VOL. 11, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

ISSN 1990-6145

ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science ©2006-2016 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

BIO-ECONOMICS OF FOLIAR APPLIED GB AND K ON DROUGHT STRESSED WHEAT (Triticum aestivum L.) Muhammad Aown Sammar Raza1, Muhammad Farrukh Saleem2, Imran Haider Khan2, Ghulam Mustafa Shah3 and Aamir Raza4 1Department

of Agronomy, University College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, the University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan 2Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan 3Department of Environmental Sciences, COMSAT Institute of Information Technology, Vehari, Pakistan 4Department of Agriculture Extension and Rural development, University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan E-Mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT Experiment was conducted during 2009-10 at Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), Faisalabad and repeated during 2010-11 at Agronomy Farm, University of Agriculture, and Faisalabad to look into the economic feasibility of exogenous application of glycinebetaine and / or potassium in improving wheat production under drought conditions. Field oriented research consist of different doses of glycinebetaine (0, 50,100 and 150 mM) and potassium (0, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5%) arranged in randomized complete block design (factorial arrangement) with three replications. Maximum grain yield was recorded with combined foliar spray of 100 mM GB and 1.5% K. Maximum net field benefits were obtained where crop was sprayed with 50 mM GB + 1.5% K, while maximum marginal rate of return (MRR) was obtained by applying only 0.5% K. Keywords: drought, wheat, osmolyte, nutrient, economic analysis.

INTRODUCTION Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is originated in South Western Asia and has been a major agricultural commodity since pre historic times (Rahman et al., 2008). It is the second most abundantly grown cereal crop of the world and commonly known as king of cereals (Datta et al., 2009). Wheat is a major staple food crop for more than one third of the world population including Pakistan (Sherazi et al., 2001). Among others environmental stresses adversely affecting the growth and development of plants, most damaging one is water deficit (drought) stress (Sinclair, 2005). Water deficit conditions severely affected the growth and yield of many crops including wheat (Raza et al., 2012a). Every aspect of plant growth and yield was affected by drought because water is essential for every stage of plant from seed germination to plant maturity (Chaves and Oliveira, 2004). Water deficit affected the wheat by modifying the anatomy, morphology, physiology, biochemistry and finally the productivity of the crop (Jones et al., 2003). Now, it is need of the time to mitigate the drought by adopting techniques which result in more efficient use of water in order to increase the crop production and fulfill the needs of increasing population (Nasrullah et al., 2011). Many strategies have been developed like use of different nutrients (Raza et al., 2012b), compatible solutes (Raza et al., 2012c) and different management practices (Mulching) to overcome deficit water conditions (Schahbazian and Nejad, 2006). Potassium (K) is one of the primary plant nutrients that plays an important role in drought stress tolerance of plants. Potassium is important for many plant processes like water relations, photosynthesis, translocation of photosynthates to various organs, and activation of enzymes (Mengel and Kirkby, 2001). There

is evidence that plants have a larger internal requirement for K when suffering from environmental stresses like drought (Cakmak and Engels, 1999). Spray of potassium under water deficit stress has been reported to be helpful in enhancing the wheat performance and ultimately yield (Raza et al., 2013). Potassium application increased the number of fertile tillers (Mehdi et al., 2001), number of grains per spike, 1000-grain weight and grain yield of wheat (Evans and Riedell, 2006). Glycinebetaine (GB) is an important osmolyte produced in plants of many crop species (Hou et al., 1998). It increases the tolerances of the plant to various stresses including drought (Raza et al., 2014a). Plants with greater ability of GB accumulation under stress are more tolerant to stress (Monyo et al., 1992). GB improved drought tolerance in wheat (Raza et al., 2006). It enhances water utilization efficiency of wheat (Aldesuquy et al., 2012), maintains turgor pressure (John, 2002), enhance the activity of anti-oxidative enzymes (Ma et al., 2006) and in this way protects important physiological processes such as photosynthesis and protein synthesis under drought stress (Sulpice et al., 1998). Combination of GB with potassium is more effective in mitigating the harmful effects of drought on wheat as compared to alone application of GB or potassium (Raza et al., 2014b). Pakistan lies in arid to semi arid region and is one of the developing countries of the world. Although Pakistan has one of the best irrigation systems, but this irrigation water is not sufficient for crop production due to various managerial problems (Akram et al., 2010). In this modern era, adaptation of latest production technology is very important in order to achiev higher yield of crops. These new production technologies demand a large amount of input, such as irrigation water, fertilizer and power source like electricity but increasing prices of these

1

VOL. 11, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

ISSN 1990-6145

ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science ©2006-2016 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com essential inputs is also an important reason of lower yield of wheat in Pakistan (Sher and Ahmad, 2008). So there is dire need to increase the production of wheat in an economic way under limited resource availability and water scare conditions. Although many researchers worked out the role of GB in improving crop productivity but few reported its economic feasibility under field conditions. Present study explore the economic feasibility of combined application of GB and K in improving wheat productivity under drought stressed field conditions.

MRR = Marginal rate of returns MNB = Change in net benefits MC = Marginal cost while MNB = net benefit of treatment- net benefit of control RESULTS Yield

MATERIALS AND METHODS Experiment was conducted at the Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), Faisalabad, Pakistan during 2009-10 and at Agronomy Farm, University of Agriculture Faisalabad during 2010-11. Experiment comprised of three glycinebetaine doses (0, 50, 100 and 150 mM) and three potassium levels (0, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5%), laid out in randomized complete block design with factorial arrangement. Net plot size was 3m × 5m and three replications were used. Drought was imposed at vegetative, flowering and grain filling stage of wheat by withholding irrigation at these critical stages. Foliar spray of different combinations of glycinebetaine and potassium were applied to the wheat at these growth stages under drought conditions. Economic analysis of data was done by using the procedure described by CIMMYT (1988) as follows. Yield (kg ha-1) After harvesting and threashing, grain yield from each plot was weighed and then yield was converted into kilogram per hectare. Net field benefit Net field benefit for each was calculated by subtracting input cost of each treatment from the gross income of each treatment. Net benefits = Gross benefits - input cost. where Gross income = yield (kg ha-1) per treatment × unit cost of commodity Dominance analysis For calculating the dominance analysis, treatments were arranged in ascending order of variable costs. A treatment is said to be dominant if its variable costs were higher than the next treatment, but its net benefit was lower. Such a treatment was termed as dominated treatment and denoted by “D’’. Marginal analysis Marginal rate of returns for non-dominated treatments were calculated. Marginal rate of return (MRR) was calculated by dividing the marginal net benefits (MNB) by the marginal cost and expressed in percentage MRR = MNB/ MC × 100 where

Yield data of two years (2009-10 and 2010-11) are presented in table 1and 2. Data revealed that grain yield was affected by different treatments. Maximum grain yield was recorded in T2K3 (100 Mm GB +1.5% K) and minimum in T0K0 (control) during both the years. For T2K3, higher grain yield (5784 kg ha-1) was recorded in 2010-11 and less (5040.5 kg ha-1) in 2009-10. Contrary to this, T0K0 produced less grain yield (2671.1) in 2010-11 than grain yield (3071 kg ha-1) in 2009-10. Treatments in which only glycine betaine or only potassium was applied produced less grain yield as compared to their combined application. Net field benefits Net field benefit (NFB) was calculated on the basis of data of 2009-10 and 2010-11 (Table 3 and 4). Wheat sprayed with T1K3 gave the maximum NFB of Rs. 79430 ha-1 during 2009-10 and Rs. 87386 during 2010-11, respectively. The minimum value of NFB (Rs. 44956 ha-1 during 2009-10 and Rs. 39991 ha-1 during 2010-11 respectively) was recorded when drought was created with no GB and K spray. Although yield and gross income was more in T2K3 but due to more total expenditure net field benefit was less as compared to T1K3. Combined spray of glycinebetaine and potassium gave more net field benefits as compared to the alone spray of glycinebetaine and potassium. Dominance analysis Dominance analysis is calculated because NFB does not tell us the rate of return about the investment. A treatment was dominated when its variable cost was higher but net benefit was less as compared to the net benefit of preceding treatments. Table-5 indicated that treatments in which different doses of glycinebetaine were sprayed without potassium (T0K3, T2K0 and T3K0) had NFB that was lower than those with lower cost, so these treatments got dominated (D). Dominated treatments were less profitable as compared to other treatments. Marginal rate of return (MRR) Marginal analysis was done to evaluate the marginal (extra) benefit on the expense of marginal cost. The un-dominated treatments were considered in marginal analysis (Table-6). Data showed that T0K1 (less input cost) gave the maximum (1347%) MRR and minimum value (655%) was recorded in T2K3. Although grain yield was more in T2K3 but due to high input cost it could not perform better in terms of marginal rate of return.

2

VOL. 11, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

ISSN 1990-6145

ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science ©2006-2016 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com Table-1. Economic analysis of wheat during 2009-10. Treatments

Grain yield kg/ha

Adjusted grain yield (kg/ha)*

Net grain yield (kg/ha)**

Seed grain value (Rs.)

Straw yield (kg/ha)

Adjusted straw yield (kg/ha)*

Straw yield value (Rs.)

Gross income/ha (Rs.)

T0K0 = 0% GB + 0 % K

3071.0

2763.9

2217.51

52665

4232.8

3809.52

7619

60284

T0K1= 0% GB + 0.5 % K

3404.2

3063.78

2487.40

59075

4733.0

4259.7

8519

67594

T0K2= 0% GB + 1 % K

3514.3

3162.87

2576.59

61180

5165.2

4648.68

9297

70477

T0K3 = 0% GB + 1.5 % K

3556.7

3201.03

2610.93

61987

5225.0

4702.5

9405

71392

T1K0= 50 mM GB + 0 % K

4096.0

3686.4

3047.76

72382

7296.5

6566.85

13132

85514

T1K1= 50 mM GB + 0.5 % K

4479.7

4031.73

3358.55

79764

7960.7

7164.63

14328

94092

T1K2 =50 mM GB + 1 % K

4705.5

4234.95

3541.45

84108

8160.8

7344.72

14688

98796

T1K3= 50 mM GB + 1.5 % K

4971.0

4473.9

3756.51

89216

9050.3

8145.27

16290

105506

T2K0= 100 mM GB + 0 % K

4209.5

3788.55

3139.69

74567

7526.7

6774.03

13548

88115

T2K1 =100 mM GB + 0.5 % K

4540.8

4086.72

3408.04

80940

8191.0

7371.9

14742

95682

T2K2= 100 mM GB + 1 % K

4758.5

4282.65

3584.38

85127

8335.3

7501.77

15002

100129

T2K3= 100 mM GB + 1.5 % K

5040.5

4536.45

3812.80

90554

9034.2

8130.78

16260

106814

T3K0 =150 mM GB + 0 % K

3930.8

3537.72

2913.94

69205

7094.5

6385.05

12770

81975

T3K1= 150 mM GB + 0.5 % K

4395.8

3956.22

3290.59

78151

7819.3

7037.37

14074

92225

T3K2= 150 mM GB + 1 % K

4721.2

4249.08

3554.17

84409

8522.3

7670.07

15340

99749

T3K3=150 mM GB + 1.5 % K

4869.7

4382.73

3674.45

87267

8974.8

8077.32

16154

103421

Adjusted straw yield (kg/ha)* 4443.03

Straw yield value (Rs.) 11107

Gross income/ha (Rs.) 56079

• * 10% adjustment in yield • ** Harvesting charges @ 300 kg ha-1 and Threshing charges @ 10% of grain yield Table-2. Economic analysis of wheat during 2010-11.

T0K0 = 0% GB + 0 % K

Grain yield kg/ha 2671.1

Adjusted grain yield (kg/ha)* 2403.99

Net grain yield (kg/ha)** 1893.59

T0K1= 0% GB + 0.5 % K

3596.2

3236.58

2642.92

62769

5539.2

4985.28

12463

75232

T0K2= 0% GB + 1 % K

4286.3

3857.67

3291.90

78182

5977.3

5379.57

13448

91630

Treatments

Seed grain value (Rs.) 44972

Straw yield (kg/ha) 4936.7

T0K3 = 0% GB + 1.5 % K

4472.0

4024.80

3352.32

79617

6282.5

5654.25

14135

93752

T1K0= 50 mM GB + 0 % K

4347.7

3912.93

3251.63

77226

5731.8

5158.62

12896

90122

T1K1= 50 mM GB + 0.5 % K

4684.7

4216.23

3534.60

83946

6983.8

6285.42

15713

99659

T1K2 =50 mM GB + 1 % K

5104.3

4593.87

3864.48

91781

7329.2

6596.28

16490

108271

T1K3= 50 mM GB + 1.5 % K

5386.8

4848.12

4093.30

97215

7559.0

6803.1

17007

114222

T2K0= 100 mM GB + 0 % K

4705.2

4234.68

3541.21

84103

7526.7

6774.03

16935

101038

T2K1 =100 mM GB + 0.5 % K

5121.8

4609.62

3878.65

92117

8154.5

7339.05

18347

110464

T2K2= 100 mM GB + 1 % K

5458.8

4912.92

4151.62

98600

8543.0

7688.7

19221

117821

T2K3= 100 mM GB + 1.5 % K

5784.0

5205.60

4415.04

104857

8403.2

7562.88

18907

123764

T3K0 =150 mM GB + 0 % K

4500.5

4050.45

3375.40

80165

7366.0

6629.4

16573

96738

T3K1= 150 mM GB + 0.5 % K

4876.7

4389.03

3680.12

87402

7804.0

7023.6

17559

104961

T3K2= 150 mM GB + 1 % K

5214.2

4692.78

3953.50

93895

8245.2

7420.68

18551

112446

T3K3=150 mM GB + 1.5 % K

5574.0

5016.60

4244.94

100817

8023.7

7221.33

18053

118870

• * 10% adjustment in yield • ** Harvesting charges @ 300 kg ha-1 and Threshing charges @ 10% of grain yield

3

VOL. 11, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

ISSN 1990-6145

ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science ©2006-2016 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com Table-3. Fixed cost (Rs.) ha-1 = 15328 (2009-10). Treatment combinations

(b) Cost that varied (Rs.) ha-1

(a+b) Total expenditure ha-1

T0K0 = 0% GB + 0 % K

-

15328

Net benefit (gross income – total expenditure) (Rs.) ha-1 44956

T0K1= 0% GB + 0.5 % K

914

16242

51352

T0K2= 0% GB + 1 % K

1828

17156

53321

T0K3 = 0% GB + 1.5 % K

2742

18070

53322

T1K0= 50 mM GB + 0 % K

8006

23334

62180

T1K1= 50 mM GB + 0.5 % K

8920

24248

69844

T1K2 =50 mM GB + 1 % K

9834

25162

73634

T1K3= 50 mM GB + 1.5 % K

10748

26076

79430

T2K0= 100 mM GB + 0 % K

16012

31340

56775

T2K1 =100 mM GB + 0.5 % K

16926

32254

63428

T2K2= 100 mM GB + 1 % K

17840

33168

66961

T2K3= 100 mM GB + 1.5 % K

18754

34082

72732

T3K0 =150 mM GB + 0 % K

24018

39346

42629

T3K1= 150 mM GB + 0.5 % K

24932

40260

51965

T3K2= 150 mM GB + 1 % K

25846

41174

58575

T3K3=150 mM GB + 1.5 % K

26760

42088

61333

Table-4. Fixed cost (Rs.) ha-1 = 16088 (2010-11). Treatment combinations T0K0 = 0% GB + 0 % K

(b) Cost that varied (Rs.) ha-1 -

(a+b) Total expenditure ha-1 16088

Net benefit (gross income total expenditure) (Rs.) ha-1 39991

T0K1= 0% GB + 0.5 % K

914

17002

58230

T0K2= 0% GB + 1 % K

1828

17916

73714

T0K3 = 0% GB + 1.5 % K

2742

18830

74922

T1K0= 50 mM GB + 0 % K

8006

24094

66028

T1K1= 50 mM GB + 0.5 % K

8920

25008

74651

T1K2 =50 mM GB + 1 % K

9834

25922

82349

T1K3= 50 mM GB + 1.5 % K

10748

26836

87386

T2K0= 100 mM GB + 0 % K

16012

32100

68938

T2K1 =100 mM GB + 0.5 % K

16926

33014

77450

T2K2= 100 mM GB + 1 % K

17840

33928

83893

T2K3= 100 mM GB + 1.5 % K

18754

34842

88922

T3K0 =150 mM GB + 0 % K

24018

40106

56632

T3K1= 150 mM GB + 0.5 % K

24932

41020

63941

T3K2= 150 mM GB + 1 % K

25846

41934

70512

T3K3=150 mM GB + 1.5 % K

26760

42848

76022

4

VOL. 11, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

ISSN 1990-6145

ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science ©2006-2016 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com Table-5. Dominance analysis of (two year average total variable cost and net field benefit) different treatment. Treatment combinations

Cost that varied (Rs.) ha-1

Net benefit (Rs.) ha-1

T0K0 = 0% GB + 0 % K

0

42473

T0K1= 0% GB + 0.5 % K

914

54791

T0K2= 0% GB + 1 % K

1828

63517

T0K3 = 0% GB + 1.5 % K

2742

64122

T1K0= 50 mM GB + 0 % K

8006

64104 D

T1K1= 50 mM GB + 0.5 % K

8920

72247

T1K2 =50 mM GB + 1 % K

9834

77991

T1K3= 50 mM GB + 1.5 % K

10748

83408

T2K0= 100 mM GB + 0 % K

16012

62856 D

T2K1 =100 mM GB + 0.5 % K

16926

70439

T2K2= 100 mM GB + 1 % K

17840

75427

T2K3= 100 mM GB + 1.5 % K

18754

80827

T3K0 =150 mM GB + 0 % K

24018

49630 D

T3K1= 150 mM GB + 0.5 % K

24932

57953

T3K2= 150 mM GB + 1 % K

25846

64543

T3K3=150 mM GB + 1.5 % K

26760

68677

Table-6. Effect of combined application of GB and K on marginal analysis of wheat (each value is average of two years data). Treatment combinations

Cost that varied (Rs.) ha-1

Marginal cost (Rs.) ha-1

Net benefit (Rs.) ha-1

Marginal net benefit (Rs.) ha-1

Marginal rate of return (%)

T0K0 = 0% GB + 0 % K

-

-

42473

-

-

T0K1= 0% GB + 0.5 % K

914

914

54791

12318

1347

T0K2= 0% GB + 1 % K

1828

1828

63517

21044

1151

T0K3= 0% GB +1.5 % K

2742

2742

64122

21649

789

T1K0= 50 mM GB + 0 % K

8006

-

64104

-

T1K1= 50 mM GB + 0.5 % K

8920

914

72247

8143

890

T1K2 =50 mM GB + 1 % K

9834

1828

77991

13887

759

T1K3= 50 mM GB + 1.5 % K

10748

2742

83408

19304

704

T2K0 =100 mM GB + 0 % K

16012

-

62856

T2K1 =100 mM GB + 0.5 % K

16926

914

70439

7583

829

T2K2= 100 mM GB + 1 % K

17840

1828

75427

12571

687

T2K3= 100 mM GB + 1.5 % K

18754

2742

80827

17971

655

T3K0= 150 mM GB + 0 % K

24018

-

49630

T3K1= 150 mM GB + 0.5 % K

24932

914

57953

8323

910

T3K2= 150 mM GB + 1 % K

25846

1828

64543

14913

815

T3K3=150 mM GB + 1.5 % K

26760

2742

68677

19047

694

5

VOL. 11, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

ISSN 1990-6145

ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science ©2006-2016 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com DISCUSSIONS Results revealed that water deficit stress significantly affected the yield of wheat crop. Drought affects yield by reducing stem and root growth, disturbing leaf photosynthesis, plant water relations, nutrient relations, dry matter partitioning and eventually yield (Farooq et al., 2008). Among the various osmoprotectants, glycinebetaine plays an important role in improving the stress tolerance in plants when applied either as foliar spray or as seed priming (Ashraf, 2010). Treatments in which glycinebetaine was applied under drought conditions, produced more yield than control treatment. Similar results were reported by Raza et al. (2014a) that foliar spray of GB improved the growth and yield of wheat grown under water deficit conditions. Foliar application of glycinebetaine significantly improves the yield of wheat grown under drought (Shahbaz et al., 2011). In present study foliar applied potassium also mitigated the harmful effects of drought. Damon and Rengel (2007) reported that foliar applied potassium minimized the detrimental effects. of drough. Combined application of glycinebetaine and potassium is more effective for improving the yield as compared the alone application of glycine betaine or potassium. Application of 100 mM GB + 1.5 % K produced 46.95% more grain yield as compared to T0K0 (0% GB + 0 % K); the findings already published by Raza et al. (2014b). Naidu et al. (1998) stated that foliar spray of glycine betaine increased the net benefit, with a marginal glycinebetaine cost of US$ 20–25/kg, the net benefit increased up to US$ 580/ha. More net benefit with glycinebetaine application is due to less increase in input cost and more increase in yield which ultimately enhances the net profit. Haile (2009) achieved highest net field benefit when potassium was added in combination with N and P as compared to only NP. Khan et al. (2006) also obtained more profit with foliar application of 0.5% K solution. Similar benefits have also been reported by Chapagain and Wiesman (2004). More net benefit with potassium application might be due to higher crop yield in response to potassium with less expense (Astatke et al., 2004). In present study T0K1 (0% GB + 0.5 % K) gave maximum (1347%) MRR It means that for the expense of 100 rupees, the investor not only gets back 100 rupees but also gets supplementary amount of 1347 rupees. As the input cost increases, value of MRR decreases except the control treatment. Hussain (2010) sprayed different doses of osmolyte (abscisic acid) on sunflower under drought conditions and observed maximum MRR in treatment with less input cost, although seed yield was more in treatments with high input cost. Similar results were reported by Haile (2009) who stated that value of MRR decreased from 347% to 197% when potassium was added in combination of N and P (input cost increased) as compared to only NP combination. CONCLUSIONS Although maximum MRR was obtained when wheat crop facing drought was foliar applied with only

0.5% K however, growers with high investment power can get considerably higher grain yield and maximum net field benefits by spraying it with 50-100 mM GB + 1.5% K in combination. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Financial support from Higher Education Commission Pakistan and farm facilities from NIAB (Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology) and University of Agriculture Faisalabad are thankfully acknowledged. REFERENCES Akram H. M., Sattar A., Ali A. and Nadeem M. A. 2010. Agro-physiological performance of wheat genotypes under moisture stress conditions. Journal of Agriculture Research. 48: 361-369. Aldesuquy H. S., Hamed S. A. A., Abbas M. A. and Elhakem A. H. 2012. Role of glycinebetaine and salicylic acid in improving growth vigour and physiological aspects of droughted wheat cultivars. Journal of Stress Physiology and Biochemistry. 8: 149-171. Ashraf M. 2010. Inducing drought tolerance in plants: some recent advances. Advances in Biotechnology. 28: 169-183. Astatke A., Mamo T., Peden D. and Diedhiou M. 2004. Participatory on-farm conservation tillage trial in Ethiopian highland vertisols: The impact of potassium application on crop yield. Experimental Agriculture. 40: 369-379. Cakmak I. and Engels C. 1999. Role of mineral nutrients in photosynthesis and yield formation. In: Rengel Z, editor. Mineral Nutrition of Crops: Mechanisms and Implications, New York: The Haworth Press. pp. 141-168. Chapagain B. P. and Wiesman Z. 2004. Effect of NutriVant-Peak foliar spray on plant development, yield, and fruit quality in greenhouse tomatoes. Horticulture sciences. 102: 177-188. Chaves M. M. and Oliveira M. M. 2004. Mechanisms underlying plant resilience to water deficits: prospects for water-saving agriculture. Journal of Experimental Botany. 55:365-384. CIMMYT. 1998. From agronomic data to farmer recommendations: An economics training manual. Completely revised edition. Mexico. Damon P. M. and Rengel Z. 2007. Wheat genotypes differ in potassium efficiency under glasshouse and field conditions. Australian Journal of Agriculture Research. 58: 816-823.

6

VOL. 11, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

ISSN 1990-6145

ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science ©2006-2016 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com Datta J. K., Nag S., Banerjee A. and Mondal N. K. 2009. Impact of salt stress on five varieties of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars under laboratory condition. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environment Management 13: 93-97. Evans K. M. and Riedell W. E. 2006. Response of spring wheat cultivars to nutrient solutions containing additional potassium chloride. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 29: 497504. Farooq M., Basra S. M. A., Wahid A., Cheema Z. A., Cheema M. A. and Khaliq A. 2008. Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L.). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Sciences. 194: 325–333. Haile W. 2009. On farm verification of potassium fertilizer effect on the yiled of irish potato grown on acidic soils of Hagere Selam, Southern Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Natural Resources 11: 207-221. Hou C. X., Yu X. J., Li R., Xu C. H., Tang Z. C. and Shen Y. G. 1998. The mechanism of stabilization of the oxygen evolving extrinsic polypeptides in PS II particles by glycine betaine. Sciences China. 28: 355-361. Hussain S. 2010.Enhancement of drought tolerance in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) by exogenous application of abscisic acid. Faculty of Agriculture, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan. John E. 2002. Candidate effector and regulator genes activated by glycine betaine in Arabidopsis. http://abstracts.aspb.org/pb2002/public/P63/0153. html. Jones C. A., Jacobesen J. S. and Wraith J. M. 2003. The effects of P fertilization on drought tolerance of Malt Barley. Western Nutrient Management Conference. Salt Lake City. 5: 88-93. Khan M. Z., Muhammad S., Naeem M. A., Akhtar E. and Khalid M. 2006. Response of some wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties to foliar application of N and K under rainfed conditions. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 38: 1027-1034. Ma Q. Q., Wei W., Yong-hua L., De-Quan L., and Zoa L. Q. 2006. Alleviation of photoinhibition in drought-stressed wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) by foliar applied glycinebetaine. Journal of Plant Physiology. 163: 165-175.

Monyo E. S., Ejeta G. and Rhodes D. 1992. Genotypic variation for glycinebetaine in sorghum and its relationship to agronomic and morphological traits. Media. 37: 283-286. Naidu B. P., Cameron D. F. and Konduri S. V. 1998. Improving drought tolerance of cotton by glycinebetaine application and selection. Proceedings of the 9th Australian agronomy conference, Wagga. Nasrullah M., Khan M. B., Ahmad R., Ahmad S., Hanif M. and Nazeer W. 2011. Sustainable cotton production and water economy through different planting methods and mulching techniques. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 43: 1971-1983. Rahman M., Soomro U. A., Zahoor-ul-Haq M. and Gul S. 2008. Effects of NaCl salinity on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars. World Journal of Agriculture Sciences. 4: 398-403. Raza H. S., Athar H. U. R. and Ashraf M. 2006. Influence of exogenously applied glycinebetaine on the photosynthetic capacity of two differently adapted wheat cultivars under salt stress. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 38: 241-251. Raza M. A. S., Saleem M. F., Jamil M. and Khan I. H. 2014a. Impact of foliar applied glycinebetaine on growth and physiology of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under drought conditions. Pakistan Journal of Agriculture Sciences. 51: 327-334. Raza M. A. S., Saleem M. F., Shah G. M., Khan I. H. and Raza A. 2014b. Exogenous application of glycinebetaine and potassium for improving water relations and grain yield of wheat under drought. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 14: 348-364. Raza M. A. S., Saleem M. F., Anjum S. A., Khaliq T. and Wahid M. A. 2012c. Foliar application of potassium under water deficit conditions improved the growth and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences. 22: 431-437. Raza M. A. S., Saleem M. F., Ashraf M. Y., Ali A, and Asghar H. N. 2012b. Glycinebetaine applied under drought improved the physiological efficiency of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Plant and Soil Environment. 31: 67-71.

Mehdi S. M., Ranjha A. M., Sarfraz M. and Hassan G. 2001. Response of wheat to potassium application in six soil series of Pakistan. Journal of Biological Sciences. 6: 429- 431.

Raza M. A. S., Saleem M. F., Khan I. H., Jamil M. and Ijaz M. A. 2012a. Evaluating the drought stress tolerance efficiency of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars. Russian Journal of Agriculture and Socio-Economic Sciences. 12: 41-46.

Mengel K., Kirkby E. A., Kosegarten H. and Appel T. 2001. Potassium. In: Principles of plant nutrition, Netherlands: Springer. pp. 481-511.

Raza M. A. S., Saleem M. F., Shah G. M., Jamil M. and Khan I. H. 2013. Potassium applied under drought improves physiological and nutrient uptake performances

7

VOL. 11, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

ISSN 1990-6145

ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science ©2006-2016 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 13: 175-185. Schahbazian N. and Iran-Nejad H. 2006. The effects of different mulch types and irrigation intervals on cotton yield. Die Bodenkultur. 57: 765-766. Shahbaz M., Masood Y., Perveen S. and Ashraf M. 2011. Is foliar-applied glycinebetaine effective in mitigating the adverse effects of drought stress on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)? Journal of Applied Botant and Food Quality. 84: 192-199.

Shirazi M. U., Asif S. M., Khanzada B., Khan M.A. and Mohammad A. 2001. Growth and ion accumulation in some wheat genotypes under NaCl stress. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences. 4: 388-391. Sinclair T. R. 2005. Theoretical analysis of soil and plant traits influencing daily plant water flux on drying soils. Journal of Agronomy. 97: 1148-1152. Sulpice R., Gibon Y., Bouchereau A. and Larher F. 1998. Exogenously supplied glycinebetaine in spinach and rapeseed leaf discs: compatibility or non-compatibility. Plant Cell Environment. 21: 1285-1292.

Sher F. and Ahmad E. 2008. Forecasting wheat production in Pakistan. Lahore Journal of Economics. 13: 57-85.

8