Table 4 Effect of mild water deficit on water-use physiological markers measured in MUNASQA and TJ2049.

From: Selecting putative drought-tolerance markers in two contrasting soybeans

Genotype and Treatment

RWC (Relative Water Content; %)

WUE (Water Use Eficiency; g kg−1)

ANOVA

Correlations

ANOVA

Correlations

V3 Stage

R5 Stage

V3 vs R5

vs Yield

V3 Stage

R5 Stage

V3 vs R5

vs Yield

 

0 DAS

4 DAS

8 DAS

0 DAS

4 DAS

8 DAS

r2

r2

0 DAS

4 DAS

8 DAS

0 DAS

4 DAS

8 DAS

r2

r2

TJ2049 Control

74.54

Aa

78.24

Ca

80.33

Ca

71.89

Aa

81.46

Cb

78.94

Cab

0.87 (S)

***

–

–

6.54

Ca

5.66

Bb

7.02

Bc

7.89

Cb

6.60

Bc

8.09

Bb

0.89 (S)

***

− 0.44 (W)

**

TJ2049 Stress

72.87

Ab

58.41

Aa

59.01

Aa

75.22

Ab

53.82

Aa

56.40

Aa

0.96 (S)

***

–

–

5.87

Bb

4.59

Aa

4.76

Aa

7.47

Cb

5.43

Aa

5.48

Aa

0.95 (S)

***

0.82 (S)

***

MUNASQA Control

83.42

Ba

80.07

Ca

85.37

Ca

82.89

Ba

85.40

Ca

88.65

Ca

0.90 (S)

***

–

–

5.16

Aa

5.72

Bb

6.52

Bc

6.23

Aa

6.77

Bb

7.51

Bc

0.91 (S)

***

− 0.78 (S)

***

MUNASQA Stress

83.08

Bb

68.16

Ba

65.76

Ba

80.55

Bb

64.36

Ba

60.30

Ba

0.94 (S)

***

–

–

5.42

Aa

7.68

Cb

8.58

Cc

7.03

Ba

8.24

Cb

7.91

Bc

0.96 (S)

***

0.84 (S)

***

Standard Error

1.90

 

1.85

 

1.88

 

2.20

 

2.04

 

3.07

     

0.48

 

0.24

 

0.54 

 

0.38

 

0.18

 

0.49

     
 

CTD (Canopy temperature depression; oC)

                

ANOVA

Correlations

                

V3 Stage

R5 Stage

V3 vs R5

vs Yield

                
 

0 DAS

4 DAS

8 DAS

0 DAS

4 DAS

8 DAS

r2

r2

                

TJ2049 Control

3.11

Ba

2.97

Ca

3.21

Ca

3.37

Ba

3.50

Ca

3.25

Da

0.93 (S)

***

0.70 (S)

***

                

TJ2049 Stress

2.86

Bb

1.58

Ba

1.87

Ba

3.52

Bc

1.54

Bb

1.02

Ca

0.91 (S)

***

− 0.79 (S)

***

                

MUNASQA Control

1.27

Aa

1.19

Ba

1.33

Ba

1.77

Aa

1.46

Ba

1.61

Ba

0.95 (S)

***

0.76 (S)

***

                

MUNASQA Stress

1.43

Ab

− 1.32

Aa

− 1.39

Aa

1.60

Ab

− 0.94

Aa

− 1.12

Aa

0.97 (S)

***

− 0.85 (S)

***

                

Standard Error

0.28

 

0.30

 

0.37

 

0.17 

 

0.22

 

0.40

                     
  1. RWC, WUE and CTD were assessed in plants submitted to water deficit (Ψs = − 0.65 MPa) and well-watered treatments (Ψs = − 0.05 MPa) in V3 and R5 stages. Two independent experiments (n = 10 per genotype/treatment) were conducted, assessing parameters at 0, 4, and 8 d after stress (DAS) imposition. Additionally, 50 plants per genotype and the following treatments: 1: Control, 2: V3-Stress and 3: R5-Stress, were harvested at physiological maturity to obtain relative yield. Average values followed by the same uppercase letter in the column and the same lowercase letter in the row do not differ statistically among them within each phenological stage, according to Tukey’s HSD test at 5%. The strength of association between markers evaluated in V3 and R5 stages (n = 240) and between markers and yield (n = 300) was measured by Pearson's correlation analysis adjusted by Bonferroni (P > 0.05 indicated as ns; P < 0.05 indicated as *; P < 0.01 ** and P < 0.001 ***). Correlation coefficients (r2) were classified as “S: Strong” (> ± 0.60) and “W: weak” (below ± 0.59).
  2. Significant values are in bold.
Back to article page