4.7 Article

Role of exogenous nitrogen supply in alleviating the deficit irrigation stress in wheat plants

期刊

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT
卷 210, 期 -, 页码 261-270

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.08.034

关键词

Wheat; Nitrogen supply; Deficit irrigation; Growth and productivity; Anatomy; Osmoprotectants

资金

  1. Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University [R.G.P. 1/43/39]
  2. Agricultural Botany Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Fayoum University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Efficient nitrogen (N) nutrition has the capability to assuage water stress in crops by via sustaining the metabolic activities even at a low tissue water potential. The study aimed to evaluate the role of N-supply in improving the drought tolerance in wheat plants under a deficit irrigation (DI) condition. Two-pot experiments were conducted during the two successive seasons of 2015 and 2016; N-fertilizer (0.3 and 0.6 g N/kg soil) was added for plants under full crop water requirement (100% of ETc) or deficit irrigation (60% of ETc). The effect of N- supply on the growth, yield characteristics and water use efficiency (WUE), stem anatomy, physio-biochemical attributes, and antioxidant enzymes activities (SOD and CAT) of wheat plants exposed to DI stress was assessed. Results approved that the nitrogen-treated plants exposed to DI had higher growth and yield characteristics compared to the untreated plants. The grain yield, WUE, photosynthetic pigments, soluble carbohydrates, soluble proteins, total soluble phenols and free proline, relative water content (RWC%), and antioxidant enzymes activities as well as a positive changes in the stem anatomy and had lower relative membrane permeability (RMP) compared to nitrogen-untreated plants were significantly improved as the result of N-supplying. Application of N-0.6 + I-60 treatment was more effective in alleviating the damages of drought stress in wheat plants by maintaining higher RWC, WUE, and osmoprotectants, antioxidant system and lower RMP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据