SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.95 número1La familia Solanaceae en México índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • No hay artículos similaresSimilares en SciELO

Compartir


Botanical Sciences

versión On-line ISSN 2007-4476versión impresa ISSN 2007-4298

Bot. sci vol.95 no.1 México ene./mar. 2017

https://doi.org/10.17129/botsci.747 

Genetics

Screening for root and shoot traits in different wheat species and wild wheat relatives

Hayati Akman1  * 

Necdet Akgun2 

Ahmet Tamkoc2 

1 Seed Department, Sarayonu Vocational School, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey

2 Field Crops Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey


Abstract:

Background:

Definitive comparison on root traits of wheat landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives are scarce. Those adaptive genetic resources with superior root and shoot traits can be utilized in breeding programs.

Questions:

Do modern wheats have more superior root and shoot traits than ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives?

Studied species:

We performed large-scale screening for significant root and shoot traits of 47 different genotypes including cultivars, lines, landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives belonging to 14 different species.

Study site and years:

was carried out in Central Anatolian Conditions of Turkey from October, 2013 to July, 2014.

Methods:

This study was conducted at 200 cm long tube under field weather conditions where plants can translate superior performance.

Results:

A wide range of variations in terms of root and shoot traits were observed among the screened wheat cultivars, lines, landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. The grain yield per plant and root length per plant varied from 2.11 to 12.30 g and 134.7 to 250.7 cm in the cultivars, lines and landraces, respectively, while they ranged from 0.23 to 6.49 g and 170.0 to 240 cm in the ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives.

Conclusions:

The superior genotypes that had longer root system and high grain yield can be considered in breeding programs to improve high yielding genotypes and deep-rooted system.

Key words: Modern and ancient wheats; wild wheat relatives; root and shoot traits; screening

Wheat (Triticum L. spp.) is one of the world’s major cereal crops, with an annual production over 713 million tons in 2013 (Faostat 2014). Throughout the world, wheat is grown from temperate, irrigated areas to dry, high-rainfall areas and warm, humid environments to dry, cold environments.

The adaptive genetic resources of wild wheats and wheat relatives, landraces, and cultivars with superior root and shoot traits can be utilized to efficiently improve the quality of wheat crops. Triticum, Aegilops, Agropyron, Haynaldia, and Secale genera possess some common characteristics (Mohibullah et al. 2011). In general, wheat landraces (Akçura 2009) and wild wheat relatives are generally tolerant to biotic and abiotic stresses. Furthermore, plant breeders consider Haynaldia villosa as a significant gene source for improving the quality of wheat grain (Vacino et al. 2010). Ancient wheats such as einkorn, emmer and Khorasan wheat all have higher contents of the carotenoid lutein than bread wheat (Shewry & Hey 2015). The genetic diversity confers the variations in drought and salt tolerance in the wild wheats and wheat relatives (Nevo & Chen 2010). Therefore, further studies should be performed on root and shoot traits of wheat landraces, wild wheats and wheat relatives, which contribute to increases in productivity and quality of improved crops. In addition, genetic diversity in wheat root traits was reported in bread wheat (Mackay & Barber 1986) and durum wheat (Motzo et al. 1992).

Screening and selection for shoot and root taitrs are considered as important aspects of crop breeding programs. Screening for genotypes with deep-roots can be useful to obtain deep-rooted cultivars that take up moisture from deep soil. Deep-rooted crops rely on seasonal precipitation when water is insufficient (Sayar et al. 2007).

Traits selected in the laboratory and greenhouse may not translate to superior performance in the field. Therefore, for effective screening, the assessment should be performed under field conditions. This study aimed to screen the root and shoot traits of wheat genotypes and wild wheats and wheat relatives under field conditions.

Materials and Methods

This study screened some root and shoot traits in full grain maturity (GS 92) of 47 cultivars, lines, landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives belonging to 14 different species under field conditions at Konya, Turkey during the 2013-2014 growing season. The soil medium consisted of a mixture of peat (70 %) and perlite (30 %). Soil samples were taken before sowing and analyzed for certain chemical and physical parameters. The soil at the experimental area has a loam texture and is slightly acidic, high in organic matter, and calcareous. It is adequate for K2O, Zn, and Cu and high for Mg. In addition, P2O5, Ca, and Mn is found in the soil as very high. The climate of the Konya can be defined as semiarid continental. According to the meteorological data, the long-term (1980-2013) and average annual rainfall (2013-2014) is 310.9 and 301.1 mm, the average annual temperature is 10.3 and 12.5 °C, respectively.

In the study, 47 genotypes of Triticum aestivum L., Triticum Durum Desf., and Triticum compactum Host, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives such as Triticum spp. and Haynaldia spp. were studied (Table 1). Each genotype was sown in October toa cylindrical PVC tube that was 200 cm in height and 12 cm in diameter, which had previously been replaced to soil excavated by a backhoe (Figure 1). The tubes were established in 15×15 cm row and intra row spaces. The experimental design was a “randomized complete block design” with three replications.

Table 1 Taxonomy and origin of modern wheats, ancient wheats and wild wheat relatives 

Genotypes Taxonomy Origin
Turkish Wheat Genotypes
Konya 2002 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Bayraktar 2000 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Harmankaya Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Tosunbey Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Karahan 99 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Sönmez 2001 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Ahmetağa Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Gerek 79 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Dağdaş 94 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Kırik Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Turkey
Esperya Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Registered Cultivar, Turkey
Bezostaja 1 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Registered Cultivar, Turkey
Çeşit 1252 Triticum turgidum subsp. durum Cultivar, Turkey
Kızıltan 91 Triticum turgidum subsp. durum Cultivar, Turkey
Kunduru 1149 Triticum turgidum subsp. durum Cultivar, Turkey
Berkmen 469 Triticum turgidum subsp. durum Cultivar, Turkey
TR 053 ‘1’ Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Line, Turkey
TR 062 Triticum turgidum subsp. durum Line, Turkey
Vanlı Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Landrace, Turkey
Kamçı Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Landrace, Turkey
Ribasa 1 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Landrace, Turkey
Ribasa 2 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Landrace, Turkey
Gır Triticum turgidum subsp. durum Landrace, Turkey
Kamut Triticum turgidum subsp. durum Landrace, Turkey
AK 702 Triticum aestivum subsp. compactum Cultivar, Turkey
Wheat genotypes from abroad
Yellowstone Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, USA, Montana
Rampart Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, USA, Montana
ARS Amber Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, USA, Washington
Westonia Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, Australia
Vizir Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Cultivar, France
Tamaroi Triticum turgidum subsp. durum Cultivar, Australia
5924 Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Line, Australia
Daws High PPO Triticum aestivum subsp. aestivum Near Isogenic Line, USA, Washington
PahaNIL (vrn4) Triticum aestivum subsp. compactum Near Isogenic Line, USA,Washington
Ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives
Triticum turgidum (Asturie H4) Triticum turgidum subsp. turgidum Domesticated emmer wheat, Spain, Oviedo
Triticum dicoccon (Rufum) Triticum turgidum subsp. dicoccon Domesticated emmer wheat, Ethiopia
Triticum macha (WIR 29576) Triticum aestivum subsp. macha Makha wheat, Georgia
Triticum boeoticum Triticum monococcum subsp. aegilopodies Wild einkorn, Asia Minor
Triticum spelta (Spelta 46) Triticum aestivum subsp. spelta Spelt wheat, Belgium, Namur
Haynaldia villosa Haynaldia villosum Wild wheat relative, Bulgaria
Triticum turanicum (Sarı Tuya Tish) Triticum turgidum subsp. turanicum Khorasan wheat, Hungary, Pest
Triticum vavilovii Triticum vavilovii Valilov wheat, Sweden, Uppsala
Triticum carthlicum (Persian) Triticum turgidum subsp. carthlicum Persian wheat, Iran
Aegilops biuncialis Aegilops biuncialis Wild relative of wheat,Turkey
Triticum monococcum (Kelcyras) Triticum monococcum subsp. monococcum Domesticated einkorn, Albania
Triticum monococcum Triticum monococcum subsp. monococcum Domesticated einkorn, Former Yugoslavia
Triticum monococcum Triticum monococcum subsp. monococcum Domesticated einkorn, Turkey

Figure 1 PVC tubes were replaced to above 200 cm depth in soil under field environmental conditions 

After emergence, one seedling per tube was allowed to grow. At sowing, the fertilizer DAP (18 % N, 46 % P2O5) 130 kg ha-1 was top-dressed on all plots. At the stem elongation stage (GS 31) and completing of flowering (GS 69), the plants were drip irrigated (141-tube) with a solution containing 37.5 g urea (46 % N), 64 g micro elements, and 11.8 cc humic acid. The plants were watered with tap water at three times, stages of tillering, stem elongation and completion of anthesis.

At GS 92 (middle of July), the plant roots were washed and cleaned on the sieve and the longest root length was measured on a flat surface (Figure 2). In addition, number of secondary roots per plant was counted. Shoot traits such as plant height per main stem, number of fertile tillers per plant, spike length per main spike, number of spikelets per main spike, number of kernels per main spike, kernel weight per main spike and grain yield per plant were determined.

Figure 2 Roots were washed on sieve after nylon bag were removed from root media 

The statistical significance of the means was determined by analysis of variance using the statistical packages, MSTAT-C followed by comparisons by LSD test.

Results and Discussion

Table 2 shows the results of variance analysis related to the root and shoot traits of cultivars, lines, landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. The average values and groups of significance are given in Table 3. A significant difference was observed between the cultivars, lines, landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives with regards to investigated traits (P ≤ 0.01).

Table 2 Results of variance analysis of root and shoot traits of different wheat species and wild wheat relatives 

S DF Plant
height
Spike
length
Spikelet
number
Kernel
number
Kernel
weight
Fertile tiller
number
Grain
weight
Secondary root
number
Root
length
R 2 224.872 1.255 3.709 104.028 0.205 6.496 1.276 3605.645 440.879
G 46 1335.866** 10.219** 68.850** 444.884** 0.851** 56.572** 24.553** 648.785** 1999.373**
E 92 48.316 0.896 5.285 61.206 0.080 4.536 1.540 334.533 514.350
CV (%) 6.97 10.75 11.90 21.65 22.15 21.61 22.52 27.66 10.52

**P ≤ 0.01, S: Sources; R:Replication; G: Genotypes; E: Error

Table 3 Root and shoot traits of different wheat species and wild wheat relatives 

Genotypes Plant height
(cm)
Spike length
(cm)
Spikelet
/Spike
Kernel
/Spike
Kernel weight
(g spike-1)
Fertile tiller/
Plant
Grain yield
(g plant-1)
Secondary
root /Plant
Root length
(cm)
Konya 2002 85.0o-u 11.5ab 20.0c-i 43.0b-j 2.05ab 7.0i-n 7.11c-j 65.7a-e 231.3a-f
Bayraktar 2000 88.7m-r 6.7lmn 14.3k 30.0h-m 1.23f-m 10.3f-j 6.30d-l 68.3a-e 216.0a-g
Harmankaya 78.0q-w 9.7b-h 20.7c-h 53.3a-d 1.89a-d 7.0i-n 5.63f-m 97.7ab 218.0a-g
Tosunbey 87.0n-s 9.5b-i 17.3f-k 49.0b-f 1.84b-e 10.0f-k 9.27bc 62.3a-f 183.7f-i
Karahan 99 102.7h-m 10.5a-e 17.7f-k 37.7d-l 1.25e-m 7.0i-n 4.61i-p 52.7c-f 204.7a-g
Sönmez 2001 92.5l-q 10.5a-e 19.0d-k 35.7e-l 1.37d-m 9.3f-k 8.45cde 77.0a-e 250.7a
Ahmetağa 84.7o-u 10.8a-d 22.0c-f 47.0b-g 1.59b-k 8.7f-l 7.73c-g 98.3a 210.0a-g
Gerek 79 106.7g-l 9.2c-j 16.7g-k 35.0e-l 1.18g-n 10.0f-k 8.23c-f 74.7a-e 223.7a-f
Dağdaş 94 101.7i-n 10.8a-d 19.7c-j 35.7e-l 1.21f-m 9.0f-l 7.56c-g 66.3a-e 227.3a-f
Kırik 117.5c-h 10.8a-d 16.5g-k 27.0j-o 1.18g-n 17.0bc 7.36c-h 42.5ef 229.0a-f
Esperya 71.0u-w 8.3f-l 20.3c-i 43.7b-j 1.54b-l 9.7f-k 8.74cd 76.7a-e 229.3a-f
Bezostaja 1 82.7o-v 7.8h-m 17.3f-k 48.3b-f 1.35d-m 9.0f-l 8.37cde 69.0a-e 242.3abc
Çeşit 1252 83.3o-u 8.8d-k 23.7c-d 44.7b-i 1.81b-f 6.7i-n 4.75h-p 70.3a-e 236.7a-d
Kızıltan 91 89.7m-r 8.3f-l 22.0c-f 43.7b-j 1.73b-h 8.3g-m 6.08d-l 65.0a-e 228.7a-f
Kunduru 1149 109.0f-j 7.2j-n 19.0d-k 34.7e-l 1.68b-i 7.0i-n 4.55j-p 61.0a-f 216.7a-g
Berkmen 469 122.7b-f 6.8k-n 18.0f-k 35.0e-l 1.15h-n 12.0d-g 9.44bc 67.0a-e 234.7a-g
TR 053 ‘1’ 101.7i-n 10.8a-d 20.3c-i 44.7b-i 1.60b-j 6.7i-n 5.44g-n 76.3a-e 227.0a-f
TR 062 115.0c-i 8.5e-l 16.0h-k 33.5f-l 1.38d-m 6.0j-n 2.13o-s 71.0a-e 153.0hij
Vanlı 116.3c-i 10.0a-g 15.0jk 29.3i-n 1.24e-m 13.0b-f 12.30a 52.3c-f 222.7a-f
Kamçı 111.3d-j 6.0mn 20.3c-i 39.7c-l 1.25e-m 9.3f-k 4.10l-p 64.0a-f 218.3a-g
Ribasa 1 124.0b-e 11.8a 19.3c-j 30.3g-m 1.27e-m 12.7c-g 7.00c-k 84.7a-d 198.7b-h
Ribasa 2 111.3d-j 10.5a-e 18.0f-k 24.0k-o 0.50opq 12.3d-g 7.62c-g 74.0a-e 232.3a-f
Gır 71.7t-w 5.7no 14.3k 23.7l-o 0.99k-o 4.7lmn 2.11p-s 46.3def 134.7j
Kamut 106.7g-l 8.2g-l 16.0h-k 43.3b-j 2.46a 3.7n 3.16m-q 42.7ef 220.0a-f
AK 702 114.7c-i 6.7lmn 17.3f-k 32.7f-l 1.15h-n 16.3bcd 11.68ab 60.7a-f 242.3ab
Yellowstone 83.7o-u 10.0a-g 19.7c-j 46.3b-h 1.74b-h 8.7f-l 7.52c-g 84.0a-d 211.0a-g
Rampart 94.0k-p 8.8d-k 18.7e-k 30.0h-m 0.77m-p 9.7fk 2.76o-s 58.0c-f 199.7b-h
ARS Amber 79.7p-w 10.3a-f 20.3c-i 55.0abc 2.00abc 9.7f-k 8.24c-f 82.0a-d 246.0ab
Westonia 75.0r-w 10.0a-g 18.0f-k 56.7ab 2.01abc 12.5c-g 7.15c-j 73.0a-e 226.0a-f
Vizir 72.3s-w 9.7b-h 21.3c-g 50.3b-e 1.48b-l 6.7 i-n 7.23 c-i 58.3c-f 222.7a-f
Tamaroi 66.7w 6.7lmn 17.0g-k 38.3c-l 1.18g-n 4.0mn 2.43o-s 59.0b-f 140.7ij
5924 68.3vw 8.5e-l 16.3h-k 30.7g-m 0.95l-o 9.7f-k 4.79h-o 60.7a-f 249.0a
Daws High PPO 86.0o-t 11.0abc 22.0c-f 43.3b-j 1.42c-l 9.0f-l 3.97l-p 82.3a-d 226.7a-f
PahaNIL (vrn4) 75.0r-w 5.8mno 23.3cde 68.0a 1.88a-d 5.7k-n 4.27l-p 73.0a-e 216.3a-g
Triticum turgidum 148.5a 8.2g-l 24.0c 36.5e-l 1.58b-k 8.5f-m 5.90e-l 64.5a-f 240.0a-d
Triticum dicoccon 114.8c-i 7.2j-n 20.7c-h 34.3e-l 0.80m-p 11.0e-i 2.90n-r 57.0c-f 194.3c-h
Triticum macha 109.3e-j 7.5i-n 20.0c-i 35.3e-l 1.02j-o 8.7f-l 2.71o-s 66.7a-e 208.7a-g
Triticum boeoticum 148.5a 10.8a-d 31.0b 12.7nop 0.14q 10.0f-k 0.23s 86.3abc 216.7a-g
Triticum spelta 124.7bcd 10.7a-d 18.0f-k 34.0e-l 1.10 i-o 11.7e-h 4.38k-p 84.3a-d 225.7a-f
Haynaldia villosa 97.3j-o 6.0mn 15.0jk 23.3l-o 1.22f-m 10.7 f-i 3.09m-q 78.0a-e 186.0 e-i
Triticum turanicum 108.7f-k 9.8a-h 15.7ijk 28.0i-o 1.41c-l 9.0f-l 6.49d-l 71.7a-e 211.0a-g
Triticum vavilovii 96.7j-o 10.5a-e 18.0f-k 40.7b-k 1.76b-g 7.3h-n 6.30d-l 59.3a-f 233.0a-e
Triticum carthlicum 108.5f-k 9.5b-i 19.5c-j 35.0e-l 0.79m-p 11.0 e-i 4.62 i-p 50.0c-f 236.0a-d
Aegilops biuncialis 68.0v-w 3.8o 3.3l 4.7p 0.09q 30.0a 0.73qrs 25.3f 170.0g-j
Triticum monococcum 136.0ab 8.5e-l 36.3a 15.0m-p 0.10q 17.3b 0.33rs 57.7c-f 226.7a-f
Triticum monococcum 117.7c-g 7.8h-m 19.0d-k 12.3op 0.22pq 4.7lmn 0.85qrs 41.0ef 193.3d-h
Triticum monococcum 129.3bc 7.2j-n 29.7b 23.7l-o 0.58n-q 15.3b-e 2.31o-s 49.0c-f 217.7a-g
Mean 99.7 8.8 19.3 36.2 1.28 9.9 5.51 66.1 215.5
LSD(P ≤ 0.01) 14.9 2.0 4.9 16.1 0.60 4.6 2.67 39.3 48.7

Shoot Traits. Plant height per main stem showed differences according to the genotypes. The plant height of all the genotypes ranged from 66.7 to 148.5 cm. The landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives out of Aegilops biuncialis and Gır had long plant stem. The highest plant height of 148.5 cm was observed in two species, Triticum turgidum and Triticum boeoticum. The Australian wheat genotypes, Tamaroi (68.3 cm) and line 5,924 (66.7 cm) had the shortest plant height. Among the 222 winter wheat genotypes, the stem height varied between 110 and 133 cm and the most of landraces had a very long stem, however obsolete bred cultivars had a shorter stem (Dotlačil et al. 2003). Similarly, the results indicated that most of wheat landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives had longer plant height. Cultivars originated from abroad had shorter stem height than wheat landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives.

The spike length per main spike varied from 5.7 to 11.8 cm in cultivars, lines and landraces and 3.8 to 10.8 cm in ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. Similarly, it was found that spike length of Aegilops biuncialis (3.5 cm) was shorter than that of Triticum dicoccon (7.3 cm) and Triticum monococcum (8.7 cm) (Karagöz et al. 2006).

The number of spikelets per main spike ranged between 14.3 (Bayraktar 2000) and 23.7 (Çeşit 1252) in cultivars, lines and landraces and 3.3 (Aegilops biuncialis) and 36.3 (Triticum monococcum) in ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. There was a considerable difference between the ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives, and the cultivated wheat genotypes in terms of spikelet number.

The number of kernels per main spike ranged from 23.7 to 68.0 in cultivars, lines and landraces and 4.7 to 36.5 in ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. PhaNIL (Triticum compactum) (68.0) had maximum number of kernels, while Aegilops biuncialis (4.7) had minimum number of kernels.

The maximum and minimum kernel weight per main spike was obtained in landraces; Among the genotypes, Kamut had the maximum kernel weight (2.46 g), while Ribasa 2 had the minimum kernel weight (0.50 g). Among the ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives, Aegilops biuncialis had the lowest kernel weight per main spike (0.09 g) and Triticum vavilovii had the highest kernel weight (1.76 g).

The number of tillers per plant changed from 3.7 to 17.0 in cultivars, lines and landraces and 4.7 to 30.0 in ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. Genotypes that had more tiller per plant were not always high yielding because the grain yield was affected by yield components such as number of spikelets, number of kernels, and kernel weight per main spike.

The grain yield per plant ranged from 2.11 to 12.30 g in the cultivars, lines and landraces and 0.23 to 6.49 g in the ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. In the study, Triticum aestivum genotypes, Vanlı (12.30 g), Tosunbey (9.27 g), Esperya (8.74 g) and Sönmez 2001 (8.45 g), Triticum durum genotypes, Berkmen 469 (9.44 g) and Triticum compactum genotype, AK 702 (11.68 g) had higher grain yield per plant. Triticum turgidum (5.90 g), Triticum turanicum (6.49 g), and Triticum vavilovii (6.30 g) had higher grain yield among the ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. However, Triticum boeoticum, Triticum monococcum (Kelcyras), Triticum monococcum (982) and Aegilops biuncialis had very low grain yield.

Root traits. The secondary root number widely varied in the evaluated genotypes, ranging from 42.5 to 98.3 for wheat cultivars, lines, and landraces and from 25.3 to 86.3 for ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. Manske et al. (2002) observed that there are two types of root in cereals, i.e., primary and secondary roots. The primary roots are called the first root or seminal root, and the secondary roots are known adventitious root, coleoptilar root, or nodal root. The secondary roots develop from first leaf node under 1-2 cm of soil when the leaf of the fourth main stem appears. Pinthus (1969) showed that late cultivars have not only larger number of secondary roots than early cultivars, taking a long period between germination and heading and but they have also more tillers. To some extent, the number of roots increases in proportion to the number of tillers (Roasti 2005). However, in the study, Aegilops biuncialis had the highest tiller number among the genotypes, while it had the lowest secondary root number.

Wheat cultivars, lines, landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives showed significant differences in terms of root length, which varied from 134.7 to 250.7 cm for cultivars, lines and landraces and from 170 to 240 cm for ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives. A study on the drought tolerance of wild barley in the early growth stages has indicated that the most significant trait is root length, followed by shoot length and root shoot length-1 ratio (Tyagi et al. 2011). The root length of wild barley (Hordeum vulgare L. ssp. spontaneum) was up to 91 % greater than the spring barley cultivar, Scarlett (Sayed 2011). The average root length of wheat cultivars, lines and landraces was 216.8 cm, however ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives had 212.2 cm. Root length has been shown to reach up to 2 m in soil (Gregory 1976, Hoad et al. 2001, Botwright Acuña & Wade 2012), and up to 5 m in sandy soil (Zhang & Hu. 2013). Here, the wheat root reached up to 2.5 m under favorable conditions. A landrace genotype, Gır had minimum root length, however Sönmez 2001 had the maximum. In addition, Aegilops biuncialis had the shortest root system among the wild wheats and wheat relatives. Genotypes with deeper root system may have adaptation mechanisms. Deep-rooted cultivars absorb water and nitrogen from deep soil (Smika & Grabouski 1976). Genes controlling root length may become drought tolerant by avoiding or delaying the drought effects (Ober 2008). The results of study indicated that among the cultivars, lines and landraces, Sönmez 2001, line 5924, AK 702 and ARS Amber that had a root length of 240.0 cm and above can be used in breeding programs to obtain deep-rooted genotypes. Triticum turgidum and Triticum vavilovii that had higher grain yield and longer root length comparing to ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives can be considered to improve superior cultivars.

Conclusions

The evaluated cultivars, lines, landraces, ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives showed wide range of genetic variation in terms of root and shoot traits. The average root length of wheat cultivars, lines and landraces was 216.8 cm, while that of wild wheats and wheat relatives was 212.2 cm. In the study, Sönmez 2001, Bezostaja 1, 5924 (line), AK 702, ARS Amber and Triticum turgidum that had up to 240.0 cm root length could be considered in breeding programs to improve deep rooted genotypes.

The study showed that ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives such as Triticum monococcum, Triticum boeoticum and Haynaldia villosa resulted lower grain yield than other genotypes. However, the ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives are known to be the most important sources of genetic wealth, providing resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses. Furthermore, Triticum vavilovii and Triticum turgidum that had higher root length and grain yield among the ancient wheat species and wild wheat relatives can be evaluated in breeding programs to improve the genotypes with high yield and deep-root system. Among the cultivars, lines and landraces, Sönmez 2001, Bezostaja1, AK 702, ARS Amber, and line 5964 that had longer root system can be considered to improve deep-rooted genotypes. In addition to deep-rooting system of genotypes, more study should be performed at field conditions where plants are compared with grain yield in large plots.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Selcuk University Scientific Research Projects Coordinator for the financial support of this study under the grant No 13401004. The data presented in this article was generated in the purview of the afore-mentioned project; however, the authors of this article are only responsible for the results and discussions made here in. Authors would like to thank Prof. Dr. Ali Topal to provide TR 053 ‘1’, TR 062 wheat lines and landraces, Prof. Dr. Phil Bruckner for Montana cultivars and USDA-ARS for genotypes from abroad.

Literature cited

Akçura M. 2009. Genetic variability and interrelationship among grain yield and some quality traits in Turkish winter durum wheat landraces, Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 33: 547-556. DOI:10.3906/tar-0903-5 [ Links ]

Gregory PJ. 1976. The growth and activity of wheat root systems. Unpubl. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nottingham. [ Links ]

Botwright Acuña TL, Wade RJ. 2012. Genotype × environment interactions for root depth of wheat. Field Crops Research 137: 117-125. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.08.004 [ Links ]

Dotla?il L, Hermuth J, Stehno Z. 2003. Earliness, spike productivity and protein content in European winter wheat landraces and obsolete cultivars. Plant Soil Environment 49:67-74. [ Links ]

FAOSTAT. 2014.Accessed at: http://faostat.fao.org. [ Links ]

Hoad S, Russell G, Lucas ME, Bingham IJ. 2001. The management of wheat, barley and oat root systems. Advances in Agronomy 74:193-246. DOI:10.1016/S0065-2113(01)74034-5 [ Links ]

Karagöz A, Pilanalı N, Polat T. 2006. Agro-morphological characterization of some wild wheat (Aegilops L. and Triticum L.) species. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 30:387-398. [ Links ]

Mackay, AD, Barber SA. 1986. Effect of nitrogen on root growth of two corn genotypes in the field. Agronomy Journal 78:699-703. DOI: 10.2134/agronj1986.00021962007800040028x [ Links ]

Manske GGB, Vlek PLG. 2002. Root architecture - Wheat as o model plant. In: Waisel Y,Eshel A,Beeckman T,Kafkafi U. 2002. Plant roots: The hidden half. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc., 382- 397. [ Links ]

Mohibullah M, Rabbani MA, Zakiullah SJ, Amin A, Farullah G. 2011. Genetic variability and correlation analysis of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) accessions. Pakistan Journal of Botany 43: 2717-2720. [ Links ]

Motzo R, Attene G, Deidda M. 1992. Genotypic variation in durum wheat root systems at different stages of development in a Mediterranean environment. Euphytica 66: 197-206. DOI: 10.1007/BF00025303 [ Links ]

Nevo E, Chen G. 2010. Drought and salt tolerances in wild relatives for wheat and barley improvement. Plant, Cell and Environment 33:670-685. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.02107.x [ Links ]

Ober ES. 2008. Breeding for improved drought tolerance and water use efficiency. HGCA Conference?Arable cropping in a changing climate. http://www.hgca.com/publications/documents/S2_3_Ober_5.pdfLinks ]

Pinthus MJ. 1969. Tillering and coronal root formation in some common and durum wheat varieties. Crop Science 9: 267-272. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci1969.0011183X000900030004x [ Links ]

Roesti D. 2005. Bacterial community associated with the rhizosphere of wheat: interactions with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and selection of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for the increase of wheat growth and soil health in Indian marginal rainfed fields.Unpubl. PhD Thesis University of Neuchâtel. [ Links ]

Sayar R, Khemira H, Kharrat M. 2007. Inheritance of deeper root length and grain yield in half-diallel durum wheat (Triticum durum) crosses. Annals of Applied Biology 151:213-220. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7348.2007.00168.x [ Links ]

Sayed M. 2011. QTL analysis for drought tolerance related to root and shoot traits in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). PhD Thesis,Universität Bonn. [ Links ]

Shewry, PR, Hey S. 2015. Do “ancient” wheat species differ from modern bread wheat in their contents of bioactive components?. Journal of Cereal Science 65: 236-243. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcs.2015.07.014 [ Links ]

Smika DE, Grabouski PH. 1976. Anhydrous ammonia applications during fallow for winter wheat production. Agronomy Journal 68: 919-922. DOI:10.2134/agronj1976.00-021962006800060019X [ Links ]

Tyagi K, Park MR, Lee HJ, Lee CA, Rehman S, Steffenson B, Yun SJ. 2011. Fertile crescent region as source of drought tolerance at early stage of plant growth of wild barley (Hordeum vulgare L. ssp. spontaneum). Pakistan Journal of Botany 43: 475-486. [ Links ]

Vacino P, Banfi R, Corbellini M, De Pace C. 2010. Improving the wheat genetic diversity for end-use grain quality by chromatin introgression from the wild wheat relative Dasypyrum villosum. Crop Science 50:528-540. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2009.04.0179 [ Links ]

Zhang X, Hu C. 2013. Root growth and distribution in relation to different water levels.. In: Timlin D,Ahuja LR, eds., Enhancing understanding and Quantification soil-root growth interactions, Advances in Agricultural Systems Modeling, Volume 4, Madison, USA: Published by Soil Sciences Society of America Inc. DOI: 10.2134/advagricsystmodel4.c3 [ Links ]

Received: February 23, 2016; Accepted: August 04, 2016

* Corresponding author: Hayati Akman, e-mail: hayatiakman@selcuk.edu.tr

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License