root (SRGR) and crop (CGR) during 180–210 days after planting (DAP) and leaf area index (LAI) at 120 DAP were related to storage root dry weight for all three rates of N fertilizer. Storage root growth during 90–120 DAP, CGR during 180–210 DAP and specific leaf area (SLA) at 210 DAP contributed most to storage root dry weight of the three genotypes grown at 46·9 kg N/ha, while the combination of SRGR during 90–120 DAP, SRGR during 180–210 DAP, LAI at 210 DAP and SLA at 210 DAP was best for N fertilizer at 90·0 kg N/ha and the combination of leaf growth rate (LGR) during 180–210 DAP and LAI at 210 DAP was best for N fertilizer at 133·2 kg N/ha.

Information

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 155 , Issue 6 , August 2017 , pp. 978 - 992
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Arunyanark, A., Jogloy, S., Wongkaew, S., Akkasaeng, C., Vorasoot, N., Wright, G. C., Rachaputi, R. C. N. & Patanothai, A. (2009). Association between aflatoxin contamination and drought tolerance traits in peanut. Field Crops Research 114, 14–22.Google Scholar
Banterng, P., Patanothai, A., Pannangpetch, K., Jogloy, S. & Hoogenboom, G. (2003). Seasonal variation in the dynamic growth and development traits of peanut lines. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 141, 51–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banterng, P., Hoogenboom, G., Patanothai, A., Singh, P., Wani, S. P., Pathak, P., Tongpoonpol, S., Atichart, S., Srihaban, P., Buranaviriyakul, S., Jintrawet, A. & Nguyen, T. C. (2010). Application of the cropping system model (CSM)-CROPGRO-Soybean for determining optimum management strategies for soybean in tropical environments. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 196, 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cenpukdee, U. & Fukai, S. (1991). Effects of nitrogen supply on cassava/pigeonpea intercropping with tree contrasting cassava cultivars. Fertilizer Research 29, 275–280.Google Scholar
Cruz, J. L., Mosquim, P. R., Pelacani, C. R., Araujo, W. L. & DaMatta, F. M. (2003). Photosynthesis impairment in cassava leaves in response to nitrogen deficiency. Plant and Soil 257, 417–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czerednik, A. & Nalborczyk, E. (2001). Physiological factors affecting yield formation in the canopy of traditional and new morphotypes of triticale plant (Triticosecale Wittmack). Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 23, 87–93.Google Scholar
Dordas, C. A. (2010). Variation of physiological determinants of yield in linseed in response to nitrogen fertilization. Industrial Crops and Products 31, 455–465.Google Scholar
El-Sharkawy, M. A. (2012). Stress tolerant cassava: the role of integrative ecophysiology breeding research in crop improvement. Open Journal of Soil Science 2, 162–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Sharkawy, M. A. & de Tafur, S. M. (2010). Comparative photosynthesis, growth, productivity, and nutrient use efficiency among tall- and short-stemmed rain-fed cassava cultivars. Photosynthetica 48, 173–188.Google Scholar
El-Sharkawy, M. A., Hernandez, A. D. P. & Hershey, C. (1992 a). Yield stability of cassava during prolonged mid-season water stress. Experimental Agriculture 28, 165–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Sharkawy, M. A., de Tafur, S. M. & Cadavid, L. F. (1992 b). Potential photosynthesis of cassava as affected by growth conditions. Crop Science 32, 1336–1342.Google Scholar
Fageria, N. K., Baligar, V. C. & Jones, C. A. (1991). Growth and Mineral Nutrition of Field Crops. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.Google Scholar
Freed, R. D. & Nissen, O. (1992). MSTAT-C Version 1.42. East lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Fukai, S., Alcoy, A. B., Llamelo, A. B. & Patterson, R. D. (1984). Effects of solar radiation on growth of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz.). I. Canopy development and dry matter growth. Field Crops Research 9, 347–360.Google Scholar
Gomez, K. A. & Gomez, A. A. (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Howeler, R. H. (2002). Cassava mineral nutrition and fertilization. In Cassava: Biology, Production and Utilization (Eds Hillocks, R. J., Thresh, J. M. & Bellotti, A. C.), pp. 115–147. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
Jones, J. W., Hoogenboom, G., Porter, C. H., Boote, K. J., Batchelor, W. D., Hunt, L. A., Wilkens, P. W., Singh, U., Gijsman, A. J. & Ritchie, J. T. (2003). The DSSAT cropping system model. European Journal of Agronomy 18, 235–265.Google Scholar
Kaweewong, J., Tawornpruek, S., Yampracha, S., Yost, R., Kongton, S. & Kongkaew, T. (2013 a). Cassava nitrogen requirements in Thailand and crop simulation model predictions. Soil Science 178, 248–255.Google Scholar
Kaweewong, J., Kongkeaw, T., Tawornprek, S., Yampracha, S. & Yost, R. (2013 b). Nitrogen requirements of cassava in selected soils of Thailand. Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development in the Tropics and Subtropics 114(1), 13–19.Google Scholar
Koutroubas, S. D., Papakosta, D. K. & Doitsinis, A. (2009). Phenotypic variation in physiological determinants of yield in spring sown safflower under Mediterranean condition. Field Crops Research 112, 199–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, B. A., Evenson, J. P. & Fukai, S. (1982 a). Environmental effects on growth and development of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz.). II. Crop growth rate and biomass yield. Field Crops Research 5, 283–292.Google Scholar
Keating, B. A., Evenson, J. P. & Fukai, S. (1982 b). Environmental effects on growth and development of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz.). III. Assimilate distribution and storage organ yield. Field Crops Research 5, 293–303.Google Scholar
Massignam, A. M., Chapman, S. C., Hammer, G. L. & Fukai, S. (2009). Physiological determinants of maize and sunflower grain yield as affected by nitrogen supply. Field Crops Research 113, 256–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, H., Schoenau, J. J., Nguyen, D., Van Rees, K. & Boehm, M. (2002). Effects of long-term nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium fertilization on cassava yield and plant nutrient composition in north Vietnam. Journal of Plant Nutrition 25, 425–442.Google Scholar
Olasantan, F. O. (1999). Nitrogen fertilization of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) in an intercropping system with cassava (Manihot esculenta) and maize (Zea mays) in south-western Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 133, 325–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puangbut, D., Jogloy, S., Toomsan, B., Vorasoot, N., Akkasaeng, C., Kesmala, T., Rachaputi, R. C. N., Wright, G. C. & Patanothai, A. (2010). Physiological basis for genotypic variation in tolerance to and recovery from pre-flowering drought in peanut. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 196, 358–367.Google Scholar
Ruttanaprasert, R., Banterng, P., Jogloy, S., Vorasoot, N., Kesmala, T. & Patanothai, A. (2016). Diversity of physiological traits in Jerusalem artichoke genotypes under non-stress and drought stress. Pakistan Journal of Botany 48, 11–20.Google Scholar
Sangakkara, U. R. & Wijesinghe, D. B. (2014). Nitrogen fertilizer affects growth, yield, and N recovery in cassava (Manihot esculenta L. Crantz). Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 45, 1446–1452.Google Scholar
Vilayvong, S., Banterng, P., Patanothai, A. & Pannangpetch, K. (2015). CSM-CERES-Rice model to determine management strategies for lowland rice production. Scientia Agricola 72, 229–236.Google Scholar
Yusuf, R. I., Siemens, J. C. & Bullock, D. G. (1999). Growth analysis of soybean under no-tillage and conventional tillage systems. Agronomy Journal 91, 928–933.Google Scholar