Volume 12, Number 44 (summer 2008)                   JCPP 2008, 12(44): 111-121 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Jalali N R, Homaee M, Mirnia S K. Modeling Canola Response to Salinity in Productive Growth Stages. JCPP. 2008; 12 (44) :111-121
URL: http://jcpp.iut.ac.ir/article-1-873-en.html

Abstract:   (18473 Views)
Canola (Brassica napus L.) in response to salinity represents various resistances with respect to its phonologic stages. Most plants such as Canola are resistant at germination stage. However, at seedling or earlier growth stages, plants become more sensitive to salinity but their tolerance increases with age. Salt tolerance of various plants has been extensively studied however, the results have either been qualitative or expressed as average values over root zone salinity for the whole growth season. Thus, developing appropriate models for quantitative characterization of plant response to salinity at different growth stages is essential. Canola which is considered as high economic value plant was selected for this study. Two productive stages for canola are recognized as flowering and ripening. To determine the effect of salinity on canola at vegetative growth stages, a greenhouse experiment was conducted on a natural saline loamy sand soil, using salinity treatment including one non-saline water (tap water) and 8 saline waters of 3 to 17 dS.m-1. The canola plants were irrigated with tap water before the desired stage and then salinity treatments were imposed. The Maas and Hoffman (1977), van Genuchten and Hoffman (1984), Dirksen et al., (1993), and Homaee et al., (2002b) models were used to predict relative transpiration (Ta/Tp ) and relative yield ( Y/Ym) as a function of soil salinity. The maximum error (ME), root mean square error (RMSE), coefficient of determination (CD), modeling efficiency (EF) and coefficient of residual mass (CRM) statistics were calculated to compare the models and their efficiencies. The results indicated that the van Genuchten and Hoffman (1984) model provides best prediction at flowering stage. However the Homaee et al. (2002b) model offers better prediction at ripening growth stage.
Full-Text [PDF 356 kb]   (1017 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: General

Add your comments about this article : Your username or email:
Write the security code in the box

© 2015 All Rights Reserved | Isfahan University of Technology - Journal of Crop Production and Processing

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb