Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.
We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.
To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India:
CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd.
www.cbspd.com
|
customercare@cbspd.com
The abiotic stresses, such as drought, waterlogging, heat, cold, and salinity, cause significant crop yield losses associated with extremes of moisture and temperature and ion imbalance. The occurrence of these conditions is being aggravated by climate change, global warming, and industrial pollution. It is crucial to safeguard food security through a constant and sustainable crop production system under multiple abiotic stresses. The cultivation of climate-resilient varieties is one of the best strategies being followed across diverse agroecosystems in the world including India to mitigate the impact of abiotic stress on crop production. Indian agricultural institutional network under the umbrella of the National Agriculture Research System developed a good number of abiotic stress-tolerant varieties across the field and horticultural crops. However, only a few crops’ varieties’ introgression with SUB1 gene and salinity tolerant QTLs are being cultivated largely in the areas prone to submergence and salinity stress, respectively. In this book chapter, we have updated the status of abiotic stress tolerance crop varieties (ASTCVs) along with stress-wise trend analysis to disseminate information among farmers, students, scientists, and policymakers involved in abiotic stress management. Finally, we also discussed the strategies to reorient the breeding program to develop climate-smart varieties with multiple biotic and abiotic stress tolerance.
ICAR-National Institute of Abiotic Stress Management, Baramati, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Basavaraj P.S.
ICAR-National Institute of Abiotic Stress Management, Baramati, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Vijaysinha D. Kakade
ICAR-National Institute of Abiotic Stress Management, Baramati, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Harisha C.B.
ICAR-National Institute of Abiotic Stress Management, Baramati, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Pratapsingh Khapte
ICAR-National Institute of Abiotic Stress Management, Baramati, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Halagundegowda G.R.
Central Silk Board, Bengaluru, India
Krishnamurthy D.
Tieerra Seed Science Pvt. Ltd. Hyderabad, India
Neeraj Kulshreshtha
ICAR- Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, India
Vijayakumar H.P.
ICAR-Indian Institute of Agriculture Research, New Delhi, India
Bhojaraj Naik
ICAR-Indian Institute of Seed Science, Regional Station, Bengaluru, India
Jagadish Rane Sammi Reddy K.
ICAR-National Institute of Abiotic Stress Management, Baramati, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Himanshu Pathak
Department of Agriculture Research and Education (DARE), Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR), New Delhi, India
*Address all correspondence to: bors_km@yahoo.co.in
1. Introduction
Agriculture is a livelihood for about 60% of India’s population, and it is significantly contributing to the national economy. It has been proved even during covid pandemic situation. Although other sectors of the economy dominating in the gross domestic product (GDP) with faster growth rates and agriculture contribution reduced to less than 20%, agricultural production has enhanced substantially. With the advent of new innovations and technologies in agriculture since after independence, India translated from the begging bowl to being self-sufficient in food production, and even emerged as a net exporter of agriculture and allied products. The food grain production increased over six times to over 314 Mt. in 2022 from 51 million tonns (Mt) in 1950–1951 [1]. On the other hand, increase in the demand for quantity, quality, and nutritious and diverse food due to the increasing population, average income, and awareness on health and globalization. Fulfilling this demand is a serious challenge as the nation often witnesses frequent droughts, floods, heat, and cold waves, as well as incidences of pest and disease epidemics resulting in losses in agricultural productivity [2, 3, 4]. Further, arable soils become saline, sodic, and acidic as a consequence of frequent floods, high temperatures, indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers, and also due to the use of polluted or sewage water for irrigation. These conditions are further worsened due to changing climate, which poses a serious threat to food security in the future. Although the negative impacts of climate change-driven abiotic stresses are global, countries such as India are more vulnerable in view of the greater proportion of its population depending on rainfed-based agriculture with limited natural resources.
In this book chapter, we have briefly discussed the impact of abiotic stresses on crop husbandry and enlisted percent yield losses that occurred in different crops due to drought as a shred of evidence. Further, mentioned the different management strategies to cope up with the abiotic stresses and discussed about climate-resilient varieties developed by associate institutes of the National Agricultural Research System (NARS) for different abiotic stresses with a brief trend analysis and status on varietal development for different abiotic stress tolerance and their adoption with citing success stories. Finally, discussed strategies to upscale from the development of climate-resilient varieties to climate-smart crop varieties as a way forward.
Abiotic stresses affect agricultural production and its productivity and cause losses up to 50% of overall agricultural production depending on their intensity. The loss in crop production alone is projected 10–40% in India by 2080–2100 unless we adapt and mitigate global warming (IPCC 2007). For instance, a rise in temperature by 1.5°C and a reduction in the precipitation of 2 mm can reduce the yield of rice by 3 to 15% [5]. Similarly, the loss in wheat production in Indo-Gangetic plains would be 4 to 5 million tonnes with 1°C rise in temperature [6]. The National Institute of Abiotic Stress Management located in Pune Maharashtra compiled information on the impact of different abiotic stresses on agricultural crops along with management strategies to prevent yield loss [1, 7]. The prevalence of high temperatures and often unforeseen hailstorm events coupled with unseasonal heavy rainfall in the central and southern parts of the country were increasing in recent years. These events cause sunburn and fruit cracking in fruit crops particularly berries and other temperate fruit crops [8, 9]. Similarly, extreme temperature and moisture coupled with high or low relative humidity adversely affect productivity and quality beside aggravating the pest and diseases on vegetable crops.
3. Strategies for coping with abiotic stresses in Indian agriculture
Abiotic stresses together with biotic stresses are threatening crop production and consequently food and nutritional security. Further, the situation is likely to worsen with projected climate change. For combating the effects and impact of the resultant abiotic stressors, various approaches can be employed by adopting advanced science and policy initiatives including government schemes such as Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY) to save water and expand irrigation facilities and Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana to provide insurance against crop loss due to unforeseen extreme natural phenomena. Improved agricultural practices such as water-saving technologies such as in situ and ex situ moisture conservation, water harvesting for supplemental irrigation, residue incorporation, developing and adopting/cultivating tolerant crop varieties, conservation agriculture, site-specific nutrient management practices, etc. are some of the strategies to cope up with abiotic stresses. Adoption and cultivation of varieties with tolerance to the deficit and excess moisture, heat, cold, and salinity in vulnerable agroecosystems play a crucial role. This relies on the development, popularization, and availability of abiotic stress-tolerant crop varieties (ASTCVs) to farming communities.
Plant science experts of the Indian NARS including various institutes of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) are making concerted efforts over the years for developing improved varieties with enhanced tolerance to different abiotic stresses. Some of these climate-resilient crop varieties are being cultivated by farming communities in different parts of the country in the event of extreme weather situations to mitigate the adverse impact of abiotic stresses on crop production. The adoption and cultivation of such varieties by the farming community across the world including India contributed to sustainable food security even under changing climate scenarios [10, 11, 12, 13]. However, the lack of information on abiotic stress-tolerant crop varieties in one place is a prime limiting factor for awareness, adoption, and cultivation of such varieties on a large scale. Only a few organizations working on abiotic stresses including ICAR-NIASM and ICAR-CRIDA attempted to gather such data for documenting and disseminating the information on abiotic stress-tolerant crop varieties [14]. In this book chapter, we updated the comprehensive information on abiotic stress-tolerant crop varieties along with a brief and critical analysis of stress-wise trends in the number of ASTCVs and also cited some success stories of the adoption of climate-resilient varieties. Further, we also discussed the strategies to develop and assess climate-smart crops for mitigating the adverse effects of climate change on crop production.
4. Climate-resilient varieties for abiotic stresses
Enhanced and sustainable crop production is key to stabilizing and doubling the farmer’s income by minimizing the risk of prevailing abiotic stresses in agriculture in order to retain the farming community in the agriculture sector and improve their livelihoods. This also ensures food and nutritional security even under abiotic stress situations driven by aberrant weather conditions. Many policymakers and experts worldwide from the public and private sectors have suggested that the development and identification of climate-resilient varieties with enhanced tolerance to different abiotic stresses are crucial to sustaining and improving crop yields under changing climate scenarios. In this regard, the Indian National Agricultural Research System (NARS) including various ICAR institutes and State Agricultural Universities are making concerted efforts over the years for developing climate-resilient varieties of different crops with enhanced tolerance to different abiotic stresses. For instance, ICAR-NRRI, Cuttack, Odisha developed and released rice varieties tolerant to submergence and flooding, and high-temperature conditions. Similarly, ICAR-CSSRI, Karnal developed salinity-tolerant varieties in rice, wheat, mustards, etc. Beside, the intervention of the private campiness through R&D in the identification of genetic resources and development of varieties and hybrids particularly in vegetable crops gained momentum in the past decade.
The data on ASTCVs developed by NARS and their relevant information collected from diverse sources such as agricultural public institutional (ICAR and SAUs) publications, websites, seed portals, research and review papers, and documents from national and state government was scrutinized, compiled, and used for trend analysis. It was found that about 750 crop varieties (Figure 1A) were reported to be tolerant for different abiotic stresses such as drought (65%), flood/waterlogging (5%), high temperature (17%), low temperature (5%), and salinity/acidity (8%). It indicates drought followed by heat stress is more prevalent and frequently affects the agri-based food production system though other stresses affect often it. Further, data also gave insights into crop-wise abiotic stress-tolerant varieties. More number varieties belong to field crops including cereals, pulses, and oilseeds indicating the importance of crops and crop priority in the abiotic stress resistance breeding program. Trends on stress-wise tolerant crop varieties are discussed in the next section along with traits/mechanisms explored in abiotic stress tolerance breeding program and cited some of the successful examples.
Figure 1.
Proportion of agricultural crop varieties tolerant to different abiotic stresses (A) and crop group wise distribution of drought tolerant varieties (B).
4.1 Drought-tolerant crop varieties
Drought is one of the serious threats to crop production in most parts of India, particularly in arid and semiarid regions. Water deficit affects the number of plant growth and developmental process. In turn, plants have different responses at morphological, biochemical, and physiological levels to deficit moisture conditions to adapt and survive. A number of adaptive traits have been studied and used for the improvement of drought tolerance such as early vigor, early flowering, osmotic adjustment, leaf senescence, stay green, etc. Plant breeders of several institutes across the world including ICAR and state agricultural universities in India explored the traits associated with early flowering, better root architecture, and efficient photosynthesis [7] to develop drought-tolerant varieties.
In India, among the reported ASTCVs, more than 65% of crop varieties are drought tolerant. Among drought-tolerant varieties, more number varieties belong to field crops (Figure 1B) including cereals (23%), pulses (18%), and oilseeds (35%) indicating the scope and priority for the drought resistance breeding program. The varieties of rice, wheat, sorghum, and pearl millet are shared a major proportion of drought-tolerant cereal crops. Though this may not be representing the holistic crop component since millets, which are naturally and inherently multiple stress tolerant, including drought were not covered due lack of reliable information. However, this trend definitely indicates some realistic trend of major and staple food crops and their importance in drought tolerance breeding. A similar trend has been observed in pulses also where major pulse crops such as pigeon pea and chickpea dominate among drought-tolerant pulse crop varieties. Whereas, among the oilseeds though most of them cultivated in rainfed condition except hybrid-based sunflower and mustard, reported a greater number of drought-tolerant varieties in groundnut. This is mainly due to the large cultivated area of groundnut frequently witnessing the drought at critical growth stages beside its unique reproductive stages, such as peg development and penetration, were sensitive to deficit moisture. This indicates potential scope for the development of drought-tolerant varieties in groundnut with special emphasis on maximizing pod-peg and mature-immature pod ratio. Beside field crops, there are number of fruits and vegetable crops reported tolerant to drought (Table 1).
There are several pieces of evidence on successful breeding efforts in the development of drought-tolerant varieties [15, 16] and subsequently, case studies reported the impacts of such varieties [17] in reducing the risk of drought and sustaining the livelihood of farmers. Further, under the NICRA project, it was demonstrated that short duration and drought-tolerant rice varieties such as Sahbhagi dhan, Anjali, Naveen, Birsa Vikas Dhan 109′ (85 days duration), and ‘Abhishek’ withstand up to 2 weeks of exposure to dry spells in northern and eastern states. Such varieties are the best choice for drought-proofing in rainfed rice cultivation as they provide a significant yield advantage in drought years over the traditional long-duration varieties. Similarly, in groundnut, several varieties including some recently released varieties, such as Dharani, Co7, Ajeya, Vijetha, DH-257, Dh 256, and Kadiri Lepakshi, were reported as drought tolerant (Table 1) and a few of them particularly, Kadiri Lepakshi gaining wide popularity due to its high yielding and resistance to pest and diseases. However, farmers are being reported problems of irregular maturity and immature pods with poor quality kernels in rainfed areas, which most of the time witness drought situations due to the gambling of monsoon winds. Hence, it is essential to consider the quality and other traits during the abiotic resistance breeding program.
4.2 Waterlogging or submergence-tolerant crop varieties
In recent years, Indian agriculture witnessing frequent occurrences of waterlogging conditions due to increasing events of heavy rainfall. For instance, currently, about 20 million hectares of the world’s rice-growing area are at risk of occasionally being flooded to submergence level, particularly in major rice-producing countries such as India and Bangladesh. Waterlogging conditions affect plant growth and physiological process and ultimately leading to yield loss. Except for sorghum, most of the field crops are sensitive to waterlogging conditions, and thus it is very crucial to mitigate the effects of waterlogging on crops to sustain food production. Hence, there is tremendous scope for the development of varieties tolerant to excess moisture conditions and which necessities basic research. An extensive basic study at the physiological and molecular level unraveled the traits (aerenchyma and adventitious roots), and mechanisms (formation of a barrier against radial oxygen loss, regulation of ethylene and gibberellic acid, and economizing carbohydrate reserve) associated with submergence tolerance in rice [18].
The most striking progress was the discovery of the SUBMERGENCE 1 (SUB1) locus from landrace FR13A and its deployment into popular rice varieties. Consequently, the development of new versions of submergence tolerant and high-yielding popular, and mega rice varieties was witnessed across the world including India [19, 20]. Central Rice Research Institute (ICAR-CRRI), Cuttack and Indian Institute of Rice Research Institute (ICAR-IRRI), Hyderabad in collaboration with international and national institutes developed and released more than 20 submergence-tolerant rice varieties (Table 2). Some of them were popularized and subsequently adopted by farmers. The success of the new version of mega varieties was mainly attributed to additional yield and income advantage due to their biotic stress resistant and retention of their original grain quality besides 2-week protection from submergence tolerance [21].
Crop varieties tolerant submergence and waterlogging.
4.3 Heat-tolerant crop varieties
High temperature due to global warming is negatively affecting crop production across the world. High temperatures affect plant growth at various phenological stages, limit biomass production, and mainly reduce the reproductive period to curtail flower and fruit numbers, thus resulting in severe yield losses. Wheat, one of the global staple food crops, was witnessing severe yield loss in Australia and Pakistan followed by India and China due to heat stress [22] indicating the alarming situation in these countries. This was evident from estimated yield loss [23] and the sliding down of wheat production in India during 2021–2022 due to terminal heat stress. Further, summer crops, such as pulses, coarse cereals, oilseeds, vegetables, and fruits, have also witnessed the heatwaves across northern and western parts of the country.
The adverse effects of heat stress can be mitigated by developing thermotolerant crop varieties through genetic improvement, which demands understanding the mechanisms and traits associated with heat tolerance [24]. Extensive molecular studies and continuous screening efforts in wheat led the identification of QTLs/traits associated with heat tolerance [25, 26] and heat-tolerant genetic resources [27, 28]. Promising wheat varieties such as Parbhani-51 (PBN-51) and Lok-1 designated as heat-tolerant genotypes, are being used in the breeding program beside farmers still cultivating in central India. This shows inherent thermotolerance in old and local varieties and it is supported by information provided in Table 3. Recently, number of varieties/hybrids of diverse crops viz., wheat (HD 3293, CG 1029, DBW 221, and SHIATS W-13), maize (RCRMH 2), rice (NLR 40024 and Kau Pournami), and mustard (Radhika, Brijraj, and Azad Mahak) tolerant heat stress were released for cultivation in India [29] indicating the scope for heat tolerance breeding. Further, high temperature affects fruit and vegetable crops severely in terms of yield and quality. Thus, efforts are being made by ICAR institutes and other SAUs in developing heat-tolerant varieties in fruits and vegetable crops.
Sl. No.
Varieties
Year
Organizations/Institute
Rice
1.
DRR Dhan 47 & 52
2019
ICAR-IIRR, Hyderabad
Wheat
2.
Lok-1
1981
Lokbharati Foundation
3.
Ajantha
1983
CoA, Badnapur
4.
HD 2402
1988
IARI, New Delhi
5.
K9465 and HD 2160
1998
CSAUA&T, Kanpur
6.
HW 2045
2002
IARI, New Delhi
7.
Pusa gold
2003
8.
RAJ 3765
2006
RARI, Durgapura
9.
DWR17
2007
ICAR-IIWBR, Karnal
10.
K 0307
2007
CSAUA&T, Kanpur
11.
WH 1124
2014
ICAR-IIWBR, Karnal
12.
DBW 107
2015
13.
DBW 173
2018
14.
HI 1634 (Pusa Ahilya)
2021
ICAR-IARI, Regional Station, Indore
Maize
15.
Suwan
-
BAU, Sabour
16.
PMH-7
-
PAU,Ludhaiana
17.
RCRMH2
2016
UAS, Raichur
Pearl millet
18.
GHB-558,538, 732
-
JAU, Jamnagar
Pigeonpea
19.
Bahar
1986
RAU, Pusa
20.
UPAS-120
1976
GBPUA&T, Pantanagar
Chickpea
21.
Indira Chana
-
IGKV, Raipur
22.
JG-315
1984
JNKV, Jabalpur
23.
Pant G 186
1996
GBPUAT, Pantanagar
24.
JG-11
1999
JNKV, Jabalpur
25.
JG -6, JAKI 9218
2006
26.
JG-14
2009
Moth bean
27.
RMO-40
1994
ICAR-CAZRI, Jodhpur
28.
RMO-225, CAZRI Moth-1
1999
Lentil
29.
Kota Masoor 3
2020
AU, Kota
Groundnut
30.
Kadiri-3
1978
APAU, Kadiri
31.
Phulepragati (JL-24)
1978
MPKV, Jalgaon
32.
ICGS-44 , 76
1988
ICRISAT, Hyderabad
33.
ICGV-86031
1991
34.
TG-22
1992
BARC, Mumbai
35.
Ambar (CSMG-84-1)
1992
CSAUA&T, Mainpuri
36.
Vemana (K-134)
1995
APAU, Kadiri
37.
Kadiri-6 (K-1240)
2005
ANGRAU, Kadiri
Soybean
38.
JS-335
1994
JNKVV, Jabalpur
Sunflower
39.
DRSF-113
2007
ICAR-IIOR, Hyderabad
40.
PSFH-118
2002
PAU, Ludhiana.
41.
Jawahar-552 (R-552)
1980
IGKV, Jabalpur
42.
Deepika (RLC-78)
2006
43.
Indira Alsi-32 (RLC-81)
2005
KGKV, Raipur
Linseeds
44.
RLC 92 (IC 555926)
2008
IGKV, Jabalpur
Sesame
45.
CUMS-17 (Suprava)
2018
IAS, University of Calcutta
Rape seed and mustard
46.
NRCDR-02
2007
ICAR-DRMR, Bharatpur
47.
Pusa Mustard 22 & Vijay
2008
IARI, New Delhi
48.
Pusa Tarak
2009
49.
Pusa mustard 25 (NPJ 112)
2010
50.
NRCDR 601 (DMR 601)
2010
DRMR, Bharatpur
51.
RGN 229 and RGN 236
2011
RAU,ARS, Sriganganagar
52.
Pusa Mustard 27(EJ 17)
2011
IARI, Regional Station, Karnal
53.
Pusa Mustard 26 & 28
2012
IARI, Karnal
54.
Pant Rai-19 (PR-2006-1)
2012
GBPAUT, Pantanagar
55.
Divya-33
2013
M.R. Seeds Pvt. Ltd.
56.
Pusa mustard 29 & 30
2013
IARI, New Delhi
57.
RH 0406
2013
CCSHAU, Hissar,
58.
Pro 5222 Bayer Mustard
2019
Bayer BioScience Pvt. Ltd.
59.
Vasundhara
CCS HAU, HISSAR
Vegetable crops
Bottle gourd
60.
Thar Samridhi
CIAH, Bikaner
61.
Pusa Santushti
2005
IARI, New Delhi
Brinjal
62.
Kashi Sandesh,
2004
IIVR, Varanasi
63.
Kashi Taru
2005
64.
Thar Rachit
CIAH, Bikaner
Chilli
65.
Kashi Abha
2019
IIVR, Varanasi
Cucumber
66.
PusaBarkha
2012
IARI, New Delhi
Okra
67.
KashiPragati
2004
IIVR, Varanasi
68.
KashiKranti
2012
Potato
69.
Kufri Surya Surya
-
CPRI, Shimla
70.
Kufri Lauvkar
-
Radish
71.
Pusa Chetaki
1988
IARI, New Delhi
72.
Kashi Mooli-40
2019
IIVR, Varanasi
Ridge gourd
73.
Thar Karni
-
CIAH, Bikaner
74.
Pusa Sneha
2004
IARI, New Delhi
75.
Thar Tapish
2018
CIAH, Bikaner
Tomato
76.
Pusa Sadabahar
2004
IARI, New Delhi
77.
Arka Meghali
2006
IIHR, Bengaluru
78.
Varkha Bahar-1 & 2
2009
PAU, Punjab
79.
Arka Vikas
-
IIHR, Bengaluru
Water melon
80.
Thar Manak
2016
CIAH, Bikaner
Table 3.
Crop varieties tolerant to high temperature.
4.4 Cold/frost-tolerant crop varieties
Like heat waves, the occurrence of cold waves is being experienced in the recent past, particularly in northern and western parts of the country, and consideration of cold waves depends on the prevalence of normal temperature in particular regions [14]. Rice and maize, which are staple food crops of India, are highly sensitive to low temperatures as the vegetative and reproductive growth stages are severely affected when temperatures fall below 10°C. Crops that are native to warm environments, exhibit symptoms of injury, reduction of leaf expansion, wilting, chlorosis, and necrosis when subjected to low nonfreezing temperatures. Whereas, severe low temperature for longer periods during pollination or fertilization and seed maturation affect the seed quality and extend harvesting time in agricultural crops besides yield losses. The yield loss due to low temperature depends on the crop stage and severity of stress. For instance, yield loss in sensitive crops such as maize was around 8–10% if low temperature (8–10°C) prevails at the germination stage, where yield penalty was more (60–75%) if the crop was exposed to low temperature (8–10°C) during grain filling stage [30].
Unraveling the crop and even stage-specific cold tolerance mechanisms and traits/genes is very essential for breeding crop varieties tolerant to low temperature [31, 32]. Identification and exploitation of traits/genes associated with cold tolerance helped in developing crop varieties tolerant to low temperature and some of them are listed in Table 4. The increasing trend of cold-tolerant varieties in rice, wheat, mustard, and other forage and vegetable crops indicates the increasing incidence of the negative effect of low temperature on crop yield and quality irrespective of growing seasons and crop habitat. Thus, the identification of genetic stocks or germplasm, genes or QTLs, and other molecules including nucleotide sequences and proteins associated with cold tolerance and their utilization in the development of cold-tolerant varieties is very crucial. Similar to heat-tolerant varieties, most of the reported genotypes tolerant to low temperature are old and local varieties Table 4.
Sl. No.
Varieties
Year
Organizations/Institute
Rice
1.
Kalinga 1
1973
ICAR-NRRI, Cuttack
2.
Tellahamsa
1975
ANGRAU, Hyderabad
3.
Pant Dhan 11
1993
GBPUAT, Pantanagar
4.
Varun Dhan
2008
CSKHPKV, Palampur
5.
Gizza-14, K-39, 343 & 448
-
SKUA&T, Jammu
6.
NE Megha Rice 1 & 2
-
ICAR Barapani
Wheat
7.
Buland
PAU, Ludhiana
8.
Mansarovar
1999
SKUAST, Srinagar
9.
Shalimar wheat-1
2005
10.
RSP 561
2015
Pearl millet
11.
GHB-538
2005
JAU, Jamnagar
Pigeonpea
12.
Bahar
1986
RAU, Pusa
Chickpea
13.
PDG 4
2003
GBPUAT, Pantanagar
Rape seed and mustard
14.
RH-9801 (SWARNA)
2003
CCS HAU, HISSAR
15.
RGN-48, 73
2007
RAU, ARS, Sriganganagar.
Buffalo grass
16.
Bundel Anjan-1
1989
IGFRI, Jhansi
Dhaman
17.
Bundel Dinanath-2
1989
IGFRI, Jhansi
Rye grass
18.
Pb. Ryegrass No.1
1991
PAU, Ludhiana
Setaria grass
19.
PSS-1, Nandi
1983
CSK HPKVV, Palampur
20.
Setaria-92
2005
21.
S-18
2013
ICAR-IGFRI, Jhansi
22.
Him Palam Setaria - 2 (S -25)
2020
CSK HPKVV, Palampur
Bottle gourd
23.
Pusa Santushti
2005
IARI, New Delhi
Carrot
24.
Ooty-1
1997
TNAU, Coimbatore
25.
PusaYamdagni
1986
IARI, New Delhi
Knol-khol
26.
Pusa Sheetal
1987
IARI, New Delhi
27.
Pusa Nayanjyoti & Pusa Virat
2009
Tomato
28.
Pusa Sadabahar
2004
IARI, New Delhi
Table 4.
Crop varieties tolerant to low temperature (cold/frost).
4.5 Salt-tolerant crop varieties
Salt stress particularly, salinity is becoming a major threat to crop production in arid and semiarid regions of the country where deficit moisture is a common scenario and also in the irrigated agricultural lands with inadequate drainage. The intrusion of seawater in the coastal area is another foremost root cause for the increase in salinity. Sodicity in clay soils is a consequence of salinity, where leftover over-soluble salts are leached into the subsoil and sodium is left bound to the negative charges of the clay [33]. Sodic soils are more common in the pockets of the arid and semiarid regions of western and central India and peninsular tracts in southern India beside patches of Indo-Gangetic plains. On the other hand, acid soils are problematic soils formed by human activities, such as construction and mining and highly acidic soils naturally prevailed in the Himalayan ecosystem, red, and lateritic regions of India [34]. Increased salinization and sodicity and acidity of arable lands are expected to have devastating effects on agricultural production as these soil conditions cause hyper-ionic and hyperosmotic stresses in plants and affect normal growth and developmental process [35]. Whereas, acid soils affect plant growth indirectly through the dissolution of harmful elements and causing nutrient deficiency besides directly affecting the plant metabolic process due to an imbalance in pH [36]. Though data on crop yield loss associated with the type of salt-affected soils may not be available it is evident from the available literature that there was significant yield loss of up to 34 and 69% in major staple crops such as maize due to salinity and acidity, respectively [30, 37].
To cope with the effects of salt stress, the development stress-tolerant crop varieties is an eco-friendly and economically viable option, particularly in the regions where the above-mentioned problematic soils spread across a large area and are difficult to reclaim with limited available resources. Breeding varieties tolerant to specific problematic soils pose a great challenge for plant breeders, which necessitates unraveling the mechanisms and traits/genes associated with salinity, sodicity, and acidity tolerance [37, 38]. A number of mapping studies have been attempted to identify candidate genes or QTLs for salinity tolerance in different crops including rice [39, 40, 41, 42, 43], wheat [44], and chickpeas [45]. However, limited progress has been made in the development of salt-tolerant cultivars. As a premier institute of ICAR, CSSRI, Karnal working in the area of crop improvement for problematic soils has developed and released varieties in rice (13), wheat (5), mustard (5), and chickpea (1) for saline and acid soils (Table 5). For instance, several rice breeding lines were developed through marker-assisted breeding by transferring Saltol and qSSISFHS8.1 QTLs in the genetic background of Indian mega rice varieties viz., Pusa44, Sarjoo52, and PR114 [46].
In fruit crops, there is scope for the identification of rootstocks tolerant to salinity as these crops also witness the effects of salt stress on yield and quality under the scenario of accelerated climate change. Several rootstocks in different fruit crops were identified across the world [47, 48], and some of them were collected and maintained by NARS institutes (Table 6).
Sl. No.
Crop
Genotypes/varieties/lines/genetic stocks
Stress
1.
Apple
M4,7,26,104,106, 111 Malus baccata, M. toringoides, M. sieversii
Drought
G 11, 30, 41, 935, B 9, P 2, M7, 26, 106,
Cold
2.
Apricot
Prunus armeniaca ‘Suka’ wild type
Cold
P. armeniaca ‘Sahara’ wild type
Heat
Line FA-3-6, Pollizo prune
Waterlogging
3.
Avocado
West Indian race
Salinity
4.
Blue berry
V. corymbosum x V. angustifolium
Cold
V. darrowi, V. amoenum, V. arboretum, V. elliottii, V. myrsinites
5. Reorientation of breeding strategies to develop climate-smart varieties: A way forward
Most of the ASTCVs enlisted and discussed in the previous section were developed through conventional breeding approaches by exploiting heritable, adaptive phenological traits such as early flowering/maturity, root traits, and other morphological traits. Except a few salinity-tolerant crop varieties and submergence-tolerant rice varieties, several of ASTCVs are not being cultivated by farmers on a large scale. This is mainly due to a lack of awareness and availability of quality seeds of such varieties. Further, the poor and variable genetic potential of varieties was another major limitation, resulting in poor quality and performance in comparison to other high-yielding varieties (HYVs) under normal conditions besides being susceptible to pests and diseases. Therefore, it is very essential to develop climate-smart varieties with higher genetic gain in terms of yield and quality and should perform irrespective of any stress/es or nonstress condition. However, breeding, such varieties, is a very big challenge since abiotic stress tolerance is a complex trait and is controlled by several genes/quantitative trait loci (QTLs). With novel discoveries and the faster development of many new techniques and tools, great progress has been made in the last decade in delivering scientific leads for understanding the abiotic stress tolerance mechanisms in plants. However, such advanced tools and techniques failed to translate novel findings into deliverable and significant outputs in the form climate-smart varieties. It is very crucial to adopt new tools in the right way and reorient the breeding strategies to gear up a genetic gain of crop plants to breed climate smart with multiple stress-tolerant varieties.
5.1 Genomic interventions
The current understanding of abiotic tolerance in crop plants reveals the general role of some regulatory factors of gene expression involved in stress tolerance mechanisms. Further, in the last two decades identified the common QTLs/genes/traits involved in multiple stress tolerance through extensive and interdisciplinary molecular studies. Identification and characterization of these factors by exploiting the new and advanced molecular tools will not only deliver the scientific leads to the understanding complex mechanism of abiotic stress tolerance. Subsequently, it helps to develop stable and climate-smart crop varieties through integrated molecular-conventional breeding approaches. For instance, several QTLs associated with drought tolerance have been identified and exploited in breeding program in chickpea [49], groundnut [50], maize [30], etc. Further, forward genetics tools including fine mapping, map-based cloning, TILLING, and eco-TILLING are being exploited to unravel the candidate genes controlling the stress tolerance and their functions at the genome level. In addition, together with microarray technology affordable sequencing tools enables decoding the sequences of coding regions of the genome regulating the stress tolerance even at tissues specific level. The new and cutting-edge molecular techniques, such as RNAi, CRISPR/CAS, or DNA-free genome editing (DFFE), are more precise and reduce the risk of off-targets, which is commonly encountered in the transgenic approach.
The metadata information from advanced ‘genomic’ tools provides insight for the identification of ‘hot spots’ or ‘genomic regions’ controlling the stress tolerance mechanisms. In addition, unraveling the expression networks of stress-responsive, defense signaling, and expression genes encoding for proteins and enzymes involved in cellular-level defense mechanisms, which ultimately results in tolerance at the phenotypic level. The exploration of such insights in the integrated and physiological-based breeding program accelerates genetic gains in abiotic stress resistance breeding. However, the identification of candidate genes/QTLs or network or regulatory genes governing the abiotic tolerance remains as a great challenge due to the large number of genes influencing the targeted traits. Hence, an extensive and continuous investigation into the basis of tolerance in model crops or arid and semiarid crops, xerophytes, and halophytes will undoubtedly provide a clearer insight into the genes/traits associated with different abiotic stress tolerance mechanisms.
5.2 Phenomic interventions
Dissecting and quantifying the effects of genotypes (G), phenotype (P), and environment (E) components and subsequent utilization of comprehensive information is key for unlocking the complex genetics mechanism of trait/s. This approach holds good for biotic and abiotic stress tolerance mechanisms in crops. Even after dissecting the genotype of plants using modern and advanced tools, which are discussed in the above section, understanding a clear picture of phenotype is very crucial and it stands foremost among all the three components. Hence, since last decade crop phenotyping communities across the world being witnessed the use of reliable, automatic, multifunctional, and high-throughput phenotyping technologies for phenotyping and subsequent rapid advancement of genetic gain in breeding programs. In this context, the plant phenotyping experts not only designing the multi-domain, multi-level, and multi-scale crop phenotyping models [51] to generate a big database but also continuously making efforts to standardize precise protocols for the identification of phenotypic traits [52] and develop bioinformatics tools for mining information from the exhaustive omics data [53].
5.3 Integrating omics tools with conventional and molecular breeding
Understanding the genetic, molecular, and physiological complex mechanisms of abiotic stress tolerance, which are interconnected through biochemical or gene networks by integrating different omics (genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics) with bioinformatics tools is very crucial for developing climate-smart varieties. In this context, phenomics and modeling communities together with plant scientists can exchange interdisciplinary knowledge through a common platform and multi-omics data, through intelligent data-mining analysis [54], which offers a powerful tool to unravel the physio-morphological responses upon multiple stresses [55] and tolerance mechanisms thereof much needed for the development of climate-smart varieties. Thus, simplifying the complexity of biological processes by dissecting genetics or molecular action (including pleiotropy, epigenetics if any) of the QTLs/genes or biomolecules associated with abiotic stress tolerance is a basic necessity for climate-smart breeding. This provides a holistic understanding of heritability, expression, and penetrance of traits or genes controlling stress tolerance. Further, phenotyping the candidate trait/gene or its surrogated traits through high-throughput phenotyping tools and quantitative genetic models enables to confirm the expression of traits/genes by measuring trait values at the phenotypic level in a large number of diverse germplasm or mapping population. Finally, the genetic enhancement of various crops can be carried out through the transfer of stable and candidate traits/QTLs/genes using different approaches such as marker-assisted selection (MAS), marker-assisted recurrent selection (MARS), genome-wide selection (GWS), and genetic engineering/transgenics.
In view of the remarkable progress in ‘omics’ areas in recent years, the integration of biotechnological approaches such as molecular breeding with conventional breeding along with different omics tools (particularly genomics and phenomics) should be the major emphasis for accelerating the development climate-smart varieties. Overall, linking biophysical and genetic models to integrate physiology, molecular biology, and plant breeding helps in dissecting or unraveling the complex traits associated with abiotic stress tolerance which accelerates the breeding program to develop climate-smart varieties with great resilience to abiotic stresses [56]. In recent years, remarkable progress has been made by plant breeders of NARS in this direction and succeeded in the development of drought-tolerant varieties in chickpea [49] and wheat [57] through marker-assisted breeding.
Mitigating the impact of abiotic stresses, which are accelerated by climate change is very crucial to safeguard national food and nutritional security, particularly in the arid, semiarid, and coastal regions. The cultivation of abiotic stress-tolerant crop varieties (ASTCVs) is one of the best strategies to cope up climate change and consequent abiotic stresses. Indian NARS bred a number of climate-resilient varieties tolerant to different biotic and abiotic stress-tolerant varieties. Documentation of ASTCVs with success stories of adoption of such varieties is very important to popularize and create awareness on climate-resilient varieties. Further, developing strategic plans to enhance the availability quality seeds of is a key factor for reaping the benefits of trait values of climate-resilient varieties. Most of the ASTCVs are developed accidentally but not exclusively by abiotic resistance breeding program, and thus only a few of them, which are stable and perform in both stress and normal conditions. Hence it is very crucial to shift from climate-resilient varieties (ASTCVs) to climate-smart varieties, tolerant multiple biotic, and abiotic stresses. Accordingly, national and international organizations reoriented their breeding strategies to develop climate-smart varieties through an integrated ‘omic’ approach. Along the way, continuous efforts are being made to understand mechanisms/traits associated with different abiotic stress tolerance by exploiting the advanced tools and techniques in molecular science. The smart breeding comprising modern pre-breeding, gene/QTLs mapping using MAGIC population, genomic-based selection and mapping, genetic engineering approach with advanced genome editing, and high throughput genotyping and phenotyping (HTGP) tools along with speed breeding technique accelerates the abiotic resistance breeding program. This integrated approach helps in the development of climate-smart varieties within a short period of time to safeguard food and nutritional security in the abiotic stress-prone regions of the country through enhanced and sustainable food production systems under changing climate scenarios.
Authors are not responsible for any damage caused by the content/information of this chapter.
References
1.Pathak H, Mishra JP, Mohapatra T. Indian Agriculture after Independence. New Delhi: Indian Council of Agricultural Research; 2022. p. 426
2.Pathak H, Aggarwal PK, Singh SD. Climate Change Impact, Adaptation and Mitigation in Agriculture: Methodology for Assessment and Applications. New Delhi, India: Indian Agricultural Research Institute; 2012
3.Venkateswarlu B. Climate change scenario in India and its impact on agroecosystems. In: Chary R, Srinivasa Rao G, Srinivas K, Maruthi Sankar GR, Nagarjuna Kumar R, Venkateswarlu B, editors. Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies for Climate Resilient Agriculture. ICAR, Hyderabad, India: Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture; 2013. pp. 1-16
4.Mukherjee S, Aadhar S, Stone D, Mishra V. Increase in extreme precipitation events under anthropogenic warming in India. Weather and Climate Extremes. 2017;30:1-9
5.Ahluwalia VK, Malhotra S. Environmental Science. New Delhi: Anne Books India; 2006
6.Kumar NS, Aggarwal PK, Rani SD, Saxena R, Chauhan N, Jain S. Vulnerability of wheat production to climate change in India. Climate Research. 2014;59(3):173-187. DOI: 10.3354/cr01212
7.Rane J, Singh AK, Kumar M, Boraiah KM, Meena KK, Pradhan A, et al. The adaptation and tolerance of major cereals and legumes to important abiotic stresses. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22(23):12970. DOI: 10.3390/IJMS222312970
8.Sharm S, Manjeet. Heat stress effects in fruit crops: A review. Agricultural Reviews. 2020;1(1):73-78
9.Seo HJ, Sawant SS, Song J. Fruit cracking in pears: Its cause and management—A review. Agronomy. 2022;12:2437. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy12102437
10.Ismail AM, Singh US, Singh S, Dar MH, Mackill DJ. The contribution of submergence-tolerant (Sub1) rice varieties to food security in flood-prone rainfed lowland areas in Asia. Field Crops Research. 2013;152:83-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2013.01.007
11.Chattopadhyay K, Sukanta G, Ismail M, Sumanta M, Mukherjee Arup K, Marandi BC, et al. Impact of climate resilient varieties on Rice productivity and ensuring food security in coastal area of eastern India. In: NRRR Research Bulletin No. 10. Cuttack, Odisha, India: National Rice Research Institute; 2016. p. 68
12.Dar MH, Waza SA, Shukla S, Zaidi NW, Nayak S, Hossain M, et al. Drought tolerant Rice for ensuring food security in eastern India. Sustainability. 2020;12:2214. DOI: 10.3390/SU12062214
13.Radeny M, Rao EJZ, Ogada MJ. Impacts of climate-smart crop varieties and livestock breeds on the food security of smallholder farmers in Kenya. Food Security. 2022;14:1511-1535. DOI: 10.1007/s12571-022-01307-7
14.Boraiah KM, Basavaraj PS, Harisha CB, Kochewad SA, Khapte PS, Bhendarkar MP, et al. Abiotic stress tolerant crop varieties, livestock breeds and fish species. In: Technical Bulletin No. 32. Baramati, Pune, Maharashtra, India: ICAR-National Institute of Abiotic Stress Management; 2021. p. 83
15.Kumar A, Dixit S, Ram T, Yadaw RB, Mishra KK, Mandal NP. Breeding high-yielding drought-tolerant rice: Genetic variations and conventional and molecular approaches. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2014;65(21):6265-6278
16.Abady S, Shimelis H, Janila P, Yaduru S, Shayanowako AIT, Deshmukh D. Assessment of the genetic diversity and population structure of groundnut germplasm collections using phenotypic traits and SNP markers: Implications for drought tolerance breeding. PLoS One. 2021;16(11):e0259883
17.Yamano T, Dar MH, Panda A, Gupta I, Malabayabas ML, Kelly E. Impact and Adoption of Risk-Reducing Drought-Tolerant Rice in India. 3ie Impact Evaluation Report 72. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie); 2018
18.Xu K, Xu X, Fukao T, Canalas P, Maghirang-Rodriguez R, Heuer S, et al. Sub1A is an ethylene responsive-factor-like gene that confers submergence tolerance to rice. Nature. 2006;442:705-708
19.Septiningsih EM, Pamplona AM, Sanchez DL, Neeraja CN, Vergara GV, Heuer S, et al. Development of submergence-tolerant rice cultivars: The Sub1 locus and beyond. Annals of Botany. 2009;103(2):151-160. DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcn206 Epub 2008 Oct 30
20.Pathak H, Parameswaran HN, Subudhi SR, Prabhukarthikeyan PSK, Anandan A, Yadav MK, et al. Rice varieties of NRRI: Yield, quality, special traits and tolerance to Biotic & Abiotic Stresses. In: NRRI Research Bulletin No. 20. Cuttack, Odisha, India: ICAR-National Rice Research Institute; 2019. p. 68
21.Anonymous, Annual Report, 2019-20. Indian council of Agriculture Research (ICAR). New Delhi, India
22.Zulkiffal M, Ahsan A, Ahmed J, Musa M, Kanwal A, Saleem M, et al. Heat and drought stresses in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): Substantial yield losses, practical achievements, improvement approaches, and adaptive mechanisms. In: Plant Stress Physiology. London, UK: IntechOpen; 2020. DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.92378
23.Dubey R, Pathak H, Chakrabarti B, Singh S, Gupta DK, Harit RC. Impact of terminal heat stress on wheat yield in India and options for adaptation. Agricultural Systems. 2020;181:102826. DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102826
24.Ni Z, Li H, Zhao Y, Peng H, Hu Z, Xin M, et al. Genetic improvement of heat tolerance in wheat: Recent progress in understanding the underlying molecular mechanisms. Crop Journal. 2017;6(1):2-4
25.Paliwal R, Röder MS, Kumar U, Srivastava JP, Joshi AK. QTL mapping of terminal heat tolerance in hexaploid wheat (T. aestivum L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2012;125(3):561-575
26.Kushwah A, Bhatia D, Singh I, Thudi M, Singh G, Bindra S. Identification of stable heat tolerance QTLs using inter-specific recombinant inbred line population derived from GPF 2 and ILWC 292. PLoS One. 2021;16(8):e0254957
27.Mishra SC, Singh SK, Patil R. Breeding for heat tolerance in wheat. In: Shukla RS, Mishra PC, Chatrath R, Gupta RK, Tomar SS, Sharma I, editors. Recent Trends on Production Strategies of Wheat in India. Karnal, India: JNKVV, Jabalpur & ICAR-IIWBR; 2014. pp. 15-29
28.Chaudhary S, Devi P, Bhardwaj A, Jha UC, Sharma KD, Prasad PVV, et al. Identification and characterization of contrasting genotypes/cultivars for developing heat tolerance in agricultural crops: Current status and prospects. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2020;11:587264. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.587264
29.Anonymous, Annual Report, 2021-22. Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR). New Delhi, India: DARE-ICAR; 2022
30.Boraiah KM, Basavaraj PS, Halli HM, Muhkri G, Yathish KR, Ranjan N, et al. Maize: Impacts and management of abiotic stresses. In: Pathk H et al., editors. Abiotic Stresses in Agriculture: Impacts and Management. Baramati, Pune, Maharashtra, India: ICAR-Natioanal Institute of Abiotic Stress Management (ICAR-NIASM); 2022. pp. 116-150
31.Sanghera GS, Wani SH, Hussain W, Singh NB. Engineering cold stress tolerance in crop plants. Current Genomics. 2011;12(1):30-43. DOI: 10.2174/138920211794520178
32.Adhikari L, Baral R, Paudel D, Min D, Makaju SO, Poudel HP, et al. Cold stress in plants: Strategies to improve cold tolerance in forage species. Plant Stress. 2022;4:100081. DOI: 10.1016/J.STRESS.2022.100081
33.Wang W, Vinocur B, Altman A. Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: Towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta. 2003;218:1-14
34.Maji AK, Obi Reddy GP, Sarkar D. Acid Soils of India - Their Extent and Spatial Variability, NBSS Publication No. 145, NBSS&LUP, Nagpur. 2012. p. 138
35.Munns R, Tester M. Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annual Reviews of Plant Biology. 2008;59:651-681
36.Matsumoto S, Shimada H, Sasaoka T, Miyajima I, Kusuma GJ, Gautama RS. Effects of acid soils on plant growth and successful revegetation in the case of mine site. In: Oshunsanya S, editor. Soil pH for Nutrient Availability and Crop Performance. London, UK: IntechOpen; 2017. DOI:10.5772/intechopen.70928
37.Ngoune Tandzi L, Mutengwa CS, Ngonkeu ELM, Gracen V. Breeding maize for tolerance to acidic soils: A review. Agronomy. 2018;8(6):84. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy8060084
38.Hanin M, Ebel C, Ngom M, Laplaze L, Masmoudi K. New insights on plant salt tolerance mechanisms and their potential use for breeding. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2016;7:1787. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01787
39.De Leon TB, Linscombe S, Subudhi PK. Identification and validation of QTLs for seedling salinity tolerance in introgression lines of a salt tolerant rice landrace ‘Pokkali’. PLoS One. 2017;12(4):e0175361. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175361
40.Puram VRR, Ontoy J, Subudhi PK. Identification of QTLs for salt tolerance traits and pre-breeding lines with enhanced salt tolerance in an introgression line population of rice. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter. 2018;36:695-709. DOI: 10.1007/s11105-018-1110-2
41.Mazumder A, Rohilla M, Bisht DS. Identification and mapping of quantitative trait loci (QTL) and epistatic QTL for salinity tolerance at seedling stage in traditional aromatic short grain rice landrace Kolajoha (Oryza sativa L.) of Assam, India. Euphytica. 2020;216:75. DOI: 10.1007/s10681-020-02602-0
42.Nakhla WR, Sun W, Fan K, Yang K, Zhang C, Yu S. Identification of QTLs for salt tolerance at the germination and seedling stages in Rice. Plants. 2021;10(3):428. DOI: 10.3390/plants10030428
43.Rathor S, Krishnamurthy SL, Lokeshkumar BM, Warraich AS, Yadav S, Sharma PC, et al. Dissection of genomic regions for ion homeostasis under sodic salt stress in MAGIC rice population. Environmental Sciences Proceedings. 2022;16:39. DOI: 10.3390/environsciproc2022016039
44.Asif MA, Garcia M, Tilbrook J, Brien C, Dowling K, Berger B, et al. Identification of salt tolerance QTL in a wheat RIL mapping population using destructive and non-destructive phenotyping. Functional Plant Biology: FPB. 2021;48(2):131-140. DOI: 10.1071/FP20167
45.Soren KR, Madugula P, Kumar N, Barmukh R, Sengar MS, Bharadwaj C, et al. Genetic dissection and identification of candidate genes for salinity tolerance using axiom®CicerSNP Array in chickpea. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020;21(14):5058. DOI: 10.3390/ijms21145058
46.Krishnamurthy SL, Lokeshkumar BM, Rathor S, Warraich AS, Yadav S, Gautam RK, et al. Development of salt-tolerant Rice varieties to enhancing productivity in salt-affected environments. Environmental Sciences Proceedings. 2022;13:30. DOI: 10.3390/environsciproc2022016030
47.Duran VH, Raya AM, Aguilar J. Salt tolerance of mango rootstocks (Magnifera indica L. cv. Osteen). Spanish journal of. Agricultural Sciences. 2003;1:68-78
48.Sá FVDS, Nobre RG, Silva LD, Moreira RC, Paiva EP, FAD OA. Tolerance of guava rootstocks under salt stress. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental. 2016;20:1072-1077
49.Bharadwaj C, Tripathi S, Soren KR, Thudi M, Singh RK, Sheoran S, et al. Introgression of “QTL-hotspot” region enhances drought tolerance and grain yield in three elite chickpea cultivars. Plant Genome. 2021;14:e20076
50.Pandey MK, Gangurde SS, Sharma V, Pattanashetti SK, Naidu GK, Faye I, et al. Improved genetic map identified major QTLs for drought tolerance- and iron deficiency tolerance-related traits in groundnut. Genes. 2020;12(1):37. DOI: 10.3390/genes12010037
51.Rane J, Raina SK, Govindasamy V, Bindumadhava H, Hanjagi P, Giri R, et al. Use of Phenomics for differentiation of Mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) genotypes varying in growth rates per unit of water. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2021;12:692564. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2021.692564
52.Zaman-Allah M, Zaidi PH, Samuel T, Jill C, Vinayan MT, Seetharam K. Phenotyping for abiotic stress tolerance in maize: drought stress. 2016. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/10883/17716
53.Zhao C, Zhang Y, Du J, Guo X, Wen W, Gu S, et al. Crop phenomics: Current status and perspectives. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2019;10:714. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00714
54.Cast S, Lobet CG, Cabrera-Bosquet L, Couvreur V, Pradal C, Tardieu F, et al. Connecting plant phenotyping and modelling communities: Lessons from science mapping and operational perspectives, in silico. Plants. 2022;4(1):diac005
55.Pandey P, Irulappan V, Bagavathiannan MV, Senthil-Kumar M. Impact of combined abiotic and biotic stresses on plant growth and avenues for crop improvement by exploiting physio-morphological traits. Frontiers in Plant Sciences. 2017;8:537. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00537
56.Naqvi RZ, Siddiqui HA, Mahmood MA, Najeebullah S, Ehsan A, Azhar M, et al. Smart breeding approaches in post-genomics era for developing climate-resilient food crops. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2022;13:972164. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2022.972164
57.Kumar PKC, Bellundagi A, Krishna H, Mallikarjuna MG, Thimmappa RK, Rai N, et al. Development of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L) variety HD3411 following marker-assisted backcross breeding for drought tolerance. Frontiers in Genetics. 2023;14:1046624. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2023.1046624
Written By
Boraiah K.M., Basavaraj P.S., Vijaysinha D. Kakade, Harisha C.B., Pratapsingh Khapte, Halagundegowda G.R., Krishnamurthy D., Neeraj Kulshreshtha, Vijayakumar H.P., Bhojaraj Naik, Jagadish Rane Sammi Reddy K. and Himanshu Pathak
Submitted: 26 April 2023Reviewed: 18 May 2023Published: 17 October 2023
Open access peer-reviewed chapter
