4.5 Article

Variation in shoot tolerance mechanisms not related to ion toxicity in barley

Journal

FUNCTIONAL PLANT BIOLOGY
Volume 44, Issue 12, Pages 1194-1206

Publisher

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/FP17049

Keywords

Hordeum spp.; osmotic stress; plant growth; plant phenomics; salt tolerance

Categories

Funding

  1. Grains Research and Development Corporation, Australia [UA00118, UA00145]
  2. National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy of the Commonwealth of Australia
  3. Adelaide Barley Breeders (University of Adelaide)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Soil salinity can severely reduce crop growth and yield. Many studies have investigated salinity tolerance mechanisms in cereals using phenotypes that are relatively easy to measure. The majority of these studies measured the accumulation of shoot Na+ and the effect this has on plant growth. However, plant growth is reduced immediately after exposure to NaCl before Na+ accumulates to toxic concentrations in the shoot. In this study, nondestructive and destructive measurements are used to evaluate the responses of 24 predominately Australian barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) lines at 0, 150 and 250mMNaCl. Considerable variation for shoot tolerance mechanisms not related to ion toxicity (shoot ion-independent tolerance) was found, withsome lines being able to maintain substantial growth rates under salt stress, whereas others stopped growing. Hordeum vulgare spp. spontaneum accessions and barley landraces predominantly had the best shoot ion independent tolerance, although two commercial cultivars, Fathom and Skiff, also had high tolerance. The tolerance of cv. Fathom may be caused by a recent introgression from H. vulgare L. spp. spontaneum. This study shows that the most salt-tolerant barley lines are those that contain both shoot ion-independent tolerance and the ability to exclude Na+ from the shoot (and thus maintain high K+: Na+ ratios).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available