//o

Name of speaker : Patel Satishkumar

Reg. no. : 04-1313-2010
Major advisor : Dr. J.A. Patel
Date : 14/03/2012
Time : 1600 hrs
 Introduction
Mechanism of Drought Tolerance
Screening Methods
Case studies on Drought Tolerance
Physiological
Variability and Correlation
Biochemical
Biotechnological Studies
Breeding approaches
Achievements
Limitations
Conclusion
Future thrust 2
INTRODUCTION

Botanical Name: Synonyms: Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.

Pennisetum typhoides (Burm. F.) Stapf. and Hubbard
Pennisetum typhoideum Rich.,
Pennisetum americanum L. Leeke
Common Names:- Bajra, Bulrush millet, Spiked millet, Cat tail millet
Family: - Poeaceae Sub family: Panicoideae Tribe: Paniceae
Origin :- Sahel zone of West Africa
Chromosome No.: 2n=14
Uses:- Feed: Fodder, Fuel, Fencing,

Cross pollinated Crop Spices due to its protogynous flowering nature

Annual C4 crop species.
Stable diet for the vast majority of poor farmers

3
Table:-1 Area, Production And Productivity (2010-11)

Area Production Productivity

(million (million tonns) (kg /hectare)
hectare)

India 8.75 8.89 1015

Gujarat 0.92 1.31 1365

Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation.

4
 State wise Bajra production (2010-11)

Production Productivity
State (Million Tonnes) (kg/ha)

Tamil Andhra 2.03 394

Karnataka Rajasthan
Nadu Pradesh
2%
1% 1% 1.39 1638
Uttar Pradesh
MP
0.93 1593
MH 4% Rajasthan
Haryana
12% 31% 0.92 1365
Gujarat
Gujarat
Maharashtra 0.77 741
13%
Uttar
Haryana Pradesh 0.25 1495
14% Madhya Pradesh
22%
Karnataka 0.15 502

Tamil Nadu 0.08 1513

Andhra Pradesh 0.05 1178

Source: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation.
5
 Drought
Drought is event which implies the absence of a period
of time, long enough to cause moisture-depletion in soil
and water deficit with decrease of water potential in
plant tissues.

Drought is highly heterogenous in time, space, degree

of stress, growth stage and time of stress exposure, and
it is unpredictable.

6
 Types of Drought

Meteorological Drought:- It is related to deficiencies in

rainfall compared to the average mean seasonal rainfall in
an area.
Agricultural Drought:- Deficit rainfall over cropped
areas during their growth cycle can destroy crop or lead
to poor crop yields.
Hydrological Drought:- It is a deficiency in surface and
sub-surface water supply. It is measured as stream flows
and also as lake, reservoir and groundwater levels.

7
 Drought affected area in the world

The major bajra growing countries are Senegal, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Sudan and India.
1.3 Billions people are under drought-prone areas (India/Africa)
8
Major Bajra Growing Regions of India States affected by Drought

Severely Affected

Moderately Affected

Source: www.milletindia.org Source : http://www.mapsofindia.com

Bajra is a major cereals in northwestern zone as it represents approximately 25 % of the total
acreage of the crop in the country.
The chronically drought-prone areas around 33 % -receive less than 750 mm of rainfall, while
35 % classified as drought-prone receive rainfall of 750-1,125 mm (in India). 9
 Main features of drought
About 36% of the land area constitutes arid and semi arid zones, arid and
semi arid areas are more prone to drought.

Drought leads to reduction in both yield and quality of economic product in

crop plants. It has adverse effect on plant growth and development.

Drought damages chloroplasts and lowers photosynthetic output.

There is an increase in proline level in the leaves of plants which are

subjected to all stresses.

Drought resistance is a genetically controlled physiological property of plant

species.

Breeding for drought tolerance is a major objective in arid and semiarid

regions of the world due to inadequate precipitation, shortage of irrigation
water and high water demand for crop evapotranspiration in such climates
10
 Drought resistance : Ability of a plant to live, grow and yield
satisfactorily with limited water supply or under periodic water
deficits.
Drought escape : Ability of plant to mature before water stress
becomes a serious limiting factor.
Drought avoidance: Ability of a plant to withstand water deficit as
measured by degree and duration of low plant water potential.
water savers-closing of stomata
water spenders- extract more water from soil
Drought tolerance: Ability of a plant to recover from a dry period
by producing new leaves from buds, and those were able to survive the
dry spell.

Gupta et al., 1986

11
 Symptoms of Drought
Reduced leaf area
Early senescence of older leaves
Effect on flowering, largely delay in flowering (Cause abscission
of flowers.)

Injury Mechanism
Water stress directly affects cellular processes, membrane structures
and structure of macromolecules.

Cause severe embolism formation in the xylem vessels.

12
Morphological traits Physiological factors
Earliness
Higher rate of photosynthesis

Stomatal characters :-
Shrunken type, small size, less number per unit Lower rate of transpiration
area, rapid closing nature
Leaf character:- Waxy leaves, small Higher leaf turgidity
thick leaves, hairiness
Root characters:- Root length, root
Higher osmotic concentration
density, R/S ratio
Growth habit:- Indeterminate

Biochemical factors

Proline content

ABA content in Leaf

13
Drought avoiding plant must maintain

High water potential

Thick and highly impermeable cuticle

Closure of stomata

More waxier leaves

Higher root -shoot ratio

14
 Measurement of drought tolerance
1. Change in growth patterns
2. Change in seed production
3. Electrolyte leakage from leaf
segments
4. Leaf wilting
5. Relative leaf water content
6. Change in the transcriptome
Traits investigated
in pearl millet References
Grain and stover yield Ibrahim et al. (1985), Kumari S (1988).
and quality Bidinger et al. (1987, 2007), Singh and
Singh (1995), van Oosterom et al (1996),
Nepolean et al. (2006), Yadav et al.
(I999a,b, 2002, 2003. 2004) Serraj et al.
(2005)
ABA accumulation Henson et al. (1981). Henson (1983).
Henson et al. (1983). Henson(1984)
Water potential Henson (1982)
Osmotic potential Henson (1982)
Osmolytes Patil et al. (2005), Kholova et al. (2008)
Antioxidative enzymes Patil et al. (2005), Kholova et al. (2008)
Photosynthetic Ibrahim et al. (1985), Ashraf et al. (2001)
pigments
Transpiration related Ibrahim et al. (1985), Squire (1979), Black
traits and Squire (1979), Henson et al. (1981),
Henson (1984), Kholova et al. (2008, 2010
a, b.c)
Canopy temperature Singh and Kanemasu (1983)
15
Fig. 1 Drought tolerance improvement tools and processes

Physiolo
gical
processes
Expression
Comparative Profiling
mapping

Forward Reverse
Genetics Genetics
Drought
Tolerance

Allele
Forward Mining for
Cloning natural
Variation

Map
MAS/Tran
Based
sformation
Cloning

16
Screening Criteria

17
 Screening Criteria
The selection criteria primarily based on morphological characters could be
selection of parents as well as desirable segregants followed by hybridization.

During selection, characters have high heritabilities and high correlation with
yield under stress across the environments.

Grain yield under stress conditions is usually the primary traits for
selection.

A suitable secondary traits should have (Edmeades et al. 2001).

1) Genetically association with grain yield under drought,

2) High heritability,
3) Stable and feasible to measure,
4) Lack of association with yield loss under ideal growing conditions.
18
Screening methods for Drought
tolerance in Pearl millet

19
 Laboratory method
In Laboratory method to identify genotypic difference in germinability, osmotic
solutions like polyethylene glycol (PEG) is used.
The osmotic effect of drought are known to be comparable to true drought effects

Field method:
The field is uniformly irrigated with overhead system using perforated pipes.
Also used sprinkler method.
The percentage of seedling that emerge is computed.

Line source irrigation method Water

Source/chennel
Increase water stress

Tested Material

Tested Material

20
Case Studies

21
Table 2 :-Effect of osmotic stress on seedling traits of pearl millet genotype during drought induced by PEG in
Vitro condition.

ICRISAT (A. P.) Govindaraj et al. (2010) 22

Table 3 :- Germination and physiological parameters under normal (N) and
induced stress (PEG) (S) treatments (T) in pearl millet cultivars (V)

Genotype Germination % Root length Seedling height Dry mass of Vigor index
(cm) (cm) seedling (g)

Normal Stress Normal Stress Normal Stress Normal Stress Normal Stress

X7 99.5 98.0 10.89 6.53 17.90 10.71 0.058 0.074 1781.3 1049.6
X6 97.0 96.0 10.23 6.17 17.48 10.65 0.070 0.080 1695.6 1022.4
Co7 98.3 95.5 9.28 5.58 16.17 9.03 0.073 0.094 1589.5 862.4
WC-C75 99.8 98.3 11.18 4.64 18.43 7.75 0.093 0.101 1839.3 761.8
CD T 0.636** 0.650** 0.755** 0.0065** 72.133**
(P<0.05 %) V 0.900** 0.919 (NS) 1.068** 0.0092* 102.002 (NS)
T X V 1.272 1.300* 1.510** 0.0131 (NS) 144.268 (NS)
(NS)

Coimbatore (T.N.)
Vijayalakhsmi et al. (2000) 23
 Table 4:-Average growth and yield attributes of pearl millet as affected by different
treatments
Treatment Plant Plants/m Tillers/m Effective Length Weight 1000 Average Percent
height tillers/m of ear of ear Grain Yield Reduction
(cm) (cm) (g) weight (kg/ha)
(g)
T1, control
154 5.0 15.9 8.1 24.2 30.4 9.45 2101 -
T2, Rain out
during crop 149 4.8 17.5 6.2 22.2 28.8 9.27 1852 11.80
establishment
T3, Rainout during
tillering stage 144 4.8 11.8 5.8 20.4 26.3 8.89 1629 22.50

T4, Rainout during

earing and 139 5.2 11.6 6.3 21.2 27.8 8.67 1707 18.80
flowering stage
T5, Rainout during
grain-filling and 152 4.7 16.2 5.8 20.5 28.2 7.75 1970 6.20
maturity stage

CD (P < 0.05 %) NS NS 2.23 0.30 0.78 NS 0.25 - -

Agra (U.P.) Prakash et al. (2008) 24

Fig. 2 Response of pearl millet cultivars (Dadda and Shella ) to post-flowering
drought stress.

WW (36 %) MS(21 %) SS (9 %)
WW (36 %) MS(21 %) SS (9 %)

WW= Well Water

MS= Moderately Stress
SW= Severely Stress

WW (36 %) MS(21 %) SS (9 %)
Ethiopia Yalew and Yemane (2011)
25
Fig.3 Potential quantum yield of two cultivars of Pearl millet subjected to
three soil moisture levels.

Dadda

Shella

WW= Well Water (36 %)

MS= Moderately Stress ( 21 %)
SW= Severely Stress ( 9 %)
Ethiopia Yalew and Yemane (2011)
26
Table 5:- Grain yield and physiological parameters as influenced by terminal
moisture stress in B-line and inbreds

Pearl Days to Grain Harvest Threshing Relative Drought

millet flower yield index Water susceptibility
lines (kg/ha) content (%) Index
81B 70.8 136.1 4.7 22.0 74.9 1.196 + 0.06
218B 65.7 234.4 8.7 28.4 63.4 1.259 + 0.12
89111B 59.3 263.3 11.2 26.0 77.4 1.104 + 0.12
95444B 58.7 628.9 22.4 47.7 74.2 0.812 + 0.06
J-108 57.8 648.9 18.2 40.0 72.0 0.846 + 0.10
J-998 62.8 353.3 9.3 29.7 69.0 1.057 + 0.04
J-2290 68.0 375.0 8.2 31.7 75.7 1.099 + 0.09
J-2296 59.2 376.7 15.4 37.7 75.0 0.880 + 0.08
J-2340 58.8 806.7 18.1 44.4 77.8 0.761 + 0.18
LSD 4.7 304.2 5.2 13.5 6.5 -
(P=0.05)
CV % 3.9 39.7 36.4 19.0 7.1 -

Jamnagar (Gujarat) Joshi et al. (2005) 27

Table 6:- Physiological parameters in pearl millet hybrids as influenced by
high temperature and receding soil moisture at seedling stage
Entries/ Root Shoot Total Root Survival Leaf Chlorophyll
Hybrids Dry dry Dry /shoot (%) at elongatio Stability
mass mass Mass ratio 19-22 n
(mg/plant) (mg/plant) (mg/plant) (dry DALI* Rate
wt. (cm/day)
basis) index at
15 DALI*
GHB-558 26.3 30.9 57.1 0.9 44.9 0.35 0.111 + 0.016

GHB-559 29.5 26.4 55.7 1.2 68.4 0.48 0.079 + 0.007

GHB-316 26.9 25.9 52.8 1.1 61.3 0.47 0.096 + 0.019

GHB-526 38.7 37.4 76.1 1.1 76.4 0.59 0.053 + 0.016

GHB-538 32.8 34.9 67.8 1.0 72.9 0.55 0.058 + 0.014

LSD NS 5.3 NS NS 16.4 0.09 -

(P=0.05)
CV (%) 10.5 15.1 10.8 17.9 9.1 17.3 -
* DALI Days after last Irrigation, NS- Non significant
Jamnagar (Gujarat) Joshi et al. (2005) 28
29
Table 7:- Estimates on GCV, PCV, heritability in broad sense(h2 B.S.), Genetic
advance as percentage of mean (GA %) of seedling traits in 63 pearl millet
genotypes

Character GCV % PCV % h2 (B.S.) % Genetic GA % of

Advance Mean
E% 12.83 13.52 90.1 20.783 25.09
FSL 12.21 12.85 90.3 2.806 23.89
FRL 12.57 13.65 98.7 4.987 25.73
FSW 16.32 16.60 96.6 0.02 33.05
FRW 21.36 21.91 95.0 0.015 42.87
DSW 22.48 23.14 94.4 0.002 44.99
DRW 24.99 25.32 97.4 0.002 50.79
R/S 22.87 24.03 90.6 0.203 44.83

E %=Emergence %, EI= Emergence index, ERI= Emergence rate, FSL=Fresh Shoot Length,
FRL= Fresh Root Length, FSW=Fresh Shoot Weight, FSL= Fresh Root Weight,
DSW= Dry Shoot Weight, DRW= Dry Root Weight.

Coimbatore (T.N.) Arulselvi and Selvi (2009)

30
 Table 8:-Character contribution towards genetic divergence

Sr. No. Character Contribution (%)

1 Emergence % 4.86
2 Fresh Shoot Length 2.66

3 Fresh Root Length 39.63

4 Fresh Shoot Weight 26.73

5 Fresh Root Weight 2.05

6 Dry Shoot Weight 7.32

7 Dry Root Weight 16.28

8 Root/Shoot 0.36

Coimbatore (T.N.) Arulselvi and Selvi (2009) 31

Table 9:- Mean Square from analysis of variance for seedling traits conferring drought
tolerance in pearl millet genotypes.

Source df E % EI ERI FSL FRL FSW FRW DSW DRW R/S

Replications 1 6.2222 0.002 0.000007 0.0287 0.0229 0.00001 0.000059 0.000002 0.000001 0.0178

Genotypes 62 238.3574** 0.0069 0.000027 4.3309** 11.9518** 0.000201** 0.000107** 0.000002** 0.000001** 0.0226**

Error 62 12.4158 0.0035 0.000014 0.2211 0.0778 0.000003 0.000003 0.0000001 0.0000001 0.0011

SE 2.4717 0.0414 0.0027 0.3298 0.1956 0.0013 0.0012 0.0002 0.0001 0.0234

CD @ 5% 4.9409 0.0828 0.0053 0.6593 0.3911 0.0026 0.0023 0.0004 0.0001 0.0468

Mean 82.8254 1.0956 0.0139 11.7437 19.3833 0.0609 0.0338 0.0047 0.0021 0.4528

** Significant at 0.01 probability level

E %=Emergence %, EI= Emergence index, ERI= Emergence rate, FSL=Fresh Shoot Length, FRL= Fresh
Root Length, FSW=Fresh Shoot Weight, FSL= Fresh Root Weight, DSW= Dry Shoot Weight, DRW= Dry
Root Weight.

Coimbatore (T.N.) Arulselvi and Selvi (2009) 32

Table 10:- Simple Correlation coefficients Between seedling traits
(conferring Drought Tolerance ) among 63 pearl millet genotypes.
Traits FSL FRL FSW FRW DSW DRW R/S

E%
0.2782 0.4332** 0.4555** 0.5009** 0.4479** 0.3204** -0.0508

FSL 0.4688** 0.7518** 0.5672** 0.5909** 0.5542** 0.0606

FRL 0.5536** 0.4769** 0.5793** 0.5411** 0.0506
FSW 0.7682** 0.8105** 0.6978** -0.0060

FRW 0.5633** 0.8800** 0.4457**

DSW
0.5176** -0.3404**

DRW 0.6158**

E %=Emergence %, EI= Emergence index, ERI= Emergence rate, FSL=Fresh Shoot Length, FRL=
Fresh Root Length, FSW=Fresh Shoot Weight, FSL= Fresh Root Weight, DSW= Dry ShootWeight,
DRW= Dry Root Weight.
Coimbatore (T.N.) ** Significant at 0.01 probability level Arulselvi and Selvi (2009) 33
Table 11:-Means and F ratios of genotypes for growth and yield components
measured in the irrigated control (c) and drought stress (s) treatments.
Characters 1988 (34 Genotypes) 1989 (34 Genotypes) 1990 (32 Genotype)
Treatment Means F ratio Means F ratio Means F ratio
Time to flowering (days) Control 64 5.80** 66 5.92** 67 11.90**
Stress 62 5.40** 65 5.99** 68 15.60**
Biomass (g m-2) Control 621 3.02** 858 1.79** 662 2.49**
Stress 437 2.49** 585 3.28** 598 2.76**
Stover (g m-2) Control 398 3.29** 482 1.91** 431 6.50**
Stress 300 4.38** 359 4.57** 423 3.91**
Panicle (g m-2) Control 223 2.54** 378 1.77** 230 0.97
Stress 137 2.05** 228 2.19** 175 1.41
Grain yield (g m-2) Control 156 2.30** 271 1.66** 158 1.07
Stress 83 2.48** 140 2.64** 121 0.78
Panicle No. m m-2 Control 9.8 1.58* 11.5 3.61** 10.3 1.50*
Stress 8.2 1.47 10.0 2.33** 8.4 1.51*
Panicle yield (g) Control 16.2 4.02** 23.7 3.81** 15.0 2.46**
Stress 9.8 3.00** 13.7 3.23** 14.2 0.72
No. Grains panicle-1 Control 2440 4.47** 3090 3.75** 2260 1.96**
Stress 1840 1.90** 2300 3.16** 2330 0.72
Grain mass (g 100-1) Control 0.67 10.39** 0.77 3.96** 0.66 5.90**
Stress 0.53 7.30** 0.53 2.86** 0.61 2.55**
No. Grains m-2 (*103) Control 2.306 3.34** 35.3 1.93** 23.5 1.16
Stress 15.4 1.88** 23.3 2.43** 19.6 0.81
Harvest index Control 25.4 4.04** 32.0 3.20** 23.0 2.01**
Stress 18.6 4.38** 24.0 3.81** 20.0 0.65
Threshing Percentage Control 70 3.61** 71 1.90** 67 2.30**
Stress 58 3.44** 60 3.76** 69 0.61

Sadore Peter (1992) 34

Table 12 :- Correlations of yield parameters in the drought stress treatment to
time to flowering under drought stress and Drought Response Index.
Correlation Coefficients
Characters Flowering DRI
1988 1989 1990 1988 1989 1990
Time to flowering (days) --- ----- --- -0.07 0.07 -0.02
Biomass (G m-2) 0.53** 0.47** 0.56** 0.56** 0.59** 0.20
Stover (G m-2) 0.76** 0.63** 0.77** 0.26. 0.37** 0.06
Panicle (G m-2) -0.31 -0.21 -0.35* 0.73** 0.74** 0.31
Grain yield (G m-2) -0.46** -0.35* -0.28 0.69** 0.71** 083**
Panicle No. M-2 -0.55** -0.47** -066** 050** 0.11 0.10
Panicle yield (g) -0.29 -0.16 0.06 0.62** 0.78** 0.88**
No. Grains per panicle 0.13 0.22 0.04 0.55** 0.63** 0.92**
Grain mass (G) -0.47** -0.57** 0.04 0.28 0.36* -0.01
No. Grains m-2 (x103) -0.22 -0.08 -0.28 0.65** 0.62** 0.85**
Harvest index -0.74** -069** -044* 0.44* 0.25 0.82**
Threshing % -0.60** -057** -0.09 0.48** 0.44* 0.91**
0.44*
** P<0.01 * P<0.05
Sadore Peter (1992) 35
Table 13:-Phenotypic correlation coefficient for different characters under terminal
drought condition in pearl millet.
Days to 50 Days to Ear Ear No. of Ear Total Grain Harvest Panicle Test Root Proline Drought
Character per cent Maturity head head produc- head biomass yield per index harvest weight length content response
Flowering length girth tive weight accumulati plant (g) index (g) per ( g g-1 f. index
(cm) (cm) tillers per on per plant w.) (DRI)
per plant plant (g) (cm0
plant (g)
Days to 50 %
1.00
Flowering
Days to
0.14** 1.00
Maturity
Ear head
-0.22** -0.07 1.00
length
Ear head
-0.06 0.07 0.07 1.00
Girth
No of
Productive -0.06 0.04 0.03 -0.18** 1.00
tillers per plant
Ear head
weight per -0.08 -0.08 -0.01 -0.16** 0.13* 1.00
plant
Total biomass
accumulation -0.05 -0.08 -0.10 -0.06 0.20** 0.24** 1.00
per plant
Grain Yield per
-0.06 -0.12 0.13* -0.20** 0.44** 0.48** 0.19** 1.00
plant
Harvest
-0.18** -0.15** 0.27** -0.08 0.22** 0.11 -0.26** 0.65** 1.00
index
Panicle harvest
-0.14** -0.08 0.16** -0.08 0.39** -0.21** 0.03 0.74** 0.66** 1.00
index
Test
-0.14** -0.15** 0.14** -0.12 0.23** 0.13* 0.09 0.59** 0.42** 0.55** 1.00
weight
Root length per
-0.00 0.03 0.17** 0.11 0.21** 0.04 0.09 0.35** 0.26** 0.36** 0.33** 1.00
plant
Proline
0.04 -0.00 0.04 -0.09 0.36** 0.10 0.13* 0.49** 0.31** 0.45** 0.50** 0.37** 1.00
Content
Drought
-0.01 0.00 -0.11 -0.30** 0.35** 0.53** 0.01 0.74** 0.28** 0.41** 0.30** 0.17** 0.35** 1.00
response index
*, ** Significant at 5 and 1 percent level of probability, respectively
AAU (Anand) Patil and Jadeja (2005) 36
Transpiration Rate

37
Fig 4:-Water Conserving mechanisms with the terminal drought tolerance of
pearl millet

Drought Tolerant
PRTL 2/89-33
863B-P2
Drought Sensitive
H 77/833-2
ICMB-841-P3

ICRISAT (A.P.) Kholova et al. ( 2010) 38

ABA content in Leaf

39
Fig. 5:- ABA content in pearl millet test cross hybrids (Drought Tolerant Drought Sensitive)
in well-water (WW) and water stress (WS) condition
Vegetative Stage Reproductive Stage

NIL-QTLs Drought Tolerant

PRTL 2/89-33
863B-P2
Drought Sensitive
H 77/833-2
ICMB-841-P3

Kholova et al. ( 2010)

ICRISAT (A.P.) 40
Drought Tolerance QTL under salt stress

41
FIG. 6:- Na+ accumulation in the leaves of drought- sensitive and drought-tolerant
parents, at three Alkalinity levels.

16
14
12
Leaf Na (mg/g dry wt.)

10
8
pH 8.5
6
pH 9.0
4
2 pH 9.4
0
843A X H 77/833- 843A X 01029 843A X PRTL
2 (Drought (QTL-NIL) 2/89-33 (Drought
sensitive parent) tolerant parent)

CSSRI (Karnal) Sharma et al. (2010)

42
FIG. 7:- Na+ accumulation in the leaves of drought- sensitive and drought-tolerant
parents, at three salinity levels.

25
Leaf Na (mg/g dry wt.)

20
15
10
EC 2 ds/m
5
EC 9 ds/m
0
EC 12 ds/m
843A X 843A X 01029 834A X PRTL
H77/833-2 (QTL-NIL) 2/89-33
(Drought (Drought
Sensitive tolerant parent)
parent)

CSSRI (Karnal) Sharma et al. (2010)

43
Table 14:- Correlation analysis between enzymatic activities and pigments contents
and ratios under well water and water stress condition.

Water stress
Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll b Carotenoids Chl a/Chl b Chl/Car
APX (Ascorbic peroxidase)
APX 2 ns ns ns ns 0.9344*
APX 4 ns ns ns ns 0.9037*/0.9881*
APX 8 ns ns -0.9104* ns ns
APX 9 ns ns ns ns 0.8929*
SOD (Superoxide dismutase)
Mn-SOD2 ns ns ns ns 0.969**
Mn-SOD3 ns ns ns ns 0.9516*
CAT (Catalse)
CAT1 ns ns ns ns 0.9439*
CAT2 ns ns ns ns 0.8911*
Well-watered
Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll b Carotenoids Chl a/Chl b Chl/Car
APX (Ascorbic peroxidase)
APX5 ns ns ns ns -0.8821*
APX 6 ns ns ns ns -0.8972*
APX Sum ns ns ns ns -0.9417*
ICRISAT (A.P) Kholova et al. ( 2011) 44
Fig. 8:- Gene networks involved in drought stress response and
tolerance
Function in stress tolerance Signal transduction and gene expression

Japan Shinozaki and Shinozaki (2007)

45
Breeding Strategies
46
Lines of pearl millet used in crosses to developed genetic
maps
Lines Characteristics
1 H 77/833-2 Elite male parent of grain hybrids in
north-western India, Susceptible to
downy mildew but with seedling
thermotolerance, high tillering capacity
and earliness
2 PRLT 2/89-33 Inbred 33 in ICRISAT potential R- line
Trail conducted in 1989; derived by
selfing in the ICRISAT bold seeded Early
Composite, low tillering, large seeds,
drought tolerant which is largely based
on lniadi landrace germplasm from West
Africa.
47
Fig. 9:- Strategy for development of Genetic linkage map to identify
QTLs linked to traits

ICRISAT Yadav et al. 2010

48
 Fig:-10 Genetic map

Genetic map of a pearl millet population that segregates for drought tolerance showing the distribution
of molecular marker on the different linkage group. The highlighted regions indicate parts of the
genome controlling grain yield, and its components, during drought stress.

49
Table:- 15 QTLs associated with drought tolerance of grain yield

Linkage Drought Response Genetic Background References

Group for Grain yield
(QTL on)
LG2 Up to 32 % H 77/833-2 x PRTL 2/89-33 Yadav et al., 1999,2002

LG 3 & 4 11.6-17.3 % ICMB 841 x 863 B Bidinger et al., 2007

LG 5 14.8 % ICMB 841 x 863 B Yadav et al., 2004

LG 6 & 1 QTL has Pleiotropic to H 77/833-2 x PRTL 2/833 Yadav et al., 2010
decreased panicle
number

50
Fig:-11 Marker Assisted Backcross Breeding for Drought Tolerance

51
Fig. 12:- Fine mapping population or High Resolution Cross

Objective of HRC
1. To fine map the DT-QTL interval
on LG 2
2. To Pyramid this DT-QTL with
the Downy-mildew resistance
QTLs on LG 1 & 4

ICRISAT Yadav et al. 2010 52

Table 16:-Comparison of the DT-QTL based and Field performance-
based Hybrids.
Moisture Environment QTL topcross Hybrids Field topcross hybrids LSD (P=0.05)
Crop Trait

Non- Stress
Flowering (d) 39.1 41.3 0.19
Biomass (g /m2) 777 845 15.6
Harvest Index (%) 49.6 45.9 0.55
Grain Yield (g/m2) 381 393 7.7
Terminal Stress
Flowering (d) 41.1 43.5 0.15
Biomass (g /m2) 581 619 11.4
Harvest Index (%) 41.7 38.3 0.60
Grain Yield (g/m2) 245 239 5.6
Line Source
Flowering (d) 35.1 38.1 0.12
Biomass (g /m2) 537 562 7.9
Harvest Index (%) 49.5 43.8 0.5
Grain Yield (g/m2) 268 255 5.1

ICRISAT Serraj et al.(2005) 53

 Fig. 13:-Marker Assisted Selection

1. Marker-assisted selection. Genetic composition at the drought tolerance QTL

( to constitute a MAS TCP)
2. Phenotypic selection. Field performance (best 16) in the drought trials used to
identify QTLs (to constitute a phenotype TCP)
3. A Random control. A random sample from within the mapping population
(to constitute a random TCP).

ICRISAT Bidinger et al. (2005)

54
55
The mapped progeny were phenotyped as testcross hybrids
rather than as the skeleton-mapped F2 plants.

To restore heterotic vigour to partially inbred mapping progeny that might

otherwise be too weak for effective screening under stress conditions
(Inbreeding depression)

To reduced variation in flowering time among the test units, in order to

focus the mapping on specific drought tolerance traits rather than traits or
responses associated with variation on capacity for drought escape

To have test units that approximate the genetic structure of the F1 hybrids
grown by farmers rather than partially inbred F3 or F4 lines.

56
Framework of an integrated strategy for genetic enhancement of crop grain yield
(GY) and its components under water-limited conditions at ICRISAT.
TR=total plant water transpired; TE=transpiration efficiency; HI= harvest index.
57
 Breeding Approaches

Breeding under optimum (water-stress free)

condition
Breeding under actual drought condition
Breeding under artificially created
environment
Incorporation of drought tolerance

58
 Breeding Methods

1. Introduction (PRLT 2/89-33, lniadi landrace germplasm from West Africa.)

2. Interspecific and intergeneric hybridization
Single backcross
Three way cross (Gene pyramiding)
3. Pedigree selection
4. Back cross breeding
5. Mutation breeding
6. Ideotype breeding : Breeding activity aimed at producing
new genotypes with novel morpho-physiological features that fit a
pre-defined architecture thought to be advantageous based on
experimental physiology and/or modelling.

59
7. Marker assisted breeding
8. Marker-assisted backcrossing (MABC): Repeated
backcrossing of the F1s to reconstitute the
recipient genome without losing the desirable
gene.
9. Tissue culture (in vitro Screening by using PEG
6000)

10.Development of Transgenic

60
Achievements

61
Table:-17 Recommended drought-tolerant/drought-avoiding
hybrids/varieties of pearl millet in India

State Hybrids Varieties

PPC 6, HC 20, JBV 2, ICTP 8203,
Maharashtra Nandi 35,Saburi, PAC 903 ICMV 221, AIMP 92901

Tamil Nadu GHB 558, CoH (Cu)8, X7 Co7, ICMV 221, ICMV 155

Andhra Pradesh PB 106, GHB 558 AIMP 92901, ASP-1, ICTP 8203

Karnataka PB 106, GHB 558 ICMV 221, ICTP 8203

HHB 67, RBH 121, GHB 538,
Rajasthan PB 180 CZP 9802, Raj 171
GHB 577, GHB 526, PB 172,
Gujarat PB 112, ICMB 356 JBV 2, HC 20
HHB 67, GHB 538, HHB 117,
Haryana ICMB 356 CZP 9802

ICRISAT REPORT (2007) 62

63
 Limitations
There is no single major gene, which has a remarkable effect on
the drought tolerance
Drought tolerance is an environmental and developmental stage
specific character
Drought reduces nutrients uptake, and is associated with
temperature stress and at higher elevation with cold. This
associations make the breeding programme more complicated.
Most of the physiological and metabolic processes are affected by
water deficits: cell growth, stomatal regulation, photosynthesis,
translocation, etc.
Large number of genes regulated up- or down- by drought
Large genetic populations and replicates are required
Even drought component traits are often complex and difficult to
screen
64
 Conclusion
Tillering stage (30-45 DAS) is most susceptible to drought; wherein 23-25
% of yield reductions occurres, followed by drought at grain filling and
maturity stage.
The osmotic (PEG 6000) stress at the seedling stage is the most suitable
method for drought tolerance screening owing to their significant
relationship with declining the germination percentage, root and shoot length.
Selection for seedling traits conferring drought tolerance such as root
length, root weight and root shoot ratio will be useful for identifying
genotypes with drought tolerance capacity.
Post-flowering drought stress is one of the most important
environmental factors reducing the grain yield and yield stability of pearl
millet and increasing the incidence of crop failure in dryland production
environments
Marker Assisted Selection is the most appropriate method to improve
drought tolerance genotype. 65
 Future thrust
Consolidation of yield grains through multiple resistance
to various abiotic and biotic stresses.
To develop a plant ideotype by restructuring the
morphological attributes these can withstand drought
conditions.
Need to saturate QTL areas to increase the efficiency
Pyramiding with other QTLs
In pearl millet, it need to be tested whether high leaf ABA
content and the lower Tr are linked or not.
Need to develop Transgenic for Drought Tolerance,
though difficult because of polygenic inheritance.

66
www.themegallery.com

Thank U