Nitrogen-Driven Genotypic Diversity of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Site and Soil Characteristics
2.2. Experimental Design and Treatment Details
2.3. Sampling and Measurements
2.4. Chemical Analysis of N Content in Plant Samples
2.5. Computation of Nitrogen Uptake in Genotypes
2.6. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Yields and Harvest Index
3.2. N Concentration and Uptake
3.3. Partial N Balance
3.4. Internal Nitrogen Use Efficiency
3.5. Correlation Analysis among Crop Traits
4. Discussion
4.1. Effects of N Fertilization on Wheat Yields, Harvest Index, and Nitrogen Uptake
4.2. Relationship between Crop Traits/Parameters of Wheat
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hitz, K.; Clark, A.J.; Van Sanford, D.A. Identifying nitrogen-use efficient soft red winter wheat lines in high and low nitrogen environments. Field Crops Res. 2017, 200, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tamang, B.G.; Brasier, K.G.; Thomason, W.E.; Griffey, C.A.; Fukao, T. Differential responses of grain yield, grain protein, and their associated traits to nitrogen supply in soft red winter wheat. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2017, 180, 316–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Sanford, D.A.; MacKown, C.T. Variation in nitrogen use efficiency among soft red winter wheat genotypes. Theor. Appl. Genet. 1986, 72, 158–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Saba, M.; Kuchel, H.; Langridge, P.; Okamoto, M. Evaluation of australian wheat genotypes for response to variable nitrogen application. Plant Soil 2015, 399, 247–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brennan, J.; Hackett, R.; McCabe, T.; Grant, J.; Fortune, R.A.; Forristal, P.D. The effect of tillage system and residue management on grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency in winter wheat in a cool atlantic climate. Eur. J. Agron. 2014, 54, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.; Westcott, M.; Neill, K.; Wichman, D.; Knox, M. Row configuration and nitrogen application for barley–pea intercropping in montana. Agron. J. 2004, 96, 1730–1738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hirel, B.; Bertin, P.; Quilleré, I.; Bourdoncle, W.; Attagnant, C.; Dellay, C.; Gouy, A.; Cadiou, S.; Retailliau, C.; Falque, M.; et al. Towards a better understanding of the genetic and physiological basis for nitrogen use efficiency in maize. Plan Physio 2001, 125, 1258–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sylvester-Bradley, R.; Kindred, D.R. Analysing nitrogen responses of cereals to prioritize routes to the improvement of nitrogen use efficiency. J. Exp. Bot. 2009, 60, 1939–1951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pathak, R.R.; Ahmad, A.; Lochab, S.; Raghuram, N. Molecular physiology of plant nitrogen use efficiency and biotechnological options for its enhancement. Curr. Sci. 2008, 94, 1394–1403. [Google Scholar]
- Hirel, B.; Le Gouis, J.; Ney, B.; Gallais, A. The challenge of improving nitrogen use efficiency in crop plants: Towards a more central role for genetic variability and quantitative genetics within integrated approaches. J. Exp. Bot. 2007, 58, 2369–2387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walkley, A.; Black, I.A. An examination of the degtjareff method for determination of soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934, 37, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Subbiah, B.V.; Asija, G.L. A rapid method for the estimation of nitrogen in soil. Curr. Sci. 1956, 25, 259–260. [Google Scholar]
- Olsen, S.R. Estimation of Available Phosphorus in Soils by Extraction with Sodium Bicarbonate; No. 939; US Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 1954.
- Hanway, J.J.; Heidel, H. Soil Analysis Methods as Used in Iowa State College Soil Testing Laboratory; Bulletin 57; Iowa State College of Agriculture: Ames, IA, USA, 1952. [Google Scholar]
- Prasad, R.; Shivay, Y.S.; Kumar, D.; Sharma, S.N. Learning by Doing Exercises in Soil Fertility (A Practical Manual for Soil Fertility); Division of Agronomy, Indian Agricultural Research Institute: New Delhi, India, 2006; Volume 68. [Google Scholar]
- de Mendiburu, F. agricolae: Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. R Package Version 1.3-5. 2021. Available online: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=agricolae (accessed on 3 February 2023).
- Singh, B. Agronomic Benefits of Neem Coated Urea—A Review. In International Fertilizer Association Review Papers; International Fertilizer Association: Paris, France, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Foulkes, M.J.; Hawkesford, M.J.; Barraclough, P.B.; Holdsworth, M.J.; Kerr, S.; Kightley, S.; Shewry, P.R. Identifying traits to improve the nitrogen economy of wheat: Recent advances and future prospects. Field Crops Res. 2009, 114, 329–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Slafer, G.A.; Andrade, F.H. Genetic improvement in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) yield in Argentina. Field Crops Res. 1989, 21, 289–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barraclough, P.B.; Howarth, J.R.; Jones, J.; Lopez-Bellido, R.; Parmar, S.; Shepherd, C.E.; Hawkesford, M.J. Nitrogen efficiency of wheat: Genotypic and environmental variation and prospects for improvement. Eur. J. Agron. 2010, 33, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ortiz-Monasterior, J.I.; Sayre, K.D.; Rajaram, S.; McMahon, M. Genetic progress in wheat yield and nitrogen use efficiency under four nitrogen rates. Crop Sci. 1997, 37, 898–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Le Gouis, J.; Béghin, D.; Heumez, E.; Pluchard, P. Genetic Differences for nitrogen uptake and nitrogen utilisation efficiencies in winter wheat. Eur. J. Agron. 2000, 12, 163–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guarda, A.; Rosell, C.M.; Benedito, C.; Galotto, M.J. Different hydrocolloids as bread improvers and antistaling agents. Food Hydrocoll. 2004, 18, 241–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laperche, A.; Devienne-Barret, F.; Maury, O.; Le Gouis, J.; Ney, B. A Simplified conceptual model of carbon/nitrogen functioning for qtl analysis of winter wheat adaptation to nitrogen deficiency. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2006, 113, 1131–1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaju, O.; Allard, V.; Martre, P.; Snape, J.W.; Heumez, E.; LeGouis, J.; Moreau, D.; Bogard, M.; Griffiths, S.; Orford, S.; et al. Identification of traits to improve the nitrogen-use efficiency of wheat genotypes. Field Crops Res. 2011, 123, 139–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gawdiya, S.; Kumar, D.; Shivay, Y.S.; Kour, B.; Kumar, R.; Meena, S.; Saini, R.; Choudhary, K.; Al-Ansari, N.; Alataway, A.; et al. Field screening of wheat cultivars for enhanced growth, yield, yield attributes, and nitrogen use efficiencies. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kubar, M.S.; Alshallash, K.S.; Asghar, M.A.; Feng, M.; Raza, A.; Wang, C.; Saleem, K.; Ullah, A.; Yang, W.; Kubar, K.A.; et al. Improving winter wheat photosynthesis, nitrogen use efficiency, and yield by optimizing nitrogen fertilization. Life 2022, 12, 1478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yousaf, M.; Li, X.; Zhang, Z.; Ren, T.; Cong, R.; Ata-Ul-Karim, S.T.; Fahad, S.; Shah, A.N.; Lu, J. Nitrogen fertilizer management for enhancing crop productivity and nitrogen use efficiency in a rice-oilseed rape rotation system in China. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lammerts van Bueren, E.T.; Struik, P.C. Diverse concepts of breeding for nitrogen use efficiency. A Review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 37, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Habbib, H.; Hirel, B.; Verzeaux, J.; Roger, D.; Lacoux, J.; Lea, P.; Dubois, F.; Tétu, T. Investigating the combined effect of tillage, nitrogen fertilization and cover crops on nitrogen use efficiency in winter wheat. Agronomy 2017, 7, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehrabi, F.; Sepaskhah, A.R. Interaction effects of planting method, irrigation regimes, and nitrogen application rates on yield, water and nitrogen use efficiencies of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Int. J. Plant Prod. 2018, 12, 265–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grant, C.A.; Moulin, A.P.; Tremblay, N. Nitrogen management effects on spring wheat yield and protein concentration vary with seeding date and slope position. Agron. J. 2016, 108, 1246–1256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, Y.; Yu, Z. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer rates and ratios of base and topdressing on wheat yield, soil nitrate content and nitrogen balance. Front. Agric. China 2008, 2, 181–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Man, J.; Shi, Y.; Yu, Z.; Zhang, Y. Dry matter production, photosynthesis of flag leaves and water use in winter wheat are affected by supplemental irrigation in the Huang-Huai-Hai plain of China. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0137274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gowda, M.; Hahn, V.; Reif, J.C.; Longin, C.F.H.; Alheit, K.; Maurer, H.P. Potential for simultaneous improvement of grain and biomass yield in central European winter triticale germplasm. Field Crops Res. 2011, 121, 153–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cormier, F.; Faure, S.; Dubreuil, P.; Heumez, E.; Beauchêne, K.; Lafarge, S.; Praud, S.; Le Gouis, J. A multi-environmental study of recent breeding progress on nitrogen use efficiency in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Theor. Appl. Genet. 2013, 126, 3035–3048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voss-Fels, K.P.; Stahl, A.; Wittkop, B.; Lichthardt, C.; Nagler, S.; Rose, T.; Chen, T.-W.; Zetzsche, H.; Seddig, S.; Majid Baig, M.; et al. Breeding improves wheat productivity under contrasting agrochemical input levels. Nat. Plants 2019, 5, 706–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guttieri, M.J.; Frels, K.; Regassa, T.; Waters, B.M.; Baenziger, P.S. Variation for nitrogen use efficiency traits in current and historical great plains hard winter wheat. Euphytica 2017, 213, 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brasier, K.; Oakes, J.; Balota, M.; Reiter, M.; Jones, N.; Pitman, R.; Sneller, C.; Thomason, W.; Griffey, C. Genotypic variation and stability for nitrogen use efficiency in winter wheat. Crop Sci. 2020, 60, 32–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brasier, K.; Oakes, J.; Balota, M.; Thomason, W.; Griffey, C. Greater biomass accumulation at anthesis increases nitrogen use efficiency in winter wheat. Agron. J. 2019, 111, 2163–2173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swarbreck, S.M.; Wang, M.; Wang, Y.; Kindred, D.; Sylvester-Bradley, R.; Shi, W.; Varinderpal-Singh; Bentley, A.R.; Griffiths, H. A roadmap for lowering crop nitrogen requirement. Trends Plant Sci. 2019, 24, 892–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sylvester-Bradley, R.; Kindred, D.; Berry, P.M.; Storer, K.; Kendall, S.; Welham, S. Development of Appropriate Testing Methodology for Assessing Nitrogen Requirements of Wheat and Oilseed Rape Varieties; DEFRA Evidence Project Final Report; IF01110; HMSO: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- De Oliveira Silva, A.; Slafer, G.A.; Fritz, A.K.; Lollato, R.P. Physiological basis of genotypic response to management in dryland wheat. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 10, 1644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ju, X.-T.; Xing, G.-X.; Chen, X.-P.; Zhang, S.-L.; Zhang, L.-J.; Liu, X.-J.; Cui, Z.-L.; Yin, B.; Christie, P.; Zhu, Z.-L.; et al. Reducing environmental risk by improving n management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 3041–3046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; He, P.; Jin, J.; Zhou, W.; Sulewski, G.; Phillips, S. Yield gaps, indigenous nutrient supply, and nutrient use efficiency of wheat in China. Agron. J. 2011, 103, 1452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fixen, P.; Brentrup, F.; Bruulsema, T.; Garcia, F.; Norton, R.; Zingore, S. Nutrient/Fertilizer Use Efficiency: Measurement, Current Situation, and Trends. Managing Water and Fertilizer for Sustainable Agricultural Intensification. 2015, Volume 270, pp. 1–30. Available online: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/208412/files/managing_water_and_fertilizer_for_sustainable_agricultural_intensification.pdf#page=21 (accessed on 28 February 2023).
- Maiti, D.; Das, D.K.; Pathak, H. Simulation of fertilizer requirement for irrigated wheat in eastern india using the quefts model. Sci. World J. 2006, 6, 231–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pathak, H.; Aggarwal, P.K.; Roetter, R.; Kalra, N.; Bandyopadhaya, S.K.; Prasad, S.; Van Keulen, H. Modelling the quantitative evaluation of soil nutrient supply, nutrient use efficiency, and fertilizer requirements of wheat in india. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2003, 65, 105–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramanjaneyulu, A.V.; Shankar, V.G.; Neelima, T.L.; Shashibhusahn, D. Genetic analysis of rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes under aerobic conditions on Alfisols. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 2014, 46, 99–111. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, M.; Chen, J.; Cao, F.; Jiang, L.; Zou, Y.; Deng, G. Improving physiological n-use efficiency by increasing harvest index in rice: A case in super-hybrid cultivar guiliangyou 2. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2015, 62, 725–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Huang, L.; Zhu, G.; Zhang, H.; Wang, Z.; Adnan, M.; Saud, S.; Hayat, Z.; Fahad, S. Screening of rice cultivars for nitrogen use efficiency and yield stability under varying nitrogen levels. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2021, 41, 1808–1819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, U.; Ladha, J.K.; Castillo, E.G.; Punzalan, G.; Tirol-Padre, A.; Duqueza, M. genotypic variation in nitrogen use efficiency in medium- and long-duration rice. Field Crops Res. 1998, 58, 35–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samonte, S.O.P.B.; Wilson, L.T.; Medley, J.C.; Pinson, S.R.M.; McClung, A.M.; Lales, J.S. nitrogen utilization efficiency: Relationships with grain yield, grain protein, and yield-related traits in rice. Agron. J. 2006, 98, 168–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, W.; Wang, J.; Wang, C.; Ma, G.; Wei, Q.; Lu, H.; Xie, Y.; Ma, D.; Kang, G. Root growth, water and nitrogen use efficiencies in winter wheat under different irrigation and nitrogen regimes in north China Plain. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 1798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nazim Ud Dowla, M.A.N.; Edwards, I.; O’Hara, G.; Islam, S.; Ma, W. developing wheat for improved yield and adaptation under a changing climate: Optimization of a few key genes. Engineering 2018, 4, 514–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nouri, A.; Etminan, A.; Silva, J.A.T.; Mohammadi, R. Assessment of yield, yield-related traits and drought tolerance of durum wheat genotypes (Triticum turjidum vardurum Desf.). Aust. J. Crop Sci. 2011, 5, 8–16. [Google Scholar]
- Gawdiya, S.; Kumar, D.; Shivay, Y.S.; Bhatia, A.; Mehrotra, S.; Chandra, M.S.; Kumawat, A.; Kumar, R.; Price, A.H.; Raghuram, N.; et al. Field-based evaluation of rice genotypes for enhanced growth, yield attributes, yield and grain yield efficiency index in irrigated lowlands of the Indo-Gangetic plains. Sustainability 2023, 15, 8793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glass, A.D.M. Nitrogen use efficiency of crop plants: Physiological constraints upon nitrogen absorption. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2003, 22, 453–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: https://icar.org.in/index.php/node/12081 (accessed on 21 September 2023).
- Available online: https://www.iari.res.in/iari-varieties/crops.php?grp=bkY2T0dYUC9uS1VoMzM0ZkM4SmtLdz09&crp=eElpNlpJOU1TOUY4TzlVMnFVamNZZz09 (accessed on 21 September 2023).
- Available online: https://www.isgpb.org/article/wheat-variety-pusa-wheat-3249-hd-3249 (accessed on 21 September 2023).
- Available online: http://ztmbpd.iari.res.in/technologies/varietieshybrids/cereals/wheat/ (accessed on 21 September 2023).
- Available online: https://www.pau.edu/coa/index.php?_act=manageDepartments&DO=viewMatter&intDepTitleID=20&intLinkID=9&strDepTitle=Important%20Achievements (accessed on 21 September 2023).
- Available online: https://epubs.icar.org.in/index.php/JWR/article/view/123981 (accessed on 21 September 2023).
Nitrogen × Variety | HD 3226 | HDCSW 18 | HD 2967 | HD 3086 | HD 3249 | HD 2733 | PBW 550 | PBW 343 | HD 3117 | HD 3298 | Mean | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Straw yield—SY (t/ha) | ||||||||||||
2020–2021 | N0 | 3.03 k | 3.36 ijk | 4.10 gh | 4.12 fgh | 4.57 fg | 3.59 hij | 4.12 fgh | 3.19 jk | 4.66 f | 3.75 hi | 3.85 b |
N75 | 4.40 fg | 5.87 e | 6.39 de | 6.44 d | 7.28 c | 6.11 de | 6.50 d | 5.86 e | 6.58 d | 6.14 de | 6.16 a | |
N150 | 6.57 d | 8.04 b | 8.55 ab | 8.78 a | 8.87 a | 8.03 b | 8.33 ab | 6.44 d | 8.39 ab | 8.41 ab | 8.04 a | |
Mean | 4.67 g | 5.76 e | 6.34 bc | 6.45 b | 6.91 a | 5.91 de | 6.31 bc | 5.16 f | 6.54 b | 6.10 cd | ||
* N × V = 0.6/* V × N = 2 | ||||||||||||
2021–2022 | N0 | 3.18 lm | 3.13 m | 3.91 ijklm | 4.08 hijk | 4.68 hi | 3.62 jklm | 4.28 hij | 3.30 klm | 4.75 h | 3.75 jklm | 3.87 c |
N75 | 3.76 jklm | 3.84 jklm | 8.07 bcd | 6.96 fg | 7.13 efg | 7.41 def | 6.72 fg | 4.00 hijkl | 7.09 efg | 7.91 cde | 6.29 b | |
N150 | 6.44 g | 8.05 bcd | 8.80 ab | 8.78 ab | 8.97 a | 8.26 abc | 8.82 ab | 6.44 g | 8.86 ab | 8.76 ab | 8.22 a | |
Mean | 4.46 d | 5.01 c | 6.93 a | 6.61 ab | 6.93 a | 6.43 b | 6.61 ab | 4.58 cd | 6.90 ab | 6.81 ab | ||
* N × V = 0.8/* V × N = 1.8 | ||||||||||||
Pooled | 4.6 f | 5.4 d | 6.6 b | 6.5 b | 6.9 a | 6.2 c | 6.5 b | 4.9 e | 6.7 ab | 6.5 b | ||
Year-1 = 6/Year-2 = 6.1/*SY × Year = 0.72/*SY × V = 0.28 | ||||||||||||
Biological yield—BY (t/ha) | ||||||||||||
2020–2021 | N0 | 4.67 q | 5.33 opq | 6.64 mn | 6.82 mn | 7.77 kl | 5.72 op | 6.91 lmn | 4.99 pq | 7.86 k | 6.05 no | 6.28 b |
N75 | 7.01 klm | 9.64 j | 10.80 ghi | 10.94 ghi | 12.59 f | 10.16 ij | 11.09 gh | 9.55 j | 11.35 g | 10.26 hij | 10.34 a | |
N150 | 10.57 ghi | 13.36 ef | 14.89 bc | 15.44 ab | 16.26 a | 13.58 de | 15.12 bc | 10.60 ghi | 15.28 bc | 14.41 cd | 13.95 a | |
Mean | 7.42 g | 9.45 e | 10.78 c | 11.07 bc | 12.21 a | 9.82 de | 11.04 bc | 8.38 f | 11.50 b | 10.24 d | ||
* N × V = 0.9/* V × N = 3.7 | ||||||||||||
2021–2022 | N0 | 4.90 m | 5.02 lm | 6.37 jk | 6.71 ij | 7.96 i | 5.83 jklm | 7.15 ij | 5.18 klm | 8.03 i | 6.05 jklm | 6.32 c |
N75 | 5.96 jklm | 6.24 jkl | 13.42 de | 11.76 fgh | 12.48 efg | 12.11 efg | 11.52 gh | 6.45 jk | 12.19 efg | 13.01 def | 10.51 b | |
N150 | 10.56 h | 13.37 de | 15.14 abc | 15.32 ab | 16.37 a | 13.82 cd | 15.60 ab | 10.60 h | 15.87 ab | 14.88 bc | 14.15 a | |
Mean | 7.14 e | 8.21 d | 11.64 ab | 11.26 bc | 12.27 a | 10.59 c | 11.42 b | 7.41 e | 12.03 ab | 11.31 bc | ||
* N × V = 1.3/* V × N = 3.4 | ||||||||||||
Pooled | 7.3 h | 8.8 f | 11.2 cd | 11.2 cd | 12.2 a | 10.2 e | 11.2 c | 7.9 g | 11.8 b | 10.8 d | ||
Year-1 = 10.2/Year-2 = 10.3/*BY × Year = 2.2/* BY × V = 0.45 |
Nitrogen × Variety | N Concentration in Grain (NCG-%) | N Concentration in Straw (NCS-%) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2020–2021 | 2021–2022 | Pooled | 2020–2021 | 2021–2022 | Pooled | |
N0 | 1.60 c | 1.61 b | 1.60 c | 0.392 b | 0.393 c | 0.392 c |
N75 | 1.97 b | 1.98 a | 1.98 b | 0.474 a | 0.477 b | 0.476 b |
N150 | 2.13 a | 2.14 a | 2.13 a | 0.509 a | 0.510 a | 0.509 a |
LSD (p = 0.05) | 0.10 | 0.15 | 0.06 | 0.062 | 0.015 | 0.02 |
HD 3226 | 1.60 f | 1.62 f | 1.61 f | 0.443 def | 0.446 ef | 0.445 fg |
HDCSW 18 | 1.99 b | 2.00 b | 2.00 b | 0.443 def | 0.437 fg | 0.44 gh |
HD 2967 | 1.65 ef | 1.66 ef | 1.66 f | 0.453 cde | 0.458 d | 0.455 ef |
HD 3086 | 2.01 b | 2.03 b | 2.02 b | 0.433 ef | 0.436 fg | 0.435 gh |
HD 3249 | 2.20 a | 2.20 a | 2.20 a | 0.487 ab | 0.487 ab | 0.487 ab |
HD 2733 | 1.97 b | 1.98 bc | 1.97 b | 0.460 cd | 0.456 de | 0.458 de |
PBW 550 | 1.71 e | 1.72 e | 1.71 e | 0.427 f | 0.433 g | 0.430 h |
PBW 343 | 1.81 d | 1.82 d | 1.81 d | 0.467 bc | 0.471 c | 0.469 cd |
HD 3117 | 2.16 a | 2.16 a | 2.16 a | 0.497 a | 0.498 a | 0.498 a |
HD 3298 | 1.90 c | 1.91 c | 1.90 c | 0.473 bc | 0.477 bc | 0.475 bc |
LSD (p = 0.05) | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.022 | 0.011 | 0.012 |
Interaction | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
Year-1 | 1.91 a | 0.458 a | ||||
Year-2 | 1.90 a | 0.460 a | ||||
NCG/NCS × Year | 0.022 | 0.33 | ||||
NCG/NCS × V | 0.05 | 0.012 |
Nitrogen × Variety | HD 3226 | HDCSW 18 | HD 2967 | HD 3086 | HD 3249 | HD 2733 | PBW 550 | PBW 343 | HD 3117 | HD 3298 | Mean | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N uptake of grain (NUG—kg ha−1) | ||||||||||||
2020 | N0 | 20.0 p | 36.8 mno | 32.6 no | 47.7 m | 64.8 l | 35.4 no | 37.8 mn | 26.0 op | 63.7 l | 35.4 no | 40.03 b |
N75 | 43.7 mn | 81.6 hijk | 75.1 jkl | 92.9 gh | 118.5 f | 82.8 hij | 81.0 ijk | 70.7 kl | 104.4 g | 82.6 hij | 83.35 ab | |
N150 | 77.2 ijk | 104.6 g | 126.7 ef | 149.2 bc | 175.0 a | 124.8 ef | 139.8 cd | 87.7 hi | 160.7 b | 130.6 de | 127.62 a | |
Mean | 47.0 h | 74.3 f | 78.1 ef | 96.6 c | 119.4 a | 81.0 def | 86.2 d | 61.5 g | 109.6 b | 82.9 de | ||
* N × V = 11.70/* V × N = 49.97 | ||||||||||||
2021 | N0 | 21.5 q | 35.1 opq | 31.5 pq | 46.3 no | 66.6 kl | 36.9 op | 38.9 nop | 27.3 pq | 65.3 lm | 35.6 opq | 40.5 b |
N75 | 37.1 op | 52.2 mn | 91.8 hij | 99.2 ghi | 120.3 ef | 96.6 hi | 85.1 ij | 47.4 no | 112.0 fg | 102.8 gh | 84.4 ab | |
N150 | 79.8 jk | 104.9 gh | 126.8 de | 149.4 bc | 174.8 a | 125.1 ef | 139.9 cd | 87.5 ij | 163.2 ab | 133.5 de | 128.5 a | |
Mean | 46.1 e | 64.1 d | 83.4 c | 98.3 b | 120.6 a | 86.2 c | 88.0 c | 54.1 e | 113.5 a | 90.6 bc | ||
* N × V = 52.5/* V × N = 8.2 | ||||||||||||
Pooled | 46.6 h | 69.2 f | 80.8 e | 97.5 c | 120.0 a | 83.6 de | 87.1 d | 57.8 g | 111.6 b | 86.8 d | ||
Year-1 = 83.7 a/Year-2 = 84.5 a/* NUG × Year = 3.1/*NUG × V = 5.2 | ||||||||||||
N uptake of straw (NUS—kg ha−1) | ||||||||||||
2020 | N0 | 11.6 m | 12.9 lm | 16.1 kl | 15.3 l | 19.3 jk | 14.1 lm | 14.9 lm | 12.8 lm | 20.2 j | 15.1 lm | 15.2 b |
N75 | 20.3 j | 27.3 i | 30.1 ghi | 29.1 hi | 36.6 ef | 29.6 hi | 28.7 i | 28.2 i | 33.8 fg | 30.2 ghi | 29.4 a | |
N150 | 32.5 gh | 39.6 de | 43.0 bcd | 42.2 cd | 48.1 a | 41.1 d | 40.1 de | 33.8 fg | 46.4 ab | 44.8 abc | 41.1 a | |
Mean | 21.5 f | 26.6 de | 29.7 bc | 28.9 bc | 34.6 a | 28.3 bcd | 27.9 cd | 24.9 e | 33.4 a | 30.0 b | ||
* N × V = 1.27/* V × N = 2.28 | ||||||||||||
2021 | N0 | 12.0 l | 11.8 l | 15.3 jkl | 14.9 jkl | 19.7 hi | 13.9 jkl | 15.6 ijkl | 13.1 kl | 20.8 h | 15.1 jkl | 15.2 c |
N75 | 17.7 hij | 17.1 hijk | 38.8 de | 31.9 fg | 35.9 ef | 34.5 fg | 30.3 g | 19.6 hi | 36.0 ef | 39.4 de | 30.1 b | |
N150 | 31.5 g | 39.4 de | 43.9 bc | 42.5 cd | 48.1 ab | 42.6 cd | 42.6 cd | 33.6 fg | 48.6 a | 46.2 abc | 41.9 a | |
Mean | 20.4 d | 22.8 d | 32.7 ab | 29.8 c | 34.6 a | 30.3 bc | 29.5 c | 22.1 d | 35.1 a | 33.6 a | ||
* N × V = 9.9/* V × N = 2.5 | ||||||||||||
Pooled | 20.9 e | 24.7 d | 31.2 b | 29.3 c | 34.6 a | 29.3 c | 28.7 c | 23.5 d | 34.3 a | 31.8 b | ||
Year-1 = 28.6 a/Year-2 = 29.1 a/*NUS × Year = 28.9/* NUS × V = 1.6 |
Nitrogen × Variety | HD 3226 | HDCSW 18 | HD 2967 | HD 3086 | HD 3249 | HD 2733 | PBW 550 | PBW 343 | HD 3117 | HD 3298 | Mean | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total N uptake (TNU kg ha−1) | ||||||||||||
2020 | N0 | 31.6 q | 49.7 nop | 48.7 op | 63.0 mn | 84.1 l | 49.5 nop | 52.7 mno | 38.8 pq | 83.8 l | 50.6 mnop | 55.3 b |
N75 | 64.1 m | 109.0 ijk | 105.3 jk | 122.0 i | 155.1 fg | 112.4 ijk | 109.6 ijk | 98.9 k | 138.2 h | 112.8 ij | 112.7 ab | |
N150 | 109.7 ijk | 144.2 gh | 169.7 de | 191.4 c | 223.1 a | 165.8 ef | 179.9 cd | 121.4 i | 207.1 b | 175.4 de | 168.8 a | |
Mean | 68.5 g | 100.9 e | 107.9 de | 125.5 c | 154.1 a | 109.2 d | 114.1 d | 86.4 f | 143.1 b | 112.9 d | ||
* N × V = 13.80/* V × N = 61.55 | ||||||||||||
2021 | N0 | 33.4 o | 46.9 mno | 46.9 mno | 61.2 klm | 86.3 j | 50.8 lmn | 54.5 klmn | 40.4 no | 86.1 j | 50.7 lmn | 55.7 b |
N75 | 54.8 klmn | 69.3 jk | 130.6 gh | 131.1 fgh | 156.2 de | 131.0 fgh | 115.3 hi | 67.0 kl | 148.0 ef | 142.1 efg | 114.6 ab | |
N150 | 111.3 i | 144.3 efg | 170.7 cd | 191.8 b | 222.9 a | 167.7 cd | 182.5 bc | 121.2 hi | 211.8 a | 179.7 bc | 170.4 a | |
Mean | 66.5 e | 86.8 d | 116.0 c | 128.1 b | 155.1 a | 116.5 c | 117.4 c | 76.2 e | 148.6 a | 124.2 bc | ||
* N × V = 62.2/* V × N = 9.8 | ||||||||||||
Pooled | 67.5 h | 93.9 f | 112.0 e | 126.8 c | 154.6 a | 112.9 de | 115.8 de | 81.3 g | 145.8 b | 118.5 d | ||
Year-1 = 112.3 a/Year-2 = 113.6 a/*TNU × Year = 32.1/*TNU × V = 6.2 |
Nitrogen × Variety | HD 3226 | HDCSW 18 | HD 2967 | HD 3086 | HD 3249 | HD 2733 | PBW 550 | PBW 343 | HD 3117 | HD 3298 | Mean | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Partial N balance—PNB (Kg N removed per kg N applied) | ||||||||||||
2020–2021 (N) | N75 | 1.07 jk | 1.82 de | 1.75 def | 2.03 c | 2.59 a | 1.87 cd | 1.83 d | 1.65 efg | 2.30 b | 1.88 cd | 1.88 a |
N150 | 0.91 k | 1.20 j | 1.41 i | 1.59 fgh | 1.86 cd | 1.38 i | 1.50 ghi | 1.01 k | 1.73 def | 1.46 hi | 1.41 b | |
Mean | 0.99 g | 1.51 e | 1.58 de | 1.81 c | 2.22 a | 1.63 de | 1.66 d | 1.33 f | 2.01 b | 1.67 d | ||
* N × V = 0.179/* V × N = 0.176 | ||||||||||||
2021–2022 | N75 | 0.93 i | 1.20 gh | 2.18 c | 2.19 c | 2.60 a | 2.18 c | 1.92 d | 1.12 hi | 2.47 ab | 2.37 bc | 1.91 a |
N150 | 0.91 i | 1.16 h | 1.42 fg | 1.60 ef | 1.86 d | 1.40 fg | 1.52 f | 1.01 hi | 1.77 de | 1.50 f | 1.42 a | |
Mean | 0.92 e | 1.18 d | 1.80 bc | 1.89 b | 2.23 a | 1.79 bc | 1.72 c | 1.06 de | 2.12 a | 1.93 b | ||
* N × V = 0.22/* V × N = 0.48 | ||||||||||||
Pooled | 0.96 d | 1.34 c | 1.69 b | 1.85 b | 2.23 a | 1.71 b | 1.69 b | 1.20 c | 2.07 a | 1.80 b | ||
Year-1 = 1.64 a/Year-2 = 1.66 a/*PNB × Year = 0.52/*PNB × V = 0.10 |
Nitrogen × Variety | HD 3226 | HDCSW 18 | HD 2967 | HD 3086 | HD 3249 | HD 2733 | PBW 550 | PBW 343 | HD 3117 | HD 3298 | Mean | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2020–2021 (N) | N75 | 40.8 a | 37.0 b | 42.0 a | 36.9 b | 34.3 e | 36.5 bcd | 41.9 a | 37.4 b | 34.7 de | 36.6 bc | 37.6 a |
N150 | 36.6 bc | 35.0 cde | 37.5 b | 34.9 cde | 33.3 e | 33.8 e | 38.0 b | 34.5 e | 33.5 e | 34.3 e | 35.3 b | |
Mean | 38.7 a | 36.0 b | 39.8 a | 35.9 b | 33.8 d | 35.1 bc | 39.9 a | 36.0 b | 34.1 cd | 35.5 b | ||
* N × V = 1.7/* V × N = 1.8 | ||||||||||||
2021–2022 | N75 | 40.1 a | 36.8 b | 40.9 a | 36.6 bc | 34.2 def | 36.0 bcd | 41.6 a | 36.5 bc | 34.5 def | 35.8 bcde | 37.1 a |
N150 | 37.0 b | 34.8 cdef | 37.2 b | 34.2 def | 33.3 f | 33.4 f | 37.3 b | 34.5 def | 33.2 f | 34.1 ef | 35.1 a | |
Mean | 38.5 a | 35.8 b | 39.1 a | 35.4 b | 33.7 c | 34.7 bc | 39.5 a | 35.5 b | 33.9 c | 34.9 bc | ||
* N × V = 1.86/* V × N = 1.91 | ||||||||||||
Pooled | 38.6 b | 35.9 c | 39.4 ab | 35.7 cd | 33.8 e | 34.9 d | 39.7 a | 35.7 cd | 34.0 e | 35.2 cd | ||
Year-1 = 36.5 a/Year-2 = 36.1 a/* INUE × Year = 2/* INUE × V = 0.9 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gawdiya, S.; Kumar, D.; Shivay, Y.S.; Radheshyam; Nayak, S.; Ahmed, B.; Kour, B.; Singh, S.; Sadhukhan, R.; Malik, S.; et al. Nitrogen-Driven Genotypic Diversity of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2447. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13102447
Gawdiya S, Kumar D, Shivay YS, Radheshyam, Nayak S, Ahmed B, Kour B, Singh S, Sadhukhan R, Malik S, et al. Nitrogen-Driven Genotypic Diversity of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes. Agronomy. 2023; 13(10):2447. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13102447
Chicago/Turabian StyleGawdiya, Sandeep, Dinesh Kumar, Yashbir Singh Shivay, Radheshyam, Somanath Nayak, Bulbul Ahmed, Babanpreet Kour, Sahadeva Singh, Rahul Sadhukhan, Sintu Malik, and et al. 2023. "Nitrogen-Driven Genotypic Diversity of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes" Agronomy 13, no. 10: 2447. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13102447