Effect Of Water Stress On The Leaf Relative Water Content And Yield Of Some Cowpea (Vigna Unguiculata (L) Walp.) Genotype
HAYATU M., Muhammad S.Y., HABIBU U. A.
Key words: Cowpea, growth stages, Leaf Relative Water Content and Leaf Area, water stress,
Abstract: This Experiment was carried out in the screen house of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) Kano station to study the leaf relative water content and yield of nine cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp.) varieties to water stress. Data were collected on the following criteria, number of leaves, leaf area (LA), leaf relative water content (LRWC), and agronomic traits. The experimental materials were arranged in randomize complete block design with three treatments which include unstressed, vegetative stage and flowering stage of water stress. The results indicate that Leaf Relative Water Content (LRWC) of the water stressed genotypes were lower than the unstressed genotypes. At vegetative stage of water stress only 22.22% had an increase in their leaf water content and 77.78% recorded reduction in their LRWC. The highest reduction was exhibited by IT97K-568-19 with 9.5% and lowest reduction was recorded 0.1% by TVU-7778. 55.55% of the genotypes at flowering stage of water stress had reduction in their pod number. The Fodder yield at vegetative stage of water stress showed that 77.77% of the genotypes recorded reduction in their Fodder yield. IT98K-503-1 had higher dry fodder yield with 4.07% increase. At flowering stage of water stress, 99% of the genotypes recorded reduction in their fodder yield. The present study conclude that, water stress reduced the leaf area, relative water content and grain yield, among the cowpea screen genotypes TVU-7778 and IT98Kk-503-1recorded lower seed number at vegetative and flowering stages
. Singh B.B, Chambliss, O.L; and Sharina, B. (1997). Recent advances in cowpea breeding. in: Advances in cowpea research. B.B. Singh, B.R Mohan Raji, K.E Dasiell and L.E.N. Jackiat (eds) co-pub. Of IITA and JIRCAS IITA Ibadan, Nigeria.
. Ehlers-JD. Hall-A.E (1997). Heat tolerance of contrasting cowpea varieties in short and long days. Field-Crops-Research 55:1-2.
. Begg, J.E. and Turner, N.C., 1976. Crop water deficits.Adv. Agron. 28:161-217
. Hsiao TC (1973). Plant responses to water stress. Ann. Rev. Plant physiology 24:519-570.
. Karamanos A.S. (1980). Water stress and leaf growth of field beans (Vicia faba) in the field. Leaf number and total leaf area. Ann. Bot. 42:1393-1402
. Rawson H.M and N.C Turner, (1982). Recovery from water stress in five sunflower (Helain thus annus!) cultivars 1
. Painawadee, M., S. Jogloy, T. Kesmala, C. Akkasaeng and A. Patanothai, (2009). Identification of Traits Related to Drought Resistance in Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Asian Journal of Plant Sci. 8(2) pp:120-128.
. Slavick,B.,1979. Methods of studying plant water relation. Springer-Verlang. New York.
. O’Neal M; Douglas AL; and Rufus I. (2002). An inexpensive, Accurate Method for Measuring Leaf Area and Defoliation through Digital Image Analysis, J.Entomol.95 (6): 1190-1194
. Lobato, A.K., Costa, R.C.,2011.ABA-mediated proline synthesis in Cowpea leaves exposed to water deficiency and rehydration. Turk J. Agric. (35): 309-317
. Aguyoh, J.N., Sibomana, I.C, Opiyo, A.M., 2013.Water stress affects growth and yield of container grown tomato plants.Global Journal of Bio-Science and Biotechnology. Vol2(4): 461-466
. Samson H., Helmut H. (2007). Drought effect on yield, leaf parameters and evapotranspiration efficiency of cowpea. Conference on International Agricultural Research for Development.
. Mitra J (2001). Genetics and genetics improvement of drought resistance of crop plants. Curr Sci 80:758-763
. Abidoye T.O. (2004). Effects of soil moisture content on growth and yield of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.Walp). B. Agric. Dissertation, University of Ilorin, Nigeria.
. Abayomi, Y.A., T.O. Abidoye (2009). Evaluation of cowpea genotypes for soil moisture stress tolerance under screen house conditions. African Journal of Plant Science Vol. 3. (10) pp. 229-239