Yield attributing physio-morphological trait response in rice (Oryza sativa) genotypes grown under aerobic situation in eastern Indo-Gangetic plain

Abstract

A field experiment was carried out during wet season 2010-2012 with an objective to evaluate the effect of aerobic situation on yield attributes and physio-morphological trait performance of advanced breeding lines and popular high yielding rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties of eastern India including aerobic check MAS 946. Significant yield decline was observed almost in all the rice genotypes grown under aerobic situation as compared to normal transplanted condition. The range of yield decline was 1.43 to 3.27 tonnes/ha under aerobic situation compared to normal irrigated condition. Rice genotypes capable of maintaining high early vegetative vigour, plant biomass, RWC, chlorophyll content and photosynthetic rate leads to produce higher grain yield under aerobic situation. The existence of genetic variation (PCV and GCV) revealed significant differences among genotypes for different morpho-physiological traits. Higher values of heritability and genetic advance were observed for plant height and DFF whereas low heritability for grain yield, plant biomass and test weight. Promising rice genotypes for aerobic situation, IR77298-14-1-2-130-2, IR84899-B-182-3-1-1-2, IR84887-B-157-38-1-1-3,IR84887-B-156-17-1-1, IR 84899-B-179-1-1-1-2 and IR 83927-B-B-278-5-1-1-1showed high yield advantage (40.29%) over susceptible genotypes due to better performance of physio-morphological traits. Hence these promising genotypes may be adopted in rainfed lowland ecosystem as well as under limited water availability areas. Moreover, these promising genotypes can also be utilised as donor parents in future aerobic rice breeding programme.

Full text

Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 85 (8): 1102–8, August 2015/Article
https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v85i8.50858
Yield attributing physio-morphological trait response in rice (Oryza sativa)
genotypes grown under aerobic situation in eastern Indo-Gangetic plain
SANTOSH KUMAR1, S S SINGH2, S K DWIVEDI3 and SANJEEV KUMAR4
ICAR-Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar 800 014
Received: 22 March 2014; Accepted: 8 April 2015
ABSTRACT
A field experiment was carried out during wet season 2010-2012 with an objective to evaluate the effect of aerobic
situation on yield attributes and physio-morphological trait performance of advanced breeding lines and popular high
yielding rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties of eastern India including aerobic check MAS 946. Significant yield decline
was observed almost in all the rice genotypes grown under aerobic situation as compared to normal transplanted
condition. The range of yield decline was 1.43 to 3.27 tonnes/ha under aerobic situation compared to normal irrigated
condition. Rice genotypes capable of maintaining high early vegetative vigour, plant biomass, RWC, chlorophyll
content and photosynthetic rate leads to produce higher grain yield under aerobic situation. The existence of genetic
variation (PCV and GCV) revealed significant differences among genotypes for different morpho-physiological traits.
Higher values of heritability and genetic advance were observed for plant height and DFF whereas low heritability for
grain yield, plant biomass and test weight. Promising rice genotypes for aerobic situation, IR77298-14-1-2-130-2,
IR84899-B-182-3-1-1-2, IR84887-B-157-38-1-1-3,IR84887-B-156-17-1-1, IR 84899-B-179-1-1-1-2 and IR 83927-
B-B-278-5-1-1-1showed high yield advantage (40.29%) over susceptible genotypes due to better performance of
physio-morphological traits. Hence these promising genotypes may be adopted in rainfed lowland ecosystem as well
as under limited water availability areas. Moreover, these promising genotypes can also be utilised as donor parents
in future aerobic rice breeding programme.
Key words: Aerobic Rice, Grain yield, Irrigated rice, Physiological traits, Water deficit
1Scientist (Plant breeding) (e mail: santosh9239@gmail.com);
2Head (e mail: sssinghpatna@yahoo.co.in), Division of Crop
Production, Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur, Uttar
Pradesh 208 024; 3Scientist (Plant Physiology) (e mail:
sharad.dwivedi9736@gmail.com), 4Principal Scientist (Agronomy)
(e mail: shiv_sanjeev@yahoo.co.in), Division of Crop Research
Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is cultivated under diverse
ecologies ranging from irrigated to rainfed and upland to
lowland to deep water system. Irrigated rice accounts for
55% world area and about 75% of total rice production.
Rainfed rice accounts for around 45% of the world’s rice
area (IRRI 2002). Around 40 million ha of rainfed area is
concentrated in South and Southeast Asia alone (Maclean et
al. 2002). Rainfed rice-growing areas are highly prone to
water scare condition. Almost 28% of world’s rice is grown
under rainfed lowland (Khush 1997) and frequently affected
by un-even rainfall distribution pattern. Another 13% of the
rice area is under upland cultivation, which is always
subjected to water stress during the growing season. Scarcity
of freshwater resource has threatened the production of the
flood-irrigated rice crop (IWMI 2000). By 2025, 15 out of
75 million hectare of Asia’s flood-irrigated rice crop will
118
experience water shortage. Being an extravagant consumer
of water, rice uses around 5000 litres of fresh water to
produce 1 kg of rice (Bouman 2009). The increasing
depletion of fresh water resources is a major threat to the
traditional way of rice cultivation (Gleick 1993). It has been
estimated that 22 million hectare of irrigated dry season rice
in South and Southeast Asia was experiencing economic
water scarcity and 2 million hectare of Asia’s irrigated dry
season rice and 13 million hectare of its wet season rice
would suffer from physical water scarcity by 2025 (Tuong
and Bouman 2002).
Under present climate scenario, water scarcity that we
are facing today is the greatest threat to rice cultivation.
Because of increasing water scarcity, there is a need to
develop alternative system that requires less water for rice
crop production. Several technologies were developed to
reduce water loss and increase the water productivity.
However, the fields are still kept irrigated for some periods
in most of systems, so water losses remain high. Aerobic
rice, a new way of growing rice: it is high yielding rice
grown in non-puddled, non-irrigated aerobic soils under
irrigation and high external inputs (Bouman et al. 2002).
It is efficient water saving rice technology for water short

1103August 2015] YIELD RESPONSE OF RICE UNDER AEROBIC CONDITION
119
irrigated rice area. Aerobic rice promises substantial water
savings by minimizing seepage and percolation and greatly
reducing evaporation. The basis of yield variation and
performance of genotypes are yet to be understood. Further,
physiological basis of yield gap between aerobic and
irrigated rice was not studied extensively. There are reports
that compared photosynthetic rate among individual leaves
of rice and some clear differences have been observed
among varieties, among species and among progenies
derived from crosses between species (Hirasawa et al.
2010). However, it is significantly affected by stomatal
conductance and Rubisco content present in the leaf
(Hirasawa et al. 2010). Currently in India, particularly in
eastern region, aerobic rice cultivation practice is in initial
phases. There is also need to establish reason of
physiological basis for yield gap among genotypes under
aerobic and irrigated situation. In this context, a field
experiment was conducted for three consecutive wet
seasons 2010-2012 to examine the yield and yield attributes
response of seventy two rice genotypes under water scarcity
(aerobic) situation and to identify promising genotypes for
this condition and morpho-physiological basis for yield
gap between aerobic and irrigated condition.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A field experiment was carried out at the experimental
farm of the ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region,
Patna, India (latitude 25.30ºN, longitude 85.15ºE) during
three consecutive wet seasons 2010-2012. The experimental
site was typical rainfed having clay loam soil with pH 7.5,
organic carbon 0.67%, bulk density 1.47 g/cm3, electrical
conductivity 0.26 dS/m, available nitrogen 227 kg/ha,
available phosphorous 28.4 kg/ha, and exchangeable
potassium 218 kg/ha. The total rainfall was 568 mm, 624mm,
and 502 mm during crop growth periods in 2010, 2011 and
2012, respectively. Seventy two rice genotypes comprised
of advanced breeding lines, popular high yielding cultivars
rainfed lowland ecosystem and check varieties (IR 64,
Rajendra Bhagwati and MAS 946) of the eastern region
were evaluated under both aerobic and normal transplanted
irrigated irrigated condition following alpha lattice design.
The rice genotypes used under study were collected from
International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), Philippines
and Central Rice Research Institute (CRRI), Cuttack.
In aerobic field, surface irrigation was given once in a
week at vegetative stage and 2-3 days interval at reproductive
stage. During vegetative growth period, irrigation was
applied at soil moisture tension of -30 KPa at 15cm soil
depth while at reproductive phase the threshold for irrigation
was reduced to -10 kPa to prevent spikelet sterility. In
control (irrigated) field, twenty one days old, 2-3 seedling
per hill were transplanted at a spacing of 20 cm×15 cm and
at least 5 cm standing water is maintained till 25 days before
harvesting. Both aerobic and control field were fertilized at
the rate of 100-60-40 kg N, P, K/ha, respectively. Nitrogen
was applied in three equal splits (as basal, at maximum
tillering and at panicle initiation stage), while total dose of
P2O5 and K2O were applied as basal. The observations on
yield and yield attributes such as early vegetative vigour
(EVV), total plant biomass, effective tillers/m2, panicle
length, test weight, harvest index, spikelet/panicle, percent
spikelet sterility and fertility under both the situation (control
and aerobic) were recorded. EVV was recorded by using 1-
9 scale developed by IRRI (1996).
Ten promising genotypes along with three check
varieties were selected out of seventy two genotypes on the
basis of yield and yield attributes for further physiological
studies; Relative water content (RWC), chlorophyll content,
stomatal conductance and photosynthesis rate were recorded
by using following formulae and techniques.
Relative water content (RWC) was estimated by
(Weatherly 1950) method.
Relative water content (%) = [(Fresh weight- Oven dry
weight) × 100/(Turgid weight- Oven dry weight)]
Chlorophyll content was estimated by extracting 0.05 g of
leaf material in 10 ml dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) (Hiscox
and Israelstam 1979).Total chlorophyll = (20.2 × OD 645 +
8.02 × OD 663) × V/1000 × w. Chlorophyll content was
expressed as mg/gfreshweight. Photosynthesis rate and
stomatal conductance were measured using portable Infrared
Gas Analyzer (IRGA LI-6400 Model). The rate of
photosynthesis was measured by operating the IRGA in the
closed mode. The net photosynthetic rate was expressed as
µmol/m2/s. The stomatal conductance was expressed as
cm/s.
Agro-morphological data were analyzed by following
Gomez and Gomez (1984) using CropStat 7.2 (IRRI 2009)
programme. The genetic parameters, genotypic and
phenotypic coefficient of variation, heritability and genetic
advance were computed following the Singh and Chaudhury
(1985) procedure. Physiological data was analyzed using
OPSTAT software of Hisar Agricultural University, Hisar.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Genetic parameters
Genetic variability in any crop is the pre-requisite for
selection of superior genotypes over the best existing cultivar.
In the present study, the genotypic coefficient of variation
(GCV) and phenotypic coefficient of variation (PCV) were
computed separately for the irrigated condition (IC) and
aerobic condition (AC) (Table 1). Yield and yield
contributing traits showed low genotypic coefficient of
variation (GCV) than phenotypic coefficient of variation
(PCV), which indicated the influence of environment on
these traits. Under irrigated (control), the minimum difference
between PCV and GCV values were observed for almost all
the characters under study. This was also supported by
higher values of heritability and genetic advance, while in
aerobic conditions; coefficients of variation (PVC and GCV)
have more difference in comparison to control condition,
which is supported by moderate to high heritability for all
the characters. Girish et al. (2006) also reported that that the
PCV was higher than GCV and indicated the influence of

1104 [Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 85 (8)
120
KUMAR ET AL.
environment on these characters. In aerobic condition, the
GCV estimate ranged from 4.97% to 27.84%. Higher values
of GCV and PCV were observed for grain yield (27.84,
39.61) while lowest for DFF (4.97, 5.25) and plant biomass
(7.07, 12.26) under aerobic condition.
Under aerobic condition, the heritability estimate ranged
from 29.83% for grain yield to 84.35% for DFF, whereas
genetic advance varied from 4.29% for plant biomass to
33.47% for plant height. High values of heritability and
genetic advance under aerobic management were observed
for plant height and days to 50% flowering. Similar findings
were reported for plant height by Girish et al. (2006), and
Murthy et al. (2011). Moderate heritability and genetic
advance were observed for effective tiller number/m2, panicle
length and spikelets/panicle. However, low heritability and
genetic advance values were observed for grain yield, straw
yield, test weight, plant biomass and percentage spikelet
sterility indicating high environmental influence for these
characters. Murthy et al. (2011) also reported the similar
finding for these characters.
Performance of yield and yield attributes
Observations on yield and yield contributing traits were
recorded under both aerobic and irrigated situation. Aerobic
rice produced significantly lower grain yield and total plant
biomass than irrigated rice during all the three years of
experimentation. The mean and range of grain yield was
2.19 tonnes/ha, 0.96-3.92 tonnes/ha, 4.21 tonnes/ha and
2.96-6.07 tonnes/ha observed under aerobic and irrigated
condition, respectively. Similarly, the mean and range of
sterility percentage was 11.6, 6.29-23.55, 29.7 and 13.81-
61.82% observed under irrigated and aerobic condition,
respectively. In general, in most of the genotype during all
three years a slight but insignificant delay in days of fifty
percent flowering was observed under aerobic condition as
compared to control (irrigated); however, the responses
varied among genotypes. Significant decrease in plant height
was also observed in rice genotypes grown under aerobic
situation than irrigated condition (Table 2).
The result revealed that yield gap between aerobic and
irrigated rice was more during third year wet crop season
2012 (Table 2).The yield difference between aerobic and
irrigated rice ranged 19 to 78%. The yield difference between
aerobic and irrigated rice were 19 to 57%, 26 to 64% and 23
to 78% in year 2010, 2011 and 2012, respectively. Out of
seventy two rice genotypes evaluated, ten were identified as
promising genotypes which performed better than checks
and existing high yielding varieties of eastern region. Higher
grain yields of 3.92 tonnes/ha was observed in IR77298-14-
1-2-130-2 followed by 3.69/tha in IR84899-B-182-3-1-1-2
and 3.53 tonnes/ha inIR84887-B-157-38-1-1-3. Ventura and
Watanabe (1978) reported 30-60% yield reduction in the
second season under continuous upland rice cropping for
variety IR2061- 464-2-4 and similar results were also
Table 1 Variability parameters of different morphological traits under irrigated condition (IC) and aerobic condition (AC)
Character Environments LSD CV Coefficient of variation Heritability Genetic advance
GCV (%) PCV (%) (h2b) (as % of mean)
Days to 50 per cent flowering IC 3.36 1.94 4.97 5.25 93.18 23.24
(days)
Plant Height (cm) AC 2.52 1.85 6.32 9.93 84.35 19.75
IC 6.53 4.11 13.72 14.34 89.17 42.57
Tiller number/m2AC 4.95 3.68 13.86 18.77 77.41 33.49
IC 25.63 5.64 16.51 18.38 77.63 26.89
Panicle length (cm) AC 16.91 8.33 12.42 21.15 55.44 21.47
IC 1.69 6.21 6.33 8.24 83.31 25.94
Plant biomass (g) AC 1.24 7.23 11.81 17.19 60.39 22.64
IC 0.74 7.29 7.07 12.26 78.46 15.44
Sterility (%) AC 0.53 5.88 6.11 21.43 31.53 4.29
IC 1.48 6.14 11.57 13.29 74.62 28.49
Test weight (g) AC 2.06 8.79 15.82 24.45 33.57 13.16
IC 1.59 5.48 8.76 12.25 83.59 19.28
Harvest index AC 1.37 6.71 10.36 19.77 44.75 11.72
IC 0.04 6.76 9.84 15.19 74.29 27.98
Spikelets/panicle AC 0.03 5.49 12.78 22.96 43.22 14.57
IC 7.45 6.59 13.92 16.81 76.88 28.26
Grain yield (tonnes/ha) AC 6.94 8.27 11.25 21.57 52.91 15.34
IC 0.45 6.37 19.51 26.63 57.61 34.41
Straw yield (tonnes/ha) AC 0.27 11.96 27.84 39.61 29.83 18.77
IC 0.52 8.72 17.95 24.06 48.94 27.56
AC 0.44 9.34 23.91 36.57 32.35 11.49
AC (Aerobic condition), IC (Irrigated condition), DFF (Days to fifty percent flowering), Plant height (PH) and Harvest Index (HI)

1105August 2015]
121
YIELD RESPONSE OF RICE UNDER AEROBIC CONDITION
reported by George et al. (2002) under mono-cropping of
aerobic rice in the Philippines. Significant difference of
spikelet/panicle was observed between aerobic and irrigated
condition. Spikelet number per panicle and effective tillers
were more in irrigated rice than in aerobic rice in all three
crop season and consequently higher harvest index was
recorded in irrigated transplanted rice compared to aerobic
rice. Similar trend was observed by Peng et al. (2006).
All the promising genotypes in the present study have
shown high early vegetative vigour (EVV) whereas, check
varieties have average to low vegetative vigour under aerobic
situation (Table 3). EVV is an important trait because it
enables crop plant to compete with weed and also ensure
that the crop achieves its critical leaf area at flowering. The
yield gap between aerobic and irrigated rice was attributed
more to difference in e number of effective tiller per m2,
plant biomass and harvest index (Table 4). Aerobic rice had
lower test weight (1000 grain weight) and grain filling
percentage than irrigated rice. Irrigated rice showed more
consistent 1000 grain weight in all three seasons than aerobic
rice.
Physiological traits
Physiological traits, viz. Relative water content (RWC),
chlorophyll content, photosynthetic rate, and stomatal
conductance influenced under aerobic situation to a larger
extent.
The capacity to maintain higher relative water content
(RWC) under moisture stress condition has been suggested
as a possible water scarcity tolerance mechanism in rice
(O’Toole and Garrity 1984). A significant difference in
RWC was observed among genotypes between aerobic and
irrigated conditions. In aerobic condition, higher value of
RWC was recorded in water deficit stress tolerant rice
genotypes as compared to sensitive one at reproductive
stage. Highest value of RWC was observed in IR84887-B-
157-38-1-1-3 (72.2%) followed by IR77298-14-1-2-130-2
(71.4%) and IR84889-B-179-1-1-1-2 (69.1%) (Fig 1). Study
revealed that relative water content of all genotypes reduced
significantly under aerobic (water scarcity) situation as
compared to normal irrigated condition. Reena et al. (2011)
and Jongdee et al. (1998) also reported the similar findings.
Chlorophyll content of all the best performing genotypes
as well as check varieties (IR 64, Rajendra Bhagwati and
MAS 946) was higher under normal (irrigated) situation.
Genotypes IR77298-14-1-2-130-2 and IR84887-B-156-17-
1-1 have much higher chlorophyll content in comparison to
other genotypes and check varieties under aerobic situation
(Fig 1). Higher genotypic differences in chlorophyll content
were observed under aerobic situation. Madhan Mohan et
al. (2000) stated that the chlorophyll content is an indication
of stress tolerance capacity of plants and its high value
means that the stress did not have much effect on chlorophyll
content of tolerant plants. Gowri (2005) observed decrease
in chlorophyll content under aerobic situation than irrigated
environment.
Out of better yield performing genotypes under aerobic
situation, IR77298-14-1-2-130-2, IR84887-B-156-17-1-1
and IR84887-B-157-38-1-1-3 showed higher photosynthetic
rate and stomatal conductance in comparison to other high
yielding genotypes as well as check varieties whereas, all
the genotypes showed higher photosynthetic rate and stomatal
conductance under control (Fig 1). The increase in leaf
photosynthetic rate is important to increase the yield potential
of rice (Hirasawa et al. 2010) because the photosynthetic
rate of individual leaves which form the canopy, affect dry
Table 2 Yield and yield attributes response of top ten promising rice genotypes and check varieties to aerobic and irrigated condition
Promising genotypes DFF pH (cm) Grain yield in Number of effective Spikelets/ HI
(tonnes//ha) tillers/m2panicle
AC IC AC IC AC IC AC IC AC IC AC IC
IR77298-14-1-2-130-2 88 85 116 124 3.92 5.68 351 469 194 216 0.42 0.48
IR84899-B-182-3-1-1-2 84 89 119 126 3.69 5.97 364 478 176 203 0.41 0.51
IR84887-B-157-38-1-1-3 85 84 109 114 3.53 5.16 338 433 191 224 0.41 0.46
IR84887-B-156-17-1-1 84 88 121 126 3.47 5.38 329 408 177 194 0.42 0.48
IR 84899-B-179-1-1-1-2 86 82 117 126 3.41 4.91 335 421 182 211 0.43 0.45
IR 83927-B-B-278-5-1-1-1 98 95 115 132 3.34 5.19 358 442 175 197 0.39 0.45
IR 84887-B-158-7-1-1-4 89 93 113 124 3.27 4.83 327 415 192 231 0.39 0.43
IR 84882-B-B-123-46-1-1 95 103 125 128 3.20 5.45 336 452 170 202 0.41 0.47
IR 84895-B-125-12-1-1 87 85 120 127 3.19 4.62 321 434 183 214 0.40 0.42
IR 84894-B-140-16-1-1-1 84 85 117 125 3.05 5.23 345 441 179 195 0.41 0.44
Rajendra Bhagwati (check) 89 85 108 119 1.97 4.68 267 424 148 209 0.34 0.45
MAS 946 (check) 92 90 103 111 2.32 4.53 289 437 156 197 0.36 0.44
IR 64 (check) 86 83 113 116 1.81 4.81 253 429 145 211 0.32 0.46
Mean 88.7 85.9 105.4 117.2 2.19 4.21 248 369 166 207 0.31 0.43
CV (%) 1.85 1.94 3.68 4.11 11.96 6.38 8.33 5.64 8.27 6.59 5.49 6.76
LSD (5%) 2.52 3.36 4.95 6.53 0.27 0.45 16.91 25.63 6.94 7.45 0.03 0.04

1106 [Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 85 (8)
122
KUMAR ET AL.
Fig 1 RWC (%), chlorophyll content (mg/g fw), photosynthetic rate and stomatal conductance (cm/S) in best performing rice genotypes
as well as in three check varieties (Rajendra Bhagwati, MAS 946 and IR 64)) under aerobic condition
Table 3 Plant biomass, panicle length, test weight, grain sterility percentage and early vegetative vigour of top ten promising rice
genotypes and check varieties to aerobic and irrigated (control) condition
Promising genotypes Plant biomass Panicle length Test weight Sterility EVV
(g/plant) (cm) (g) (%) (1-9 scale)
AC IC AC IC AC IC AC IC AC IC
IR77298-14-1-2-130-2 20.7 28.4 27.2 27.9 25.6 26.6 14.5 7.8 1 1
IR84899-B-182-3-1-1-2 18.3 26.9 26.5 27.1 25.3 27.2 16.9 11.5 1 1
IR84887-B-157-38-1-1-3 19.8 27.8 25.9 26.6 24.5 26.1 13.8 14.2 1 1
IR84887-B-156-17-1-1 21.8 26.4 24.7 25.8 25.9 26.9 16.5 9.4 3 1
IR 84899-B-179-1-1-1-2 22.5 30.7 25.2 25.8 24.8 25.6 22.4 10.7 1 1
IR 83927-B-B-278-5-1-1-1 17.9 25.6 24.8 25.4 23.7 24.3 16.7 7.3 3 3
IR 84887-B-158-7-1-1-4 19.2 26.9 24.6 25.3 24.5 25.1 19.5 11.2 1 1
IR 84882-B-B-123-46-1-1 20.7 29.3 25.7 25.9 23.8 24.9 25.1 8.3 1 3
IR 84895-B-125-12-1-1 16.8 24.8 24.2 24.7 23.6 24.7 24.6 12.5 3 1
IR 84894-B-140-16-1-1-1 18.7 27.5 26.4 27.2 24.3 25.1 22.4 13.7 3 1
Rajendra Bhagwati 15.3 26.1 23.8 22.8 17.8 23.7 36.9 15.1 5 3
MAS 946 (check) 16.7 25.3 24.1 24.7 19.2 24.8 33.7 12.5 5 1
IR 64 (check) 13.6 26.9 24.5 24.9 16.3 25.2 41.8 12.8 7 1
Mean 15.7 23.4 24.5 25.7 22.6 24.2 29.7 11.6 4.39 1.24
CV (%) 5.88 7.29 7.23 6.21 6.71 5.48 8.79 6.14 - -
LSD (5%) 0.53 0.74 1.24 1.69 1.37 1.59 2.06 1.48 - -
AC (Aerobic condition), IC (Irrigated condition) and Early Vegetative Vigour (EVV)

1107August 2015]
matter production via photosynthesis within the canopy.
On the basis of present finding it can be conduced that
existence of phenotypic and genotypic variations among the
genotype for grain yield and yield contributing physiological
traits had showed differential reaction in their relative
adaptation to aerobic environment. Study also revealed that
plant biomass, harvest index, test weight and effective tiller
number exhibited significant and positive direct effects on
grain yield under aerobic condition. Yield improvements
under aerobic situation can be achieved by identifying
physiological traits contributing for water scarce tolerance
and yield advantage against water stress. Selection of good
aerobic rice genotypes with desired physiological traits gives
better survival under targeted water shortage environments.
Rice genotypes IR77298-14-1-2-130-2, IR84899-B-182-3-
1-1-2, IR84887-B-157-38-1-1-3, IR 84899-B-179-1-1-1-2,
IR84887-B-156-17-1-1 and IR 83927-B-B-278-5-1-1-1
having better physiological attributes showed significant
yield advantage over checks under aerobic management,
may be adopted in large area of rainfed ecosystem as well
as those irrigated area where water is too scarce. Moreover,
these promising genotypes can also be directly utilised as
donor parents in future aerobic rice breeding programme.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Authors profoundly acknowledge Dr Arvind Kumar,
Senior Scientist, IRRI, Philippines for providing seed
material and guidance for this study.
REFERENCES
Bouman B A M, Wang H Q, Yang X G, Zhao J F and Wang C G.
2002. Aerobic rice (Han Dao): a new way of growing rice in
water-short areas. (In) Proceedings of the 12th International
Soil Conservation Organization Conference, 26–31 May 2002,
Beijing, China, Tsinghua University Press, pp 175–81.
Bouman B. 2009. How much does rice use? Rice Today January-
March: 28–9.
George T, Magbanua R, Garrity D P, Tubana B S and Quiton J.
2002. Rapid yield loss of rice cropped successively in aerobic
soil. Agronomy Journal 94: 981–9.
Girish G, Viswanatha K P, Manjunath A and Yogeesh L N. 2006.
Genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance analysis in
cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.)Walp]. Journal of
Environmental Ecology 24: 1 172–4.
Girish T N, Gireesha T M, Vaishali M. G, Hanamareddy B G and
Hittalmani S.2006. Response of a new IR50/Moroberekan
recombinant inbred population of rice (Oryza sativa L.) from
an indica x japonica cross for growth and yield traits under
aerobic situations. Euphytica 152: 149–61.
Gleick P H. 1993. Water in crisis: A Guide to the World’s Fresh
Water Resources, New York (USA), Oxford University Press,
New York USA.
Gomez K A and Gomez A A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for
Agricultural Research, 2nd Edn. John Wiley & Sons Inc.,
Singapore.
Gowri S. 2005. Physiological studies on aerobic rice (Oryza
sativa L.). M Sc thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University,
Coimbatore.
Hirasawa T, Ozawa S, Tayraran R D and Ookawa T. 2010. Varietal
differences in photosynthetic rates in rice plants with special
reference to the nitrogen content of leaves. Plant Production
Science 13: 53–7.
IWMI. 2000. IWMI Global Water Scarcity Study. International
Water Management Institute.
IRRI. 1996. Standard Evaluation System for Rice, 4nd Edn.
International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, The
Philippines.
IRRI. 2002. Rice almanac. IRRIWARDA-CIAT-FAO, Los Ban˜os,
Philippines.
Jongdee B, Fukai S and Cooper M. 1998.Leaf water potential and
osmotic adjustment as physiological traits to improve drought
tolerance in rice. Field Crops Research 76:153–6.
Khush G S. 1997. Origin, dispersal, cultivation and variation of
rice. Plant Molecular biology 35: 25–34.
Mohan M M, Narayanan L S and Ibrahim S M. 2000. Chlorophyll
stability index (CSI): its impact on salt tolerance in rice.
International Rice Research Newsletters 25: 38–9.
Murthy K B C, Kumar A and Hittalmani S. 2011.Response of rice
(Oryza sativa L.) genotypes under aerobic situations. Electronic
Journal of Plant Breeding 2(2): 194–9.
O’Toole J C and Garrity D P. 1984. Upland Rice Soil–Plant–
Water Relationships. An Overview of Upland Rice Research
pp 394–411. IRRI, Los Banos, Philippines.
Table 4 Yield and yield components of rice genotypes grown under aerobic and irrigated condition
Year Treatment Plant Harvest Tillers/ 1000 Spikelet/ Sterility Grain Yield Panicle Leaf area
biomass index m2grain wt. panicle (%) filling (tonnes/ length index
(g/plant) (%) (g) (%) ha) (cm) (LAI)
2010 Aerobic 15.9 0.33 261 22.2 181 28.1 71.9 2.62 24.1 2.29
Irrigated 22.4 0.41 353 23.4 208 15.5 84.5 4.28 26.4 3.68
Difference (%) 29 19 26 5 13.0 44.8 14.9 39 9 37
2011 Aerobic 16.7 0.31 243 23.1 163 29.4 70.6 2.07 24.7 2.46
Irrigated 24.8 0.43 384 24.8 217 17.8 82.2 4.22 25.1 3.44
Difference (%) 33 28 36 7 24.9 39.5 14.1 51 2 30
2012 Aerobic 14.4 0.29 222 21.6 154 31.5 68.5 1.89 24.6 2.18
Irrigated 22.9 0.42 368 24.5 198 13.6 86.4 4.15 25.5 3.39
Difference (%) 37 31 39 12 22.2 56.8 20.7 55 4 35
Overall difference (%) 33.0 26.2 34.3 7.9 20.1 47.3 16.6 47.9 4.7 34.1
123
YIELD RESPONSE OF RICE UNDER AEROBIC CONDITION

1108 [Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 85 (8)
Peng S, Bouman B, Visperas R M, Casteneda A, Nie L and Park
H K. 2006. Comparision between aerobic and irrigated rice in
the tropics: agronomic performance in an eight season
experiment. Field Crops Research 96: 252–9.
Singh R K and Chaudhury B D. 1985. Biometrical Methods in
Quantitative Genetic Analysis. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi.
Tuong T P and Bouman B A M. 2002.Rice production in water-
scarce environments. (In) Proceedings of the Water Productivity
124
KUMAR ET AL.
Workshop, 12–14 November 2001, International Water
Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Ventura W and Watanabe I. 1978.Growth inhibition due to
continuous cropping of dryland rice and other crops. Soil
Science and Plant Nutrition 24: 375–89.
Weatherley P E. 1950. Studies in water relation of cotton plants.
The field measurement of water deficit in leaves. New Phytology
49: 81–7.