Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:57:50.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DROUGHT TOLERANCE OF SELECTED SOUTH AFRICAN TARO (COLOCASIA ESCULENTA L. SCHOTT) LANDRACES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2014

T. MABHAUDHI  and
A. T. MODI
T. MABHAUDHI*
Affiliation:
Crop Science, School of Agricultural Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu–Natal, P. Bag X01, Scottsville 3201, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
A. T. MODI
Affiliation:
Crop Science, School of Agricultural Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu–Natal, P. Bag X01, Scottsville 3201, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
*
†Corresponding author. Email: tmabhaudhi@gmail.com; modiat@ukzn.ac.za
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Drought tolerance mechanisms of three taro landraces (Dumbe Lomfula (DL), KwaNgwanase (KW) and Umbumbulu (UM)) were evaluated under field conditions Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, over two summer seasons. Taro was slow to emerge (~ 49 days) and showed significant differences between landraces with respect to final emergence with DL never achieving a good crop stand. Growth (plant height, leaf number and LAI), VGI, SC and CCI were significantly lower under rainfed (RF) than irrigated conditions. RF conditions resulted in significantly lower biomass, HI, and final yield of taro landraces compared to irrigated conditions. The UM landrace avoided drought through increased stomatal regulation, lowering chlorophyll content, smaller canopy size and reduced growth period. It is concluded that among the three landraces, UM is suitable for production under water stress conditions, because it exhibited drought avoidance and escape mechanisms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 51 , Issue 3 , July 2015 , pp. 451 - 466
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agergaard, J. and Birch-Thomsen, T. (2006). Transitional rural landscapes: the role of small-scale commercial farming in former homelands of post-apartheid KwaZulu-Natal. Danish Journal of Geography 106:87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D. and Smith, M. (1998). FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56, Crop Evapotranspiration (guidelines for computing crop water requirements). Rome, Italy: FAO.Google Scholar
Azam-Ali, S. N. (2010). Fitting underutilized crops within research-poor environments: lessons and approaches. South African Journal of Plant & Soil 27:293–298.Google Scholar
Baye, T., Kebede, H. and Belete, K. (2001). Agronomic evaluation of Vernonia galamensis germplasm collected from Eastern Ethiopia. Industrial Crops & Products 14:179–190.Google Scholar
Blum, A. (2005). Drought resistance, water-use efficiency, and yield potential – are they compatible, dissonant, or mutually exclusive? Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 56:1159–1168.Google Scholar
Cable, W. J. (1984). The spread of taro (Colocasia sp) in the Pacific. In Edible Aroids, 28–33 (Eds Chandra, S.). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Chaves, M. M., Maroco, J. P. and Pereira, J. S. (2003). Understanding plant responses to drought – from genes to the whole plant. Functional Plant Biology 30:230–264.Google Scholar
Chaves, M. M., Pereira, J. S., Maroco, J. P., Rodrigues, M. L., Ricardo, C. P. P., Osorio, M. L., Carvalho, I., Faria, T. and Pinheiro, C. (2002). How plants cope with water stress in the field. Photosynthesis and growth. Annals of Botany 89:907–916.Google Scholar
Farooq, M., Wahid, A., Kobayashi, N., Fujita, D. and Basra, S. M. A. (2009). Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 29:185–212.Google Scholar
Haudricourt, A. G. and Hédin, L. (1987). L’homme el les plantes cultiveés. Paris: Editions. A.M. Metailie.Google Scholar
Havaux, M. and Tardy, F. (1999) Loss of chlorophyll with limited reduction of photosynthesis as an adaptive response of Syrian barley landraces to high light and heat stress. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 26:569–578.Google Scholar
Idowu, O. O. (2009). Contribution of neglected and underutilized crops to household food security and health among rural dwellers in Oyo State, Nigeria. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Underutilised Plants. Acta Horticulturae 806:49–56.Google Scholar
Lebot, V. (2009). Tropical Root and Tuber Crops: Cassava, Sweet Potato, Yams and Aroids. Cambridge, UK: CABI.Google Scholar
Levitt, J. (1972). Responses of Plants to Environmental Stresses. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ludlow, M. M. (1989). Strategies of response to water stress. In Structural and functional responses to environmental stresses, 269–281 (Eds Kreeb, K. H., Richter, H. and Hinckley, T. M.). The Hague: SPB Academic.Google Scholar
Mabhaudhi, T. (2009). Responses of maize (Zea mays L.) landraces to water stress compared with commercial hybrids. MSc Thesis. University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.Google Scholar
Mabhaudhi, T. and Modi, A. T. (2013). Preliminary assessment of genetic diversity in three taro (Colocasia esculenta L. Schott) landraces using agro-morphological and SSR DNA characterisation. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology B 3:265–271.Google Scholar
Mabhaudhi, T., Modi, A. T. and Beletse, Y. G. (2013a). Response of taro (Colocasia esculenta L. Schott) landraces to varying water regimes under a rainshelter. Agricultural Water Management 121:102–112.Google Scholar
Mabhaudhi, T., Modi, A. T. and Beletse, Y. G. (2013b). Growth response of selected taro (Colocasia esculenta) landraces to water stress. Proceeding of the 2nd International Symposium of Underutilised Food Plants. Acta Horticultuare 979:327–334.Google Scholar
Mare, R. M. (2006). Phytotron and field performance of taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) landraces from Umbumbulu. MSc. Thesis. University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.Google Scholar
Mare, R. M. (2010). Taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) yield and quality in response to planting date and organic fertilisation. PhD Thesis. University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.Google Scholar
Mare, R. M. and Modi, A. T. (2012). Taro corm quality in response to planting date and post-harvest storage: I. Starch content and reducing sugars. African Journal of Agricultural Research 7:3014–3021.Google Scholar
McEwan, R. (2008). Anti-nutritional constituent of Colocasia esculenta (Amadumbe) a traditional crop in KwaZulu-Natal. PhD Thesis. University of Zululand, South Africa.Google Scholar
Mitchell, J. H., Siamhan, D., Wamala, M. H., Risimeri, J. B., Chinyamakobvu, E., Henderson, S. A. and Fukai, S. (1998). The use of seedling leaf death score for evaluation of drought resistance of rice. Field Crops Research 55:129–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Modi, A. T. (2003). What do subsistence farmers know about indigenous crops and organic farming? Preliminary case in KwaZulu-Natal. Development Southern Africa 20:673–682.Google Scholar
Modi, A. T. (2007). Effect of indigenous storage method on performance of taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) under field conditions in a warm sub-tropical area. South African Journal of Plant & Soil 24:214–219.Google Scholar
Padulosi, S. (1998). Criteria for priority setting in initiatives dealing with underutilized crops in Europe. European Symposium on Plant Resources for Food and Agriculture. Braunschweig, Germany 29 June–5 July. 55–96.Google Scholar
Plucknett, D. L. (1984). Edible Aroids. In Evolution of Crop Plants, 10–12 (Ed. Simmonds, N. W.). London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Rao, V. R., Hunter, D., Eyzaguirre, P. B. and Matthews, P. J. (2010). Ethnobotany and global diversity of taro. In The Global Diversity of Taro: Ethnobotany and Conservation, 1–5 (Ed. Rao et al.), Rome, Italy: Bioversity International.Google Scholar
Sahoo, M. R., Madhumita, D. and Mukherjee, A. (2006). Effect of in vitro and in vivo induction of polyethylene glycol-mediated osmotic stress on hybrid taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott). Annals of Tropical Research 28:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shange, L. P. (2004). Taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) production by small-scale farmers in KwaZulu-Natal: Farmer practices and performance of propagule types under wetland and dryland conditions. MSc. Thesis. University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.Google Scholar
Singh, U., Matthews, R. B., Griffin, T. S., Ritchie, J. T., Hunt, L. A. and Goenaga, R. (1998). Modelling growth and development of root and tuber crops. In Understanding Options for Crop Production, 195–156 (Eds. Tsuji et al.), the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Sivan, P. (1995). Drought tolerance and the effect of potassium supply on growth of taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) and tannia (Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott). PhD Thesis. University of Queensland.Google Scholar
Snyder, V. A. and Lugo, W. I. (1980). Soil moisture related stresses affecting aroid development. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Taro and Tannier Modelling (Ed. Sing, U.). College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources. University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii. 21–28.Google Scholar
Steduto, P., Hsiao, T. C., Raes, D. and Fereres, E. (2009). AquaCrop - the FAO model to simulate yield response to water: I. Concepts and underlying principles. Agronomy Journal 101:426–437.Google Scholar
Turner, N. C. (1986). Crop water deficits: a decade of progress. Advances in Agronomy 39:1–51.Google Scholar
United Nations (2009). Department of Economics and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision. New York.Google Scholar
Water Research Commission, South Africa (WRC) (2009). WRC Knowledge Review 2008/09. Water Research Commission, Pretoria, South Africa.Google Scholar