| Literature DB >> 28264051 |
Sushil Thapa1,2, Bob A Stewart1, Qingwu Xue2, Yuanquan Chen3.
Abstract
Cultivar selection, planting geometry, and plant population are the key factors determining grain sorghum yields in water deficit areas. The objective of this study was to investigate whether clump geometry (three plants clustered) improves microclimate within crop canopy when plants are grown under varying water levels. In a 2-yr sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) greenhouse study, plants were grown at two geometries (clump and conventional evenly spaced planting, ESP), two water levels (high and low, representing well-watered and water-limited condition, respectively), and three soil surface treatments (lid covered, straw-mulched, and bare). Air temperature and relative humidity (RH) within the plant canopy were measured every five minutes at different growth stages. Mean vapor pressure deficits (VPDs) within the clumps were consistently lower than those for ESPs, indicating that clumps improved the microclimate. Clumps had significantly higher harvest index (HI) compared to ESPs (0.48 vs. 0.43), which was largely due to clumps having an average of 0.4 tillers per plant compared to 1.2 tillers per plant for ESPs. Grain yield in the current study was similar between clumps and ESPs. However, our results suggest that improved microclimate was likely a reason for clumps producing significantly higher grain yields compared to ESPs in previous studies.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28264051 PMCID: PMC5338834 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173511
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Arrangement of clump (left) and evenly spaced planting (ESP; right) geometries in the wooden boxes.
P-values of sorghum leaf area, tiller number, aboveground biomass (AGB), grain yield, harvest index (HI), biomass water use efficiency (WUEb), and grain water use efficiency (WUEg) as affected by year, geometry, water, and soil surface as determined by analysis of variance (ANOVA).
| Effect | Leaf area | Tiller number | AGB | Grain yield | HI | WUEb | WUEg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year (Y) | < .0001 | - | < .0001 | < .0001 | 0.1602 | < .0001 | < .0001 |
| Geometry (G) | < .0001 | < .0001 | 0.0045 | 0.2435 | 0.001 | 0.0273 | 0.4073 |
| Water (W) | .0011 | 0.6807 | < .0001 | < .0001 | 0.0016 | 0.0003 | <0.0001 |
| Surface (S) | < .0001 | 0.0021 | < .0001 | < .0001 | 0.7844 | < .0001 | < .0001 |
| Y×G | < .0001 | - | 0.1029 | 0.4912 | 0.2235 | 0.4108 | 0.7790 |
| Y×W | 0.0011 | - | 0.0013 | 0.0034 | 0.0505 | 0.0362 | 0.6005 |
| Y×S | < .0001 | - | 0.3332 | 0.1824 | 0.0439 | < .0001 | 0.7958 |
| G×W | 0.4571 | 0.5948 | 0.4096 | 0.9710 | 0.6828 | 0.7752 | 0.8363 |
| G×S | 0.3107 | 0.2099 | 0.9924 | 0.3877 | 0.8688 | 0.9670 | 0.7958 |
| W×S | 0.5305 | 0.4412 | 0.0134 | 0.0013 | 0.8997 | 0.0023 | 0.0153 |
| Y×G×W | 0.4571 | - | 0.9831 | 0.7854 | 0.9042 | 0.9191 | 0.9789 |
| Y×G×S | 0.3107 | - | 0.8562 | 0.7128 | 0.9638 | 0.7556 | 0.9465 |
| Y×W×S | 0.5305 | - | 0.0277 | 0.0005 | 0.1510 | 0.0023 | < .0001 |
| G×W×S | 0.3370 | 0.6068 | 0.9968 | 0.6115 | 0.5431 | 0.9752 | 0.8007 |
| Y×G×W×S | 0.3370 | - | 0.6996 | 0.9467 | 0.5998 | 0.7910 | 0.8667 |
§Tiller data was not obtained for 2013 due to very fewer tillers.
Means of Leaf area, tiller number, aboveground biomass (AGB), grain yield, harvest index (HI), biomass water use efficiency (WUEb), and grain water use efficiency (WUEg) of sorghum grown in 2013 and 2014 at two planting geometries, two water levels, and three soil surface types.
| Effect | Leaf area per plant (cm2) | Tiller number (plant-1) | AGB (g box-1) | Grain yield (g box-1) | Harvest index | WUEb (kg m-3) | WUEg (kg m-3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | |||||||
| 2013 | 778.9 b | - | 160.8 b | 72.4 b | 0.44 a | 3.34 b | 1.48 b |
| 2014 | 1430.8 a | - | 273.4 a | 125.1 a | 0.46 a | 3.99 a | 1.83 a |
| Geometry | |||||||
| Clump | 988.0 b | 0.4 b | 210.4 b | 100.3 a | 0.48 a | 3.57 b | 1.67 a |
| ESP | 1221.8 a | 1.2 a | 223.8 a | 97.2 a | 0.43 b | 3.77 a | 1.64 a |
| Water | |||||||
| High | 1248.4 a | 0.9 a | 261.8 a | 122.4 a | 0.47 a | 3.87 a | 1.89 a |
| Low | 961.4 b | 0.8 a | 172.5 b | 75.1 b | 0.44 b | 3.47 b | 1.42 b |
| Surface | |||||||
| Lid | 1532.3 a | 1.0 a | 301.6 a | 136.5 a | 0.45 a | 5.33 a | 2.36 a |
| Straw | 1127.4 b | 1.1 a | 218.0 b | 98.1 b | 0.45 a | 3.60 b | 1.64 b |
| Bare | 654.9 c | 0.4 b | 131.8 c | 61.7 c | 0.46 a | 2.08 c | 0.97 c |
N = 36, means are the average of three replications.
†Within each effect and each column, means with the different letter are significantly different at P < 0.05.
‡Harvest index is based on dry weight of grain divided by dry weight of aboveground biomass.
Means of aboveground biomass (AGB), grain yield, biomass water use efficiency (WUEb), and grain water use efficiency (WUEg) of sorghum grown in 2013 and 2014 at two water levels and three surface types.
| Year | Water level | Soil surface | AGB (g box-1) | Grain yield (g box-1) | WUEb (kg m-3) | WUEg (kg m-3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Lid | 303.4 a | 135.8 a | 5.26 a | 2.35 a | |
| Straw | 224.1 b | 112.0 b | 3.76 b | 1.88 b | ||
| Bare | 112.1 c | 52.5 c | 1.90 c | 0.89 c | ||
| Low | Lid | 195.7 a | 80.8 a | 5.55 a | 2.30 a | |
| Straw | 91.5 b | 38.3 b | 2.56 b | 1.07 b | ||
| Bare | 38.1 c | 15.2 c | 1.05 c | 0.42 c | ||
| High | Lid | 398.2 a | 194.9 a | 5.35 a | 3.06 a | |
| Straw | 311.7 b | 134.9 b | 4.09 b | 1.82 b | ||
| Bare | 221.3 c | 104.5 c | 2.86c | 1.37 c | ||
| Low | Lid | 309.0 a | 134.6 a | 5.17 a | 1.74 a | |
| Straw | 244.7 b | 107.1 b | 3.98 b | 1.79 a | ||
| Bare | 155.6 c | 74.5 c | 2.50 c | 1.21 b | ||
N = 36, means are the average of three replications.
†Within each water level in each column for each year, means with the different lowercase letter are significantly different at P < 0.05.
‡In each column, means with the different uppercase letters are significantly different at P < 0.05.
Fig 2Average 3-day vapor pressure deficit (VPD) mean within the plant canopy recorded every five minutes for different treatments in 2013 at 50–52, 61–63, and 65–67 DAP corresponding to booting, flowering, and grain formation growth stages, respectively.
DAP: days after planting; ESPs: evenly spaced plantings. The mean VPD is derived from the average of 2592 data points.
Fig 3Average 5-day vapor pressure deficit (VPD) mean within the plant canopy recorded every five minutes for different treatments in 2014 at 45–53 DAP corresponding to booting growth stage.
DAP: days after planting; ESPs: evenly spaced plantings. The mean VPD is derived from the average of 4320 data points.
Fig 4Linear regression between water transpired, and aboveground biomass or grain yield for plants grown with lid covered surface treatments in 2013 and 2014.
TEb: biomass transpiration efficiency; TEg: grain transpiration efficiency (N = 24).