Dissecting the resilience of barley genotypes under multiple adverse environmental conditions

Abstract

As climate change increases abiotic stresses like drought and heat, evaluating barley performance under such conditions is critical for maintaining productivity. To assess how barley performs under normal conditions, drought, and heat stress, 29 different varieties were examined, considering agronomic, physiological, and disease-related characteristics. The research was conducted in five environments: two normal environments in 2020/2021 and 2021/2022, two drought stress environments in 2020/2021 and 2021/2022, and one heat stress environment in 2021/2022. The results demonstrated that genotype and environment significantly influenced all traits (p < 0.05), except canopy temperature, while genotype x environment interaction significantly influenced most traits, except total chlorophyll content and canopy temperature. Heat and drought stress environments often resulted in reduced performance for traits like plant height, spike length, grains per spike, and 100-grain weight compared to normal conditions. Based on individual traits, genotypes 07UT-44, 06WA-77, 08AB-09, and 07N6-57 exhibited the highest grain yield (4.1, 3.6, 3.6, and 3.6 t/ha, respectively). Also, these genotypes demonstrated enhanced stability in diverse drought and heat stress conditions, as assessed by the mean performance vs. stability index (Weighted Average of Absolute Scores, WAASB). The multi-trait stability index (MTSI) identified 07UT-44, 07UT-55, 07UT-71, and 08AB-09 as the most stable genotypes in terms of the performance of all traits. The imported lines demonstrated superior performance and stability, highlighting their potential as valuable genetic resources for developing climate-resilient barley.

Keywords: Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.); Climate resilience; Environmental variability; Heat stress; Stability index (MTSI).

Fig. 1

Comparisons of nine agronomic, physiological, and pathological traits among five environments. different lowercase letters indicate statistically significant differences as obtained by Tukey HSD test; p < 0.05). N_2021 and 2022 N_2022: normal conditions in 2021; DS_2021 and 2022 DS_2022: drought stress conditions in 2021; HS_2022: heat stress conditions

Fig. 2

Performance of 29 barley genotypes observed in five environments for plant height (a) and number of days to flowering (b). The data represented in each column indicates the average values of each trait of barely genotypes in each of the five environments: normal conditions in 2021 (N_2021) and 2022 (N_2022), drought stress conditions in 2021 (DS_2021) and 2022 (DS_2022) and heat stress conditions (HS_2022).

Fig. 3

Performance of 29 barley genotypes observed in the five environments for total chlorophyl content (a), canopy temperature (b), and leaf rust (c). The data represented in each column indicates the average values of each trait of barely genotypes in each of the five environments: normal conditions in 2021 (N_2021) and 2022 (N_2022), drought stress conditions in 2021 (DS_2021) and 2022 (DS_2022) and heat stress conditions (HS_2022)

Fig. 4

Performance of 29 barley genotypes observed in the five environments for spike length (a), number of grains/spike (b), 100-grain weight (c), and grain yield (d). The data represented in each column indicates the average values of each trait of barely genotypes in each of the five environments: normal conditions in 2021 (N_2021) and 2022 (N_2022), drought stress conditions in 2021 (DS_2021) and 2022 (DS_2022) and heat stress conditions (HS_2022).

Fig. 5

Dendrogram showing hierarchical classification of 29 barley genotypes based on Ward’s method utilizing nine phenotypic traits evaluated across five environments

Fig. 6

Correlation coefficients between nine agronomic, physiological, and pathological attributes examined in five different environments. NDF, number of days to flowering; PH, plant height; NGS, number of grains/spike; HGW, 100-grain weight; LR, leaf rust; GY, grain yield; CT, Canopy temperatures; TCC, total chlorophyll content; LR, leaf rust. *, **, and ***: Significant at p-value = 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001. ns: means non-significant coefficient (p-value > 0.05)

Fig. 7

The mean performance vs. WAASB bi-plot shows the joint interpretation of the mean performance of plant height (a) and number of days to flowering (b) of 29 barely genotypes across five environments

Fig. 8

The mean performance vs. WAASB bi-plot shows the joint interpretation of the mean performance of canopy temperature (a), leaf rust (b), and total chlorophyll content (c) of 29 barely genotypes across five environments

Fig. 9

The mean performance vs. WAASB bi-plot shows the joint interpretation of the mean performance of spike length (a), number of grains/spike (b), 100-grain weight (c), and grain yield (d) of 29 barely genotypes across five environments

Fig. 10

The ranking and selection of the 29 barley genotypes based on the multi-trait stability index, considering nine agronomic traits and five environments, with a selection intensity of 15%