Paper · 2013 · UWA Profiles and Research Repository (University of Western Australia)

Stay green character at grain filling ensures resistance against terminal drought in wheat.

Ahmad Nawaz; Muhammad Farooq; Sardar Alam Cheema; et al.

9
claims
19
verbatim quotes
56
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Water shortage is the main constraint limiting crop productivity across the globe especially when it occurs at reproductive and grain filling stages. This study was conducted to monitor the mechanisms of drought resistance, during reproductive stages (booting, heading anthesis and post-anthesis stages) by monitoring the stay green character, water use efficiency, grain filling rate, grain filling duration, grain yield and harvest index. Seeds of wheat cultivars C-591, Chakwal-50, Dharabi-2011, BARS2009, Uqab-2000, Sehr-2006, Shafaq-2006, Faisalabad-2008, Lasani-2008 and Mairaj-2008 were sown in 10 kg soil filled pots on November 25, 2011. The drought stress was applied at the respective reproductive stage, which continued till maturity. Controlled plants were well-watered throughout the crop ontogeny. Pots were maintained at 70% water holding capacity (WHC; well watered) till booting stage and then managed drought stress was induced as per treatment maintaining 35% WHC (drought stress). Drought stress at all the stages significantly influenced the crop performance in all the tested cultivars. Severity of drought was more when it was imposed at booting and heading stages while was less devastating when imposed at anthesis and grain filling stages. Cultivars Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008 showed more stay gray character and took longer duration for grain filling, which resulted in the maintenance of higher grain weight and grain number per spike, grain yield and water use efficiency under stress conditions. In drought sensitive cultivars (BARS-2009, Uqab-2000), the drought increased the grain filling rate, while grain filling duration was substantially decreased. To conclude, stay green character, grain filling rate and duration under drought stress may be used as selection criteria for developing and/or screening wheat cultivars for drought resistance at reproductive stages. © 2013 Friends Science Publishers

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought stress significantly influenced performance of all tested wheat cultivars.

Treatment
Drought stresse0
Outcome
crop performancee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 · show in text ↑
e0

“Drought stress at all the stages significantly influenced the crop performance in all the tested cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1002–1108 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought was more severe at booting and heading than at anthesis and grain filling.

Treatment
booting and heading stagese0
Outcome
Severity of droughte0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
anthesis and grain filling stagese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 · show in text ↑
e0

“Severity of drought was more when it was imposed at booting and heading stages while was less devastating when imposed at anthesis and grain filling stages”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1110–1265 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008 showed more stay gray character under stress.

Material
Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008e0
Outcome
stay gray charactere0
Direction
moree0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 · show in text ↑
e0

“Cultivars Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008 showed more stay gray character and took longer duration for grain filling”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1267–1378 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008 had longer grain filling duration under stress.

Material
Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008e0
Outcome
duration for grain fillinge0
Direction
longere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 · show in text ↑
e0

“Cultivars Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008 showed more stay gray character and took longer duration for grain filling”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1267–1378 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008 maintained higher grain weight and grain number per spike under stress.

Material
Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008e1
Outcome
grain weight and grain number per spikee0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
under stress conditionse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 · show in text ↑
e0

“maintenance of higher grain weight and grain number per spike, grain yield and water use efficiency under stress conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1402–1525 · show in text ↑
e1

“Cultivars Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1267–1303 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008 maintained higher grain yield and water use efficiency under stress.

Material
Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008e1
Outcome
grain yield and water use efficiencye0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
under stress conditionse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 · show in text ↑
e0

“maintenance of higher grain weight and grain number per spike, grain yield and water use efficiency under stress conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1402–1525 · show in text ↑
e1

“Cultivars Chakwal-50 and Mairaj-2008”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1267–1303 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought increased grain filling rate in BARS-2009 and Uqab-2000.

Material
BARS-2009, Uqab-2000e0
Treatment
droughte0
Outcome
grain filling ratee0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 · show in text ↑
e0

“In drought sensitive cultivars (BARS-2009, Uqab-2000), the drought increased the grain filling rate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1527–1626 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought substantially decreased grain filling duration in BARS-2009 and Uqab-2000.

Material
BARS-2009, Uqab-2000e0
Treatment
droughte0
Outcome
grain filling duratione0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–90 · show in text ↑
e0

“In drought sensitive cultivars (BARS-2009, Uqab-2000), the drought increased the grain filling rate, while grain filling duration was substantially decreased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1527–1684 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Stay green character, grain filling rate and duration under drought may serve as selection criteria for wheat drought resistance.

Outcome
selection criteria for developing and/or screening wheat cultivars for drought resistancee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“stay green character, grain filling rate and duration under drought stress may be used as selection criteria for developing and/or screening wheat cultivars for drought resistance at reproductive stages”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1699–1901 · show in text ↑

drought · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

632 papers: 95 positive, 537 negative or no effect

536 papers in the same direction as this paper · 95 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

628 papers more in this group

See all 632 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.