Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:37:57.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of saline irrigation on yield and qualitative characterization of seed of an amaranth accession grown under Mediterranean conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2015

A. LAVINI ,
C. PULVENTO ,
R. d'ANDRIA ,
M. RICCARDI  and
S. E. JACOBSEN
A. LAVINI*
Affiliation:
CNR – ISAFoM Institute for Agricultural and Forest Systems in the Mediterranean – National Research Council, Via Patacca 85, 80056 Ercolano, Naples, Italy
C. PULVENTO
Affiliation:
CNR – ISAFoM Institute for Agricultural and Forest Systems in the Mediterranean – National Research Council, Via Patacca 85, 80056 Ercolano, Naples, Italy
R. d'ANDRIA
Affiliation:
CNR – ISAFoM Institute for Agricultural and Forest Systems in the Mediterranean – National Research Council, Via Patacca 85, 80056 Ercolano, Naples, Italy
M. RICCARDI
Affiliation:
CNR – ISAFoM Institute for Agricultural and Forest Systems in the Mediterranean – National Research Council, Via Patacca 85, 80056 Ercolano, Naples, Italy
S. E. JACOBSEN
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Ecology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Taastrup, Denmark
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Yield responses of a grain amaranth accession to different irrigation strategies were evaluated in Naples, Italy. Field experiments were carried out to evaluate the quantitative and qualitative response of amaranth under combined abiotic stresses (salinity and drought) in a Mediterranean environment of South Italy affected by problems due to groundwater salinization from seawater intrusion.

A comparison was made in 2009 and 2010 between a fully irrigated treatment (1·00), with the restitution of all of the water necessary to replenish to field capacity the soil layer explored by roots (0·00–0·36 m), and two treatments with restitution of 0·50 and 0·25 of the water volume used for the fully irrigated treatment. The three levels of irrigation volume were combined with two levels of salinity, either fresh or salt water, with electrical conductivity (EC) of the irrigation water of 0·64 and 22 dS/m respectively, in a factorial experiment thus harbouring six treatments in a randomized complete block design. The results showed good adaptation of amaranth to drought. It was possible to obtain high yields even if groundwater with infiltrated seawater was used for irrigation (50% yield reduction when the EC of soil saturated paste extract (ECe) was 13·97 dS/m). A reduction of 50% in the volume of irrigation did not cause a significant reduction in yield, whether using fresh or saline water, compared to the treatment fully irrigated with fresh water. The chemical composition of amaranth seeds, however, was significantly affected by the treatments. Starch and ash content decreased with increasing drought while protein content was increased by both salt and drought.

In view of the increased presence of salinity and drought stress in the Mediterranean area and the scarce information on amaranth response to salt and water stress, the aim of the present work is evaluation of the quantitative and qualitative response of amaranth grown in a Mediterranean environment of South Italy under combined drought and salinity stress.

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 154 , Issue 5 , July 2016 , pp. 858 - 869
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

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

REFERENCES

American Association of Cereal Chemists (AACC) (2001). AACC International Approved Methods of Analysis. St. Paul, MN: AACC.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) (2005). Official Methods of Analysis, 18th edn. Gaithersburg, MD: AOAC International.Google Scholar
Barba de la Rosa, A. P., Fomsgaard, I. S., Laursen, B., Mortensen, A. G., Olvera-Martínez, L., Silva-Sánchez, C., Mendoza-Herrera, A., González-Castañeda, J. & De León-Rodríguez, A. (2009). Amaranth (Amaranthus hypochondriacus) as an alternative crop for sustainable food production: phenolic acids and flavonoids with potential impact on its nutraceutical quality. Journal of Cereal Science 49, 117–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borneo, R. & Aguirre, A. (2008). Chemical composition, cooking quality, and consumer acceptance of pasta made with dried amaranth leaves flour. LWT – Food Science and Technology 41, 1748–1751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, E. A., Bailey-Serres, J. & Weretilnyk, E. (2000). Responses to abiotic stresses. In Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Plants (Eds Gruissem, W., Buchanan, B. B. & Jones, R. L.), pp. 1158–1249. Rockville, MD: American Society of Plant Physiologists.Google Scholar
Brouwer, C. & Heibloem, M. (1986). Irrigation Water Management: Irrigation Water Needs. Training Manual No. 3. Rome, Italy: FAO.Google Scholar
Chaves, M. M., Flexas, J. & Pinheiro, C. (2009). Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell. Annals of Botany 103, 551–560.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Comai, S., Bertazzo, A., Bailoni, L., Zancato, M., Costa, C. V. L. & Allegri, G. (2007). The content of proteic and nonproteic (free and protein-bound) tryptophan in quinoa and cereal flours. Food Chemistry 100, 1350–1355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Covas, G. (1987). Fitomejoramiento de los amarantos. In Proceedings of Primeras Jornadas Nacionales sobre Amarantos. Facultad de Agronomy, La Pampa, Argentina, 26–27 July. pp. 50–62. La Pampa, Argentina: Universidad Nacional de la Pampa.Google Scholar
Džunková, M., Janovská, D., Čepková, P. H., Prohasková, A. & Kolář, M. (2011). Glutelin protein fraction as a tool for clear identification of Amaranth accessions. Journal of Cereal Science 53, 198–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El Youssfi, L., Choukr-Allah, R., Zaafrani, M., Mediouni, T., Sarr, F. & Hirich, A. (2012). Effect of domestic treated wastewater use on three varieties of amaranth (Amaranthus spp.) under semi arid conditions. International Journal of Environmental, Ecological, Geological and Geophysical Engineering 6, 10–15.Google Scholar
European Union (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Union L 327, 1–73.Google Scholar
Galwey, N. W. (1992). The potential of quinoa as a multi-purpose crop for agricultural diversification: a review. Industrial Crops and Products 1, 101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gómez-Caravaca, A. M., Iafelice, G., Lavini, A., Pulvento, C., Caboni, M. F. & Marconi, E. (2012). Phenolic compounds and saponins in quinoa samples (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) grown under different saline and nonsaline irrigation regimens. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 60, 4620–4627.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gregory, P. J. (2006). Food production under poor, adverse climatic conditions. In Proceedings of the IX ESA Congress, 4–7 September 2006 (Eds Fotyma, M. & Kaminska, B.), p. 19. Puławy, Poland: Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation Warsaw, Poland.; Montpellier, France: European Society for Agronomy.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, S.-E. & Mujica, A. (2003). The genetic resources of Andean grain amaranths (Amaranthus caudatus L., A. cruentus and A. hipochondriacus L.) in America. Plant Genetic Resources Newsletter 133, 41–44.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, S.-E., Mujica, A. & Ortiz, R. (2003). The global potential for quinoa and other Andean crops. Food Reviews International 19, 139–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, S.-E., Jensen, C. R. & Liu, F. (2012). Improving crop production in the arid Mediterranean climate. Field Crops Research 128, 34–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffman, C. S. & Weber, L. E. (1990). Grain amaranth. In Advances in New Crops (Eds Janick, J. & Simon, J. E.), pp. 127–139. Portland, OR: Timber Press.Google Scholar
Kigel, J. (1994). Development and ecophysiology of amaranths. In Amaranth Biology, Chemistry and Technology (Ed. Paredes-López, O.), pp. 39–73. Ann Arbor, MI: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Lavini, A., Pulvento, C., d'Andria, R., Riccardi, M., Choukr-Allah, R., Belhabib, O., Yazar, A., İncekaya, Ç., Metin Sezen, S., Qadir, M. & Jacobsen, S.-E. (2014). Quinoa's potential in the Mediterranean region. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 200, 344–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefèvre, I., Gratia, E. & Lutts, S. (2001). Discrimination between the ionic and osmotic components of salt stress in relation to free polyamine level in rice (Oryza sativa). Plant Science 161, 943–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, F. & Stützel, H. (2002). Leaf water relations of vegetable amaranth (Amaranthus spp.) in response to soil drying. European Journal of Agronomy 16, 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, F. & Stützel, H. (2004). Biomass partitioning, specific leaf area, and water use efficiency of vegetable amaranth (Amaranthus spp.) in response to drought stress. Scientia Horticulturae 102, 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maas, E. V. & Hoffman, G. J. (1977). Crop salt tolerance: current assessment. Journal of the Irrigation and Drainage Division 103, 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mlakar, S. G., Bavec, M., Jakop, M. & Bavec, F. (2012). The effect of drought occurring at different growth stages on productivity of grain amaranth Amaranthus cruentus G6. Journal of Life Sciences 6, 283–286.Google Scholar
Munns, R. (2002). Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant, Cell and Environment 25, 239–250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Myers, R. L. (1996). Amaranth: new crop opportunity. In Progress in New Crops (Ed. Janick, J.), pp. 207–220. Alexandria, VA: ASHS Press.Google Scholar
Ogungbenle, H. N. (2003). Nutritional evaluation and functional properties of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) flour. International Journal of Food Science and Nutrition 54, 153–158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Omami, E. N. & Hammes, P. S. (2006). Interactive effects of salinity and water stress on growth, leaf water relations, and gas exchange in amaranth (Amaranthus spp.). New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science 34, 33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omami, E. N., Hammes, P. S. & Robbertse, P. J. (2006). Differences in salinity tolerance for growth and water-use efficiency in some amaranth (Amaranthus spp.) genotypes. New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science 34, 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Písaříková, B., Kráčmar, S. & Herzig, I. (2005). Amino acid contents and biological value of protein in various amaranth species. Czech Journal of Animal Science 50, 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulvento, C., Riccardi, M., Lavini, A., d'Andria, R., Iafelice, G. & Marconi, E. (2010). Field trial evaluation of two Chenopodium quinoa genotypes grown under rain-fed conditions in a typical Mediterranean environment in South Italy. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 196, 407–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulvento, C., Riccardi, M., Lavini, A., Iafelice, G., Marconi, E. & d'Andria, R. (2012). Yield and quality characteristics of quinoa grown in open field under different saline and non-saline irrigation regimes. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 198, 254–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulvento, C., Lavini, A., Riccardi, M., d'Andria, R. & Ragab, R. (2015 a). Assessing amaranth adaptability in a Mediterranean area of south Italy under different climatic scenarios. Irrigation and Drainage 64, 50–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulvento, C., Riccardi, M., Lavini, A., d'Andria, R. & Ragab, R. (2015 b). Parameterization and field validation of saltmed model for grain amaranth tested in South Italy. Irrigation and Drainage 64, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putman, D. H. (1990). Agronomy practices for amaranth. In Proceedings of the IV National Amaranth Symposium: Perspectives on Production, Processing and Marketing. pp. 151–162. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Extension Service, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Qi, S. H., Li, Z. Z. & Gong, Y. S. (2002). Evaluating crop water requirements and crop coefficients for three vegetables based on field water budget. Journal of the China Agricultural University 7, 71–76.Google Scholar
Quispe, H. & Jacobsen, S.-E. (1999). Tolerancia de la quinua (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) a la salinidad. In Libro de Resúmenes: Primer Taller Internacional sobre Quinua – Recursos Genéticos y Sistemas de Producción, 10–14 May, UNALM, Lima, Peru (Eds Jacobsen, S.-E. & Valdez, A.), pp. 131. Lima, Peru: UNALM.Google Scholar
Repo-Carrasco, R., Espinoza, C. & Jacobsen, S.-E. (2003). Nutritional value and use of the Andean crops quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) and kañiwa (Chenopodium pallidicaule). Food Reviews International 19, 179–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riccardi, M., Pulvento, C., Lavini, A., d'Andria, R. & Jacobsen, S.-E. (2014). Growth and ionic content of quinoa under saline irrigation. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 200, 246–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivelli, A. R., Gherbin, P., De Maria, S. & Pizza, S. (2008). Field evaluation of Amaranthus species for seed and biomass yields in southern Italy. Italian Journal of Agronomy 3, 225–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulze, E. D., Beck, E. & Müller-Hohenstein, K. (2005). Plant Ecology. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
Shimose, N., Sekiya, J., Kimura, O. & Suzuki, I. (1991). Salt tolerance of amaranth, mugwort, eggplant and perilla. Japanese Journal of Tropical Agriculture 35, 16–19.Google Scholar
Stallknecht, G. F. & Schulz-Schaeffer, J. R. (1993). Amaranth rediscovered. In New Crops (Eds Janick, J. & Simon, J. E.), pp. 211–218. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Stikic, R., Glamoclija, D., Demin, M., Vucelic-Radovic, B., Jovanovic, Z., Milojkovic-Opsenica, D., Jacobsen, S.-E. & Milovanovic, M. (2012). Agronomical and nutritional evaluation of quinoa seeds (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) as an ingredient in bread formulations. Journal of Cereal Science 55, 132–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanji, K. K. & Kielen, N. C. (2002). Agricultural Drainage Water Management in Arid and Semi-Arid Areas. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 61. Rome, Italy: FAO.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture (2004). Soil Survey Laboratory Methods Manual. Soil Survey Investigations Report No. 42 Version 4.0. Lincoln, NE: USDA.Google Scholar
Wang, Y. & Nii, N. (2000). Changes in chlorophyll, ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase–oxygenase, glycine betaine content, photosynthesis and transpiration in Amaranthus tricolor leaves during salt stress. Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 75, 623–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Meng, Y. L., Ishikawa, H., Hibino, T., Tanaka, Y., Nii, N. & Takabe, T. (1999). Photosynthetic adaptation to salt stress in three-color leaves of a C4 plant Amaranthus tricolor . Plant and Cell Physiology 40, 668–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, W. X., Vinocur, B. & Altman, A. (2003). Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta 218, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitehead, W. F. & Singh, B. P. (1992). Vegetable amaranth performance at different soil moisture levels (abstract). HortScience 27, 1176–1176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar