Habte, Ermias

Jones, Christopher S.

Lee, K.W.

Muktar, Meki S.

Teressa, Alemayehu

CGSpace

Napier grass (Cenchrus purpureus Schumach L.) is an important perennial forage native to Africa and now introduced and grown in many tropical andsubtropical countries. It is considered as a short-term drought tolerant forage, which is a useful trait in areas with low soil moisture during the dry season,although it is recommended for planting in areas with rainfall >1,000 mm. In order to exploit the potential of this grass species for improved water useefficiency (WUE), a field drought stress experiment was conducted with the objective to identify traits that underlie enhanced water use efficiency and toselect best performing genotypes that can thrive in low soil moisture areas.Identification of Water Use Efficient Napier Grass Accessions Using Field Drought Stress▪ Eighty four accessions from ILRI and EMBRAPAcollections of Napier grass were planted using a P-repdesign in four blocks in Bishoftu, Ethiopia.▪ After establishment plants were exposed tooptimum water (OW) with 20% soil moisture orwater stress (WS) with 10% soil moisture during thedry season.▪ Agronomic and physiological data were collected atevery 8 weeks of re-growth.METHODOLOGYFig. 1. Napier grass growing under optimum water (OW, left panel) and water stress (WS, right panel) conditions▪ The study revealed significant differences between plants grown under optimum water andwater stress (Fig. 1).▪ Significant genotypic differences were observed among genotypes for morphological andagronomic traits which suggests selection for improved forage performance will be efficient(Table 1.).▪ Genotypes showed significant variation for total dry weight (Fig. 2) and enhanced water useefficiency (Fig. 3) implying that genotypes differ in economic use of water for increasedbiomass production under water limited conditions.▪ Genotypes showed consistent performance for biomass dry weight and water use efficiencyobserved across dry season harvests, indicating promising Napier grass accessions could beidentified for low soil moisture areas forage production.INTRODUCTION00.511.522.533.544.5102614355143891498214983149841535715743 (MOTT)16621167821678316784167851678616787167881678916790167911679216793167941679516796167971679816799168001680116802168031680416805168061680716808168091681016811168121681316814168151681616817168181681916821168221683416835168361683716838168391684016902184381844818662BAGCE 100BAGCE 17BAGCE 30BAGCE 343BAGCE 53BAGCE 81BAGCE 86BAGCE 90BAGCE 97CNPGL 00-1-1CNPGL 92-133-3CNPGL 92-198-7CNPGL 92-56-2CNPGL 92-66-3CNPGL 9279-2CNPGL 93 -37-5CNPGL 93-01-1CNPGL 93-04-2CNPGL 93-18-2CNPGL 94-13-1CNPGL 96-21-1CNPGL 96-23-1CNPGL 96-27-3PIONEIROTDW( t/ha)OW WS012345678102614355143891498214983149841535715743 (MOTT)16621167821678316784167851678616787167881678916790167911679216793167941679516796167971679816799168001680116802168031680416805168061680716808168091681016811168121681316814168151681616817168181681916821168221683416835168361683716838168391684016902184381844818662BAGCE 100BAGCE 17BAGCE 30BAGCE 343BAGCE 53BAGCE 81BAGCE 86BAGCE 90BAGCE 97CNPGL 00-1-1CNPGL 92-…CNPGL 92-…CNPGL 92-56-2CNPGL 92-66-3CNPGL 9279-2CNPGL 93 -37-5CNPGL 93-01-1CNPGL 93-04-2CNPGL 93-18-2CNPGL 94-13-1CNPGL 96-21-1CNPGL 96-23-1CNPGL 96-27-3PIONEIROWUE g/m3OW WSFig. 2. Total dry weight of 84 Napier grass accessions averaged over four dry season harvests between OW/WS Table 1. Summary ANOVA and coefficient of variationfor morphological and agronomic traits of four dry season harvestsFig. 3. WUE of 84 Napier genotypes under OW/WS over four dry season harvestsSources of Variation PH LW TN TFW TDW WUEGenotype 139.39*** 151.79*** 15293.4*** 51.08*** 4.74*** 25.26***Treatment (OW/WS) 3306.68** 857.3* 33433*** 3377.94** 308.73** 109.3**Genotype X Treatment 21.07* 19.69ns 3287.9*** 18.36*** 1.72* 7.93*Range 1.67-60.33 3-35.33 0.67-264 0.02-36.74 0.04-17.42 0.05-27.24Mean 12.11 19.01 82.52 3.89 1.2 2.75GCV% 31.26 21.57 51.37 58.29 54.39 55.07PCV% 51.64 30.74 63.14 69.84 71.49 72.35PH = plant height; LW = Leaf width; LL = Leaf length; TFW = Total fresh weight; TDW = Total dry weightWUE  =Water use efficiency; *,**,*** = Significant level at 0.5% .0.1%and 0.001%, ns=Non significantMAJOR FINDINGSErmias Habte:E.Habte@cgiar.org, Feed and Forage Development, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.  ilri.orgThis research was supported by the "Cooperative Research Program for Agriculture Science & Technology Development (Project No. PJ012187)" , Rural Development Administration, Republic of KoreaErmias Habte, Meki S. Muktar, Alemayehu T. Negawo, Ki-Won Lee and Chris S. JonesRESULTSThis document is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence.Date Year. July,2019

Identification of water use efficient Napier grass accessions using field drought stress

https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/10568/102346/1/ermias_KSBS.pdf

Identification of water use efficient Napier grass accessions using field drought stress

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CGSpace