Ruttanachira RUTTANAPRASERT, Poramate BANTERNG, Sanun JOGLOY, Nimitr VORASOOT, Thawan KESMALA, Rameshwar S. KANWAR, Carl Corley HOLBROOK, Aran PATANOTHAI

Genotypic variability for tuber yield, biomass, and drought tolerance in Jerusalem artichoke germplasm

Jerusalem artichoke could be an alternative feedstock for bioenergy during times when there are shortages of other raw materials for the ethanol industry. However, insufficient water under rainfed conditions is a major cause of Jerusalem artichoke losses. Genetic variation for drought tolerance is an essential prerequisite for the development of Jerusalem artichoke cultivars with improved drought tolerance. The objectives of this study were to determine the effects of drought stress on tuber dry weight and biomass and to investigate the genotypic variability in Jerusalem artichoke germplasm. The line-source sprinkler technique was used to compare moisture responses of a range of 40 Jerusalem artichoke genotypes grown using 3 water levels. Experiments were conducted on a Yasothon soil series in Northeast Thailand during 2010/11 and 2011/12 and included extended dry periods. Drought reduced tuber dry weight and biomass, and the reductions in tuber dry weight and biomass were greater under severe drought than moderate drought conditions. Over both seasons, CN 52867, HEL 53, HEL 231, HEL 335, JA 76, HEL 65, and JA 102 × JA 89 (8) had consistently high tuber dry weight (1.3 to 4.5 t ha-1) and HEL 53, HEL 61, HEL 231, HEL 335, JA 76, JA 15, JA 89, HEL 65, HEL 256, and JA 102 × JA 89 (8) had consistently high biomass (2.0 to 6.8 t ha-1). These Jerusalem artichoke genotypes are promising parents in breeding for drought tolerance.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Drought, bioethanol, inulin

Genotypic variability for tuber yield, biomass, and drought tolerance in Jerusalem artichoke germplasm

Keywords:

Drought, bioethanol, inulin,

PDF

___

Azhar A, Hamdy MK (2003). Alcohol fermentation of sweet potato. I. Acid hydrolysis and factors involved. Biotechnol Bioeng 23: 79–886.
Conde JR, Tenorio JL, Rodriguez-Maribona B, Ayerbe L (1991). Tuber yield of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) in relation to water stress. Biomass Bioenerg 1: 137–142.
Denoroy P (1996). The crop physiology of Helianthus tuberosus L.: A model oriented view. Biomass Bioenerg 11: 11–32.
Doorenbos J, Pruitt WO (1992). Calculation of crop water requirement. In: Crop Water Requirement. Rome, Italy: FAO of the United Nations, pp. 1–65.
Gomez KA, Gomez AA (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley and Sons.
Hank RJ, Keller J, Rasmussen VP, Wilson GD (1976). Line source sprinkler for continuous variable-crop production studies. Soil Sci Soc Am J 40: 426–429.
Kays SJ, Nottingham SF (2007). Biology and Chemistry of Jerusalem Artichoke: Helianthus tuberosus L. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
Kramer PJ (1980). Drought, stress and the origin of adaptation. In: Turner NC, Kramer PJ, editors. Adaptation of Plants to Water and High Temperature Stress. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley and Sons, pp. 7–20.
Kim S, Park JM,Kim CH (2013). Ethanol production using whole plant biomass of Jerusalem artichoke by Kluyveromyces marxianus CBS1555. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 169: 1531–1545.
Li L, Li L, Wang Y, Du Y, Qin S (2013). Biorefinery products from the inulin-containing crop Jerusalem artichoke. Biotechnol Lett 35: 471–477.
Lin Y, Tanaka S (2006). Ethanol fermentation from biomass resources: current state and prospects. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 69: 627–642.
Liu ZX, Spiertz JHJ, Jing S, Shuai X, Guang HX (2012). Growth and yield performance of Jerusalem artichoke clones in a semiarid region of China. Agron J 104: 1538–1546.
Losavio N, Lamascese N, Vonella AV (1997). Water requirements and nitrogen fertilization in Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) grown under Mediterranean conditions. Acta Hortic 449: 205–209.
Margaritis A, Pratima B (1983). Effect of sugar concentration in Jerusalem artichoke extract on Kluyveromyces marxianus growth and ethanol production. Appl Environ Microbiol 45: 723–725.
Monti A, Amaducci MT, Venturi G (2005). Growth response, leaf gas exchange and fructans accumulation of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) as affected by different water regimes. Eur J Agron 23: 136–145.
Pimsean W, Jogloy S, Suriharn B, Kesmala T, Pensuk V, Patanothai A (2010). Genotype by environment (GxE) interactions for yield components of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.). Asian J Plant Sci 9: 11–19.
Robinson RG (1978). Production and culture. In: Carter JF, editor. Sunflower Science and Technology. Agronomy 19. Madison, WI, USA: The American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America, pp. 89–143.
Rodrigues MA, Sousa L, Cabanas JE, Arrobas M (2007). Tuber yield and leaf mineral composition of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) grown under different cropping practices. Span J Agric Res 5: 545–553.
Ruttanaprasert R, Jogloy S, Vorasoot N, Kesmala T, Kanwar RS, Holbrook CC, Patanothai A (2013). Photoperiod and growing degree days effect on dry matter partitioning in Jerusalem artichoke. Int J Plant Prod 7: 393–416.
Schittenhelm S (1999). Agronomic performance of root chicory, Jerusalem artichoke and sugarbeet in stress and non-stress environment. Crop Science 39: 1815–1823.
Stephen AM, Phillips GO, Willians PA (2006). Food Polysaccharides and Their Applications. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press. Szambelan K, Nowak J, Jelen H (2005). The composition of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) spirits obtained from fermentation with bacteria and yeasts. Eng Life Sci 5: 68–71.
Walker GM (2010). Bioethanol: Science and Technology of Fuel Alcohol. London, UK: Ventus Publishing