Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T10:04:06.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Efficacy of calcium chloride and arginine foliar spray in alleviating terminal heat stress in late-sown wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2019

A. Roy Chowdhury*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur-813 210, Bihar, India
M. Ghosh
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur-813 210, Bihar, India
M. Lal
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur-813 210, Bihar, India
A. Pal
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry and Crop Physiology, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur-813 210, Bihar, India
K. K. Hazra*
Affiliation:
Crop Production Division, ICAR-Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur208 024, Uttar Pradesh, India
S. S. Acharya
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur-813 210, Bihar, India
A. Chaurasiya
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur-813 210, Bihar, India
S. K. Pathak
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur-813 210, Bihar, India
*
Author for correspondence: K. K. Hazra, E-mail: kalikrishna123@gmail.com; A. Roy Chowdhury, E-mail: arnabuas@gmail.com
Author for correspondence: K. K. Hazra, E-mail: kalikrishna123@gmail.com; A. Roy Chowdhury, E-mail: arnabuas@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Terminal heat stress leads to sizeable yield loss in late-sown wheat in tropical environments. Several synthetic compounds are known to counteract plant stress emanating from abiotic factors. A field experiment was conducted in Sabour (eastern India) during 2013–2016 to investigate the field efficacy of two synthetic compounds, calcium chloride (CaCl2) and arginine, for improving grain yield of two contrasting wheat cultivars (DBW 14 and K 307) facing terminal heat stress. For this, foliar spray of 18.0 mM CaCl2 at booting (CCB) or anthesis (CCA), 9.0 mM CaCl2 at both booting and anthesis (CCB+A), 2.5 mM arginine at booting (ARGB) or anthesis (ARGA) and 1.25 mM arginine at both booting and anthesis (ARGB+A) treatments along with no-spray and water-spray treatments were evaluated in late-sown wheat. The highest grain yield was recorded in treatment CCB+A, followed by CCA and ARGB+A. However, the effect of these compounds was marginal on grain yield when applied only at the booting stage. Grains/ear and thousand-grain weight were found to be the critical determinants for yield in late-sown wheat. During the anthesis to grain filling period, flag-leaf chlorophyll degradation and increase in relative permeability in no-spray treatment were 34–36% and 29–52%, respectively, but these values were reduced considerably in CCB+A treatment followed CCA. Thus, foliar spray of 9.0 mM CaCl2 both at booting and anthesis stages may be recommended for alleviating the negative impacts of terminal heat stress in late-sown wheat and improving its productivity (>13%).

Information

Type
Crops and Soils Research Paper
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019
Figure 0

Fig. 1. The daily minimum and maximum temperature range (°C) and rainfall (mm) during the crop growing seasons (2013–2014 to 2015–2016).

Figure 1

Table 1. Treatment description and abbreviations used for different treatments

Figure 2

Table 2. Characteristics of the wheat cultivars used in the study

Figure 3

Fig. 2. Temporal distribution of vegetative (green line) and reproductive phases (red line) of wheat crop during (2013–2016) (a). In each experimental year, the lower line represents the cultivar DBW 14 and the corresponding upper line represents the cultivar K 307. The box plots represent maximum (b) and minimum (c) temperatures faced by the cultivar DBW 14 and K 307 at the reproductive stage (anthesis to grain filling) during first, second and third year of the experiment. The lower whisker, green box, yellow box and upper whisker represent the first, second, third and fourth quartile range, respectively. The vertical line in between yellow and green box represents the mean value.

Figure 4

Fig. 3. Flag leaf chlorophyll content (mg/kg) at anthesis and grain filling stages, and degradation of chlorophyll during anthesis to grain filling period (%) as influenced by different wheat cultivars and chemical spray treatments (2013–2014 to 2015–2016). Error bars represent ± standard error of mean. NS(CT), no-spray; CC(B), 18.0 mM CaCl2 at booting; CC(A), 18.0 mM CaCl2 at anthesis, CC(B + A), 9.0 mM CaCl2 at both booting and anthesis, ARG(B), 2.5 mM arginine at booting; ARG(A), 2.5 mM arginine at anthesis; ARG(B + A), 1.25 mM arginine at both booting and anthesis; WS(B + A), water-spray at both booting and anthesis.

Figure 5

Table 3. Pooled ANOVA of yield, yield attributing and physiological parameters (2013–2014 to 2015–2016)

Figure 6

Fig. 4. Flag leaf relative permeability (%) at anthesis and grain filling stages, and increase in flag leaf relative permeability during anthesis to grain filling (%) as influenced by different chemical spray treatments (2013–2014 to 2015–2016). Error bars represent ± standard error of mean. NS(CT), no-spray; CC(B), 18.0 mM CaCl2 at booting; CC(A), 18.0 mM CaCl2 at anthesis, CC(B + A), 9.0 mM CaCl2 at both booting and anthesis, ARG(B), 2.5 mM arginine at booting; ARG(A), 2.5 mM arginine at anthesis; ARG(B + A), 1.25 mM arginine at both booting and anthesis; WS(B + A), water-spray at both booting and anthesis.

Figure 7

Table 4. Yield attributing parameters of wheat crop as influenced by different chemical spray treatments under late-sown condition

Figure 8

Table 5. Grain yield of wheat (t/ha) as influenced by chemical spray treatments under late-sown condition of Eastern India

Figure 9

Fig. 5. HUE (kg/ha/°C day) as influenced by different wheat cultivars and chemical spray treatments. NS(CT), no-spray; CC(B), 18.0 mM CaCl2 at booting; CC(A), 18.0 mM CaCl2 at anthesis, CC(B + A), 9.0 mM CaCl2 at both booting and anthesis, ARG(B), 2.5 mM arginine at booting; ARG(A), 2.5 mM arginine at anthesis; ARG(B + A), 1.25 mM arginine at both booting and anthesis; WS(B + A), water-spray at both booting and anthesis. Error bars represent ± standard error of means.

Figure 10

Fig. 6. Pearson correlation coefficient (r) between wheat grain yield and different plant growth, yield and physiological parameters during the experimental year 2013–2014 to 2015–2016. The dotted lines represent the critical (±) r value (P = 0.05, df = 46). ET, effective tillers; GPP, grains/panicle; TGW, thousand grain weight; RP(GF), relative permeability of flag leaf (grain filling); RP(A), relative permeability of flag leaf (anthesis); Chl(A), chlorophyll content (anthesis); Chl(GF), chlorophyll content (grain filling).

Figure 11

Fig. 7. Relationship between flag leaf relative permeability (RP) (grain filling) and chlorophyll content (Chl) (grain filling). Vertical and horizontal error bars represent ± standard error of means.

Figure 12

Fig. 8. Scatter plot of treatment combination on PCA coordinates based on all measures growth, yield and physiological parameters. C1, cultivar DBW 14; C2, cultivar K 307; ET, effective tillers; GPP, grains/panicle; TGW, thousand grain weight; RP(GF), relative membrane permeability of flag leaf at grain filling (%); RP(A), membrane permeability of flag leaf at anthesis (%); Chl(A), chlorophyll content (anthesis); Chl(GF), chlorophyll content (grain filling); CHLF, chlorophyll degradation during anthesis to grain filling (%); ΔRP change in membrane permeability of flag leaf during anthesis to grain filling (%).