Next Article in Journal
Mapping of Olive Trees Using Pansharpened QuickBird Images: An Evaluation of Pixel- and Object-Based Analyses
Next Article in Special Issue
Growth, Physiological, Biochemical, and Transcriptional Responses to Drought Stress in Seedlings of Medicago sativa L., Medicago arborea L. and Their Hybrid (Alborea)
Previous Article in Journal
Dynamics of Glyphosate Resistance in Lolium perenne: Pollen-Mediated Gene Flow under Field Conditions in Argentina
Previous Article in Special Issue
Performance Assessment of Drought Tolerant Maize Hybrids under Combined Drought and Heat Stress
Article Menu
Issue 12 (December) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Agronomy 2018, 8(12), 287;

Response of Yellow Quality Protein Maize Inbred Lines to Drought stress at Seedling Stage

Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Science and Agriculture, University of Fort Hare, Private Bag X1314, Alice 5700, Eastern Cape, South Africa
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 1 November 2018 / Revised: 28 November 2018 / Accepted: 29 November 2018 / Published: 1 December 2018
Full-Text   |   PDF [456 KB, uploaded 5 December 2018]   |  


This study seeks to evaluate the response of 17 yellow Quality Protein Maize (QPM) inbred line seedlings to drought stress (DS), using different morphophysiological traits (plant height (PH), chlorophyll content (CC), stem diameter (SD), proline content (Pro), photochemical efficiency of photosystem II (PS II), canopy temperature (CT) and substomatal carbon dioxide concentration (Ci). The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) and replicated three times in a growth chamber. The seedlings were exposed to DS treatment by growing them at 20% field capacity. The control/well-watered (WW) treatments were kept at 80% field capacity throughout the experiment. Highly significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed for PH, SD, and Pro across environments. On the other hand, significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed for CC and PS II, while DS had no significant effects on Ci and CT. Proline content increased under DS compared to WW conditions. Inbred lines L34, L7, L5, L2, L16, and L6 had approximately equal or more Pro than the drought tolerant check (ZM1523). As such, these lines were regarded as drought tolerant. Taking all measured parameters into consideration, L7 performed notably better than the other inbred lines under DS. View Full-Text
Keywords: drought stress; morphophysiological traits; proline; QPM; tolerant drought stress; morphophysiological traits; proline; QPM; tolerant

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Chiuta, N.E.; Mutengwa, C.S. Response of Yellow Quality Protein Maize Inbred Lines to Drought stress at Seedling Stage. Agronomy 2018, 8, 287.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Agronomy EISSN 2073-4395 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top