Indian J. Plant Physiol., Vol. 3, No.4, (N.S.) pp. 269-275 (Oct.-Dec., 1998)
CHARACTERISATION OF SORGHUM HYBRIDS AND VARIETIES FOR GROWTH
PARAMETERS, BIOMASS ACCUMULATION AND YIELD POTENTIAL
IN RAINY SEASON
S.S. RAO, M. H. RAO. T.K KRISHNAN AND B.S. RANA National Research Centre tor Sorghum, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500030, A.P.
Reccivcuon80ct., l':J'J7,RcYiscuoulOAug., l'J'J8
SUMMARY
Characterisation of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) exprimental hybrids for components of source and sink revealed that hybrids have recorded 25% higher LAI at PI than inbreds, while at anthesis, inbreds were super·ior. Ther·e was significantly positive correlation between LAI and biomass at PI, anthesis and maturity (r· == 0.776. 0.566 and 0.532, P == _::: 0.01, respectively). RGR differed significantly among the genotypes. SPH 879 and SPV 1231 had recor·ded high growth rates. Further· more, correlation of various growth parameters with biomass and yield components were positive and significant. lnbreds produced 9% and 5% higher biomass at anthesis and maturity. Whereas, hybrids were superior by 23%, 7°/o, 11%, 20% and 12 o;;. in panicle mass, 1000 grain weight, grain number, HI and grain yield, respectively. Biomass during growth stage 3 was significantly associated with biomass at maturity, panicle mass and grain yield (r == 0.922, 0.705 and 0.538, p == _::: 0.01, respectively), JKSH 161, SPH 879 and SPH 815 were the super·ior for grain yield. Grain number has a high positive correlation with grain yield (r· = 0. 745, P = 0.01). Both panicle harvest index and distribution index han shown positive relationship with HI. Selection of donors with these physiological attributes will further improve the yield potential of sorghum.
Key word.o;: Biomass, growth analysis, sorghum,
INTRODUCTION
Sorghum being the major dryland crop in India occupied 12.0 million ha ofland, out of which, about 6.3 million ha is cultivated during rainy (kharif) season (Anonymous, 1997). Traditional tropical sorghums are tall, late maturing, photo-sensitive and low in harvest index despite of their high biomass production (Rao, 1982). The introduction of early maturing, short, high yielding, photo-insensitive temperate materials (msCK 60) has clearly brought out the transfonnation in the Indian sorghum progranm1e (Reddy and Stenhouse, 1994: Anonymous, 1997). However, the yield of the current day HYVs have been plateaused in the recent times due to limitations in expression various growth parameters,
components of source or sink. Blum eta!., (1992) have reported that hybrids had larger LAI and produced more _grain and have high harvest indices than inbreds. Sri Ram and Rao, ( 1983) have concluded that the growth parameters such as leaf area ratio and its duration had strong association with grain yield. Muchow (1989) reported that in sorghum hybirds, high biomass both at maturity and during grain filling stage and HI had positively associated with grain yield. However, inspite of above investigations the nature of association of various components of leaf area development and growth with biomass accumulation and grain yield has not been clearly understood especially in the current day sorghum genotypes. The present investigation was aimed at comparing the hybrids and
S.S. RAO, et al.
inbreds for kev morpho-physiological traits such as leaf area development, components of growth, biomass accumulation, yeild and understanding the various growth and yield processess related to modelling of crop growth and development.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Nine experimental hybrids and four inbreds including 3 checks i.e. CSH 6, CSH 14 and CSV 15 were evaluated at the experimental fann, Rajendranagar during the rainy (kharif) season (June-October) 1996. The genotypes were planted in medium alfisol (red soil) on 28th June, l996 in 9. 0 m2 plots with 3 replications and arrangeu in a
completely randomised block design. Seeds were directly hand dibbled and a spacing of 45 em x 15 em was followed. Fertilizer \vas applied <.§ 60 : 30 : 0 : kg.ha-1 N P.K., respectively. Entire ·p• and 50% of 'N' were applied as basal and the remaining 'N' was top dressed at panicle initiation (PI) stage i.e. 35 da.ys after emergence. Plant protection measures were adopted whenever needed. Leaf area was determined by using automatic area meter. Ll -T -devices, England, U.K. and the LAI was computed on land area basis. Total above ground biomass was estimated after oven drying the plants at 85°C for 48 h. Based on the leaf area and biomass data, growth parameters were calculated for the period from panicle initiation (P .1) to anthesis as per the methods of Radford ( 196 7). Leaf area was recorded at PI and anthesis, while biomass measured at PI, anthesis and physiological maturity. Grain yield and its components were recroded from one m2 area of net plot as per the standard procedure. Data
were statistically analysed with the help of 'MSTATC' package. All the experimental hybrids tested were early (days to anthesis : 61-64 days), while, the inberds were of medium (days to anthesis : 68-73 days) in maturity. The crop received in 740 nun rainfall in 46 rainy days from standard week 24 to 41. Weekly mean maximum and minimum temperature ranged from 28.0 to 35.2°C and from 18.5 to 25.5°C, respectively. While the RH ranged from 75 to 95% and 48 to 78% at 7.30 hr and 14.30 hr, respectively. Weekly mean evaporation varied from 1.9 to 7. 8 mm during the crop period.
270
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Hybrids recorded 25% higher LAI at PI than inbreds. While at anthesis, inbreds were superior. Higher LAI of hybrids at P. I. was due to high seedling vigour in the early stages. Similarly, hybrids showed higher specific leaf area (SLA) and leaf weight ratio (LWR) at both the stages (Table I). LAI at anthesis ranged from 3.20 to 7.70 and SPH 879 (7.70) and CSV 15 (6.07) had recorded significantly higher LAI. SLA was positively correlated with LAI and leaf area ratio (LAR) both at PI and anthesis. On the other hand, there was highly significant (P > 0. 0 1) positive relationship between LAI and biomass at PI, anthesis an maturity stages. There was significant positive correlation between LAI and panicle mass, grains per panicle, biomass in GS 3 and grain yield. While LAI too related positively with relative growth rate (RGR) and crop growth rate (CGR) (Table II). These correlations clearly suggest that increased leaf area caused more biomass production through early canopy closure with rapid growth rates i.e., CGR and RGR. Myers et a/.. (1986) and Easti~ (1983) have reported the positive association between LAI and CGR. Sri Ram and Rao (1983) made comparison bet\veen hybrids and inbreds for growth parameters and yield components and concluded that LAI, LAR and leaf area duration (LAD) at flowering are strongly related to grain yield. Blum (1992) demonstrated that hybrids had large LAI than open pollinated varieties. Our earlier studies have also shown that there was strong positive correlation between LAI and biomass.
There were significant genotypic differences in RGR with a range of 44.3 to 68.6mg.g-1d-1 (Tablel). SPV 1231 and SPH 789 maintained both higher CGR and RGR than others. lnbreds as a group showed higher CGR, RGR and NAR than hybrids. Whereas, hybrids were superior for LAR by 7% over their inbred counterparts. CGR was positively associated with RGR and biomass (P
S
0.01). NAR showed significant negativc'relationship with LAR, while its relationship with RGR and boimass at anthesis was positive. On the other hand, LAR had a significant positive relationship with leaf weight ratio (L WR), panicleGROWTH AND Y1ELD Of SORGHUM
mass, biomass in GS 3 and grain yield. RGR is the product of LAR and NAR. While LAR in tum deependent on LWR and specific leaf area (SLA). The association of various growth parameters with biomass and grain yield was also reported by Reddy and Rao ( 1982) and Kulkami (1983). In current study, the association between NAR and RGR, and LAR and biomass indicated that the higher assimilation rate is pre-requisie for more growth rates and hence biomass accumulation. Another important morphological component i.e. LAR which is the relative increase in leaf surface area per unit plant weight was also found to be positively correlated with L WR, panicle mass, biomass both at maturity and during GS3 (Table II)
inferring the influence of size of photosynthetic system in goveming growth, biomass and grain yield. Sri Ram and Rao ( 1983) observed significant variation in leaf area, LAR and LAD in a set of hybrids and inbreds.
Biomass varied from 1462 to 2769 g.m-: at maturity and SPH 870 (2796 g) and SPY 1231 (2421 g) \\ere significantly superior to check CSH 14 (Table 1). Hybrids produced II% higher biomass at PI stage, while inbreds were superior by 9% and 5% at anthesis and maturity, respectively. Higher biomass production by hybrids at PI indicative of their early seedling vigour. rapid growth and canopy development. At anthesis and maturity, inbreds produced higher biomass because of their longer duration
Table I : LAI, growth parameters and biomass of sorghum hybrids and varities at various crop developmental stages
Entry
JKSH 161 ICI 501 SPH 815 SPH 831 SPH 832 SPH 660 SPH 879 SPV 1022 SPV 1025 SPV 1231 CSV 15(C) LA!
Pl Anth.
2.38 5.03 2.4 4.6 2.31 5.06 2.13 3.2 2.17 5.02
2.1 5.4 1.66 7.7 1.92 4.31 1.76 4.95 1.56 6.02 1.63 6.07 CSH 6(C) 2.33 3.2 CSH 14(C) 1.88 4.42 Grand me<m 2.0 I 5 .oJ
C.D. (0.05) 0.49 2.01
C.V.(%) 14.1 23.9
Mean: Hybr. 2.15 4.85 Mean: Var. 1.72 5.34
Pl 208 209 217 202 200 211 191 200 182 203 184 204 210 202 NS 9.6 206 192 Anth. 273 259 2l\7 169 308 32l\ 337 233 293 256 280 226 280 271 NS 22 274 266
LWR (gnr')
PI 0.53 0.57 ()55 0.56 0.47 0.56 0.55 0.47 0.53 0.56 0.52 0.53 0.55 0.54 NS 8.7 0.54 0.52 Anth. 0.19 0.27 ()] g O.ll\ 0.19 0.2 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.21 0.21 0.15 0.18 0.2 NS 28.7 0.19 0.2
Indian J. Plant Physiol., Vol. 3, No.4, (N.S.) pp. 269-274 (Oct-Dec .. I 998)
CUR RGR NA.R LAR
(gnr' (mg.g·•. (g.m·'- (cm'.g·') d·') d·') LA.d ')
22.5 23.2 26.1 24.6 21.1 25.1 30.l\ 24.5 26.7 32.3 28.5 25.6 25 26 NS 20.3 24.9 28 47.6 47.2 517 55.9 44.3 55.3 66.1 52.2 56.2 68.6 60 48.9 57.3 54.7 12.3 13.3 52.7 59.3
648 75 7.23 75.6
7.5 70.5 9.73 58.5 6.2 71.2 7.4 811 8.32 80.2 8.75 59.6 l\.72 64.1 9.85 69.8 8.51 70.8 9.1 54.9 8.56 68.2 8.18 69.2
NS NS
20.7 16.4 7.84 70.6
9 66
Bion1ass
(g.m·')
Biomass
in GS3
(g.m·')
213 888 2,101 1,213 304 904 2,121 1,217 210 994 2,032 1,017 171 909 L881 974 237 871 1,952 1,082 174 928 I ,758 830 156 1,124 2,796 1,673 202 963 2,020 l ,057 182 982 I ,928 946 141 1,109 2,421 1,312 172 1,026 L955 928 222 917 1.462 545 161 91 () 1,722 812 188 964 2,012 1,048 56.6 NS 40l\ 517
1~9 16 12 2~3
194 938 1,981 1,043 174 1,020 2,081 1,061
~ Table II : Correlation coetlicients among the components ofleaf area, gmwth, biomass and grain yield in sorghum.
N ~ to, !:>
"'
'... '"tl lS' :; '"tl ~ "' ::s ,._£:
"w z 0 .f>. ~ ~ ~""'
""' ,..,
\0"'
'-> -.} v.0
~6
~g \0 \0 3Parameter LAI at PI LA! at anthesis -0.341 * LAI at anthesls
SLA at-PI
SLA at PI 0.601** -0.251 SLA at anthesis -0.191 0.755** -0.135 LAR PI-anthesis -0.015 0.613** 0.113 LWRatPI -0.028 0.317 -0.005 CGR PI-anthesis -0.383* 0.487* -0.166 RGR PI-anthesis -0.726* 0.515* -0.218 LWR CGR at PI to
RGK PI
to
NAR PI
to
SLA at
anthesis
LAR PI
to anthesis PI anthesis anthesis anthesis
0.689** 0.208
0.503* 0.078 -0.191 0.016 0.166 0.046 -0.014 0.821 **
Bio- mass at
PI. Bio- mass at anth. NAR PI-anthesis -0.557** -0.164 -0.266 -0.431* -0.651** 0.285 0.659** 0.671** Biomass at PI 0.776** -0.263 0.147 -0.160 -0.237 -0.112 -0.361 * -0.798** -0.498* Biomass at anth. -0.186 0.566** -0.160 0.113 -0.176 -0.018 0.918** 0.638** 0.452* -0.068 Biomass at mat. -0.031 0.532** 0.187 0.212 0.433* 0.194 0.241 0.263 -0.193 -0-.119 0.305
Bio- mass at mat.
Biomass in GS 3 0.044 0.327* 0.261 0.176 0.524* 0.210 -0.121 0.016 -0.385* -0.097 -0.087 0.922** Bioma. lll GS 3 Panel. mass at mat 0.549* 0.295 0.321 * -0.209 0.374* 0.083 0.040 0.014 -0.308 0.03)1 0.112 0.718** 0.705** Grains/panicle 0.342* -0.059 0.208 -0.073 0.054 0.044 -0.138 -0.1)10 -0.196 0.195 0.012 0.293 0101 1000 gr. weight 0.163 0.066 0.116 -0.304 0.143 .041 -0.232 -0.2'!6 -0.35 0.248 -0.159 -0.003 0.061
Pan. mass at mat. 0.406*
Grains/ panicle
0.335* -0.080 IOOOgr. HI wt. HI 0.306 -0.327* 0.168 -0.008 -0.140 -0.068 -0.329* -0.341* -0.!42 0.183 -0.278 -0.536** -0.448* 0.406* 0.410* 0.289 PHI PHI -0.088 -0.138 -0.162 0.006 -0.151 0.066 -0.141 -O.Oll5 -0.031 0.007 -0.101 -0.395* -(U72* -0.603* 0.2X9 -0.171 0.401* DI Dl 0.076 -0.176 -0.124 -0.002 -0.278 -0.205 0.093 -0.0~1 0.187 0.124 0.117 -0.620** -0.696** -0.263 0.010 -0.017 0.621** 0.247
1/J !Z'
"~
~ l:lGROWTH AND YIELD OF SORGHUM
to maturity than hybrids. Blum et. a!. ( 1992) also reported that inbreds producted higher per day biomass than hybrids. Significant genetic variation was observed with regard to biomass production during grain filling (GS 3) stage (Table 1). Panicle mass differed significantly both at anthesis and maturity and hybrids produced 46% and 23% higher panicle mass then inbreds at anthesis and maturity, respectively (Table III). SPH 879 among hybrids and SPV 1213 among inbreds have recorded both higher biomass in GS 3 and panicle mass. High significnat positive correlation's were observed between biomass at maturity and panicle mass and grain yield (Table II). These findings are in conformity with the earlier findings
of Muchow (1989), Sri Ram and Rao (1983) and Pinjari and Shinde (1995). Higher biomass production both at an thesis and maturity not only results in higher productivity but also contributes to yield stability.
Biomass in GS 3 was significantly associated with biomass at maturity, panicle mass and grain yield ( P
2':
0.01). Higher biomass in GS 3 is indicative of more current photosynthate production which is important for realizing higher yields under optimal growing conditions. Muchow ( 1989) also reported that in sorghum hybrids, higher grain yield was associated with more biomass production in GS 3 stage. Panicle mass at maturity had high correlation with grain yield (r = 0.766**). While,
Table III : Grain yield and its attributes of sorghum hybrids and inbreds
Entry Panicle mass (g m·2) 1000 grain
weight (g)
An thesis Maturity
JKSH 161 166 910 23.7
ICI 501 208 862 23.8
SPH 815 220 917 26.1
SPH 831 164 788 21.2
SPH 832 191 860 26.5
SPH660 193 760 21.9
SPH 879 188 1189 23.5
SPV 1022 134 775 22.2
SPV 1025 156 673 22.4
SPV 1231 137 699 21.7
CSV 15(C) 121 659 22.4
CSH6(C) 285 646 23.0
CSH 14(C) 181 866 24.2
Grand mean 180 816 23.3
C.D. (0.05) 63.6 219 1.41
C.V.(%) 20.9 15.9 3.60
Mean: Hybrids 200 866 23.8
Mean: Inbreds 137 702 22.2
JndianJ. Plant Physiol., VoL 3, No.4, (N.S.) pp. 269-274 (Oct.-Dec., 1998)
Grains per Harvest
panicle Index(%)
Index(%)
2965 29.4
2835 28.0
2571 29.4
3173 30.0
2513 30.3
2651 30.0
2643 21.5
2585 25.6
2656 26.9
2348 19.4
1848 23.3
2032 27.0
2212 30.8
2541 27.0
772 6.40
12.8 14.0
2622 28.5
2359 23.8
Panicle Harvest (g.m·2)
69
69
65
72
67
69
51
67
80
68
70
61
61
67
13.2
11.7
65
71
Grain yield
619
590
592
564
577
524
593
518
516
473
459
395
525
534
123
13.6
553
492
S.S. RAO, eta!. positive correlation's were observed between panicle
mass and grain number per panicle and 1000 grain weight (P
:S
0.01) (Table II). Similar findings were also observed by Subramanian et. a/., ( 1989). Realization of higher panicle mass is reflective of the genotype superior sink capacity. Significant genotypic variation was observed in I 000 grain weight, grains per panicle, harvest index (HI) and grain yield (Table llll). Grain yield ranged from 395 to 619 g.m-2. JKSH 161 topped in
yield followed by SPH 879 and SPH 815. Hybrids recorded 7'1o, ll '%, 20% and 12% more 1000 grain \\eight grain number, HI and grain yield respectively than inbreds. Higher yields were mainly due to high sink number coupled with more sink size as in JKSH 161, SPH 879 and SPH 815. While comparing hybrids and inbrids Blum eta/., (1992) and Ram and Rao (1983) have also shom1 the superiority ofhybrids over inbreds
Ill y1cld and ns components.
In the current study. although, inbreds produced high biomass and this was not resulted into higher yield due to their inherently low HI and grain number. Further more. grain number per panicle had strong positive association with grain yield (r = 0.745**). HI was positively related to grain yield (r = 0.421 *). Both panicle harvest index (PHI) and distribution index (DI) had positive correlation with HI (Table II). Several researchers have emphasised the importance of large grain number tor realising the higher yield potential (Sri Ram andRao, 1983; Heinrich et al .. 1983; Eastin, 1983; Pi1~jari and Shmde, 1995). Eastin (1983) argued that ''her~ yield stability across the environments in critical, seed size ma\' be relatively more important. High correlation bet\\cen grain number and grain yield in the present study is suggestive of that a large number of grains is essential for high yield and is dependent on adequate canopy development and biomass production upto flowering. This is tum leads to large CGR during GS 3 stage. Significant positive association between DI and HI indicative of the role of current assimilate production. MuchO\v and Wilson (1976) also observed the variation in DI among sorghum genotypes. Both
more seed number and size are essential for yield stability, wider adaptation across the environments.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thanks are due to Mr. J. Narasinga Rao and Mr. A. Laxma Reddy for their assisstance in the conduct of experiment and data collection.
REFERENCES
Anonymous, (I 997). All India Coordinated Sorghum Improvement Project, Annual Progress Report for I 996-97. National Research Centre for Sorghum, Hydcrabad, India pp. 1-6.
Blum, A, Golan, G., Mayer, J., Sinmena, B. and Obilana, T. (1992). Comparative productivity and drought response of semi-tropical hybrids and open pollinated varitics of Sorghum. J. Agric. Sci.,
118 : 29-36.
Eastin, J.D. (1983). Sorghum. In :Proceedings of the Symposium on potential productivity offield crops under dit1erent environments, Inti. Rice Res. Inst., Los Banos, Manila, Philippines.
Heinrich, G.M , Francis, C.A. and Eastin, J.D. ( 1983). Stability of grain sorghum yield components across diverse environemnts. Crop Sci., 23 : 209-212.
Kulkami, L.P. ( 1983). Photosynthetic efiiciency and translocation in relation to leaf characters and productivity in sorghum genotypes.
lv~vsoreJ. Agric. Sci., 17: 84.
Muchow, R.C. and Wilson, G.L. (1976). Photosynthate and storage limitations to yield in sorghum bicolor. Aust. J. Agric. Res .. 27: 489-500.
Muchow, R.C. (1989). Comparative productivity of maize, sorghum aml pearl millet in a semi-arid tropical em itomnent. I. YielJ potential. Field Crops Res., 20: 191-205.
Myers,R.J.K., Keeter, G.D. anJ Foale, M.A. (1986). Sorghum growth anJ development in the tropical and sub-tropical environments. 2. Growth rate, grain yield and yield components. In: Proc ofthe firstAustralianSorghum Cmiference(M.A. Foale,R.G. Henzel!.
eds. Gatton, Queensland, Australia; pp. 4.55-4.63.
Pinjari, M.B. and Shinde, M.S. (1995). Studies on the morpho physiological traits contributing to the grain yield in sorghum hybrids. Arm. Plant Physiol., 9 : 161-163.
GROWTH AND YIELD OF SORGHUM
Radford, P.J. (1967). Growth analysis formulae-Their use ::.nd Abuse.
Crop Sci., 7: 171-!75.
Rao. N.G.P. (I 982). Transforming traditional Sorghums in India. In:
Proceedings of the International Symposium on "Sorghum in
Eighties"ICRlSAT, Patancheru,AP., India. Vol. I. pp. 39-59.
Reddy,B.B. andRao. N.G.P. (1982). Bridging the gap betwcenl1ybrid
and veri eta! performance in sorghum. Indian.!. Genet., 42 :
64-69.
Jnd.ianJ. Plant Phy.nuL Vol. 3, No.4, (N.S.) pp. 269-274 (Oct.-Dec., 1998)
Reddy, B. V.S. and Stenhouse, J.W. (1994 ). Sorghrun improvement
for semi-arid tropics region. Past, current and future research
thrust in Asia. P.K.V. Res . .!., 18: 155-169.
Sri Ram, N. and Rao, J.S. (I 9lG ). Physiological parameters influencing
sorghum yield. Ind..!. Agric. Sci. 53:641-649.
Subramanian, V.B., Sankar,G.R.M. andRao,D.G. (l9S9)Relationship between ear dry matter at anthesis and gmin yield in a rainted
sorghum hybrid. Indian.!. Plan/ J>Jn•.l·iol., 32 : 228-232.