Waterlogging tolerance and recovery of 10 Lotus species
Daniel Real A B D , Jonathan Warden A , Graeme A. Sandral A C and Timothy D. Colmer A BA Cooperative Research Centre for Plant-based Management of Dryland Salinity, The University of Western Australia, University Field Station, 1 Underwood Avenue, Shenton Park, WA 6009, Australia.
B School of Plant Biology, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.
C New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Private Mail Bag, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: dreal@agric.wa.gov.au
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48(4) 480-487 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA07110
Submitted: 23 April 2007 Accepted: 21 December 2007 Published: 7 March 2008
Abstract
Medicago sativa L. is the most widely sown perennial forage legume in farming systems of southern Australia. However, M. sativa lacks adaptation to winter waterlogged conditions. This constraint has highlighted the need for new perennial forage legumes adapted to winter waterlogged conditions and to locations where the summer is too dry for the survival of Trifolium repens L. and T. fragiferum L. To explore new perennial legume options suitable for these circumstances, 10 species of Lotus were evaluated for waterlogging tolerance including: two accessions of L. corniculatus L., four accessions of L. tenuis Waldst. & Kit., two accessions of L. pedunculatus Cav., two accessions of L. australis Andrew, three accessions of L. creticus L., three accessions of L. glaucus Sol., one accession of L. cruentus Court., one accession of L. argyrodes R.P. Murray, one accession of L. campylocladus Webb & Berthel and one accession of L. latifolius Brand. These were compared with the M. sativa cultivar Sceptre. The ability to grow in waterlogged conditions, and to recover, was assessed in a pot experiment conducted over 19 weeks. The Lotus species most tolerant of waterlogging were L. corniculatus, L. tenuis and L. pedunculatus. Each of these species developed aerenchyma, adventitious roots, surface roots and split stems at the base to improve oxygen transport into the roots. Significant intra-species variation was also found within each of the three tolerant species, highlighting the opportunity for genetic improvement. By comparison, the remaining Lotus species were susceptible to waterlogging and showed poor recovery, whereas M. sativa Sceptre partially recovered after waterlogging.
Barta AL
(1980) Regrowth and alcohol dehydrogenase activity in waterlogged alfalfa and birdsfoot trefoil. Agronomy Journal 72, 1017–1020.
|
CAS |
Barta AL
(1986) Metabolic response of Medicago sativa L. and Lotus corniculatus L. roots to anoxia. Plant, Cell & Environment 9, 127–131.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Cocks PS
(2001) Ecology of herbaceous perennial legumes: a review of characteristics that may provide management options for the control of salinity and waterlogging in dryland cropping systems. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 52, 137–151.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dear BS,
Moore GA, Hughes SJ
(2003) Adaptation and potential contribution of temperate perennial legumes to the southern Australian wheatbelt: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 43, 1–18.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Howieson JG, Ewing MA
(1989) Annual species of Medicago differ greatly in their ability to nodulate on acid soils. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 40, 843–850.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Humphries AW, Auricht GC
(2001) Breeding lucerne for Australia’s southern dryland cropping environments. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 52, 153–169.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Malik AI,
Colmer TD,
Lambers H, Schortemeyer M
(2001) Changes in physiological and morphological traits of roots and shoots of wheat in response to different depths of waterlogging. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 28, 1121–1131.
Malik AI,
Colmer TD,
Lambers H,
Setter TL, Schortemeyer M
(2002) Short-term waterlogging has long-term effects on the growth and physiology of wheat. New Phytologist 153, 225–236.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Malik AI,
Colmer TD,
Lambers H, Schortemeyer M
(2003) Aerenchyma formation and radial O2 loss along adventitious roots of wheat with only the apical root portion exposed to O2 deficiency. Plant, Cell & Environment 26, 1713–1722.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rogers VE
(1974) The response of lucerne cultivars to levels of waterlogging. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 14, 520–525.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Setter TL, Waters I
(2003) Review of prospects for germplasm improvement for waterlogging tolerance in wheat, barley and oats. Plant and Soil 253, 1–34.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Smethurst CF, Shabala S
(2003) Screening methods for waterlogging tolerance in lucerne: comparative analysis of waterlogging effects on chlorophyll fluorescence, photosynthesis, biomass and chlorophyll content. Functional Plant Biology 30, 335–343.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Smethurst CF,
Garnett T, Shabala S
(2005) Nutritional and chlorophyll fluorescence responses of lucerne (Medicago sativa) to waterlogging and subsequent recovery. Plant and Soil 270, 31–45.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Striker GG,
Insausti P,
Grimoldi AA,
Ploschuk EL, Vasellati V
(2005) Physiological and anatomical basis of differential tolerance to soil flooding of Lotus corniculatus L. and Lotus glaber Mill. Plant and Soil 276, 301–311.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Teakle NL,
Real D, Colmer TD
(2006) Growth and ion relations in response to combined salinity and waterlogging in the perennial forage legumes Lotus corniculatus and Lotus tenuis. Plant and Soil 289, 369–383.
|
CAS |
Crossref |
Vignolio OR,
Fernandez ON, Maceira NO
(1999) Flooding tolerance in five populations of Lotus glaber Mill. (Syn. Lotus tenuis Waldst. et. Kit.). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 50, 555–559.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
