effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotype sensitivity to isoxaflutole
A glasshouse experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) tolerance to isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence at 0, 75 (recommended rate) and 300 g a.i. ha-¹. For this study, the variables examined were two desi chickpea genotypes (97039-1275 as a tolerant...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Plant and soil 2008-02, Vol.303 (1-2), p.49-54 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 54 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1-2 |
| container_start_page | 49 |
| container_title | Plant and soil |
| container_volume | 303 |
| creator | Datta, Avishek Sindel, Brian M Kristiansen, Paul Jessop, Robin S Felton, Warwick L |
| description | A glasshouse experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) tolerance to isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence at 0, 75 (recommended rate) and 300 g a.i. ha-¹. For this study, the variables examined were two desi chickpea genotypes (97039-1275 as a tolerant line and 91025-3021 as a sensitive line) and four pH levels (5.1, 6.9, 8.1, and 8.9). The results demonstrated differential tolerances among chickpea genotypes to isoxaflutole at different rates and soil pH levels. Isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence resulted in increased phytotoxicity with increases in soil pH and herbicide rate. Even the most tolerant chickpea genotype was damaged when exposed to higher pH and herbicide rates, as indicated by increased leaf chlorosis and significant reductions in plant height, and shoot and root dry weight. The effects were more severe with the sensitive genotype. The susceptibility of chickpea to this herbicide depends on genotype and soil pH which should be taken into account in breeding new lines, and in the agronomy of chickpea production. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11104-007-9430-2 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20630952</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>42951779</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>42951779</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-beb64af03bae2395370ee85f3c030b832e1257fa2bb1c52921c81b7479a72b263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE-LFDEQxRtRcFz9AB7EICh6aK0knT99lEFdYcGDu-AtpENlzNjTaZO0ON_eNL2s4MFTVfF-9ap4TfOUwlsKoN5lSil0bW3bvuPQsnvNjgrFWwFc3m92AJy1oPpvD5tHOR9hnancNdfoPbpCoic5hpHMlyROxH0P7seMlrzeB4eJ2BSwhGk5vSEHnGI5z0gyTjmU8CuUMymRhBx_Wz8uJY74uHng7ZjxyW29aG4-frjeX7ZXXz593r-_al3HWGkHHGRnPfDBIuO94AoQtfDcAYdBc4aUCeUtGwbqBOsZdZoOqlO9VWxgkl80rzbfOcWfC-ZiTiE7HEc7YVyyYSA59IJV8MU_4DEuaaq_VQaEllLqCtENcinmnNCbOYWTTWdDwawhmy1ks7ZryGY1fnlrbLOzo092ciHfLTKgWlNOK8c2LldpOmD6-8D_zJ9tS8dcYroz7VgvqFJ91Z9vurfR2EOqh2--1pMcQAsmO83_AGY_nck</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>200586668</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotype sensitivity to isoxaflutole</title><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Datta, Avishek ; Sindel, Brian M ; Kristiansen, Paul ; Jessop, Robin S ; Felton, Warwick L</creator><creatorcontrib>Datta, Avishek ; Sindel, Brian M ; Kristiansen, Paul ; Jessop, Robin S ; Felton, Warwick L</creatorcontrib><description>A glasshouse experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) tolerance to isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence at 0, 75 (recommended rate) and 300 g a.i. ha-¹. For this study, the variables examined were two desi chickpea genotypes (97039-1275 as a tolerant line and 91025-3021 as a sensitive line) and four pH levels (5.1, 6.9, 8.1, and 8.9). The results demonstrated differential tolerances among chickpea genotypes to isoxaflutole at different rates and soil pH levels. Isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence resulted in increased phytotoxicity with increases in soil pH and herbicide rate. Even the most tolerant chickpea genotype was damaged when exposed to higher pH and herbicide rates, as indicated by increased leaf chlorosis and significant reductions in plant height, and shoot and root dry weight. The effects were more severe with the sensitive genotype. The susceptibility of chickpea to this herbicide depends on genotype and soil pH which should be taken into account in breeding new lines, and in the agronomy of chickpea production.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0032-079X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-5036</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11104-007-9430-2</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PLSOA2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Agricultural soils ; Agronomy ; Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; Alkaline soils ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Chickpeas ; Cicer arietinum ; Ecology ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Genotype & phenotype ; Genotypes ; Herbicide resistance ; Herbicides ; isoxaflutole ; Legumes ; Life Sciences ; Organic soils ; Phytotoxicity ; Plant Physiology ; Plant Sciences ; Regular Article ; Soil organic matter ; Soil pH ; Soil Science & Conservation ; Soils ; Toxicity</subject><ispartof>Plant and soil, 2008-02, Vol.303 (1-2), p.49-54</ispartof><rights>2008 Springer</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-beb64af03bae2395370ee85f3c030b832e1257fa2bb1c52921c81b7479a72b263</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-beb64af03bae2395370ee85f3c030b832e1257fa2bb1c52921c81b7479a72b263</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/42951779$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/42951779$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318,58016,58249</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20188131$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Datta, Avishek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sindel, Brian M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kristiansen, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jessop, Robin S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Felton, Warwick L</creatorcontrib><title>effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotype sensitivity to isoxaflutole</title><title>Plant and soil</title><addtitle>Plant Soil</addtitle><description>A glasshouse experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) tolerance to isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence at 0, 75 (recommended rate) and 300 g a.i. ha-¹. For this study, the variables examined were two desi chickpea genotypes (97039-1275 as a tolerant line and 91025-3021 as a sensitive line) and four pH levels (5.1, 6.9, 8.1, and 8.9). The results demonstrated differential tolerances among chickpea genotypes to isoxaflutole at different rates and soil pH levels. Isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence resulted in increased phytotoxicity with increases in soil pH and herbicide rate. Even the most tolerant chickpea genotype was damaged when exposed to higher pH and herbicide rates, as indicated by increased leaf chlorosis and significant reductions in plant height, and shoot and root dry weight. The effects were more severe with the sensitive genotype. The susceptibility of chickpea to this herbicide depends on genotype and soil pH which should be taken into account in breeding new lines, and in the agronomy of chickpea production.</description><subject>Agricultural soils</subject><subject>Agronomy</subject><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>Alkaline soils</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Chickpeas</subject><subject>Cicer arietinum</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Genotype & phenotype</subject><subject>Genotypes</subject><subject>Herbicide resistance</subject><subject>Herbicides</subject><subject>isoxaflutole</subject><subject>Legumes</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Organic soils</subject><subject>Phytotoxicity</subject><subject>Plant Physiology</subject><subject>Plant Sciences</subject><subject>Regular Article</subject><subject>Soil organic matter</subject><subject>Soil pH</subject><subject>Soil Science & Conservation</subject><subject>Soils</subject><subject>Toxicity</subject><issn>0032-079X</issn><issn>1573-5036</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE-LFDEQxRtRcFz9AB7EICh6aK0knT99lEFdYcGDu-AtpENlzNjTaZO0ON_eNL2s4MFTVfF-9ap4TfOUwlsKoN5lSil0bW3bvuPQsnvNjgrFWwFc3m92AJy1oPpvD5tHOR9hnancNdfoPbpCoic5hpHMlyROxH0P7seMlrzeB4eJ2BSwhGk5vSEHnGI5z0gyTjmU8CuUMymRhBx_Wz8uJY74uHng7ZjxyW29aG4-frjeX7ZXXz593r-_al3HWGkHHGRnPfDBIuO94AoQtfDcAYdBc4aUCeUtGwbqBOsZdZoOqlO9VWxgkl80rzbfOcWfC-ZiTiE7HEc7YVyyYSA59IJV8MU_4DEuaaq_VQaEllLqCtENcinmnNCbOYWTTWdDwawhmy1ks7ZryGY1fnlrbLOzo092ciHfLTKgWlNOK8c2LldpOmD6-8D_zJ9tS8dcYroz7VgvqFJ91Z9vurfR2EOqh2--1pMcQAsmO83_AGY_nck</recordid><startdate>20080201</startdate><enddate>20080201</enddate><creator>Datta, Avishek</creator><creator>Sindel, Brian M</creator><creator>Kristiansen, Paul</creator><creator>Jessop, Robin S</creator><creator>Felton, Warwick L</creator><general>Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080201</creationdate><title>effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotype sensitivity to isoxaflutole</title><author>Datta, Avishek ; Sindel, Brian M ; Kristiansen, Paul ; Jessop, Robin S ; Felton, Warwick L</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c422t-beb64af03bae2395370ee85f3c030b832e1257fa2bb1c52921c81b7479a72b263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Agricultural soils</topic><topic>Agronomy</topic><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>Alkaline soils</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Chickpeas</topic><topic>Cicer arietinum</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Genotype & phenotype</topic><topic>Genotypes</topic><topic>Herbicide resistance</topic><topic>Herbicides</topic><topic>isoxaflutole</topic><topic>Legumes</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Organic soils</topic><topic>Phytotoxicity</topic><topic>Plant Physiology</topic><topic>Plant Sciences</topic><topic>Regular Article</topic><topic>Soil organic matter</topic><topic>Soil pH</topic><topic>Soil Science & Conservation</topic><topic>Soils</topic><topic>Toxicity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Datta, Avishek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sindel, Brian M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kristiansen, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jessop, Robin S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Felton, Warwick L</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Plant and soil</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Datta, Avishek</au><au>Sindel, Brian M</au><au>Kristiansen, Paul</au><au>Jessop, Robin S</au><au>Felton, Warwick L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotype sensitivity to isoxaflutole</atitle><jtitle>Plant and soil</jtitle><stitle>Plant Soil</stitle><date>2008-02-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>303</volume><issue>1-2</issue><spage>49</spage><epage>54</epage><pages>49-54</pages><issn>0032-079X</issn><eissn>1573-5036</eissn><coden>PLSOA2</coden><abstract>A glasshouse experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) tolerance to isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence at 0, 75 (recommended rate) and 300 g a.i. ha-¹. For this study, the variables examined were two desi chickpea genotypes (97039-1275 as a tolerant line and 91025-3021 as a sensitive line) and four pH levels (5.1, 6.9, 8.1, and 8.9). The results demonstrated differential tolerances among chickpea genotypes to isoxaflutole at different rates and soil pH levels. Isoxaflutole applied pre-emergence resulted in increased phytotoxicity with increases in soil pH and herbicide rate. Even the most tolerant chickpea genotype was damaged when exposed to higher pH and herbicide rates, as indicated by increased leaf chlorosis and significant reductions in plant height, and shoot and root dry weight. The effects were more severe with the sensitive genotype. The susceptibility of chickpea to this herbicide depends on genotype and soil pH which should be taken into account in breeding new lines, and in the agronomy of chickpea production.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s11104-007-9430-2</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0032-079X |
| ispartof | Plant and soil, 2008-02, Vol.303 (1-2), p.49-54 |
| issn | 0032-079X 1573-5036 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20630952 |
| source | JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Agricultural soils Agronomy Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions Alkaline soils Animal, plant and microbial ecology Biological and medical sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences Chickpeas Cicer arietinum Ecology Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Genotype & phenotype Genotypes Herbicide resistance Herbicides isoxaflutole Legumes Life Sciences Organic soils Phytotoxicity Plant Physiology Plant Sciences Regular Article Soil organic matter Soil pH Soil Science & Conservation Soils Toxicity |
| title | effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotype sensitivity to isoxaflutole |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T00%3A11%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=effect%20of%20soil%20pH%20on%20chickpea%20(Cicer%20arietinum)%20genotype%20sensitivity%20to%20isoxaflutole&rft.jtitle=Plant%20and%20soil&rft.au=Datta,%20Avishek&rft.date=2008-02-01&rft.volume=303&rft.issue=1-2&rft.spage=49&rft.epage=54&rft.pages=49-54&rft.issn=0032-079X&rft.eissn=1573-5036&rft.coden=PLSOA2&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11104-007-9430-2&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E42951779%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=200586668&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=42951779&rfr_iscdi=true |