Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-5mhkq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T14:24:35.504Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Water stress and time of floral initiation in pearl millet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

V. Mahalakshmi  and
F. R. Bidinger
V. Mahalakshmi
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, ICRISAT, Patancheru, P.O., Andhra Pradesh, 502 324, India
F. R. Bidinger
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, ICRISAT, Patancheru, P.O., Andhra Pradesh, 502 324, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The interaction of water stress and time from sowing to floral initiation was investigated in the field with pearl millet hybrid BJ 104. Extended daylength was used to delay panicle initiation (PI) and flowering (FL) of crops exposed to single periods of mid-season drought. Growth, yield and yield components were related to the number of days for PI and FL in both irrigated and water-stressed treatments. Delay in PI resulted in more leaves and tillers per plant, and greater leaf area, height and total dry matter. Grain yield, however, was not affected resulting in lower ‘harvest index’. There was, however, an increase in the grain yield of main shoots which was offset by a proportional decrease in the grain yield of tillers.

Water stress effects were dependent on the physiological stage of the crop at which stress occurred, as a result of the photoperiod treatments. Water stress prior to panicle initiation did not affect the grain yield of the main shoot but increased tiller grain yield, resulting in a higher total (crop) grain yield. Water stress during panicle development reduced the grain yield on the main shoot but this loss was compensated by the grain from the increased number of tiller panicles which reached flowering. Water stress during flowering and grain filling reduced grain yields of both main shoot and tillers, making this the most sensitive stage. Photoperiodic control of floral initiation can provide an escape mechanism to avoid the coincidence of mid-season water stress with sensitive periods of growth.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 105 , Issue 2 , October 1985 , pp. 437 - 445
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

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

REFERENCES

Andrews, D. J. (1973). Effects of date of sowing on photosensitive Nigerian sorghums. Experimental Agriculture 9, 337–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, D. K. & Burton, G. W. (1966). Tropical environment of Puerto Rico useful for studying day length sensitivity in pearl millet. Crop Science 6, 212–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begg, J. E. & Burton, G. W. (1971). Comparative study of five genotypes of pearl millet under a range of photoperiods and temperatures. Crop Science 11, 803–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilquez, A. F. (1963). Etude du mode d'hérédité de la préocité chez le mil penicillaire (Pennisetum typhoides Stapf et Hubbard). I. Déterminisme génétique des différences de sensibilité a la longeur du jour existant entre les mils du groupe Sanio et ceux du group Souna. Agronomie Tropicale 18, 289–291.Google Scholar
Burton, G. W. (1965). Photoperiodism in pearl millet (Pennisetum typhoides). Crop Science 5, 333–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caddel, J. L. & Weible, D. E. (1972). Photoperiodism in sorghum. Agronomy Journal 64, 473–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chinoy, J. J. & Nanda, K. K. (1951). Effect of vernalization and photoperiodic treatments on growth and development of crop plants. 3. Rate of dry matter production, net assimilation rate and water content of wheat under varying photoinductive and post-photoinductive treatments. Physiologia Plantarum 4, 427–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coohran, W. G. & Cox, G. M. (1957). Experimental Designs, 611 pp. London: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Curtis, D. L. (1968 a). The relationship between the date of heading of Nigerian sorghums and the duration of the growing season. Journal of Applied Ecology 5, 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis, D. L. (1968 b). The relation between yield and date of heading of Nigerian sorghums. Experimental Agriculture 4, 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwinkel, A. (1978). Ear size in relation to tiller emergence and crop density. In Crop Physiology and Cereal Breeding. Proceedings of the Eucarpia Workshop, Wageningen, Netherlands, pp. 10–15.Google Scholar
Egharevba, P. N. (1977). Tiller number and millet grain productivity. Cereal Research Communication 5, 235–247.Google Scholar
Hanson, A. D. & Nelson, C. E. (1981). Water: adaptation of crops to drought-prone environments. In The Biology of Crop Productivity (ed. Carlson, P. S.), pp. 78–152. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi Arid Tropics (1982). Annual Report 1981, pp. 80–82. Patancheru A.P. India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Kassam, A. H. & Andrews, D. J. (1975). Effects of sowing date on growth, development and yield of photosensitive sorghum at Samaru, Northern Nigeria. Experimental Agriculture 11, 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1967). The effect of plant density upon the growth and yield of barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 68, 317–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Eisenberg, B. E. (1966). Some effects of photoperiod on barley. Journal of Experimental Botany 17, 204–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. & Faris, D. J. (1972). The effect of plant density on tiller growth and morphology in barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 78, 281–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahiri, A. N. & Kumar, V. (1966). Studies on plant water relationships. III. Further studies on the drought mediated alteration in the performance of bullrush millet. Proceedings of the National Institute of Science India B. 32, 116–129.Google Scholar
Mahalakshmi, V. & Bidinger, F. R. (1985). Flowering response of pearl millet to water stress during panicle development. Annals of Applied Biology (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maiti, R. K. & Bidinger, F. R. (1981). Growth and development of the pearl millet plant. Research Bulletin No. 6, 14 pp. Patancheru A.P. India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Ong, C. K. & Everard, A. (1979). Short day induction of flowering in pearl millet (Pennisetum typhoides) and its effect on plant morphology. Experimental Agriculture 15, 401–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seetharama, N., Mahalakshmi, V., Bidinger, F. R. & Singh, S. (1982). Response of sorghum and pearl millet to drought stress in semi-arid India. In Agrometeorology of Sorghum and Millet in the Semi-Arid Tropics. Proceedings of the International Symposium, ICRISAT, Patancheru, India, pp. 159–175.Google Scholar
Thorne, G. N., Ford, M. A. & Watson, J. D. (1968). Growth, development and yield of spring wheat in artificial climates. Annals of Botany 32, 425–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, N. C. (1981). The role of shoot characteristics in drought resistance of crop plants. In Drought Resistance in Crops with Special Emphasis on Rice, pp. 115–134. Los Baños, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Wittwer, S. H. (1979). Agriculture for the 21st century. Fertiliser News 24, 102–118.Google Scholar