Response of Rice Varieties to Water Stress in Sokoto, Sudan Savannah, Nigeria

doi:10.4236/jbm.2014.21008

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Journal of Biosciences and Medicines, 2014, 2, 68-74

Published Online March 2014 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/jbm

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jbm.2014.21008

How to cite this paper: Sokoto, M.B. and Muhammad, A. (2014) Response of Rice Varieties to Water Stress in Sokoto, Su-

dan Savannah, Nigeria. Journal of Biosciences and Medicines, 2, 68-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jbm.2014.21008

Response of Rice Varieties to Water Stress in

Sokoto, Sudan Savannah, Nigeria

M. B. Sokoto*, A. Muhammad

Department of Crop Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto, Nigeria

Email: *[email protected]

Received December 2013

Abstract

Pot experiment was conducted at the Botanical Garden of the Department of Biological Science,

Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto Nigeria, during the 2013 dry season. The main objective of

this research was to determine the effect of water stress and variety on productivity of rice (Oryza

sativa) at Sokoto. The treatment consisted of water stress at three growth stages (Tillering, flow-

ering, Grain filling) and unstress (control) and three rice varieties (FARO 44, NERICA 2 and FARO

15) laid out in a Completely Randomised Design (CRD) replicated three times. The result indicated

that water stress significantly (P < 0.05) resulted to decreased in plant height, number of leaves

per plant, total biomass, harvest index and grain yield. The results indicated significant (P < 0.05)

differences among genotypes. Faro 44 differed significant from in plant height, number of leaves

per plant, total biomass, harvest index and grain yield. FARO 44 differed significantly from NERICA

2 and FARO 15 at all the parameters under study. Water is very vital as far as rice production is

concern should be applied at every stage of rice production. FARO 44 is recommended for the area

for higher yield.

Keywords

Response; Rice Varieties; Water Stress; Sudan Savannah, Nigeria

1. Introduction

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is the most important cereal crop in the world and it is the primary source of food and cal-

ories for about half of mankind [1]. More than 75% of the annual rice supply comes from 79 million hectares of

irrigated paddy land. Irrigation is an important practice in agriculture, the competition for fresh water in the de-

velopment of urbanization, industry, leisure, and agriculture causes the decline of fresh water for irrigation [2]-

[4]. Water scarcity is a severe environmental limitation to plant productivity. Drought induced loss in crop yield

may exceeds loses from all other causes, since both the severity and duration of the stress are critical [5].

According to [6] Stress has been define as “any environmental factor capable of inducing a potentially injurious

strain in plants”. Water is a major constituent of tissue, a reagent in chemical reaction, a solvent for and mode of

translocation for metabolites and minerals within plant and is essential for cell enlargement through increasing

Corresponding author.

M. B. Sokoto, A. Muhammad

turgor pressure. With the occurrence of water deficits many of the physiological processes associated with growth

are affected and under severe deficits, death of plants may result. The effect of water stress may vary with the

variety, degree and duration of water stress and the growth stage of the rice crop. Water stress during vegetative

stage reduces plant height, tiller number and leaf area. However, the effect during this stage varies with the se-

verity of stress and age of the crop. Long duration varieties cause less yield damage than short duration varieties as

long vegetative period could help the plant to recover when water stress is relieved. Leaf expansion during

vegetative stage is very sensitive to water stress. Cell enlargement requires turgor to extend the cell wall and a

gradient in water potential to bring water into the enlarging cell. Thus water stress decreases leaf area which re-

duces the intercepted solar radiation. Rice leaves in general have a very high transpiration rate thus under high

radiation levels rice plant may suffer due to mid day wilting. Rice plant can transpire its potential rate even when

soil moisture was around field capacity.

Water stress is one of the most limiting environmental factors to plant productivity world wide and can be

caused by both soil and atmospheric water deficits. Water stress is one of the most limiting factors for plant sur-

vival since it regulates growth and development and limits plant productivity. The effect of water stress varies

with variety, degree and duration of stress and the growth of the plant [7].

The effect of water stress on yield decrease of rice is very pronounced during certain period of growth, called

the moisture sensitive periods. The most sensitive periods to water deficits are flowering and head development.

In an experiment conducted in the Philippines [8]. It has been shown that moisture stress early in the growth of

the rice reduced tillering, thereby reduced yield. When moisture stress was extended into reproductive phase,

yield loss was significant. [9] examined the effect of varying soil water regime during different growth phaseson

rice yield. They reported that the soil water stress applied any of the growth phases reduced rice grainyield,

compared to the continuous flooding irrigation. The ripening phase appeared to be most sensitive to compared to

the other phases. Soil water stress during the earlier growth phases (vegetative) appeared the production of ef-

fective tillers resulting in the reduction of grain yield, while stress during the later growth phases (reproductive)

appeared to affect the reproductive physiology by interfering with pollination, fertilization and grain filling in

the reduction of grain yield.

The objectives of this study are to examine the effects of water stress on growth and yield of three rice var i e-

ties in Sokoto.

2. Materials and Method

2.1. Experiment Site

Pot experiment was conducted during the 2013 dry season at the Botanical garden of the Department of Bio-

logical Science, Usmanu Danfordiyo University, Sokoto. Sokoto State is located between latitude 13˚01' North

and longitude 05˚15' East of about 350 m above sea level.

The area has a long dry season that is characterized by cool dry air during harmattan from November to Feb-

ruary and hot dry air during hot season from March to May. Relative humidity ranged from 26% - 39% in the

dry season. Minimum temperature ranged between 19˚C and 29˚C and maximum temperature ranged from 30 to

40˚C and, wind speed ranged between 1.8 to 5 MS−1 [(Sokoto Energy Research Center) (SERC, 2013)] (Appen-

dix 1). Soil sample was collected from 0 - 20 cm soil depth and analyzed for physic-chemical characteristics.

The soil of the experimental area is sandy, slightly acidic, low in organic carbon, total nitrogen, exchangeable

cations and available phosphorous (Appendix 2).

Treatments consisted of factorial combination of water stress at three (3) critical growth stages (Tillering,

Flowering and Grain filling) and unstress (control) and three varieties of rice (FARO 44, NERICA 2 and FARO

15), laid out in a Completely Randomized Design with three (3) Replications.

2.2. Pot Preparation

Pot was arranged according to the design layout Complete Randomized Design each pot containing 5.0 kg of the

soil which was collected from the Fadama at Kwalkwalawa near the Univer s ity. NPK 15:15:15 fertilizer was

applied at the rate of 76 kg N, 30 kg P and 30 kg K, the fertilizer was applied at basal and at 4 and 6 weeks after

planting. Three varieties of rice were sown at the rate of 10 g/pot by broadcasting method; the seedlings were

latter thinned to10 stands per pot. Weeding was done manually using hand at 2 - 3 and 5 - 6 weeks after planting.

M. B. Sokoto, A. Muhammad

There was no record of pest and disease attack. Harvesting involves manual cutting and collection of matured

rice panicles when the rice ripens in to a golden brown colour. Data was collected in respect of plant height,

Number of leaves per plant, biomass, harvest index and grainyield. The data collected were subjected to the

analysis of variance (ANOVA) and treatments were compared using Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test

(DNMRT ).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Plant Height

The effect of water stress and variety on plant height is presented on Table 1. The result indicated that water

stress had no significant (P < 0.05) effect on plant height at 3 Weeks After Planting (WAP). Water at tillering

resulted to significant (P < 0.05) reduction in plant height at 6, 9, 12 and 15 WAP. Control (unstress) is statisti-

cally (P < 0.05) similar with water stress at flowering and grain filling. The reduction in plant height was as a

result of water stress imposed at tillering stage. This is because imposing water stress resulted in law leaf water

potentials and reductions in photosynthesis; photosynthetic activity declines because of decreased stomatal

opening and the inhibition of chloroplast activity; this reduced the length of the internodes at jointing stage

which follows tillering stage. At the time when water stress was imposed at flowering and grain filling, the

jointing stage had taken place and plants have reached their maximum height, thus the effect of water stress was

ineffect ive. [10] and [11] Found significant reductions in tillers and panicles numbers as well as plant height and

grain yield when water stress was imposed at tillering stagewater stress resulted to decreased in plant height,

number of tillers per plant, total biomass and grain yield [12 ]-[14].

The effect of variety showed that at 3 WAS varieties did not differ in plant height. But Faro 44 differed sig-

nificantly with taller plants, while Wheata 4 and Nereca 2 did not differ significantly with shorter plants. The

significant differences among genotypes for plant height indicate appreciable amount of variability among the

genotype s. [15] subjected the varieties to moisture stress at different growth stages particularly during seeding

stage. They identified some promising lines had tolerance to the water stress. [16] reported varietal differences

among the cultivar for moisture stress.

Table 1. Effect of water stress and variety on plant height of rice at Sokoto.

Treatments Weeks after planting

Water Stress 3 6 9 12 15

Tillering 17.13 29.43 46.79 60.39 60.41

Flowering 17.06 33.11 51.63 68.16 68.46

Grainfilling 17.56 3202 52.09 67.43 67.63

Control 17.90 32.00 53.37 68.89 68.91

Significance * * * * *

S.E± 0.652 0.433 1.200 1.872 1.642

Variety

NERICA 2 19.31 32.03b 51.39b 67.88b 68.12b

FARO44 20.68 35.56a 55.76a 74.12a 74.36a

FARO15 19.42 31.27b 51.26b 67.12b 68.67b

Significance * * * * *

S.E± 0.564 0.375 1.039 1.621 1.422

Interaction

WXV NS NS NS NS NS

Within a treatment, mean in a column followed by the same letter(s) in superscript are not significantly different using LSD; NS = not significant, * =

significant at 5%.

M. B. Sokoto, A. Muhammad

3.2. Number of Tillers per Plant

The effect of water stress and variety on number of tillers per plantis is presented in Table 2. Water stress at

tillering resulted in significantly (P < 0.05) fewer number of tillers than water stress at flowering or grain filling

and control (no stress) which were statistically at par with each other. The fewer tillers recorded at tillering could

be as a result of water stress imposed at tillering because non-availability of water at tillering stage resultedin

reduction in the amount of intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). Similarly, during tillering plant

produces leaves and due to reduced growth as a result of water stress, the leaf initiation gets decreased and thus,

tends to reduce tillering. [10] and [ 11] reported that significant reductions in tillers and panicles numbers as well

as plant height and grain yield were found when water stress was imposed at tillering stage.

The effect of variety indicated that.FARO 44 differed significantly (P < 0.05) with higher number of tillers per

plant, while FARO15 and NERICA 2 did not differ significantly with fewer number of tillers plant. The signifi-

cant differences among genotypes for number of tillers indicate appreciable amount of variability among the

genotypes. [15] identified promising lines tolerance to water stress. [16] reported varietal differences among the

cultivar for moisture stress.

3.3. Number of Leaves per Plant

The effect of water stress and variety on number of leaves per plant is presented on Table 2. The result indicated

that water stress had no significant effect on number of leaves per plant at 3 Weeks After Planting (WAP). Water

at tillering resulted to significant (P < 0.05) reduction in number of leaves per plant at 6, 9, 12 and 15 WAP. The

reduction in plant height could be as a result of water stress imposed at tillering, which could result to decrease

in photosynthesis and translocation of photosynthates. The decline in leaf number is due to death and abscission

of leaves at faster rate as no new leaves were initiated during the reproductive stage. Significant reduction of

number of leaves at tillering was as a result of water stress imposed at that stage, this was because law leaf water

potential resulted in large reductions in photosynthesis, the reductions are caused both by decreases in the pho-

tosynthetic activity of a unit of leaf and in the production of new leaf surface.

Table 2. Growth and yield of three (3) rice varieties as influenced by water stress at Sokoto.

Water stress Number of

tillers/plant Number of Leaves

per plant 6 WAP

Number of Leaves

per plant 9 WAP Number of Leaves

per plant 12 WAP Biomass Harvest

index

Grain yield

t/ha

Tillering 5.19 12.44 19.33 19.89 4.66b 23.84b 1.111b

Flowering 9.29 15.89 22.67 23.11 5.68a 15.65c 0.889c

Grain filling 9.33 15.00 22.56 23.44 5.59a 15.65c 0.889c

Control 9.33 15.33 22.67 23.67 5.72a 52.44a 3.00a

Significance * * * * * * *

SE± 0.304 0.416 0.786 0.906 0.241 9.04 0.429

Variety

NERICA 2 5.92b 14.67b 21.92b 24.75b 4.42b 28.28b 1.20b

FARO44 8.25a 16.50a 24.33a 26.75a 5.69a 57.11a 3.25a

FARO15 5.18b 14.56b 21.89b 24.83b 4.69b 26.65b 1.25b

Significance * * * * * * *

SE± 0.964 0.360 0.680 0.640 0.340 2.830 0.371

Interaction WX V NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

Within a treatment, mean in a column followed by the same letter(s) in superscript are not significantly different using LSD; NS = not significant, * =

significant at 5%.

M. B. Sokoto, A. Muhammad

The effect of variety showed that FARO 44 differed significantly (P < 0.05) with higher number of leaves per

plant, while FARO 15 and NERIC 2 did not differ significantly with fewer number of leaves per plant. The sig-

nificant (P < 0.05) differences among genotypes for plant height indicate appreciable amount of variability

among the genotypes. [16] reported varietal differences among the cultivar for moisture stress.

3.4. Biomass

The effect of water stress and variety on biomassis is presented on Table 2. Water stress at tillering resulted in

lower biomass than water stress at flowering and grain filling or no stress control which were statistically similar.

Lower biomass was from water stress at tillering. This could be as a result of water stress imposed at tillering

which could result to decrease in photosynthesis, translocation rate and dry matter accumulation. Similarly till-

ers per unit area, plants height, number of leaves all these contributes to biomass and all these components were

affected by water stress.

The effect of variety showed that FARO 44 differed significantly (P < 0.05) with higher biomass, while

FARO 15 and NERECA 2 did not differ significantly with lower biomass. This could be as a result of taller

plants and higher plants produced by FARO 44. The significant differences among genotypes for biomass indi-

cate appreciable amount of variability among the genotypes. [16] reported varietal differences among the culti-

var for moisture stress.

3.5. Harvest I nd ex

The effect of water stress and variety on Harvest index (HI) of threerice varieties is presented on Table 2. Water

stress at flowering and grain filling resulted in lower HI than water stress at tillering and no stress control which

are statistically similar with higher HI. Decrease in HI could be largely due to water stress which resulted to de-

crease in translocation of assimilates to the grains, which lowered grain weight and increased the empty grains.

High HI indicate the efficient translocation of assimilates towards sink. Lower HI values under water stress at

flowering and grain filling stages indicate that it was more harmful in translocation of assimilates towards the

grain s . This is in accord with that of [17] who observed highest HI well irrigated genotypes compared to that of

the genotypes which were grown under water stress condition the result indicated that water stress at flowering

and grain filling resulted in lower HI than water stress at tillering and no stress control which are statistically

similar with higher HI. Decrease in HI could be largely due to water stress which resulted to decrease in trans-

location of assimilates to the grains, which lowered grain weight and increased the empty grains. High HI indi-

cate the efficient translocation of assimilates towards sink. Lower HI values under water stress at flowering and

grain filling stages indicate that it was more harmful in translocation of assimilates towards the grains. This is in

accord with that of [17] who observed highest HI well irrigated genotypes compared to that of the genotypes

which were grown under water stress condition.

The effect of variety showed that Faro 44 differed significantly (P < 0.05) with higher harvest index, while

FARO 15 and NERICA 2 did not differ significantly with lower harvest index. The significant differences

among genotypes for harvest index indicate appreciable amount of variability among the genotypes. [16] re-

ported varietal differences among the cultivar for moisture stress.

3.6. Grain Y i e ld

The effect of water stress and variety on grain yield (t∙ha −1) of three rice varieties is presented on Table 2. Water

stress at flowering and grain filling resulted to significant (P < 0.05) reduction in grain yield. Yield reduction

due to water stress could be as a result of reduction in photosynthesis and translocation. There was a linear rela-

tionship between available water and yield, where reduction in available water limits evapotranspiration and

consequently reduced yield, as reported by several researchers [18]. [19] reported that drought stress at duration

of filling grains period with acceleration in ripening time, casing to growth period duration and filling grains de-

creased.

The effect of variety on grain yield indicated that Faro 44 differed significantly (P < 0.05) with higher grain

yield, while FARO15 and NERICA 2 did not differ significantly with lower grain yield. The significant differ-

ences among genotypes for plant height indicate appreciable amount of variability among the genotypes. [16]

reported varietal differences among the cultivar for moisture stress.

M. B. Sokoto, A. Muhammad

4. Conclusion

The water stress applied after tillering initiation stage is more effective on grain yield and the other characters.

FARO 44 exhibited better water stress tolerance and this variety proved the promising cultivar under water stress

conditions or water limiting area.

References

[1] Khush, G.S. (2005) What It Will Take to Feed 5.0 Billion Rice Consumers in 2030. Plant Molecular Biology, 59, 1-6.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11103-005-2159-5

[2] Bergez, J.E. and Nol leau, S. (2003 ) Maize Grain Yield Variability between Irrigation Stands: A Theoretical Study. Ag-

ricultural Water Management, 60, 43-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(02)00152-X

[3] Qadir, M. and Oster, J.D. (2004) Crop and Irrigation Management Strategies for Salinesodic Soils and Waters Aimed

at Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture. Science of the Total Environment, 323, 1-19.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2003.10.012

[4] Zwart, S.J. and Bastiaanssen, W.G.M. (2004) Review of Measured Crop Water Productivity Values for Irrigated Wheat,

Rice, Cotton and Maize. Agricultural Water Management, 69, 115-133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2004.04.007

[5] Farooq, M., Wahid , A. , Kobayash i, N., Fujita, D. and Basra, S.M.A. (2008) Plan t Drought Stress: Effects, Mechanisms

and Management. Agronomy for k Mechanisms and Management. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 1-28.

with ICTA.

[7] Adejare, F.B. and Unebesse, C.E. (2008 ) Water Stress Induces Cultivar Department Changes in Stomatal Complex,

Yield and Osmotic Adjustments in Glyche Max L. International Journal of Agricultural Research, 3, 287 -295.

http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/ijar.2008.287.295

[8] IRRI (1973) Water Management in Philippines Irrigation Systems—Water Stress Effects in Flooded Tropical Rice.

Los Baños, Philippines.

[9] Jana, R.K. and Ghildyal, B.P. (1971) Effect of Varying Soil Water Regimes during Different Growth Phases on the

Yield of Rice under Different Atmospheric Evaporative Demands. Il Riso Anno, xx, 31-37.

[10] Bahattacharjee, D.P., Krishn ayya, G.R. and Ghosh, A.K. (1973) Analyses of Yield Components Andproductive Effi-

ciency of Rice Varieties under Soilmoisture Deficit. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 16, 314-343.

[11] De Datta, S.K., Abilay, W.P. and Kal war (1973) Water Stress Effect on Flooded Tropical Rice. Water Management in

Philippines Irrigation System Research and Operation, 16-36.

[12] Tantawi, B.A. and Ghanem, S.A. (2001) Water Use Efficiency in Rice Culture. Agricultural Research Center, Giza

(Egypt). CIHM-Optin Mediter raneennes, 40, 39-45.

[13] Rahman, M.T., Islam, M.T. and Islam, M.O. (2002) Effect of Water Stress at Different Growth Stages on Yield and

Yield Contributing Characters of Transplanted Aman Rice. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 5, 169-172.

http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2002.169.172

[14] Tuong, T.P., Bouman, B.A.M. and Mortimer, M. (2005) More Rice, Less Water-Integrated Approaches for Increasing

Water Productivity in Irrigated Rice-BasedSystems in Asia. Plant Production Science, 8, 229-239.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1626/pps.8.231

[15] P ramanik, S. and Grupta, S. (1 989) Screening Advanced Breeding Lines and Germplasme for Drought Resistance un-

der Uplandconditions. International Rice Research Newsletter, 14 , 20.

[16] Singh U.P. and Sing, K. (1980) IR5178-1-1-4 an Outstanding Drought Tolerant Line. International Rice Research

Newsletter , 5, 9.

[17] Sharma, K.D., Pannu, R.K., Tyagi, P.K., Chaudhary, B.D. and Sin gh , D.P. (2003) Effect of Moisture Stress on Plant

Water Relations and Yield of Different Wheat Genotypes. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 8, 99-102.

[18] Shani, U. and Dud ley, L.M. (2001) Field Studies of Crop Response to Water and Salt Stress. Soil Science. Society of

America Journal, 65, 1522-1528 . http://dx.doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2001.6551522x

[19] Boonjung, H. and Fukai, S. (1996) Effects of Soil Water Deficit at Different Growth Stages on Rice Growth and Yield

Under Upland Conditions. Field Crops Research, 48, 47-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-4290(96)00039-1

M. B. Sokoto, A. Muhammad

Appendix 1. Soil Physico-Chemical Properties of the Experimental Site during the

2013 Dry Seasons

Physical properties 2013 dry season

Sand (g∙kg−1) 701

Silt (g∙kg−1) 127

Clay (g∙kg−1) 172

Textural class Sandy loam

Chemical Properties

pH in (H2O) 1:1 ratio 6.4

Total nitrogen g∙kg−1 0.046

Organic C (g∙kg−1) 16.98

Available P (mg∙kg−1) 1.64

Exchangeable bases (C mol∙kg−1)

Ca 2.4

Mg 1.9

K 1.56

Na 0.95

CEC (C mol∙kg−1) 8.4

Appendix 2. Meteorological Data during the 2013 Dry Seasons at Sokoto

Months Mean Max Temp (˚C) Mean Min Temp (˚C) Relative Humidity (%) AVG. Wind Speed (m/s)

Ma rch 40.8 28.0 17.00 1 .8

April 42.0 29.7 28.28 2.6

May 40.8 26.3 49.08 3.8

June 39.0 24.2 18.20 1.9

Source: Sokoto Energy Research Center UDUS.