Rice Genomics and Genetics 2015, Vol.6, No.1, 1-5
2
Figure 1 Root traits showed wide range of variation
Note: A: Variation in root length of HKR47
×
MAS26 F
2
plants and parental rice genotypes (HKR47 and MAS26); B: HKR47
×
MAS26 F
2
plants with root length greater than parental rice genotypes (HKR47 and MAS26)
Table 2 Phenotypic correlation coefficients among agronomic and root traits in F
2
population
PH
a
TN
PL
LB
TGW
YPP
RL
FRW
DRW
DSW
RT
PH
1
TN
0.069
1
PL
0.322** 0.272** 1
LB
-0.065
0.154
0.029
1
TGW
0.343** 0.249*
0.411** 0.052
1
YPP
0.472** 0.622** 0.536** 0.180
0.571**
1
RL
-0.163
-0.086
-0.106
-0.192
-0.179
0.279** 1
FRW
0.099
0.404** 0.274** -0.019
-0.096
0.232*
0.255*
1
DRW
0.135
0.390** 0.239*
0.007
-0.091
0.269** 0.204*
0.844** 1
DSW
0.305** 0.464** 0.284** 0.073
0.032
0.368** 0.031
0.636** 0.725** 1
RT
0.004
0.251*
0.002
-0.175
-0.085
0.000
0.224*
0.350** 0.346** 0.272** 1
Note: *Significant at 5%, ** Significant at 1% level; PH: Plant height; TN: Effective no of tillers/plant; PL: Panicle length; LB:
Length/breadth ratio; TGW: 1 000 grain weight; YPP: Yield per plant; RL: Root length; FRW: Fresh root weight; DRW: Dry root
weight; DSW: Dry shoot weight; RT: Root thickness
fight against mechanism since they contribute to the
regulation of plant growth and extraction of water
and nutrients from deeper layers (Fukai and Cooper,
1995). Among the root morphological traits,
maximum root length, dry root weight and root
thickness were found to be associated with drought
resistance in upland conditions. In the present study,
root length, root biomass and root thickness were
found to be higher in aerobic rice variety (MAS26)
than in drought susceptible parent (HKR47).
MAS26 had 47% higher root length, 37% higher dry
root weight and 16% higher root thickness than
HKR47. Eighty-eight and seventy plants had
better root length and dry root weight than MAS26,
