Response of Different Wheat Genotypes to Aphids Infestation Under Irrigated and Rainfed Conditions
Research Article
Response of Different Wheat Genotypes to Aphids Infestation Under Irrigated and Rainfed Conditions
Sher Nawab Khan* and Ghulam Hassan
Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, The University of Agriculture Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
Abstract | Aphids are common wheat and barley pest in many parts of the world including Pakistan. This experiment was conducted at the experimental field of the department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, The University of Agriculture Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan during 2014-15 and 2015-16. Eight bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties i.e., Atta-Habib (AH), Lalma-13 (Lal-13), Tatara-96 (Tat-96), Punjab-11 (PJ-11), Pirsabak-2005 (PS-05), Pirsabak-2013 (PS-13), Janbaz (JB) and land race Khatakwal (KW) were crossed in 8×8 full diallel pattern to identify aphids resistant genotypes under irrigated and rainfed conditions. Number of aphids tiller-1 revealed highly significant differences (P ≤ 0.01) among the genotypes. Under irrigated condition genotypes PJ-11×Lal-13, Tat-96×Lal-13, JB×Lal-13, AH×PS-05 and PS-13×Lal-13 were comparatively resistant with low aphids density while genotype PJ-11×PS-05 and KW were most susceptible. Under rainfed condition genotypes JB×Lal-13, PJ-11×Lal-13, AH×PS-05, Tat-96×Lal-13 and PS-13×Lal-13 were comparatively resistant while genotypes PS-05×KW and PS-05 were most susceptible. Comparatively less aphids tiller-1 were observed under irrigated condition in all three scoring dates. Highest aphid’s infestation was recorded on average temperature of 24.8˚C. On the basis of field scoring resistant genotypes were identified which are prerequisite for further molecular and biochemical study to explore resistance pathway. These lines could be used as a source of aphids resistance in future wheat breeding program.
Received | January 18, 2018; Accepted | May 06, 2018; Published | June 01, 2018
*Correspondence | Sher Nawab Khan, Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics The University of Agriculture Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Email: [email protected]
Citation | Khan, S. N. and G. Hassn. 2018. Response of different wheat genotypes to aphids infestation under irrigated and rainfed conditions. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 34(2): 443-449.
DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2018/34.2.443.449
Keywords | Bread Wheat, Aphids, Rainfed and Irrigated conditions
Introduction
Aphids are common wheat and barley pest in many parts of the world (Sánchez-Monge et al., 2010) and attained the status of a regular pest in Pakistan (Zeb et al., 2011). Aphids are commonly called plant lice which cause serious yield losses in cereal crops (Bhagat, 2012). Along with plant injury and sucking juice, aphids also play the role of vector for more than 50% of the 600 viruses and transmit pathogens in host plants (Sarwar, 2013; Sudderth and Sudderth, 2014). In crops, 25 out of 29 wheat aphids species transmit viral diseases (Islam et al., 2015). Different environmental conditions alter aphids feeding behavior and movement among the host plants. Aphids feeding cause leaf rolling, longitudinal leaf chlorosis, reduced root and tiller development, stunting and even death of plant which ultimately reduce grain yield (Nicholson et al., 2012). Yield losses of 20-30% were reported in case of 100 aphids plant-1 while more infestation some time cause complete failure of crop (Sarwar, 2013). Polycultures reduce pest population due to abundance of natural enemies which decrease colonization and reproduction of pests (Dahlin and Ninkovic, 2013). While through associational resistance of some plants, neighboring crop decrease the amount of yield losses caused by aphids (Dahlin and Ninkovic, 2013). Host plant and climatic conditions play a vital role in spreading of aphids population (Şenol et al., 2014). Synthetic insecticides provide quick and adequate Aphids control (Nas, 2004) but they are expensive, develop resistant to insecticides, hazardous to environment and non-target insects and cause environmental pollution (Sarwar, 2013; Singh et al., 2012). Among the prevention strategies host plant resistance is the most effective method of aphids control (El Bouhssini et al., 2011). Although, genotypic diversity and intraspecific variation in host-plant affect the structure of associated arthropod communities (Genung et al., 2012). Plants evolve mechanical adaptations such as thorns, trichomes, lignins, silicates and allelochemicals like phenol, alkaloid and proteins to prevent herbivory (Wittstock and Gershenzon, 2002). Thus the present study was designed to identify Aphids resistant genotypes for irrigated and rainfed conditions.
Materials and Methods
This experiment was conducted on eight wheat (TriticumaestivumL.) varieties i.e., Atta-Habib (AH), Lalma-13 (Lal-13), Tatara-96 (Tat-96), Punjab-11 (PJ-11), Pirsabak-2005 (PS-05), Pirsabak-2013 (PS-13), Janbaz (JB) and land race Khatakwal (KW) and their 56 F1 hybrids as developed by 8×8 full diallel pattern. Trail was conducted at the Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar during 2014-15 and 2015-16. All the crosses and their parents were tested for aphids infestation under irrigated and rainfed conditions in adjacent field to avoid environmental bias. Both experiments were laid out in randomized complete block design with three replications. Number of rows was two in each entry with row length of two meters. Row to row and plant to plant distances were maintained 30 and 15 cm, respectively. Recommended inputs and standard agronomic practices were applied. Precipitation data during the crop season was obtained from meteorology department regional office Peshawar. Aphid’s population were scored on five randomly selected tillers on three dates with interval of 10 days in the field as described by Aheer et al. (2007) and Zeb et al. (2011). The average number of aphids tiller-1 for each variety/line was calculated according to Iqbal et al. 2008. The collected data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) according to Steel and Torrie (1980).
Results and Discussion
Table 1: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for number of aphids tillers-1 under irrigated and rainfed conditions.
| Aphids tiller-1 | Reps (d.f= 2) | Genotypes (d.f= 126) | Error (d.f=126) | CV |
| Irrigated | 21.97 | 13.85** | 4.50 | 36.77 |
| Rainfed | 11.96 | 8.81** | 2.01 |
37.24 |
Table 2: Pooled analysis of variance for number of aphids tillers-1 under irrigated and rainfed conditions.
| Environment (E) | Reps(Env) | Genotypes(G) | G × E | Pooled error | |
| Character | (D.F=1) | (D.F= 4) | (D.F=63) | (D.F= 63) | (D.F= 252) |
| Aphids tiller-1 | 371.43 ** | 16.97 | 15.67** | 6.99** |
3.257 |
Table 3: Average number of Aphids tiller-1 under irrigated and rainfed conditions on 64 wheat genotypes.
| Genotype | Irrigated | Rainfed | Genotype | Irrigated | Rainfed |
| AH | 5.33 | 6.22 | PJ-11×PS-13 | 3.00 | 4.22 |
| Lal-13 | 6.67 | 7.44 | PJ-11×KW | 4.33 | 4.33 |
| Tat-96 | 4.67 | 4.33 | PJ-11×JB | 5.11 | 6.33 |
| PJ-11 | 5.33 | 5.00 | PS-05×AH | 2.22 | 6.33 |
| PS-05 | 5.00 | 8.67 | PS-05×Lal-13 | 3.56 | 3.00 |
| PS-13 | 4.00 | 8.00 | PS-05×Tat-96 | 3.78 | 7.00 |
| KW | 7.33 | 8.56 | PS-05×PJ-11 | 4.89 | 6.33 |
| JB | 4.78 | 7.44 | PS-05×PS-13 | 2.33 | 4.44 |
| AH×Lal-13 | 2.33 | 5.56 | PS-05×KW | 4.89 | 10.22 |
| AH×Tat-96 | 1.22 | 5.56 | PS-05×JB | 3.78 | 7.22 |
| AH×PJ-11 | 2.22 | 6.56 | PS-13×AH | 3.22 | 4.00 |
| AH×PS-05 | 0.78 | 0.56 | PS-13×Lal-13 | 1.11 | 0.67 |
| AH×PS-13 | 1.67 | 8.56 | PS-13×Tat-96 | 4.11 | 5.22 |
| AH×KW | 6.33 | 5.11 | PS-13×PJ-11 | 1.67 | 8.11 |
| AH×JB | 6.33 | 4.22 | PS-13×PS-05 | 4.11 | 6.33 |
| Lal-13×AH | 6.00 | 5.67 | PS-13×KW | 3.78 | 8.33 |
| Lal-13×Tat-96 | 2.44 | 3.89 | PS-13×JB | 2.00 | 5.33 |
| Lal-13×PJ-11 | 4.33 | 7.56 | KW×AH | 3.78 | 6.00 |
| Lal-13×PS-05 | 4.22 | 4.78 | KW×Lal-13 | 4.78 | 7.11 |
| Lal-13×PS-13 | 2.33 | 5.67 | KW×Tat-96 | 5.67 | 6.33 |
| Lal-13×KW | 2.00 | 7.56 | KW×PJ-11 | 3.67 | 4.56 |
| Lal-13×JB | 3.56 | 6.78 | KW×PS-05 | 3.78 | 6.56 |
| Tat-96×AH | 3.11 | 4.22 | KW×PS-13 | 6.33 | 8.22 |
| Tat-96×Lal-13 | 0.44 | 0.67 | KW×JB | 3.22 | 8.00 |
| Tat-96×PJ-11 | 4.11 | 6.33 | JB×AH | 2.89 | 5.78 |
| Tat-96×PS-05 | 6.89 | 5.11 | JB×Lal-13 | 0.78 | 0.33 |
| Tat-96×PS-13 | 6.22 | 4.67 | JB×Tat-96 | 2.67 | 5.11 |
| Tat-96×KW | 4.44 | 7.89 | JB×PJ-11 | 3.11 | 5.44 |
| Tat-96×JB | 3.11 | 7.33 | JB×PS-05 | 4.33 | 4.78 |
| PJ-11×AH | 4.67 | 8.33 | JB×PS-13 | 4.11 | 5.11 |
| PJ-11×Lal-13 | 0.33 | 0.44 | JB×KW | 2.33 | 8.22 |
| PJ-11×Tat-96 | 4.44 | 7.56 | LSD | 1.63 | 2.25 |
| PJ-11×PS-05 | 7.56 | 4.22 |
The experiment was conducted on 64 wheat genotypes to identify Aphids resistant genotypes under irrigated and rainfed conditions. Number of aphids tiller-1 revealed highly significant differences (P ≤ 0.01) among the genotypes under both condition (Table 1). Similar findings of significant variation among the genotypes for aphids population were also reported by Dahlin and Ninkovic (2013), Iqbal et al. (2008) and Jarošík et al. (2003). Genotype by environment interaction (G×E) was also highly significant (Table 2) which is the conformity of the findings of Bruce et al. (2003). Evaluation of wheat germplasm across different environments is very important because significant G×E interaction change the rank of genotype across the environment (Ma and Singh, 1996). Maximum 7.56 aphids tiller-1 were observed on genotype PJ-11×PS-05 followed by KW (7.33 aphids tiller-1) and Tat-96×PS-05 (6.89 aphids tiller-1) and remained the most susceptible while minimum 0.33 aphids tiller-1 were recorded on PJ-11×Lal-13 followed by Tat-96×Lal-13 (0.44 aphids tiller-1), JB×Lal-13 (0.78 aphids tiller-1), AH×PS-05 (0.78 aphids tiller-1) and PS-13×Lal-13 (1.11 aphids tiller-1) were found comparatively resistant among the studied genotypes under irrigated condition (Table 3). Under rainfed condition. The most susceptible genotypes with maximum (10.22) aphids tiller-1 was observed on genotype PS-05×KW followed by PS-05 (8.67 aphids tiller-1), KW (8.56 aphids tiller-1) and AH×PS-13 (8.56 aphids tiller-1). While minimum 0.33 aphids tiller-1 was recorded on partially resistant genotype JB×Lal-13 followed
by PJ-11×Lal-13 (0.44 aphids tiller-1), AH×PS-05 (0.56 aphids tiller-1), Tat-96×Lal-13 (0.67 aphids tiller-1) and PS-13×Lal-13 (0.67 aphids tiller-1) among the 64 wheat genotypes (Table 3). Similar findings of significant variation in aphids population on different wheat genotypes were also reported by El Bouhssini et al. (2011), Mondor et al. (2007), Ochieng and Nderitu (2011) and Sarwar (2013). Number of aphids tiller-1 was counted after 110, 120 and 130 days of sowing in the first, second and third scoring, respectively. Comparatively more aphids tiller-1 were observed under rainfed condition than irrigated in all the three scoring dates (Figure 1). Upward trend in aphids population was observed on majority of wheat genotypes till second scoring except PJ-11, AH×PS-05 and KW×PJ-11 (Figure 3). While decreasing trend in aphid’s population was observed during third scoring on majority of genotypes except Lal-13×PS-05, Tat-96×PS-05 and PJ-11×PS-13 (Figure 3). During second scoring in March 2016 maximum temperature (24.8˚C) was coupled with precipitation of 87.6 mm while in third scoring temperature was 30.6˚C and precipitation was 61.0 mm (Figure 2).
Similar findings of fluctuation with temperature in aphids population were also reported by Bruce et al. (2003), Johnson, Anonymous, Messina and Bloxham (2004) and Wains et al. (2010). Climatic factors also
influence aphids population which increase or decrease aphids population but in this experiment all the genotypes were exposed to similar climatic conditions. In similar condition the presence of significant variation in aphids population among the genotypes showed variation in level of resistance in these genotypes, i.e., PJ-11×Lal-13, Tat-96×Lal-13, JB×Lal-13, AH×PS-05 and PS-13×Lal-13 and also grouped them into sub cluster 1. Three, twenty, twelve and twenty four were grouped into second, third, fourth and fifth sub cluster respectively (Figure 4). Such partial resistance are due to mechanical adaptations of plant or production of allelochemicals to prevent herbivory (Wittstock and Gershenzon, 2002). Among the studied genotypes several partially aphids resistant genotypes were identified on the basis of field scoring which is prerequisite for further molecular and biochemical study. These genotypes could be used in future as a resistance source in wheat breeding program to develop aphids resistant variety for commercial cultivation.
Acknowledgements
The authors are greatly thankful to the Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan for financial support. The authors are also thankful to the Cereal Crop Research Institute Pirsabak (CCRI) for the provision of experimental varieties as well as to the Meteorology regional office Peshawar for provision of meteorological data. We also extend our thanks to Dr. Sajid Ali and Muhammad Rameez Khan for their cooperation.
Author’s Contribution
Sher Nawab Khan: Conducted the experiment, compiled and analysed the results and wrote the paper.
Ghulam Hassan: Designed the experiments, proofread and revised the manuscript.
References
Aheer, G.M., M. Munir and A. Ali. 2007. Impact of weather factors on population of wheat aphids at Mandi Baha-ud-Din district. J. Agric. Res. 45: 61-66.
Bhagat, R. 2012. Aphids (Insecta) of agricultural importance in J&K state, India: a checklist and biodiversity. Int. J. Food Agric. Vet. Sci. 2(3): 116-125.
Bruce, T.J., J.L. Martin, J.A. Pickett, B.J. Pye, L.E. Smart and L.J. Wadhams. 2003. cis‐Jasmone treatment induces resistance in wheat plants against the grain aphid, Sitobion avenae (Fabricius)(Homoptera: Aphididae). Pest manag. sci. 59: 1031-1036. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.730
Dahlin, I. and V. Ninkovic. 2013. Aphid performance and population development on their host plants is affected by weed–crop interactions. J. App. Eco. 50: 1281-1288. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12115
El Bouhssini, M., K. Street, A. Amri, M. Mackay, F. Ogbonnaya, A. Omran, O. Abdalla, M. Baum, A. Dabbous and F. Rihawi. 2011. Sources of resistance in bread wheat to Russian wheat aphid (Diuraphis noxia) in Syria identified using the Focused Identification of Germplasm Strategy (FIGS). Plant Breed. 130: 96-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0523.2010.01814.x
Genung, M.A., G.M. Crutsinger, J.K. Bailey, J.A. Schweitzer and N.J. Sanders. 2012. Aphid and ladybird beetle abundance depend on the interaction of spatial effects and genotypic diversity. Oecologia. 168: 167-174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-011-2080-3
Iqbal, J., M. Ashfaq and A. Ali. 2008. Screening of wheat varieties/advanced lines against aphids. Pak. Entomol. 1(30): 77-81.
Islam, S.U., M. Inayatullah, S. Jan, M. Ibrahim and S.J.A. Shah. 2015. Aphis craccivora Koch on wheat in Pakistan. Dev.. 4(2):86-88.
Jarošík, V., A. Honěk and A. Tichopad. 2003. Comparison of field population growths of three cereal aphid species on winter wheat. Plant Prot. Sci. 39(2): 61-64. https://doi.org/10.17221/3827-PPS
Johnson and P.J. Anonymous. Aphids and their control on orchids. Dakpta state USA, 1-12.
Ma, H., and R.P Singh. 1996. Contribution of adult plant resistance gene Yr18 in protecting wheat from yellow rust. Plant Dis. 80: 66-69. https://doi.org/10.1094/PD-80-0066
Messina, F.J. and A.J. Bloxham. 2004. Plant resistance to the Russian wheat aphid: effects on a nontarget aphid and the role of induction. Can. Entomo. 136: 129-137. https://doi.org/10.4039/n03-062
Mondor, E.B., M.N. Tremblay and R.H. Messing. 2007. Morphological and ecological traits promoting aphid colonization of the Hawaiian Islands. Biol. Invas. 9: 87-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-006-9010-z
Nas, M.N. 2004. In vitro studies on some natural beverages as botanical pesticides against Erwinia amylovora and Curtobacterium flaccumfaciensis subsp. Poinsettiae. Turk. J. Agric. Fores. 28: 57-61.
Nicholson, S.J., S.D. Hartson and G.J. Puterka. 2012. Proteomic analysis of secreted saliva from Russian Wheat Aphid (Diuraphis noxia Kurd.) biotypes that differ in virulence to wheat. J. Proteom. 75: 2252-2268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2012.01.031
Ochieng, S. and P. Nderitu. 2011. Biocontrol approach to management of greenpeach aphid Myzus persicae in garden peas for a sustainable ecosystem. J. Horti. Forest. 3(8): 231-237.
Sánchez-Monge, A., A. Retana-Salazar, S. Brenes and R. Agüero. 2010. New records of aphid-plant associations (Hemiptera: Aphididae) from Eastern Costa Rica. Florida Entomol. 93: 489-492. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.093.0402
Sarwar, M. 2013. The inhibitory properties of organic pest control agents against aphid (Aphididae: Homoptera) on Canola Brassica napus L.(Brassicaceae) Under field environment. Int. J. Sci. Res. Envron. Sci. 1(8): 195-201. https://doi.org/10.12983/ijsres-2013-p195-201
Şenol, Ö., H. Akyıldırım, G. Görür and E. Demirtaş. 2014. New records for the aphid fauna Hemiptera: Aphidoidea)of Turkey.66(1): 133-136
Singh, A., R. Kataria and D. Kumar. 2012. Repellence property of traditional plant leaf extracts against Aphis gossypii Glover and Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 7(11): 1623-1628.
Steel, R.G. and J.H. Torrie. 1980. Principle and procedures of statistic: A biometrical approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sudderth, E.A. and E.B. Sudderth. 2014. Quantifying aphid behavioral responses to environmental change. Entomo. Exp. Applic. 150: 7-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.12139
Wains, M., M. Ali, M. Hussain, J. Anwar, M. Zulkiffal and W. Sabir. 2010. Aphid dynamics in relation to meteorological factors and various management practices in bread wheat. J. Plant Prot. Res. 50: 386-392. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10045-010-0065-6
Wittstock, U. and J. Gershenzon. 2002. Constitutive plant toxins and their role in defense against herbivores and pathogens. Current opinion in plant bio. 5: 1-8.
Zeb, Q., H. Badshah, H. Ali, R. Shah and M. Rehman. 2011. Population of aphids on different varieties/lines of wheat and their effect on yield and thousands grain weight. Sarhad J. Agric 27(3): 443-450.
To share on other social networks, click on any share button. What are these?
