TAYYAB - prr.hec.gov.pk

Investigation on intercropping of Ziziphus mauritiana with Cajanus

cajan for fruit and fodder at marginal land and cultivation of Carissa

carandas for fruits through saline water irrigation

TAYYAB

DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY

UNIVERSITY OF KARACHI

2015

ii




PhD Thesis

Submitted to the Board of advance Studies and Research in fulfillment of

the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Botany

University of Karachi

TAYYAB



2015

iii




Thesis Approved

RESEARCH SUPERVISOR EXTERNAL EXAMINER

PROF DR RAFIQ AHMAD

FPAS FTWAS

Professor (Retd) Botany (Plant Physiology)

PI Biosaline Research Projects

Department of Botany


iv

CERTIFICATE

It is hereby certified that this thesis is based on the results of the experimental work carried

out by Mr TAYYAB SO MUHAMMAD HANIF under my supervision on the topic

ldquoInvestigation on intercropping of Ziziphus mauritiana with Cajanus cajan for fruit

and fodder at marginal land and cultivation of Carissa carandas for fruits through

saline water irrigationrdquo

Mr TAYYAB had been enrolled under my guidance for the award of PhD in

Department of Botany University of Karachi I have personally checked all the research

work reported in the thesis and certify its accuracyvalidity It is further certified that the

materials included in this thesis have not been used partially or fully in a manuscript

already submitted or in the process of submission in partialcomplete fulfillment for award

of any other degree from any other university Mr TAYYAB has fulfilled requirements of

the University of Karachi for the submission of this dissertation and I endorse its

evaluation for the award of PhD Degree

RESEARCH SUPERVISOR

PROF DR RAFIQ AHMAD

FPAS FTWAS





Karachi-75270 Pakistan

v

DEDICATED TO MY FAMILY

MUHAMMAD HANIF (MY FATHER)

MRS ARIFA (LATE)

(MY BELOVED MOTHER)

SHAHEEN TAYYAB (MY WIFE)

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

All the praises for almighty Allah and all respects for Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon

Him) who has shown me the straight path

I am grateful to my supervisor Prof Dr Rafiq Ahmad for his keen interest

patronage and guidance during this research work which made successful submission of

this thesis

I also obliged to Prof Dr Ehtesham Ul Haque and Prof Dr Javed Zaki (Present

and Former Chairmen Department of Botany respectively) for providing me all the

necessary facilities and administrative support

Being employed as lecturer in Department of Botany Govt Islamia Science

College Karachi I am also thankful to Education and literacy Department Govt of Sindh

(Pakistan) for providing me facilities to perform this study

Thanks are due to Dr D Khan in assessing statistical data analysis and colleague

of Biosaline lab Dr M Azeem Dr Naeem Ahmed and M Wajahat Ali Khan for their

cooperation throughout the course of study

I am also gratefully acknowledged to Mr Noushad Raheem and Mr Noor Uddin

of Fiesta Water Park for providing field plot and facilities to perform this study I am also

thankful to Pakistan Metrological Department for providing environmental data

I am also obliged to Dr M Qasim and Dr M Waseem Abbasi for their suggestions

and support in writing this thesis

Assistance of Abbul Hassan (Lab attendant) Tajwar Khan (Biosaline field

Attendant) and Mr Wahid (Plant Physiology Lab Assistant) is also acknowledged

Thanks are also due to my friends Dr Rafat Saeed Dr Kabir Ahmad Dr Zia Ur

Rehman Farooqi Dr Noor Dr M Yousuf Adnan Asif Bashir Dr A Rauf A Hai Faiz

Ahmed MA Rasheed Jallal Uddin Saadi Ahsan Shaikh Saima Fehmi A Mubeen

Khan Dr Noor Ul Haq Saima Ahmad S Safder Raza SM Akber and my college

colleagues for giving me encouragement during this research work

vii

I can never forget the support and encouragement and good wishes of Mr M

Wilayat Ali Khan Mrs Shahnaz Rukhsana Mr Mansoor Mrs Rabia Mansoor Mrs

Chand Bibi and Mrs Saeeda Anwar

In the last I am highly grateful to my beloved father Muhammad Hanif my loving

mother Arifa (when she alive) my caring wife Shaheen and sweet childrenrsquos Sara and

Sarim my supportive brothers and sisters and all family members for their prayers love

sacrifices and encouragements provided during course of this research work

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No Title Page no

Acknowledgement vi

Summary xix

Urdu translation of summary xxi

General introduction 1

Layout of thesis 11

1 Chapter 1 13

11 Introduction 13

12 Experiment No 1 15

121 Materials and methods 15

1211 Seed collection 15

1212 Experimental Design 15

122 Observations and Results 17



1311 Seed germination 22




1411 Seedling establishment 28



1422 Shoot height 29



1511 Drum pot culture 31

1512 Experimental design 31

1513 Vegetative and Reproductive growth 32

1514 Analysis on some biochemical parameters 32



ix

No Title Page no

1522 Study on some biochemical parameters 34



1611 Isolation Identification and purification of bacteria 41

1612 Preparation of bacterial cell suspension 41

1613 Study of salt tolerance of Rhizobium isolated from root

nodules of C cajan

41





1712 Vegetative and reproductive growth 45





18 Discussion (Chapter 1) 51

2 Chapter 2 59

21 Introduction 59


221 Materials and Methods 60

2211 Growth and Development 60



2214 Irrigation Intervals 61

2215 Estimation of Nitrate content 62

2216 Relative Water content (RWC) 62

2217 Electrolyte leakage percentage (EL) 62

2218 Photosynthetic pigments 63

2219 Total soluble sugars 63

22110 Proline content 63

22111 Soluble phenols 64

x

No Title Page no

22112 Total soluble proteins 64

22113 Enzymes Assay 64


2221 Vegetative growth 67



2224 Phenols 70

2225 Proline 71

2226 Protein and sugars 71

2227 Enzyme essays 71




22211 Phenols 76

22212 Proline 77

22213 Protein and Sugars 77

22214 Enzyme assay 77

23 Experiment No8 90


2311 Selection of plants 90

2312 Experimental field 90

2313 Soil analysis 90




2317 Fruit analysis 94

2318 Nitrogen estimation 94

2319 Land equivalent ratio and Land equivalent coefficient 95

23110 Statistical analysis 95


2321 Vegetative parameters 96

2322 Reproductive parameters 96

xi

No Title Page no


2324 Nitrogen Contents 98

2325 Land equivalent ratio land equivalent coefficient 98


3 Chapter 3 113

31 Introduction 113



3211 Drum Pot Culture 114

3212 Plant material 114

3213 Experimental setup 114



3216 Mineral Analysis 116

322 Observations and Result 117




3224 Mineral analysis 118


4 Conclusion 129

5 References 130

6 Appendices 168

7 Publications 181

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Title Page no

11 Effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solutions on seed

germination indices of C cajan

27

12 Effect of irrigating water of different sea salt solutions on

seedling emergence (A) and shoot length (B) of C cajan

30

13 Environmental data of study area during experimental period

(July-November 2009)

36

14 Effect of salinity using irrigation water of different sea salt

concentrations on height of C cajan during 18 weeks treatment

36


concentrations on initial and final biomass (fresh and dry) of C

cajan

37

16 Percent change in moisture succulence relative growth rate

(RGR) and specific shoot length (SSL) of C cajan under

increasing salinity using irrigating water of different sea salt

concentrations

37


reproductive growth parameters including number of flowers

pod seeds and seed weight of C cajan

38

18 Effect of irrigating water of different sea salt solutions on leaf

pigments including chlorophyll a chlorophyll b total

chlorophyll and carotenoids of C cajan

39

19 Effect of irrigating water of different sea salt solutions on total

proteins soluble insoluble and total sugars in leaves of C cajan

40

110 Growth of nitrogen fixing bacteria associated with root of C

cajan under different NaCl concentrations

42

111 Photographs showing growth of Rhizobium isolated from the

nodules of C cajan in vitro on YEM agar supplemented with

different concentrations of NaCl

43

xiii



concentrations on height number of branches fresh weight and

dry weight of shoot of Z mauritiana after 60 and 120 days of

treatment

47


concentrations on succulence specific shoot length (SSL)

moisture and relative growth rate (RGR) of Z mauritiana

48


concentrations on number of flowers of Z mauritiana

49


concentrations on leaf pigments including chlorophyll a

chlorophyll b total chlorophyll and chlorophyll ab ratio of Z

mauritiana

49


concentrations on total sugars and protein in leaves of Z

mauritiana

50

21 Vegetative parameters of Z mauritiana and C cajan at grand

period of growth under sole and intercropping system at two

irrigation intervals

79

22 Fresh and dry weight of Z mauritiana and C cajan plants under

sole and intercropping system at 4th and 8th day irrigation

intervals

80

23 Leaf weight ratio (LWR) root weight ratio (RWR) shoot weight

ratio (SWR)specific shoot length (SSL) specific root length

(SRL) plant moisture Succulence and relative growth rate

(RGR) of Z mauritiana and C cajan grow plants under sole and

intercropping system at 4th and 8th day irrigation intervals

81

24 Leaf pigments of Z mauritiana and C cajan grow plants under


intervals

83

xiv


25 Electrolyte leakage phenols and proline of Z mauritiana and C

cajan at grand period of growth plants under sole and


84

26 Total protein in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan plants

under sole and intercropping system at 4th and 8th day irrigation

intervals

86

27 Enzymes activities in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan plants


intervals

87

28 Nitrate reductase activity and nitrate concentration in leaves of

Z mauritiana and C cajan plants under sole and intercropping

system at 4th and 8th day irrigation intervals

89

29 Soil texture triangle (Source USDA soil classification) 99

210 Vegetative growth of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing under

sole and intercropping system

100

211 Reproductive growth of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing

under sole and intercropping system

101

212 Leaf pigments of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing under sole

and intercropping

102

213 Sugars protein and phenols in leaves of Z mauritiana and C

cajan at grand period of growth under sole and intercropping

system

103

214 Sugars protein and phenols in fruits of Z mauritiana grown


105

215 Nitrogen in leaves and in soil of Z mauritiana and C cajan

growing under sole and intercrop system

106

31 Chlorophyll a chlorophyll b total chlorophyll chlorophyll a b

ratio carotenoids contents of C carandas growing under

salinities created by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt

124

xv


32 Total protein sugars and phenolic contents of C carandas

growing under salinities created by irrigation of different

dilutions of sea salt

125

33 Mineral analysis including Na and K ions was done on leaves of

C carandas growing under salinities created by irrigation of

different dilutions of sea salt

126

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page no

11 Electrical conductivities of different sea salt solutions

used in germination of C cajan

18

12 Effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solutions

on germination percentage (GP) per day of C cajan

seeds pre-soaked in non-saline water prior to

germination with duration of time under various salinity

regimes

19


on germination rate (GR) per day of seeds C cajan pre-

soaked in non-saline water prior to germination with

duration of time under various salinity regimes

20


on mean germination rate (GR) coefficient of

germination velocity (GV) mean germination time

(GT) mean germination index (GI) and final

germination (FG) of C cajan seeds pre-soaked in non-

saline water prior to germination under various salinity

regimes

21



24



seeds pre-soaked in respective sea salt concentrations

with duration of time

25


on germination rate (GR) per day of C cajan seeds pre-

soaked in respective sea salt concentrations with

duration of time

26

xvii

Table Title Page no

18 Electrical conductivities of different Sea salt

concentrations and ECe of soil saturated paste at the end

of experiment

30

21 Soil analysis data of Fiesta Water Park experimental

field

99

22 Land equivalent ratio (LER) and Land equivalent

coefficient (LEC) with reference to height chlorophyll

and yield of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing under


107

31 Electrical conductivities of different sea salt

concentration used for determining their effect on

growth of C carandas

119

32 Vegetative growth in terms of height and volume of

canopy of C carandas growing under salinities created

by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt

120




121

34 Reproductive growth in terms of flowers and fruits

numbers flower shedding percentage fresh and dry

weight of ten fruit and their totals per plant fruit length

and diameter of C carandas growing under salinities

created by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt

123

xviii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

APX Ascorbate peroxidase

CAT Catalase

DAP Diammonium Phosphate (fertilizer)

dSm-1 Deci Siemens per meter

ECe Electrical conductivity of the Soil saturated extract

ECiw Electrical conductivity of the irrigation water

GPX Guaiacol Peroxidase

GR Glutathione reductase

GSH Reduced glutathione

LEC Land equivalent coefficient

LER Land equivalent ratio

NPK Nitrogen Phosphate Potash (fertilizer)

NR Nitrate reductase

RGR Relative growth rate

ROS Reactive oxygen species

RWR Root weight ratio

SOD Superoxide dismutase

SRL Specific Root Length

SSL Specific Shoot Length

SWR Shoot weight ratio

xix

Summary

Salinity is a growing threat to crop production which affects sustainability of agriculture

in aridsemiarid areas Growth responses of plant to salinity vary considerably among

species Cajanus cajan Ziziphus mauritiana and Carissa carandas are sub-tropical crops

grown worldwide particularly in Asian subcontinent for edible and fodder purposes but

not much is known about their salinity tolerance and intercropping

Effect of salinity has been initially studied in present work at germination of C cajan

under different sea salt salinities using presoaked seeds with water and respective salt

solutions Seed germination decreased with increasing salinity and it was more sever in

presoaking under water of different salinities The 50 threshold reduction started at

ECiw= 35 dSm-1 sea salt in presoaking treatments However this threshold was decreased

up to ECiw= 168 dSm-1 sea salt at further seedling establishment stage Growth experiment

of C cajan in drum pot culture (Lysimeter) also showed a salt induced growth reduction

in which plant tolerate salinity up to 42 dSm-1 At this salinity leaf pigments (chlorophylls

and carotenoids) proteins and insoluble sugars decreased up to 50 whereas soluble

sugars were increased (~25) Reproductive growth was also affected at this salinity in

which at least 70 reduction in flowers pods and seeds were observed

Salt tolerance of symbiotic nitrogen fixing bacteria associated with root of C cajan

showed salinity tolerance up to ECw= 366 dSm-1 NaCl salinity invitro environment For

intercropping experiments Ziziphus mauritiana (grafted variety) was selected with C

cajan Preliminary investigations showed a growth promotion in Z mauritiana at low

salinity (ECe= 72 dSm-1) and growth was remained unaffected up to ECe= 111 dSm-1

Intercropping of C cajan with Z mauritiana was primarily done in drum pot (Lysimeter)

culture Result showed better growth responses of both species when growing together as

intercrops than sole in which encouraging results were found in 8th day irrigation interval

rather than of 4th day Biochemical parameters eg photosynthetic pigments protein

phenols electrolyte leakage and sugars of these species displayed increase or decrease

according to their growth responses Increased activity of antioxidant enzymes and that of

nitrate reductase and its substrate (NO3) also contributed in enhancement of growth

Field experiment of intercropping of above mentioned plants at marginal land

irrigated with underground water (Eciw= 28 dSm-1) showed better vegetative growth of

xx

both species than sole crop The overall reproductive growth remained unaffected

although the numbers size and weight of fruit were better in intercropping system

Photosynthetic pigments were mostly increased whereas leaf protein and sugars remained

unchanged In addition higher values of LER and LEC (gt 1) indicated the success of

intercropping system

Experiment on salinity tolerance of Carissa carandas (varn karonda) using drum

pots culture showed improvement at low salinity (up to ECiw= 42 dSm-1 sea salt) whereas

higher salinity (ECiw= 129 dSm-1 sea salt) adversely affected vegetative and reproductive

growth Plant managed to tolerate up to ECiw= 99 dSm-1 sea salt Salinity severely affected

biochemical parameters including photosynthetic pigments proteins and sugars whereas

leaf phenolics were increased Leaf accumulated high amount of Na+ whereas affect

absorption of essential minerals like K+ was decreased

In the light of above mentioned investigations it appears that C cajan can be

propagated in saline soils with good presoaking techniques in non-saline water which

would helped to grow at moderately saline conditions It could be a good option used as

intercrop species because of its ability to improve soil fertility even under water deficit

conditions The proposed Cajanus-Ziziphus intercropping system could help poor farmers

to generate income from unproductive soils by obtaining sufficient fodder from C cajan

for their cattle and producing delicious edible fruits from Z mauritiana for commercial

purposes Carissa carandas could also be introduced as new crop for producing fruits from

moderate saline waste lands and used for preparing prickle jam and jelly for industrial

purposes

xxi

لاصہ خ

کا عمل ے ں ب ڑھئ لف پ ودوں می ی ےمخ طرہ ہ

وا خ ا ہ ے ب ڑھی لئ داوار کے ی ں زرعی ب وں می

ر علاق ج

ن ی م ب

ر و ب ج ن کھاری پ ن کھاری پ ن ب

دا کروت ی ر اور ر ب ے ارہ ا ہ وت لف ہ ی ی مخ کاف ں ودگی می اص Subtropical کی موج ا اور خ ی و پ وری دب ں ج ی ں ہ صلی

کی ف طے

خ

وراک و ں ج می

ی ملکوں

ائ ی ش کھاکر ای کی ی ان پ ودوں کم لوگ ہ ہت کن ب ں لی ی ی ہ

وئ عمال ہ

ارے کے طور ب ر است ری پ ن سے خ

ں ی ے ہ ں علم رکھئ ارے می ے عمل کے ت گئ ے گائ

کر ا ھ ملا

ی سات ک ہ رواداری اور ات

وں ج ن ر کےب ے ارہ

ھگوئ ہلے سے ت ں ب کاز والے محلول می لف ارت ی

مک کے مخ

دری ں ں سمی ی مطالعہ می

دائ ی کھاری اب کا

کہ پ ن کے و ی ج وئ ع ہ

کمی واف ں ی ت می ب

کی طن وں ج ن

ھ ب ہ کے سات

اف ں اض کھاری پ ن می ا گی ا کی دہ اہ کا مش رات

iwEC =اب

1-35 dSm می خ ی کہ ت ی ج مک کے ب راب ررہ

دری ں زی سمی کا

ہ ارت ں ی ام می ی ت صدی dSm= iwEC 168-1پ ودوں کے ق

ق

ی ک رہ ں Lysemeterت ے والے پ ودوں می ڑھئ ں ب روان چ می 1-dSm 24 ں جوضلہ مک محلول می


ارت

ں کر می ر خل ب زب ر س ی

ات اور غ روز مادوں لمخی

گ اف الت ف کے رت ی ت

ائ ی ں ض کھاری پ ن می ی اس

گئ کھی

ت ت د زا ب رداش

ت صدی 05اف

ق

ی ش کم وب ں کر می ی کہ خل ب زب ر س ں 50کمی ج وں می ج ن

ھلی اورب ھول ت ں ت ن می ری ج دی ب ڑھوب ولی

ا پ ا رہ مات

ہ ں اف ت صدی اض

05ق

ی گئ کھی

ت ح طور د

کمی واض ت صدی

ق

ی وی شلک سہب ڑ سے می کی چ ر مک (Symbiotic)ارہ

کی ں ا رت ی

کٹ ی ے والے ب

کرئ مد خ

ن من روج ی

اب سے (NaCl)ت

ی ر کے سا dSmwEC 366 =-1رواداری ں ب ری ہ می ج ے عمل کے ت گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا

ی سات ک ہ یات

گئ کھی

ت ک د ر ت ھ ارہ

ت

بی ق کے ب

حق ی ت دائ ی ا اب گی ا ی

کھاری پ ن کو ج کم ں ے می ج ں dSme (Ec 72 =-1(ن ی کہ می ری ج ں ب ڑھوب ی ر می e (Ec =ب

)1-111 dSm ہل ہلے ب ے عمل ب گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا

ی سات ک ہ کو ات ر ی ر اور ب ی ارہ

ر رہ اب ر می ی

ک غ کی خد ت

Lysemeter ج ب رآم ت ا ی زا ب ی کے جوضلہ اف

اش ی ے سے آب

ف ف ھ دن کے و

سی ت آت

کی ی ار دن ی خ

گئ کی ں ں دمی ن می ے ج

وئ ہ

ے عمل گئ ے گائ

کر ا ھ ملا

ی سات ک ہ سی ت ات

کی ی ے پ ودوں

گائ

ن ہا ا کی پ ودوں ب شام

وں اق

ے دوپ ج گئ

ت ا ی زا ب ادہ جوضلہ اف ں زت می

ی ول ب ات ف روزمادوں لخمی


ائ ی ضلاات می درخ ی می

ائ کی می ی

ائ ےجی

وئ Electrolyteب رآمد ہ

Leakage کی کر ں س ی وں می ب ی ان پ ودوںاور ب

ی ش کمی ب ں دار می ی دپ ں مق

ں دکھائ ر می

اظ ی ری کے ب

کے ب ڑھوب

xxii

Antioxidant ی ظرح سے ہ اور اس ہ اف ں اض کی سرگرمی وں می امروں

اور اس کے Nitrate Reeducatesخ

Substrate )3(NO ا ی کا سی ب ب ہ اف ں اض ما می وں

ش ھی ی

ت

ےdSmiw(Ec 28 =-1(معمولی گئ ے ئ کب راب ں سی ی می ائ ہ ت والے ت درج ں می ری ہ می ج

ی ت ئ ن ہا زمب کی ب الا پ ودوں


کر ا ھ ملا



ادوں ب ر لگائ ی

ب ما ب وں

ش دی ی ولی

ے پ

وئ ج خاضل ہ

ت ا ی ر بہی ادہ ب ں زت می

ےض ر رہ ہی ں ب ام می ط ے ت گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا

ی سات ک ہ شامت اور وزن ات عداد ج

کی ت ھلوں ی کہ ت ی ج ر رہ اب ر می ی

الت ف ی غ ی ت

ائ

ی وئ ں ہ ہی

ع ب ی دت لی واف ی ب

کوئ ں دار می کی مق کر

ات اور س ں لمخی ی وں می ب ی کہ ب ہ ج

اف ا اض مات

ں ں روزمادوں می

گ اف د کے رت LER مزت

ے LEC (gt1)اور ی ہ کرئ ارہ کی ظرف اس ی ائ کامی کی ام

ط ے ت گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا

ی سات ری ات ک ہ

کی ب ڑھوب

ک دا کروت ں ری ہ می ج کھاری پ ن ) Lysemeterو کھاری پ ن روداری کے ت ا کم گی ا ں اگات iwEC = 142می

1-dSm ( کھاری پ ن ادہ ی کہ زت ی ج وئ ری ہ ہی ں ب مک( می


زی dSm= iwEC 129-1 ارت کا دری ارت سمی

ی وئ ر ہ

اب ری ب ری ظرح می

دی ب ڑھوب ولی

ی اور پ

ائ علی

ں ف مک( می

ی کہ ں ک dSm9= iw(Ec 9-1(ج مک ت


ارت

ت کب رداش ات اور س روز مادوں لخمی گ اف الت ف کے رت ی ت


ائ کی می ی

ائ ےجی اب رہ کامی ں ےمی

ر ب ری ظرح کرئ

ں ی وں می ب وا ب ہ ہ

اف ں اض ی ول می ب

ں ف ی وں می

ب ی کہ ب ں ج ی

وب ر ہ اب می

+Na ہ سے کی وج مع ی ج اف رلز کے K+اض روری می

ی سے ض ج

ی وئ ر ہ

اب کی ضلاجی ت می ے

کرئ زب چ

ا ت ق حق الا ت ہ ت درج ے ظر می

وئ ےہ

ھگوئ ں ت ی می

ائ ہلے سے ت کہ ب ی

ے آئ مئ ں ی ہ ت ات سا ی می

ئ کی روش ر ت ہ سے ارہ کی وج ے

ت ف

ھی مدد دے س ں ت ے می گئ ں ا ن می ن زمی مکی دل ں وکہ معی ے ج ا ہ اسکی ا خ ھی لگات

ں ت ن خالات می مکی کو ں وں ج ن

وزہ کے ب ے مج ا ہ کی

داواری ی ر ب ی ے عمل غ گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا

ی سات ک ہ ی ر ات ر اور ب ی ضلاجی ت والی ارہ

اف ے اض لئ وروں کے

اپ کی صور ت خ ر ن ارہ زمی

ھی دا ت کروت ے ا ہ وسکی ت ہ اب کا ذرت عہ ت ے ی ب ڑھائ

کی آمدئ وں

کشاپ ی صورت

ارئ ح کی ت ل

ھ ی ت وردئ دار ج ی ر سے مزت ارہ اور ب ی خ

عئصت

صل کے طور ب ی ف ئے ب لئ ے کے

کرئ دا ی ھل ب ن سے ت کارآمد زمی ر ی

ن اور غ مکی

دل ں ے معی

لئ اضد کے ے رمق ا ہ اسکی ا خ کی ی ش ب

1

General Introduction

Intercropping is a major resource conservation technique for sustainable agriculture under

various climatic conditions (Zhang et al 2010 Li et al 2014) It can reduced operational

cost for the production of multiple crops with maintained or even higher level of

productivity (Vandermeer 2010 Perfecto and Vandermeer 2010) It can enhance the

water use efficiency by saving 20 to 40 irrigation water with improved fertilizer

management (Fahong et al 2004 Jat et al 2005 Jani et al 2008) Intercropping system

is more suitable in marginal areas with lower mechanization and cultivation input by

farmers on small tracts of farmlands (Ngwira et al 2012) It can enhance the cumulative

production per unit area and protect the small farmers against market fluctuations or crop

failure ensure the income improve soil fertility and food demands (Rusinamhodzi et al

2012) In this system dominating more compatible and productive species are selected or

replaced in which complementarity effects and beneficial interactions resulting enhanced

yield as compared to monoculture (Huston 1997 Loreau and Hector 2001) It was

estimated that in species diverse systems biomass production is 17 times higher as

compared to monoculture (Cardinale et al 2007)

It is suggested that intercropping is the best suitable cropping system which can

improve the resource-use efficiency by procurement of limiting resources enhanced

phyto-availability and effective plants interactions (Marschner 2012 White and

Greenwood 2013 Ehrmann and Ritz 2014) It is widespread in many areas of world

particularly in latin America it is estimated about 70-90 by small farmers which mainly

grow maiz potatoes beans and other crops under this system whereas intercropping of

maiz with different crops is estimated about 60 (Francis 1986) Additionally

agroforestry is more than 1 billion ha in this area (Zomer et al 2009) The land used for

intercropping system of various crops is greatly varied from 17 in India to 98 in Africa

(Vandermeer 1989 1992 Dupraz and Liagre 2011)

In intercropping system two or more crops or genotypes coexist and growing

together at a same time on a similar habitat (Li et al 2013) It may be divided into various

types such as in mixed intercropping system two or more crops simultaneously growing

without or with limited distinct arrangements whereas in relay intercropping system

second crop is planted when the first is matured while in strip intercropping both the crops

2

are simultaneously growing in strips which can facilitate the cultivation and crop

interactions (Ram et al 2005 Sayre and Hobbs 2004)

Several less-conventional fruit tress including Manilkara zapota (Chicko)

Ziziphus mauritiana (Jujubar) Carissa carndas (Karanda) Annona squamosa (Sugar

apple) and Grewia asiatica (Falsa) has been reported with high nutritional value with

capability to grow at marginal lands (Mass and hoffman 1997) Qureshi and Barrett-

Lennard (1998) suggested few grafted plants that can widely use to improve the quality

and productivity of fruits Grafting is also used to induce stress tolerance in plants against

various abiotic and biotic stresses including salinity stress (Rivero et al 2003) Both root

stocks and shoot stocks contribute to increase the tolerance level of plants Root stocks

represent the first part of defense to control the uptake and translocation of nutrients and

salts throughout the plant (Munns 2002 Santa-cruz et al 2002 Zrig et al 2011) while

shoot stocks develops physiological and biochemical changes to promote plant growth

under stress conditions (Moya et al 2002 Chen et al 2003)

Ziziphus mauritiana Lamk (varn grafted ber) belongs to the family Rhamnaceae

grows widely in most of the dry tropical and subtropical regions around the world Various

grafting methods are used for their propagation including wedge and whip or tongue

methods (Nerd and Mizrahi 1998) Intercropping of these grafted fruit trees with various

leguminous crops is also being successfully practiced in many countries thought the world

Leguminous crops are considered excellent symbiotic nitrogen fixing crops It can

effectively improve soil fertility and offset the critical problems of sub-tropical areas to

fight against desertification and soil degradation These plants are considered as an

excellent source of proteins for humans and animals They can fix the 90 of atmospheric

nitrogen and contribute 40 nitrogen to the soil thus increase the soil fertility (Peoples et

al 1995) However most of the leguminous plants are not salt tolerant while some

species are better drought tolerant and effectively contribute in marginal lands (Zahran

1999)

Among the leguminous plants Pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan (L) Millspaugh) of the

family Fabaceae is widely grown for food fodder and fuel production particularly in

semiarid areas The salinity tolerance of this specie is not well documented both at

germination and seedling stages This crop is still underexploited due to its edible and

3

economic importance While limited investigations has been made to uncover its

nutritional quality medicinal uses and drought tolerance

The identical physiological traits are important in both the mono and intercropping

systems to maximize the resource acquisition The exploitation of best possible

combination of traits of different plants in intercropping system is very important to

maximize the overall performance in intercropping system It depends on the above ground

beneficial plant interactions for light space and optimal temperatures (Wojtkowski 2006

Zhang et al 2010 Shen et al 2013 Ehrmann and Ritz 2014) as well as the

complementary below ground plant interactions with soil biotic factors (Bennett et al

2013 Li et al 2014)

Water is also a major limiting factor intercropping can enhanced the acquisition

of water by root architecture and distribution in the soil profile for effective utilization of

rainfall (Zegada-Lizarazu et al 2006 De Barros et al 2007) and enhanced the water use

efficiency for effective hydraulic redistribution by deep rooted crops and water stored in

the soil profile (Morris and Garrity 1993 Xu et al 2008) Mycorrhizal networks around

the roots of intercrop plants also enhanced the availability of water and available resources

and reduced the surface runoff (Caldwell et al 1998 Van-Duivenbooden et al 2000

Prieto et al 2012)

Intercropping with leguminous plants can enhanced the agricultural productivity in

less productive soils due to enhanced nitrogen availability and also improved the soil

fertility by effective nitrogen fixation (Seran and Brintha 2010 Altieri et al 2012) Due

to weaker soil nitrogen competition intercropping with legumes enhanced the nitrogen

availability to the non-leguminous intercrop which also absorbs the additional nitrogen

released in the soil or root nodules of the leguminous plant (Li et al 2013 White et al

2013a) The use of legumes in many intercropping systems is pivotal According to the

listing of Hauggaard-Nielsen and Jensen (2005) seven out of ten are the legumes among

the most frequently used intercrops around the world

The ecological range of adaptability of legumes reaches from the inner tropics to

arctic regions with individual species expressing tolerance to drought temperature

nutrient deficiency in soil water logging salinity and other environmental conditions

(Craig et al 1990 Hansen 1996) The woody perennial leguminous plants have a number

4

of purposes they can be used to reclaim degraded wastelands retard erosion and provide

shade fuel wood timber and green manure (Giller and Wilson 1991)

Trees with nitrogen fixing capability play an important role to offset the critical

problems of tropical and sub-tropical regions in their fight against desert encroachment

and soil impoverishment These plants are capable to live in N-poor soils through their

association with Rhizobium that fix atmospheric nitrogen Nitrogen fixing activity in the

field depends both on their N2-fixing potential and on their tolerance to existing

environmental stresses (Galiana et al 2002) Symbiotic N2 fixation in leguminous plants

can mainly be considered an excellent source of protein supply for human and animal

consumption They range from extensive pasture legumes to intensive grain legumes and

are estimated to contribution up to 40 of their nitrogen to the soil (Simpson 1987)

The traits in the monocropping system in the selected crop extensively exploit the

acquisition of limiting resources in the environment and continuously focused on the

availably of similar resources for the successful crop production (White et al 2013 ab)

whereas in intercropping with different crops cycling of resources can be optimized to

the complementarity or facilitation traits (Costanzo and Barberi 2014) to overcome

resource limitations during the growing season (Hill 1996 George et al 2014)

For the long term sustainable agriculture and food production in resource limiting

areas with lower input Intercropping systems have the potential to increase the

productivity With efficient mechanization cultural practices and optimized nutrient

management rapid improvements are also possible through this system In future

perspective intercrops with higher resource use efficiency through plant breeding and

genetics is likely to be the most effective option for sustainable agriculture and

development

Increase of world population and demand of additional food production

The demand and production gap of food fodder fuel wood and livestock products is

increasing day by day due to global population which will increase from about 7 billion

(FAO 2014) to 9 billion by 2050 (Haub 2013) The increasing urbanization further

intensifies the problem which will increase from 54 to 66 expected in 2050 (UN

2014) Majority of this rise in urbanization will occur in developing countries around the

5

globe The major problem is to meet the challenge of increasing food demand for this ever

growing population up to 70 more food crops to feed the additional 23 billion population

worldwide by 2050 (FAO 2010 2011) Hence there is great need to increase the re-

vegetation for fuel wood and fodder production (Thomson 1987) An increase in

production could be envisaged through increasing the yield of already productive land or

through more extensive use of unproductive land The high concentration of salts in soil

or water does not let the conventional crops grow and give feasible economic return

Hence it is necessary to search for unconventional crops for foods fodder and fuel which

could give profitable yield under saline conditions (Ahmad and Ismail 1993) Reclamation

of this land through chemical and engineering treatments is very expensive The most

appropriate use of saline wasteland is the production of high yielding salt tolerance fuel

wood timber and forage species (Qureshi et al 1993) Therefore the most attractive

option is to screen a range of species and identify those which have potential of being

commercially valuable for the degraded environments (Ismail et al 1993)

Pakistan is in semi-arid region and the 6th most populated county of the world

Population drastically increased in Pakistan which was 80 million in 1980 and annual

increase in population is about 4 million (UNDES 2011) This is continuously

overburdened and it is estimated that in 2025 it will reach to 250 million and 335 million

in 2050 which decrease the available water per capita to less than 600 m3 resulting 32

shortfall of water requirements causing an alarming condition particularly for Pakistan

Furthermore this shortfall in 2050 leading to severe food shortage upto 70 million tones

which indicates the further development and serious measures for the new resources

(ADB 2002) Subsequent severe food and fodder crises along with all the resource

limitations with continuous increase in urbanization from the current 35 to 52 in 2025

will further intensity the agriculture production and demand

Shortage of good quality irrigation water

On earth surface the major resources of available fresh water is deposited in the form of

ponds lakes rivers ice sheets and caps streams and glaciers whereas underground water

as underground streams and aquifers With the drastic increase in population the water

consumption rise as the twice of the speed of population growth The scarcity of water is

widespread to many countries of different regions Majority of population in developing

countries suffering from seasonal or year round water shortage which will increase with

6

expected climatic changes Currently almost 50 countries around the globe are facing

moderate to severe shortage of water

Due to the greenhouse effect it is estimated that since the start of 20th century 14

degF temperature is already risen which will likely rise at least another 2degF and over the next

100 years it is estimated about more than 11degF due to the consequences of biogenic gases

(El-Sharkawy 2014) This is mainly due to the product of human activities including

industrial malpractices excess fossil fuel consumption deforestation poor land use and

cultural practices

Rising in atmospheric CO2 concentration which probably reached 700 μmol (CO2)

molminus1 resulting severe climatic changes It will accelerate the melting of ice and glacier

resulting the rising rainfall and storms in tropics and high latitude consequently 06 to 1

meter rise in sea level on the expense of costal lowlands across the continents After this

initial high flows the decrease in inflow was very terrifying Due to these climatic changes

humans suffering from socioeconomic changes including degradation of lands with lower

agricultural output and degradation of natural resources will further enhanced the poverty

and hunger resulting dislocation and human migrations (Randalls 2010)

In the mean while scarcity of good quality water is increasing day by day with the

demands of water for domestic agricultural and industrial utilization which will further

increase up to 10 of the total available resources as estimated by 2025 which needs

serious water managements (Bhutta 1999) It is very challenging for the modern

agriculture to ensure the increasing demand of more arable and overburdened population

with the limiting resources including the unavailability of good quality water and

deterioration of even previously productive land (Du et al 2015)

In Pakistan Indus River basin is the back bone of agriculture and socioeconomic

development which contributes 65 of the total river flows and 90 for the food

production with a share of 25 to the GDP It is estimated that about 30-40 of its surface

storage capacity will reduce by 2025 due to siltation of reservoirs and climatic changes It

will impose serious threat to irrigated agriculture in near future consequently with

decreases in groundwater resources resulting shortage of fresh water and 15-20

reduction in grain yield in Pakistan (World Bank 2006)

7

Spread of saline soil and reduction in agricultural yield

Along with scarcity of water soil salinity is one of the major environmental stresses which

severely threaten the agriculture The damages of salinity is widespread around the world

which is so far effected the more than 800 million hectare (more than 6) of land

worldwide including 397 million ha by salinity associated with 434 million ha by sodicity

(FAO 2010) The out of total 230 million hactares of irrigated land more than 45 million

hactares (20) is so far effected by salinity which is about the 15 of total cultivated land

(Munns and Tester 2008)

In Pakistan out of 2036 million hectares of cultivated land more than 6 million

hectares is affected by salinity and water logging of various degrees (Qureshi et al 2004)

About 16 million hectares of tropical arid plains which have been put under crop

cultivation depend extensively on canal irrigation network This area (about 60) is now

seriously affected by water logging and salinity (Qureshi et al 2004) The rise of subsoil

water levels accompanied by its subsequent decline due to irrigation combined with

insufficient drainage has led to salinization of valuable agricultural land in arid zones all

over the world (Ahmad and Abdullah 1982) The dominated cation in salt-affected soil is

Na+ followed by Ca2+ and Mg2+ while the anions Cl and SO4 are almost equal in

occurrence (Qureshi et al 1993) Salt content varies in different regions of the salt-

affected areas but at certain sites could reach up to an ECe of 90-102 dSm-1 (Ahmad and

Ismail 1993)

Salinity is a chief anxiety to meet the ever growing demands of food crops Salinity

adversely affects the plant growth and productivity Plants differentially respond to salt

stress and categories into four classes Salt sensitive moderately salt sensitive moderately

salt tolerant and highly salt tolerant plants on the basis of their tolerance limits Whereas

mainly plants are divided into halophytes (salt tolerant) and glycophytes (salt sensitive) on

the basis of adaptive evolution (Flowers 2004 Munns and Tester 2008) Unfortunately

majority of cultivated crops are not able to withstand in higher salinity regimes and

eventually die under higher saline conditions which proposed serious attentions to manage

the dissemination of salinity (James et al 2011 Rozema and Flowers 2008)

Excessive accumulation of salts in rhizosphere initially reduced the water

absorption capacity of roots leading to hyperosmotic stress followed by specific ion

8

toxicity (Munns 2008 Rahnama et al 2010) Plants initially manage the overloaded salt

by various excluding and avoidance mechanisms depending on their tolerance levels The

management of salt inside the cytosol is depends on the compartmentalization capacity of

plants followed by osmotic adjustments and efficient antioxidant defense mechanisms

Whereas higher salt beyond the tolerance impose injurious effects on various

physiological mechanisms These are including disruption of membrane integrity

increased membrane injuries nutrient ion imbalances osmotic disturbance

overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) compromised photosynthesis and

respiration due to stomatal closure and damages of enzymatic machinery (Munns and

Tester 2008) In specific ion toxicity Na+ and Cl- are the chief contributors in

physiological disorders Excessive Na+ in rhizosphere antagonize the uptake of K+

resulting lower growth and productivity (James et al 2011) Salt load in the cytosol trigger

the overproduction of ROS including H2O2 OH- super oxides and singlet oxygen They

are involved in sever oxidative damages to various vital cellular components including

DNA RNA lipids and proteins (Apel and Hirt 2004 Ahmad and Umar 2011)

Strategies to cope up the salinity problem

The development and cultivation of highly salt tolerant crop varieties for salt affected areas

is the major necessity to meet the future demands of food production whereas the majority

of available food crops are glycophytes Therefore it is an emergent need of crop

improvement methods which are more efficient cost effective and grow on limiting

resource The use of poor quality water for irrigation is also very important under the

proposed shortage of fresh water in near future For the development of salt tolerant

varieties more understanding of stress mechanisms are required at whole plant molecular

and cellular levels

The variability in stress tolerance of salt sensitive genotypes (glycophytes) and

highly salt tolerant plants (halophytes) showed genetic basis of salt tolerance It indicate

that salt tolerance is a multigenic trait which involves variety of gene expressions and

related mechanisms Salt stress induces both the qualitative and quantitative changes in

gene expression (Manchanda and Garg 2008) These multigenetic expressions play a key

role in upregulation of various proteins and metabolites responsible for the management

of anti-stress mechanisms (Bhatnagar-Mathur et al 2008) Plant breeding and transgenic

strategies are intensively used for decades to improve the crop performance under salinity

9

and aridity conditions Few stress tolerant varieties are so far released for commercial

production whereas in natural condition where plant exposed to variety of climatic

conditions the overall performance of plant have changed as compared to controlled in

invitro conditions (Schubert et al 2009 and Dodd and Perez-Alfocea 2012) The success

stories about transgenic approaches for crop improvement under stressful environments

are still very scanty because of the insufficient understanding about the sophisticated

mechanisms of stress tolerance (Joseph and Jini 2010) It indicates that there is less

correlation between the assessment of stress tolerance in invitro and invivo conditions

Although there have been some achievement in this connection in some model plants

including rice tobacco and Arabidopsis (Grover et al 2003) which proposed the

possibilities of success in other crops in future Variety of technicalities and associated

financial challenges are still associated with this strategy

In conventional cultivation practices continuous irrigation with poor quality water

can enhanced the salinization due to evapotranspiration leading to increased saline andor

sodic soils This problem can be cope up by intercropping system in which high salt

tolerant or salt accumulator plants are intercropped with salt sensitive crops which can

accumulate salt thus can reduce the risk of salt increment in soil Additionally better

cultivation practices including the micro-jet or drip irrigation and partial root zone drying

technique is also very fruitful to optimize the water requirements and avoid the risks

associated with conventional flooding irrigation system

In dry land agriculture plantation of deep rooted perennials during off season or

annuals can reduced the risk of salinization They continuously grown and utilize excess

amount of water create a balance between water utilization and rail fall Thus prevent the

chance of salt accumulation on soil surface due to increased water table and

evapotranspiration (Manchanda and Garg 2008) The efficient irrigation and

intercropping strategy is seemed quite attractive cost effective and very beneficial in less

mechanized poor marginal areas It can ameliorate the injurious effects of salinity and

increased production per unit area thus ensure the sustainable agriculture in semi-arid or

marginal lands (Venkateswarlu and Shanker 2009)

A number of plant species are available that are highly compatible with saline

sodic and marginal lands The cultivation of these species with proposed intercropping

system is economically feasible to grow in marginal soil Some plants including Carissa

10

carandus Ziziphus mauritiana and Cajanus cajan was selected to revealed their potential

for intercropping under saline marginal lands These are important plants which can

established well at tropical and subtropical arid zone under high temperatures Hence their

range of salt tolerance and suitability for cultivation at waste saline land or with saline

water irrigation is being undertaken for commercial exploitation

Objective of present investigation

The plan of present investigation has been worked out to look into possibility of increasing

production of an unconventional salt tolerant fruit tree (Z mauritiana) by intercropping

with a legume ( C cajan) which apart from increasing fertility of soil could be able to

provide fodder for grazing animals from salt effected waste land Possibility of making

use of saline water for irrigation has also been considered for growing leguminous plant

(C cajan) and salt tolerant unconventional fruit tree (Crissa carandas) under saline

condition

11

LAYOUT OF THESIS

Chapter 1 Monoculture of Cajanus cajan (Vern Arhar) and Ziziphus mauritiana

(Varn Ber) under different range of salinities created by irrigation of

various sea salt concentrations

A Experiments on Cajanus cajan

Following experiments were performed under A

Experiment No 1 Effect of Pre-soaked seeds of C cajan in distilled water for

germination in water of different sea salt concentrations

Experiment No 2 Effect of Pre-soaked seeds of C cajan in various dilutions of sea salt

for germination in water of respective sea salt concentrations

Experiment No 3 Seedling establishment experiment of C cajan on soil irrigated with

sea salt of different concentrations

Experiment No 4 Growth and development of C cajan in Lysimeter (Drum pot culture)

being irrigated with water of different sea salt concentrations

Experiment No 5 Range of salt tolerance of nitrogen fixing symbiotic bacteria

associated with root of C cajan

B Experiments on Ziziphus mauritiana

Experiment No 6 Growth and development of Z mauritiana in large size clay pot being

irrigated with water of two different sea salt concentrations

Discussion (Chapter 1)

Chapter 2 Intercropping of Ziziphus mauritiana with Cajanus cajan

Experiment No 7 Physiological investigations on Growth of Ziziphus mauritiana and

Cajanus cajan intercropped in drum pot (Lysimeter) culture being

irrigated with water of sea salt concentration at two irrigation

intervals

Experiment No 8 Investigations of intercropping Ziziphus mauritiana with Cajanus

cajan on marginal land under field conditions

12


Chapter 3 Investigations on rang of salt tolerance in Carissa carandas (varn

karonda) for determining possibility of growing at waste saline land

Experiment No 9 Investigation on the effect of higher range of salinities on growth of

Carissa carandas (varn karonda) created by irrigation of different



13

1 Chapter 1

Monoculture of Cajanus cajan (Vern Arhar) and Ziziphus mauritiana

(Varn Ber) under different range of salinity created by irrigation of


11 Introduction

Scarcity of good quality water enforced the growers to irrigate the crops with

lowmoderately saline water at marginal lands which ultimately enhance soil salinity due

to high evapo-transpiration (Azeem and Ahmad 2011) To overcome this situation people

are now focusing on less-conventional plants which can grow on resource limited areas

and can produce edible biomass for human and animal consumption

Ziziphus mauritiana (varn grafted ber) is salt and drought tolerant plant which can

grow on marginal and degraded land (Morton 1987) It has wide spread crown and a short

bole fast growing tree with average bearing life of 25 years The ripe fruit (drupe) is juicy

hard or soft sweet-tasting pulp has high sugar content vitamins A amp C carotene

phosphorus and calcium (Nyanga et al 2013 2008 Pareek 2013) The leaves contain 6

digestible crude protein and an excellent source of ascorbic acid and carotenoids The

leaves are used as forage for cattlesheepgoats and also palatable for human consumption

(Sharma et al 1982 Bal and Mann 1978 Agrawal et al 2013) The timber is very hard

can be worked to make boats charcoal and poles for house building Roots bark leaves

wood seeds and fruits are reputed to have medicinal properties The tree also used as a

source of tannins dyes silk (via silkworm fodder) shellac and nectar (Dahiru et al 2006

Chrovatia et al 1993 Gupta 1993)

Some atmospherics nitrogen fixing bacterial associated deep rooted drought

tolerent leguminious plants like Cajanus cajan can fix up to 200 Kg nitrogen ha-1 year-1

due to symbiotic association of Rhizobium with its deep penetrating roots (Bhattacharyya

et al 1995) Total cultivated area of Pigeon pea is about 622 million hectare and global

annual crop production is around 474 million tonnes whereas total seed production of

this crop is about 015 million tonnes (FAOSTAT 2013) Its seeds are an excellent source

of good quality protein (up to 24) and foliage is used as animal fodder with high

nutritional value (Pandey et al 2014) Besides being used as food and fodder this plant

14

also have therapeutic value and it is used against diabetes fever dysentery hepatitis and

measles (Grover et al 2002) It also use traditionally as a laxative and was identified as

an anti-malarial remedy beside other medicinal species (Ajaiyeoba et al 2013 Qasim et

al 2010 2011 2014)

Following experiments were conducted to evaluate the seed germination seedling

establishment and growth of C cajan as well as grafted sapling of Z mauritiana under

various salinity regimes Investigations were also undertaken to find-out of their

intercropping has any beneficial effect on growth at marginal saline land saline

environment

15

12 Experiment No 1

Effect of Pre-soaked seeds of Cajanus cajan in distilled water for


121 Materials and methods

1211 Seed collection

Seeds of C cajan were purchased from local seed market Mirpurkhas Sindh and were

tested to determine the effect of salinity on germination at the biosaline laboratory Botany

department Karachi University Karachi The best lot of healthy seeds having 100

germination was selected for further experiments

1212 Experimental Design

Seeds of C cajan were surface sterilized with 01 sodium hypochlorite solution for 2-3

minutes washed in running tap water then soaked in sterilized distilled water for one hour

(Saeed et al 2014) Sterilized glass petri plates (9cm) lined with filter paper were moist

with 10 ml of distilled water at different saline water of different sea salt concentrations

and their germination percentage was observed Their electrical conductivities on these

sea salt dilutions are mentioned in Table 11 Three replicates were used for each treatment

Ten seed were placed in each petri plate which were kept in temperature controlled

incubator (EYELA LTI-1000 Japan) at 28 plusmn 1ordmC in dark Experiment was continued for 7

days Data were recorded on daily bases Analyses of varience by using repeated measures

and the significant differences between treatment means were examined by least

significant difference (Zar 2010) All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS for

windows version 14 and graphs were plotted using Sigma plot 2000

Germination percentage of C cajan was recorded every 24 hours per seedling

evaluation procedure up to 07 days The final percent germination related with salinity in

accordance with Maas and Hoffman (1977) The percent germination was calculated using

the following formula (Cokkizgin and Cokkizgin 2010)

16

Germination index for C cajan was recorded according to AOSA (1990) by using

following formula

Where Gt is the number of germinated seed on day t and Dt is the total number of

days (1 - 7)

Coefficient of germination velocity of C cajan was calculated described by Maguire

(1962)

Where G represents the number of germinated seeds counted per day till the end of

experiment

Mean germination time of C cajan was calculated by Ellis and Roberts (1981) by

using following formula

Where lsquonrsquo is the number of germinated seeds in day d whereas Σn is the total

germinated seeds during experimental period

Germination rate was of C cajan determined according to following formula

(Shipley and Parent 1991)

Where numbers of germinated seeds were recorded from 1 to 7

17

122 Observations and Results

Cajanus cajan (imbibed in distilled water) grown at different salinity regimes showed 50

reduction at 16 salt concentration corresponding ECiw 168 dSm-1 (Table 1 2 Appendix

I)

Rate of germination was inversely correlated with sea salt concentration It was

significantly (p lt 0001) decreased from first day to final (day 7) of observation Higher

germination rate was recorded in control and at lower concentrations of sea salt in early

days of seed incubation with contrast to higher concentrations of sea salt which was

reduced with increasing day of incubation (Table 13 Appendix I)

A significant decrease (p lt 0001) in coefficient of germination velocity was

observed with increasing salinity (Table 14 Appendix I)

A significantly increase (p lt 0001) in mean germination time of seeds was observed

with increasing sea salt concentrations However the difference was insignificant at lower

salinities (Table 14 Appendix I)

A significant decrease (p lt 0001) in mean germination index was observed with

increasing salt concentrations except lower salinities More reduction was observed

byhond 16 and onward sea salt concentration (Table 14 Appendix I)

18

Table 11 Electrical conductivities of different sea salt solutions used in germination of C cajan

Sea salt () ECiw (dSm-1)

Non saline control 06

01 09

02 16

03 35

04 42

05 58

06 62

07 79

08 88

09 99

10 101

11 112

12 128

13 131

14 145

15 159

16 168

ECiw is the electrical conductivity of irrigation water measured in deci semen per meter

19

Table 12 Effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solutions on germination percentage (GP) per day

of C cajan seeds pre-soaked in non-saline water prior to germination with duration of time under

various salinity regimes

Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day

Control 8333plusmn667 90plusmn00 9333plusmn333 9333plusmn333 9333plusmn333 9333plusmn333 9333plusmn333

09 8667plusmn333 9333plusmn333 9667plusmn333 9667plusmn333 100plusmn00 100plusmn00 100plusmn00



42 70plusmn00 8667plusmn333 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00

58 6333plusmn667 7333plusmn333 8333plusmn333 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00

62 5667plusmn667 80plusmn577 90 plusmn00 90plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90plusmn00



99 2667plusmn333 60 plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00 90 plusmn00





145 3333plusmn667 40 plusmn00 50 plusmn577 50plusmn577 50 plusmn577 5333plusmn333 5333plusmn333



LSD 005 Salinity 18496

Time (days) 13322

Fisherrsquos least significant difference

Values represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and LSD among the treatments is recorded at p lt 005

20

Table 13 Effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solutions on germination rate (GR) per day

of seeds C cajan pre-soaked in non-saline water prior to germination with duration of

time under various salinity regimes

Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day



















Time (days) 0378



21

Table 14 Effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solutions on mean germination rate (GR)

coefficient of germination velocity (GV) mean germination time (GT) mean

germination index (GI) and final germination (FG) of C cajan seeds pre-soaked in non-

saline water prior to germination under various salinity regimes

Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1) GR GV GT GI FG

Control 2624plusmn100 369plusmn005 027plusmn00 2624plusmn100 9667plusmn333

09 2743plusmn063 365plusmn009 027plusmn001 2743plusmn063 100plusmn00
















LSD005 5344 3312 0064 5344 1313



22

13 Experiment No 2

Effect of Pre-soaked seeds of Cajanus cajan in various dilutions of sea

salt for germination in water of respective sea salt concentrations


1311 Seed germination

Procedure of seed germination has been mentioned in Experiment No 1 earlier The seeds

were pre-soaked in various sea salt concentrations instead of non-saline water and

germinated in respective sea salt concentrations Their electrical conductivities mentioned

in Table 15 Data were calculated and analysed according to formulas given in Experiment

No 1

Since these pre-soaked seeds in different sea salt concentration showed 50

germination at 03 equivalent to ECiw= 42dSm-1 sea salt solution any further work

beyond ECiw= 42dSm-1was not continued


The final percent germination related with salinity in accordance with Maas and

Hoffman (1977) linear relative threshold response model as follows

Relative Final Germination = 100-200 (Ke ndash 005)

Where threshold salt concentration was 005 and Ke is the concentration of salts

at which relative final germination may be predicted This model indicated 50

declined in final germination at 030 salt concentration corresponding to ECiw= 42

dSm-1 (Table 16 Appendix II)

Rate of germination was significantly decreased (p lt 0001) from first day to final

(day 07) of observation and it was inversely correlated with sea salt concentration High

germination rate was recorded in control and low sea salt concentrations in early days of

seed incubation compared to higher sea salt concentrations but the difference in rate was

reduced (Table 17 Appendix II)

23

A progressive decline (p lt 0001) in coefficient of germination velocity was

observed with increasing salinity and fifty percent reduction was observed at 021 sea

salt concentration (ECiw = 319 dSm-1 Figure 11 Appendix II)

Final germination percentage was decreased significantly with increasing sea salt

concentrations However the difference was insignificant at lower (ECiw = 16 dSm-1)

salinity (Figure 11 Appendix II)

Mean germination time of seeds was increased significantly (p lt 0001) with

increasing sea salt concentrations However the difference was insignificant at lowest

(ECiw = 09 dSm-1) salinity (Figure 11 Appendix II)

Mean germination index was also significantly decreased (plt0001) with

increasing salt concentrations except for ECiw = 09 dSm-1 salinity Fifty percent reduction

in mean germination index was observed at 0188 sea salt concentration (ECiw = 289

dSm-1 Figure 11 Appendix II)

24



0 04

005 09

01 16

015 24

02 32

025 39

03 42


25

Table 16 Effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solutions on germination percentage (GP) per day of C cajan seeds pre-soaked in respective sea salt concentrations


Sea salt

ECiw (dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day








LSD 005 Salinity 327 Time 327


Values represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and LSD among the treatments was recorded at p lt 005

25

26

Table 17 Effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solutions on germination rate (GR) per day of Ccajan

seeds pre-soaked in respective sea salt concentrations with duration of time

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day









Time 014 Fisherrsquos least significant difference

Values represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and LSD among the treatments is recorded at p lt 005)

27

Sea salt (ECiw = dSm-1

)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42

Germ

ination Index(s

eedd

ays

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Fin

al germ

ination (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Coeff

icie

nt of

germ

ination v

elo

city

(seedd

ays

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42G

erm

ination tim

e (

Days

)

0

1

2

3

4

LSD005 = 0086

a = 0664 b = 1572

R2 = 0905 n =21

LSD005 = 062

a = 1239

b = 9836

R2 = 0894 n=21

LSD005 = 053

a = 8560b = -2272

R2 = 0969 n=21

RGF = 100-200 (Ke -005) Ke = 030

Figure 11 Effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solutions on seed germination indices of C cajan

(Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and significance among the treatments

was recorded at p lt 005)

28

14 Experiment No 3

Seedling establishment experiment of Cajanus cajan on soil irrigated with



1411 Seedling establishment

Seedling establishment experiment was carried out in Biosaline research field Department

of Botany University of Karachi Surface sterilized seeds pre-soaked were sown in small

plastic pots filled with 15 Kg sandy loam soil provided with farm manure at 91 ratio (30

water holding capacity) Sea salt solutions of different concentrations mentioned above

were used for irrigation The electrical conductivity of soil saturated paste (ECe) was also

determined at the end of the experiment (Table 18) Data on seedlings emergence was

recorded and their height were measured after 14 days of salinity treatment EC of the soil

(ECe) was initially 054 dSm-1 Statistical analyses were done according to the procedures

given in Experiment No 1

Since germination percentage of seeds pre-soaked in non-saline water was found

better under different concentrations of sea salt the seeds sown in soil for taking for

seedling establishment were pre-soaked in distilled water

29



Seedling emergence from soil was reduced significantly (p lt 0001) with increasing salt

concentration of irrigation water Not a single seedling emerged from soil in ge ECiw= 39

dSm-1 saline water irrigation However lower salinities (ECiw= 09 16 dSm-1) showed

slight decrease in seedling emergence with respect to controls Seedling emergence related

with salinity in accordance with a quadratic model as follows

Equation for seedling emergence () = 977751+ 44344 salt ndash 22215238 (salt)2 plusmn

6578 r = 09810 F = 15358 (p lt 00001)

Fifty percent reduction in seedling emergence was noticed at 016 sea salt

concentration (ECiw = 241 dSm-1 Figure 12 Appendix III)

1422 Shoot height

Shoot height was measured after fourteen days of irrigation Shoot length was

significantly decreased (p lt 0001) with increasing salinity A lower decrease was

observed in low sea salt salinity (ECiw= 09 and 16 dSm-1) compared to controls while

higher decrease in shoot height was noticed from ECiw= 2 dSm-1sea salt concentration

Shoot height related with salinity as follows

Equation for shoot height (cm) = 9116714 ndash 3420286 salt plusmn 09221 r = 0968 F =

128893 (p lt 0001)

Fifty percent reduction in shoot height was estimated at 013 sea salt concentration

(ECiw = 210 dSm-1) (Figure 12 Appendix III)

30

Table 18 Electrical conductivities of different Sea salt concentrations and ECe of soil saturated paste at the

end of experiment (ECe = 0447 + 1204 (salt ) plusmn 02797 R = 0987 F = 72301 (p lt

000001)

Sea salt () ECiw (dSm-1) ECe (dSm-1)

0 04 05

005 09 161

01 16 278

015 24 354

02 32 433

025 39 483

03 42 552

Electrical conductivity of soil saturated paste determined after 14 days of saline water irrigation in pots

Figure 12 Effect of irrigating water of different sea salt solutions on seedling emergence (A) and shoot

length (B) of C cajan (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment where similar

letters are not significantly different at p lt 005)

e f


)

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3

Shoot le

ngth

(cm

)

0

2

4

6

8

10ab

c

de

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3Seedlin

g e

merg

ence (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100a

bb

c

d

A B

31

15 Experiment No 4

Growth and development of Cajanus cajan in Lysimeter (Drum pot

culture) being irrigated with water of different sea salt concentrations


1511 Drum pot culture

A modified drum pot culture (lysimeter) installed by Ahmad amp Abdullah (1982) at

Biosaline research field (Department of Botany University of Karachi) was used in

present experiment Each drum pot (60 cm diameter 90 cm depth) was filled with 200 kg

of sandy loam mixed with cow-dung manure (91) having 28 water holding capacity

They are fixed at cemented platform at slanting position with basal hole to ensure rapid

drain Over irrigation was practiced to avoid the accumulation of salt in the root zone

1511 Experimental design

Growth and development of C cajan in drum pots was carried out in six different drum

pot sets (each in triplicate) and irrigated with sea salt of following concentrations

Drum pot Sets Sea salt

()

ECiw ( dSm-1) of

irrigation water

Resultant ECe (dSm-1) after

end of experiment

Set I Non saline (C) 04 05

Set II 005 sea salt 09 16

Set III 001 sea salt 16 28

Set IV 015 sea salt 24 35

Set V 02 sea salt 28 38

Set VI 025 sea salt 34 43

Note ECiw is the electrical conductivity of irrigation water and ECe is the electrical conductivity of the saturated soil extract taken after

eighteen weeks at the end of experiment

Ten surface sterilized seeds with 01 sodium hypochlorite were sowed in each

drum pot and were thinned to three healthy and equal size seedlings after two weeks of

establishment in their respective sea salt concentration Each drum pot was irrigated with

15 liters non-saline or respective sea salt solution at weekly intervals Electrical

conductivity of soil was measured by EC meter (Jenway 4510) using saturated soil paste

32

at the end of experiment Experiment was conducted for a period of 18 weeks (July to

November 2009) during which environmental data which includes average humidity

(midnight 76 and noon 54) temperature (low 23oC and high 33oC) wind velocity (14

kmph) and rainfall (~4 cm) was recorded (Pakistan Metrological Department Karachi) is

given in Figure 13Statistics were analysed according to the procedures given in

Experiment No 1

1512 Vegetative and Reproductive growth

Shoot height was measured at every two week interval after seedling establishment Fresh

and dry weight of shoot was recorded at final harvest (18th week when pods were fully

matured) Leaf succulence (dry weight basis Abideen et al 2014) Specific shoot length

(SSL Panuccio et al 2014) and relative growth rate (RGR Moinuddin et al 2014) were

measured using following equations

Succulence (g H2O gminus1 DW) = (FW minus DW) DW

SSL = shoot length shoot dry weight

RGR (g gminus1 dayminus1) = (lnW2 - lnW1) (t2 - t1)

Whereas FW fresh weight DW dry weight W1 and W2 initial and final dry weights and

t1 and t2 initial and final time of harvest in days

Reproductive data in terms of number of flowers number of pods number of seeds

and seed weight per plants was recorded during reproductive period

1513 Analysis on some biochemical parameters

Biochemical analysis of leaves was carried out at grand period of growth Following

investigations was undertaken at different biochemical parameters

i Photosynthetic pigments

Fresh and fully expended leaves (at 2nd3rd nodal part) samples (01g) were crushed in 80

chilled acetone and were centrifuged at 3000rpm for 10 minutes Supernatant were

separated and adjusted to 5ml final volume The absorbance was recorded at 663nm and

645 nm on spectrophotometer (Janway 6305 UVVis) for chlorophyll content while 480

33

and 510 nm for carotenoids Chlorophyll ab ratio was calculated after the amount

estimated The chlorophyll and carotenoid contents were determined according to Strain

et al (1971) and Duxbury and Yentsch (1956) respectively

Chlorophyll a (microgml) = 1163 (A665) ndash 239 (A649)

Chlorophyll b (microgml) = 2011 (A649) ndash 518 (A665)

Total Chlorophylls (microgml) = 645 (A665) + 1772 (A649)

Carotenoids (microgml) = 76 (A480) ndash 263 (A510)

ii Total soluble sugars

Dry leaf samples (01g) were homogenized in 5mL of 80 ethanol and were centrifuged

at 4000 g for 10 minutes 10 mL diluted supernatant in 5mL Anthronrsquos reagent was kept

to boil in 100oC water bath for 30 minutes and were cooled in running tap water Optical

density was taken at 620nm for the determination of soluble carbohydrates according to

Fales (1951)Total soluble carbohydrates was estimated against glucose as standard and

was calculated from the equation mentioned and expressed in mgg-1 dry weight

Total carbohydrates (microgmL-1) = 228462 OD 097275 plusmn004455

iii Protein content

Fresh and fully expended leaves at 2nd3rd nodal part were taken for protein estimation

The protein contents were measured according to Bradford Assay reagent method against

Bovine Serum Albumin as standards (Bradford 1976) Dye stock was made to dissolved

50mg comassie blue in 25 ml methanol The solution is added to 50ml of 85 phosphoric

acid and diluted to 100 ml with distilled water 02g fresh leaf samples were mills in 5 ml

phosphate buffer pH7 5ml of assay reagent (diluting 1 volume of dye stock with 4 volume

distilled water) were added in 01 ml leaf extract used for enzyme assay Absorbance was

recorded at 590nm and was expressed in mgg-1 fresh weight Proteins were calculated

from the following best fit standard curve equation

Protein (microgml-1) = -329196 + 1142755 plusmn 53436

34



Effect of sea salt on vegetative growth including height fresh and dry weight of Cajanus

cajan is presented in (Figure 14 and 15 Appendix-VI) Comparative analysis showed

that plant growth (all three parameters) was significantly increased with time (plt 0001)

however it was linearly decreased (plt 0001) with increasing salinity (Figure 16

Appendix-VI) shows the water content succulence relative growth rate (RGR) and

specific shoot length (SSL) of Cajanus cajan Under saline conditions all parameters were

significantly reduced in comparison to control however SSL showed decline after ECe38

dSm-1 Salt induced growth reduction was more pronounced at ECe 38 and 43 dSm-1 in

which plants died before reaching the reproductive maturity after 12 and 14 weeks at sea

salt treatments respectively Therefore further analysis was carried out in plant grown up

to ECe= 35 dSm-1 sea salt concentrations

Salinity significantly reduced (plt 0001) reproductive parameters including

number of flowers pods seeds and seed weight (Figure 17 Appendix-VII) Among all

treatments highest reduction was observed in 315 dSm-1 in which number of flowers and

pods reduced up to 7187 and 70 respectively Similar trend was observed in total

number and weight of seeds which showed 80 and 8793 reduction respectively

1522 Study on some biochemical parameters


Figure 18 Appendix-VII shows the effect of salinity on pigments (chlorophyll a b ab

ratio and carotenoids) of C cajan leaves A slight increase in total chlorophyll contents

(1828) and chlorophyll ab ratio (1215) was observed at low salinity (ECe= 16 dSm-

1) however they were significantly reduced (4125 and 3630 respectively) in high salt

treatment (plt 0001) Chlorophyll a was higher than chlorophyll b in all treatments

however chlorophyll b was un-affected by salinity whereas total chlorophyll content and

ab ratio was disturbed due to change in chlorophyll a This reduction was more

pronounced at high salinity (ECe= 35 dSm-1) in which chlorophyll a total chlorophylls

and ab ratio was decreased by 505 412 and 3630 respectively Carotenoid content

was maintained at ECe= 16 dSm-1 and decreased with further increase in salinity

35


Total soluble sugars in leaves of C cajan is presented in Figure 19 Appendix-VII Total

leaf sugars in C cajan were remained un-affected at 16 dSm-1 and subsequently decreased

with further increase in medium salinity Although total sugars were decreased at ECe 28

and 35 dSm-1 a significant increase (~25) of soluble sugars was observed at higher

salinities However this increment was accounted for decrease (504 ) in insoluble sugar

content at that salinity levels

iii Protein

Total protein in leaves of C cajan is presented in Figure 19 Appendix-VII An increase

in leaf protein content in C cajan was found at lower salinity regime (ECe= 16 dSm-1)

which was followed by significant reduction with further increase in salinity This decline

was 2040 at 28 which was more pronounced (5646 ) at high salinity level (ECe=

35dSm-1)

36

Months (2009)

Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Valu

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Rainfall (cm)Low Temp (

oC)

High Temp (oC)

Humidity at noon () Wind (kmph)

Humidity at midnight ()

Figure 13 Environmental data of study area during experimental period (July-November 2009)

Time (Weeks)

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Pla

nt heig

ht (c

m)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

43 38 35 28 16 Control

Figure 14 Effect of salinity using irrigation water of different sea salt concentrations on height of C cajan

during 18 weeks treatment (Lines represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment represents

significant differences at p lt 005)

37

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Initial Final

a

b b

c c cab b

c c cC 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht

(g)

012345 a

bb

bc ca a ab b c c

Dry weightMoisture

Figure 15 Effect of salinity using irrigation water of different sea salt concentrations on initial and final

biomass (fresh and dry) of C cajan (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment Different

letters represent significant differences at p lt 005)

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Succu

lance

(

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

RG

R (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

SS

L (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

ab

b b

c c

a

b bc c c

a

b b

c c c

a a a ab

c

Figure 16 Percent change (to control) in moisture succulence relative growth rate (RGR) and specific

shoot length (SSL) of C cajan under increasing salinity using irrigating water of different sea

salt concentrations (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment Different letters

represent significant differences at p lt 005)

38

Sea salt (ECe= dSm-1)

Control 16 28 35

Tota

l seeds (

Pla

nt-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 Seed w

eig

ht (g

pla

nt -1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 a

b

cc

a

a

b

b

b c

c

a

b

a

c c

Flowers

Pods

Seed weightTotal seeds

Figure 17 Effect of irrigating water of different sea salt solutions on reproductive growth parameters

including number of flowers pod seeds and seed weight of C cajan (Values represent means

plusmn standard error of each treatment Different letters represent significant differences at p lt

005)

39

Sea salt (ECe=dSm-1

)

Control 16 28 35

Caro

tinoid

s (

mg g

-1 F

W)

000

005

010

015

020

025

030

Chlo

rophyll

(mg g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

ab

ratio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

b

a

cd

b

a

c

d

a

b

c

d

a

a

ab

b

Figure 18 Effect of irrigating water of different sea salt solutions on leaf pigments including chlorophyll a

chlorophyll b total chlorophyll and carotenoids of C cajan (Bars represent means plusmn standard

error of each treatment Different letters represent significant differences at p lt 005)

40

Figure 19 Effect of irrigating water of different sea salt solutions on total proteins soluble insoluble and

total sugars in leaves of C cajan (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment

Different letters represent significant differences at p lt 005)

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 16 28 35

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

a ab b

a a

b b

a ab b

a

b

ab

c

SoluableInsoluable

41

16 Experiment No 5

Range of salt tolerance of nitrogen fixing symbiotic bacteria associated

with root of Cajanus cajan


1611 Isolation Identification and purification of bacteria

Nodules of C cajan grow in large clay pots and irrigated with running tap water at

biosaline agriculture research field were collected from the lateral roots (about 15 cm soil

depth) Nodules were surface sterilized with sodium hypochloride (2) for 5 min and

vigorously washed with sterilized distilled water Each nodule was crushed with sterilized

rod in 5 ml distilled water The bacterial suspension was streaked on yeast extract mannitol

agar (YEM) (K2HPO4 05 g MgSO 4 025g Na Cl 01 g Manitol 10g Yeast Extract 1g

Agar 20 g in 1000 ml of Distilled water) with the help of sterilized wire lope Colonies

were identified by studying different phenotypic characters as Rhizobium fredii

(Cappuccino and Sherman 1992 Sawada et al 2003) Pure culture of Rhizobium species

was stored at -20oC temperature

1612 Preparation of bacterial cell suspension

Bacteria were multiplied by growing in YEM broth for 48 hrs on shaking incubator (140

rpm) at 37oC in dark The culture in broth was centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 10 min to

obtained bacterial cell pellet Pellet was washed and centrifuged twice with sterilized

distilled water Pellet then re-suspended in sterilized distilled water before use

1613 Study of salt tolerance of Rhizobium isolated from root nodules of

C cajan

Assessment for salinity tolerance of Rhizobium species was assessed on YEM agar

Salinity levels of 0 05 10 15 20 25 and 30 having electrical conductivity 06 90

188 242 306 366 and 423 dSm-1 respectively were maintained with NaCl Bacterial

cell suspension of 01 ml (5times 103 colony forming unitsml) was poured in each sterilized

Petri dish 10 ml of molten YEM agar was poured immediately and shake well before

solidification of agar Petri plates were incubated at 37deg C in dark Colonies were observed

and counted in colony counter after 48 h and photographed (Dubey et al 2012 Singh and

42

Lal 2015) There were three replicates of each treatment and data were transformed to

log10 before analysis


Colonies of Rhizobium on YEM agar at different salinity levels is presented in Figure 110

and 111 Appendix-VIII A significant decrease (plt0001) in rhizobial colonies was

observed with increasing salinity However the difference between non saline control and

90 dSm-1 and as that of 242 dSm-1 and 302 dSm-1 salt (NaCl) concentration showed

nonsignificant difference in rizobial colonies Whereas drastic decreased was observed on

further salinity levels Rhizobial colonies were not found at 423 dSm-1salt concentration

NaCl (ECw= dSm

-1)

06 9 188 242 306 366 423

Rh

izo

bia

l co

lonie

s (l

og

10)

0

1

2

3

4 a a

b

c c

d

e

Figure 110 Growth of nitrogen fixing bacteria associated with root of C cajan under different NaCl

concentrations (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment among the treatments

is recorded at p lt 005)

43

Figure 111 Photographs showing growth of Rhizobium isolated from the nodules of C cajan invitro on

YEM agar supplemented with different concentrations of NaCl (ECw)

188

423 90

Control

366

306 242

44

17 Experiment No 6

Growth and development of Ziziphus mauritiana in large size clay pot

being irrigated with water of two different sea salt concentrations



The grafted plants obtained from the local nursery of Mirpurkhas Sindh were transported

to the Biosaline Agriculture Research field Department of Botany University of Karachi

and were transplanted carefully in large earthen pots containing 20 Kg sandy loam soil

mixed with cow dung manure at 91 ratio having about 5 liters of water holding capacity

with a basal hole for drainage of excess salts to avoid accumulation in the rhizosphere

Over irrigation with about 15 liters of non-saline saline water was kept weekly in summer

and biweekly in winter to avoid accumulation of salts in rhizosphere Plants were irrigated

to start with non-saline tap water for about two weeks for establishment All the older

leaves were fallen and new leaves were developed during establishment period Following

irrigation schedule of non-saline (control) and saline water was selected in view of Z

mauritiana being moderately salt tolerant plant which includes both low and as well as

higher concentrations of the salt in irrigation


of irrigation water

Average resultant ECe (dSm-1) of soil

with some fluctuation often over

irrigation

Non saline (Control) 06 12

04 63 72

06 101 111

ECiw = Electrical conductivity of irrigation water ECe = Electrical conductivity of saturated soil

Healthy and well established plants were selected of nearly equal height and

divided into three sets each contain three replicates (total nine pots) Salinity was provided

through irrigation water of different sea salt concentrations All pots except non-saline

control were initially irrigated with 01 sea salt solution and then sea salt concentration

45

in irrigation medium was increased gradually upto the required salinity level The salinity

level of soil was monitored by taken the electrical conductivity of saturated soil paste the

end of experiment The electrical conductivity of soil (ECe) maintained at the level of 12

72 and 111 dSm-1 respectively as described by Mass and Hoffman (1977)

1712 Vegetative and reproductive growth

Vegetative growth in terms of shoot height fresh and dry weight of shoot and number of

branches were noted at destructive harvesting at initial (establishment) 60 and 120 days

of growth For dry weight shoots were dried in oven at 70˚C for three days Shoot

succulence specific shoot length (SSL) moisture percentage and relative growth rate

(RGR) was calculated at final harvest by using formulas given in Experiment No 4

Whereas number of flowers in reproductive data were recorded at onset of reproductive

period

As regard of fruit formation the duration of experiment was not sufficient for fruit

setting and furthermore the amount of sol in pots was not sufficient for healthy growth of

this plant Secondly flowering and fruiting is reported to be poor at the time of 1st initiation

of reproductive period (Azam-Ali 2006) Furthermore statistical significance of flower

and fruit count also become far less due to their excess dropping at early stage Hence it

was decided to proceed with study of fruit formation in forthcoming field trials of their

intercropping culture


Biochemical analyses were performed at the grand period (at the time of flower initiation)

in fully expended fresh leaves Chlorophyll contents soluble sugar contents and soluble

proteins were analyzed Leaves samples taken from 3rd 4th node below the apex according

to the procedures given in Experiment No 4

46



Effect of sea salt on vegetative growth of Z mauritiana including height fresh and dry

weight is presented in (Figure 112 Appendix-IX) Comparative analysis showed that

plant growth (all three parameters) was significantly increased with time (plt 0001)

however number of branches was decreased (plt 0001) with increasing salinity

Figure 113 shows the moisture content succulence relative growth rate (RGR)

and specific shoot length (SSL) of Z mauritiana A non-significant difference in shoot

succulence SSL and moisture content was observed with time salinity and interaction of

both factors However RGR showed decline Salt induced growth reduction was more

pronounced at higher salinities

In Z mauritiana plants number of flowers showed significant decrease (plt0001)

with increasing salinity treatment Flower initiation seems non-significant at early growth

(60 days) period in controls and salinity treatments However drastic decrease was

observed with increasing salinity in 120 days of observation (Figure 114 Appendix-IX)



The effect of Z mauritiana leaves pigments (chlorophyll a b ab ratio) on salinity shower

a slight difference in chlorophyll lsquoarsquo over control However chlorophyll lsquobrsquo contents

showed increase over control in both salinity treatments due to which the total chlorophylls

were also enhanced compared to controls Chlorophyll ab ratio was significantly

(plt0001) decreased in both salinities as compared to control (Figure 115 Appendix-IX)

ii Sugars and protein

In Z mauritiana plant soluble sugars were significantly decreased (plt0001) over controls

whereas proteins showed little decrease under salinity treatments compared to controls

(Figure 116 Appendix-IX)

47

Control 72 111

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Dry

weig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Num

ber

of bra

nches

3

6

9

12

15

18

Heig

ht (c

m)

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Initial 60 days 120 days

AcBb

Ba

AcBb Ba

AcBb Ba

Ac

BbBa

Figure 112 Effect of salinity using irrigation water of different sea salt concentrations on height number of

branches fresh weight and dry weight of shoot of Zmauritiana after 60 and 120 days of

treatment (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment Different letters represent


48

120 days 60 days InitialS

uccula

nce (

g g

-1 D

W)

00

03

06

09

12

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

SS

L (

cm

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Control 72 111

Mois

ture

(

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Control 72 111

RG

R (

mg g

-1 d

ay

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

a a aa a a a a a a

a aa a a a a a

a a aa a a a a a a a

b

b b

c

Figure 113 Effect of salinity using irrigation water of different sea salt concentrations on succulence

specific shoot length (SSL) moisture and relative growth rate (RGR) of Z maritiana (Bars

represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment Different letters represent significant

differences at p lt 005)

49

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Num

ber

of flow

ers

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 60 days120 days

Ac

BbBa

Figure 114 Effect of salinity using irrigation water of different sea salt concentrations on number of flowers

of Z mauritiana (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment Different letters


Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(mg g

-1)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

bba

bba

bb

a

chl b chl a ab

ab

ra

tio

00

05

10

15

20

Figure 115 Effect of salinity using irrigation water of different sea salt concentrations on leaf pigments

including chlorophyll a chlorophyll b total chlorophyll and chlorophyll ab ratio of Z mauritiana (Values

represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment Different letters represent significant differences at p lt

005)

50

Figure 116 Effect of salinity using irrigation water of different sea salt concentrations on total sugars and

protein in leaves of Z mauritiana (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment


Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 04 06

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Solu

ble

sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

3

6

9

12

15

18a

a

bb

b b

Control 72 111

51

18 Discussion

Seed germination is the protrusion of radicle from the seed which is adversely affected by

salinity stress (Kaymakanova 2009) Salinity imposes the osmotic stress by accumulation

of Na+ and Cl- which decrease soil water potential that ultimately inhibits the imbibition

process (Othman 2005) Effect of seed germination against salinity is reported in linear

threshold response model of Maas and Hoffman (1977) The germination of a salt tolerant

desert legume Indigofera oblongifolia and a desert graminoid Pennisetum divisum are

also reported to behave to salinity in similar manner (Khan and Ahmad 1998 2007) Many

workers used chemical (organic inorganic) salt temperature biological and soil matrix

priming techniques to enhance seed germination percentage and especially germination

rate in saline medium (Ashraf et al 2008 Ashraf and Foolad 2005)Encouraging results

in most of the species of glycophytes and hydrophytes were found by presoaking in pure

water prior to germinating under saline condition Our study supports this finding and

seeds soaked in distilled water prior to germination performed better than those which

were presoaked in sea salt solutions Salinity adversely affects at all germination

parameters (germination percentage germination rate coefficient of germination velocity

and germination index) directly proportional with increasing salinity (Tayyab et al 2015)

With increase in time a delayed germination at higher salinity was found Higher sea salt

(168 dSm-1 for pure water presoaking and 35 dSm-1 for presoaking in respective

salinities) showed 50 or more reduction in all germination indices as compared to control

(Table 13-16 Figure 11)Our results are parallel with the finding of other workers such

as Kafi and Goldani (2001) who found the same trend in chickpea at higher salinities Pujol

et al (2000) reported that increased salinity inhibit the seed germination as well as delays

germination initiation in various halophyte species as well Similar response was also

found in some other crops such as pepper (Khan et al 2009) sunflower (Vashisth and

Nagarjan 2010) and eggplant (Saeed et al 2014) Salt tolerance within species may vary

at germination and other growth phases (Khan and Ahmad 1998)

According to our results C cajan appeared to be a salt sensitive in initial growth

phase specially when presoaked in saline medium (Figure 12) however at later growth

stages it proved relatively salt tolerant Salt stress delays or either seize the metabolic

activities during seed germination in salt sensitive and even in salt tolerant plants (Khan

and Ahmad 1998 Ali et al 2013b) Salinity also imposes the oxidative stress due to

52

overproduction of reactive oxygen species which may alter metabolic activities during

germination growth and developmental stages (Zhu 2001 Munns 2005

Lauchli and Grattan 2007)

In our study seeds of pigeon pea were unable to emerge beyond ECe39 dSm-1 sea

salt concentration Height of seedling was significantly affected by increasing salinity

(Figure 12) Similar results are also reported in Indian mustered (B juncea Almansouri

et al 2001) some Brassica species (Sharma et al 2013) and tomato cultivars (Jamil et

al 2005) Growth retardation with increasing salinity may be due to reduced

photosynthetic efficiency and inhibition of enzymatic and non-enzymatic proteins

(Tavakkoli et al 2011) Furthermore salt stress also limit the DNA and RNA synthesis

leads to reduced cell division and elongation during germination growth and

developmental stage

Khan and Sahito (2014) found variation in salt tolerance within species subspecies

and provenance level Furthermore the salt tolerance of a species may also vary at

germination and growth phases (Khan and Ahmad 1998 Ali et al 2013a) Srivastava et

al (2006) suggested that the genetic variability influences salinity tolerance eg wild

species like Cajanus platycarpus C scaraboides and C sericea showed better salt

tolerance than C cajan In this connection Wardill et al (2006) has also reported genetic

diversity in Acacia nilotica C cajan in this study appeared to be a salt sensitive at

germination in compression with later stages of growth Seedling establishment at saline

solution faces adverse effects when emerging radicle and plumule come in contact with

salt effected soil particle or saline water hence percent seedling establishment remains

less than germination percentage observed at petri plate Ashraf (1994) found that salinity

tolerance of different varieties of C cajan do not much differ at germination and early

growth stages whereas at adult growth stage show improvement in salt tolerance

Soil salinity is a major limiting factor for plant growth and yield production

particularly in leguminous plants (Guasch-Vidal et al 2013 Tayyab et al 2016) In

present study Plant height RGR fresh and dry biomass were severely reduced with

increasing salinity and plant was unable to grow after ECe= 43 dSm-1(Figure 14-16)

This growth inhibition of C cajan may be accounted for individual and synergistic effect

of water stress nutrient imbalances and specific ions toxicities (Hasegawa et al 2000

Silvera et al 2001) Salt induced ion imbalance results in lower osmotic potential which

53

alter physiological biochemical and other metabolic processes leading to overall growth

reduction (Del-Amor et al 2001) Excessive amount of salt in cytoplasm challenge the

compartmentalization capacity of vacuole and disrupts cell division cell elongation and

other cellular processes (Munns 2005 Munns et al 2006) Our results are parallel with

some other studies in which significant growth inhibition of peas chickpea and faba beans

have been reported against salt stress (El-Sheikh and Wood 1990 Delgado et al 1994)

Singla and Garg (2005) also observed a similar salt sensitive growth response in Cicer

arietinum In our study the fresh and dry biomass of C cajan also showed inhibitory

behavior to salt stress (Figure 15) Hernandez et al (1999) also found significant reduction

in dry biomass of pea plant and common bean (40 and 84 respectively) when grown

in saline medium Mehmood et al (2008) also found similar results in Susbania sasban

Salinity also has imposed deleterious effects on reproductive growth of C cajan

Production of flowers and pods are significantly decreased in response to salinity (Figure

19) Increase in flower shedding leads to decreased number of pods indicating salt

sensitivity of plant at reproductive phase which was more pronounced at high salinity

(Vadez et al 2007) Furthermore seed production and weight of seed per plant was also

linearly decreased Salt induced reduction of reproductive growth has also been found in

mung bean in which 60 and 12 less pods and seeds were produced respectively at 06

saline solution (Qados 2010) Similar results are reported in faba bean (De-Pascale and

Barbieri 1997) tomato (Scholberg and Locascio 1999) maiz sunflower (Katerji et al

1996) and watermelon (Colla et al 2006) Salinity reduces reproductive growth by

inhibiting growth of flowers pollen grains and embryo which leads to inappropriate ovule

fertilization and less number of seeds and fruits (Torabi et al 2013)

On biochemical parameters total chlorophyll and chlorophyll ab ratio has

increased in low salinity in contrast the adverse effect at higher salinity could be due to

high Na+ dependent breakdown of these pigments (Li et al 2010 Yang et al 2011)

Chlorophyll a is usually more prone to Na+ concentration and decrease in total chlorophyll

is mainly attributed to the destruction of chlorophyll a (Fang et al 1998 Eckardt 2009)

This diminution could be due to the destruction of enzymes responsible for green pigments

synthesis (Strogonov et al 1973) and increased chlorophyllase activity (Sudhakar et al

1997) Thus insipid of leaf was a visible indicator of salt induced chlorophyll damage

which was well correlated with quantified values as reported in other legume species

54

(Soussi et al 1998 Al-Khanjari et al 2002) In this study chlorophyll a was found to be

more sensitive than chlorophyll b (Figure 18) Garg (2004) also found similar reduction

in chlorophyll pigments (a b and total chlorophyll) in chickpea cultivars under salinity

stress

At low salinity (16 dSm-1) total carotenoids remained unaffected along with

increased total chlorophyll (Figure 18) which may suggest a role of carotenoids in

protection of photosynthetic machinery (Sharma et al 2012) Similar response was found

in Cajanus indicus and Sesamum indicum (Rao and Rao 1981) however

Sivasankaramoorthy (2013) and Ramanjulu et al (1993) reported slight increase of leaf

carotenoids in Zea maiz and mulberry when exposed to NaCl High salinity was destructive

for both leaf pigments (chlorophyll and carotenoids) of C cajan which was in accordance

with Reddy and Vora (1985) who found similar decrease in some other salt sensitive crops

Salinity led to the conversion of beta-carotene to Zeaxanthin which protect plants against

photo-inhibition (Sharma and Hall 1991)

In present study with increasing salinity water content and succulence of C cajan

were significantly reduced which indicated loss of turgor (Figure 16) Our data suggest

that decreased succulence by lowering water content may help in lowering leaf osmotic

potential when exposed to increasing salinity which is in agreement with findings of Parida

and Das (2005) and Abideen et al (2014) In addition increased production and

accumulation of organic substances is also necessary to sustain osmotic pressure which

provide osmotic gradient to absorb water from saline medium (Hasegawa et al 2000

Cha-um et al 2004) Compatible solutes including carbohydrates amino acids proteins

and ammonium compounds play important roles in water relations and cell stabilization

(Ashraf and Harris 2004) In this study C cajan produce more soluble sugars (Figure 18)

which is considered as a typical plant response under saline conditions (Murakeozy et al

2003) Sugars serve as organic osmotica and their available concentration is related to the

degree of salt stress and plantrsquos tolerance (Ashraf 1994 Murakeozy et al 2003) Sugars

are involved in osmoprotection osmoregulations carbon storage and radical scavenging

activities (Pervaiz and Satyawati 2008) On the other hand insoluble and total sugars were

reduced in higher salinity which is also supported by Parida et al (2002) and Gadallah

(1999) who found similar results in Bruguiera parviflora and Vicia faba

55

Total soluble proteins of C cajan were reduced due to deleterious effects of salinity

(Figure 18) The accumulation of Na+ in cytosol disrupts the protein and nucleic acid

synthesis (Bewley and Black 1985) Gill and Sharma (1993) and Muthukumarasamy and

Panneerselvam (1997) also reported decreased protein content with increasing salinity in

Cajanus cajan seedlings Similar results were found when tomato (Azeem and Ahmad

2011) Zingiber officinale (Ahmad et al 2009) and Sorghum bicolor (Ali et al 2013a)

were grown under variable salt concentrations (Figure 19)

Nodule formation of Rhizobium in Legume depends upon interaction between soil

chemistry of salt composition and osmotic regimes of salt and water (Velagaleti et al

1990 Zahran 1991 Zahran and Sprent 1986) Salinity reduces plant growth directly

through ion and osmotic effects and indirectly by inhibiting Legume-Rhizobium

association (El-Shinnawi et al 1989) Studies demonstrated a more sensitive response of

rhizobial N-fixing mechanism than growth of plant to abiotic stresses including salinity

(Mhadhbi et al 2004) In nodules metabolic disturbance initiated with the production of

ROS leading to tissues injury and loss of nodule function (Becana et al 2000) In general

it slow down the nitrogenase activity and decrease nodule protein and leghemoglobin

content which decreased becteroid development (Mhadhbi et al 2008) In consequence

plant suffer directly by salt induced ion toxicity low water uptake and photosynthetic

damage and indirectly through weak association of symbionts due to high energy demand

for nodule function (Pimratch et al 2008) In our study the isolated rhizobial strain from

nodules of C cajan was found to be tolerant to salinity even up to 2 (ECw= 306 dSm-1)

NaCl (Figure 110 and 111) Some of the other species of Rhizobium such as Brady

Rhizobium have been shown salt tolerant even at higher concentration than their

leguminous hosts (Zahran 1999) For instance a number of rhizobial species can tolerate

up to 06 NaCl (Yelton et al 1983) while Rhizobium meliloti can tolerate 175 to

40 NaCl and R leguminosarum can tolerate can tolerate upto 2 NaCl (Abdel-Wahab

and Zahran 1979 Sauvage et al 1983 Breedveld et al 1991 Helemish 1991

Mohammad et al 1991 Embalomatis et al 1994 Mhadhbi et al 2011) Rhizobia

isolated from soybean and chickpea can tolerate up to 2 NaCl with a difference of fast-

growing and slow growing strains (El-Sheikh and Wood 1990 Ghittoni and Bueno 1996)

Similarly Rhizobium from Vigna unguiculata can survive up to up to 55 NaCl

(Mpepereki et al 1997)

56

Present study shows an increase in vegetative growth in terms of plant height and

fresh and dry weight of shoot with increasing time under non-saline and saline conditions

but the increase was rapid at early period of growth (Figure 112) All the vegetative

growth parameters determined were reduced under salinity stress compared to non-saline

control Measurements of shoot moisture succulence specific shoot length and RGR

(Figure 113) indicate that Z mauritiana adjusted in its water relation over coming

negative water and osmotic potential with increase in salinity levels increased There is

evidence that water and osmotic potentials of salt tolerant plants become more negative in

higher salinities (Khan et al 2000) These altered water relations and other physiological

mechanisms help plants to get by adverse abiotic stress like that of drought and salinity

(Harb et al 2010) However the results clearly showed that salinity had an inhibitory

effect on growth but the decline was less at early sixty days and more during later 60-120

days in compression to controls Growth inhibition in shoot has been observed in number

of plants including different species of halophytes (Keiffer and Ungar 1997) chickpea

(Cicer arietinum Kaya et al 2008) and different wheat cultivars (Triticum aestivum

Moud and Maghsoudo 2008)

Salinity also caused reduction in the number of branches and the number of flowers

in Z mauritiana however reduction in the number of flowers is non-significant in ECe=

72 dSm-1 salinity treatment in comparison with non-saline control (Figure 114) The main

reason for this reduction could be attributed to suppression of growth under salinity stress

during the early developmental stages (shooting stage) of the plants These results are

similar to those reported by Ahmad et al (1991) and Khan et al (1998) As affirmed by

Munns and Tester (2008) suppression of plant growth under saline conditions may either

be due to osmotic effect of saline solution which decreases the availability of water for

plants or the ionic effect due to the toxicity of sodium chloride High salt concentration in

rooting medium also reduced the uptake of soil nutrients a phenomenon which affected

the plant growth thus resulting in less number of branches per plant Various abiotic

stresses such as temperature drought salinity light and heavy metals altered plant

metabolism which ultimately affects plant growth and productivity Amongst these

salinity stress is a major problem in arid and semiarid regions of the world (Kumar et al

2010) Salinity has an adverse effect on several plant processes including seed

germination seedling establishment flowering and fruit formation and ripening (Sairam

and Tyagi 2004) Salinity stress also imposes additional energy requirements on plant

57

cells and less carbon is available for growth and flower primordial initiation (Cheesman

1988) The lesser decrease in number of flowers at lower salinity (ECe= 72 dSm-1) has

been attributed to the fact that the cells of apex are un-vacuolated and the incoming salts

accumulated in the cytoplasm Munns (2002) further suggested a well-controlled phloem

transport of toxic ions from these cells prevented any change in reproductive development

Our findings showed an increase in total chlorophyll contents particularly

chlorophyll b contents were enhanced more than chlorophyll a contents under salinity

stress (Figure 115) In general the total chlorophyll contents decreased under high salinity

stress and this may be due to accumulation of toxic ions in photosynthetic tissues and

functional disorder of stomatal opening and closing (Khan et al 2009) The increase in

total chlorophylls appearing at salinity levels is considered as an important indicator of

salinity tolerance in plants (Katsuhara et al 1990 Demiroglu et al 2001) In another

study on Z mauritiana (cv Banara sikarka) the chlorophyll contents has shown decrease

with increasing salinity and sodicity but the seedlings treated with low salinity (ECe of 5

mmhoscm-1) shows slightly higher values than controls (Pandey et al 1991) Our study

also suggests that increase in total chlorophylls adapted this plant increased its tolerance

to salt stress

Slight decrease in protein has been shown under salinity treatments compared to

controls (Figure 16) Proteins play diverse roles in plants including involvement in

metabolic pathways as enzyme catalyst source of reserve energy and regulation of osmotic

potential under salt stress (Pessarakli and Huber 1991 Mansour 2000) Salts may

accumulate in cell cytoplasm and alter their viscosity depending on the response of plant

to salinity stress (Hasegawa et al 2000 Paravaiz and Satyawati 2008) The decrease in

protein contents under increasing salinity has also been documented in several plants

including Lentil lines (Ashraf and Waheed 1993) sorghum (Ali et al 2013a) and sugar

beet (Jamil et al 2014)

Soluble sugars were also decreased with increasing salinity treatments in our study

(Figure 16) Decrease in soluble sugars due to salinity has also been reported in Viciafaba

(Gadallah 1999) some rice genotypes (Alamgir and Ali 1999) Bruguiera parviflora

(Parida et al 2002) and Lentil (Sidari et al 2008) However the accumulation of soluble

sugars under salinity stress is considered as strategy to tolerate stress condition due to their

58

involvement in osmoprotection osmotic adjustment and carbon storage (Parida et al

2002 Parvaiz and Satyawati 2008)

From these experiments it is evident that C cajan is a salt sensitive plant at every

level of its life cycle starting from germination to growth phases Germination capacity

and salt tolerance ability of this species can be enhanced by water presoaking treatment

Growth reduction with increasing salinity could be attributed to physiological and

biochemical disturbances which ultimately affect vegetative and plant reproductive

growth Its roots are well associated with nitrogen fixing rhizobia and these

microorganisms were salt tolerant in in-vitro cultures Another fruit baring species of

marginal lands Z mauritiana showed growth improvement in lower salinity and its growth

was not much affected in high saline mediums owing to its controlled biochemical

responses

59

2 Chapter 2

Intercropping of Z mauritiana with C cajan

21 Introduction

Increasing soil salinity fresh water scarcity and agricultural malpractice creating shortage

of food crops for human and animal consumption (Bhandari et al 2014) and making

prices high Traditional agriculture which has been practiced since centuries using multi

species at a time in a given space could be a potential solution to narrow down the growing

edges of this supply demand scenario Plant species with innate resilience to abiotic

stresses like salinity and drought could be considered suitable to serve this purpose

especially for arid regions where marginal lands can be utilized to generate economy

Presence of such type of local systems in the region highlight their potential advantage in

crop production income generation as well as sustainability (Somashekar et al 2015)

For instance reports are available on successful intercropping of multipurpose trees

shrubs and grasses like millets pulses and some oil seed and fodder crops Green part of

these species usually mixed and used for cattle feed especially during the lean period The

utilization of the inter-row spaces of fruit trees like Ziziphus mauritiana for growing edible

legumes can generate further income by similar input (Dayal et al 2015) As an option

to this Cajanus cajan could serve as better intercropped as it provides protein rich food

nutritious fodder and wood for fuel which helped to uplift the socio-economic condition

of poor farmers Integrated agricultural practices improve the productivity of each crop by

keeping cost of production under sustainable limits (Arabhanvi and Pujar 2015)

Keeping in mind the above mentioned scenario in present study the possibility to

increase production of a non-conventional salt tolerant fruit tree (Z mauritiana) by

intercropping with a leguminous plant (C cajan) was investigated to produce edible fruits

and fodder simultaneously from salt effected waste lands

60

22 Experiment No 7

Physiological investigations on Growth of Ziziphus mauritiana and


irrigated with water of sea salt concentration at two irrigation intervals

221 Materials and Methods

2211 Growth and Development

Experiment was designed to investigate the effect of intercropping on growth and

development of Z mauritiana (a fruit tree) and C cajan (a leguminous fodder) in drum

pot culture irrigated with water of 03 sea salt concentrations at two irrigation intervals


Drum pot culture as recommended by Boyko (1966) and modified by Ahmed and

Abdullah (1982) was used for the present investigation as described in chapter 1


Three sets of 18 plastic drums (lysimeter) were used in this experiment One plant of Z

mauritiana were grown in each lysimeter Three replicates were kept for each treatment

comprising of 06 drums in each set which was further divided in two sub-sets First sub-

set was irrigated at every 4th and second subset at every 8th day

Set ldquoArdquo =Ziziphus mauritiana (Sole crop)

Set ldquoBrdquo = Cajanus cajan (Sole crop)

Set ldquoCrdquo = Ziziphus mauritiana + Cajanus cajan (intercropped)

The effect of salinity on sole crops of C cajan and Z mauritiana on salinity created

by various dilutions of sea salt has been investigated in chapter 1 Concentration of 03

sea salt considered equal level to its 50 reduction has been selected in present

experiment In addition irrigation was given in sub-sets in two intervals to investigate to

have some idea of its water conservation

61

2214 Irrigation Intervals

Sub-set 1 Irrigation was given every 4th day


In set lsquoArsquo and lsquoCrsquo six month old saplings of Ziziphus mauritiana (vern grafted

ber) plants of nearly equal height and good health were transplanted in drum pots Plants

were irrigated to start with non-saline tape water for about two weeks for purpose of

establishment All the older leaves fell down and new leaves immerged during

establishment period

In set lsquoBrsquo and lsquoCrsquo Ten healthy sterilized seeds of Cajanus cajan imbibed in distill

water were sown in each drum pot and irrigated to start with tap water and after

establishment of seedlings only six seedlings of equal size with eqal distance (about one

feet) between C cajan and that of Z mauritiana were kept for further study The sowing

time of cajanus cajan seeds in both sets (B and C) was the same In drum pot lsquoCrsquo it was

sown when sapling of Z mauritiana have undergone two weeks of their establishment

period in tap water

When seedlings of C cajan reached at two leaves stage irrigation in all the sets

(ABC ) was started with gradual increase sea salt concentration till it reached to the

salinity level of treatment (03) in which they were kept up to end of experiment Each

drum was irrigated with enough water sea salt solution which retains 15 liters in soil at

field capacity Rest of water drain down with leaching of accumulated salt in root

rhizosphere

Vegetative growth of Z mauritiana plant was noted monthly in terms of height

volume of canopy while in C cajan height and number of branches was noted Shoot

length root length number of leaves fresh and dry weight of leaf stem and root leaf

weight ratio root weight ratio stem weight ratio specific shoot and root length plant

moisture leaves succulence and relative growth rate was observed and calculated at final

harvest in both the plant species growing individually (sole) or as intercropping at two


Investigations were undertaken on nitrate content relative water content and

electrolyte leakage at grand period of growth Amount of photosynthetic pigments soluble

62

carbohydrates proline content soluble phenols and Protein contents were also investigated

in fully expended leaves

Activity of catalase (CAT) ascorbate peroxidase (APX) guaiacol peroxidase

(GPX) superoxide dismutase (SOD) (Anti-oxidant enzymes) and nitrate reductase (NR)

activity was also observed in on both the Z mauritiana and C cajan leaves growing as

sole and as intercropped at two different irrigation intervals

The procedures of above mentioned analysis as follows

Leaf succulence (dry weight basis) Specific shoot length (SSL) and relative

growth rate (RGR) were measured according to the equations given in chapter 1

2215 Estimation of Nitrate content

NO3 was estimated through Cataldo et al (1975) 01g fresh leaf samples were boiled in

50 mL distilled water for 10 min 01mL of sample were added to mixed in 04 mL 50

salicylic acid (wv dissolved in 96 H2SO4 ) and allowed to stand for 20 min at room

temperature 95 mL of 2N NaOH was slowly mixed at last The samples were permissible

to cool NO3 concentration was observed at 410 nm and was calculated according to the

standard curve expressed in mg g-1 fresh weight

2216 Relative Water content (RWC)

Young and fully expended leaf was excise from each plant removing dust particles

preceding to Relative water content (RWC) Fresh weights (FW) were taken to all leaf

samples and were immersed in distilled water at 4 degC for 10 hours The soaked leaf samples

were taken out and surfeit water was removed by tissue paper Weighted again these leaf

samples for turgid weight (TW) and were oven dried at 70 degC Dry weight (DW) was

recorded after 24 hrs The RWC of leaf was calculated by the following formula

RWC () = [FW ndash DW] [TW ndash DW] x 100

2217 Electrolyte leakage percentage (EL)

EL was measured according to Sullivon and Ross (1979) Young and fully expended

leaves removing dust particles were taken 20 disc of 6mm diameter were made through

63

porer and were placed in the test tube containing 10ml de-ionized water First electrical

conductivity (EC lsquoarsquo) was record after shaken the tubes These test tubes now were placed

at 45-50oC warmed water bath for 30 min and observed second Electrical conductivity (EC

lsquobrsquo) Finally tubes were placed at 100oC water bath for ten min and obtained third and final

Electrical conductivity (EC lsquocrsquo) The electrolyte leakage was calculated in percentage by


EL () = (EC b ndash EC a) EC b x 100

2218 Photosynthetic pigments

Photosynthetic pigments including chlorophyll a chlorophyll b total chlorophyll

chlorophyll ab ratio and carotinoids were estimated according to the procedure given in

chapter 1

2219 Total soluble sugars

Dry leaf samples (01g) were milled in 5mL of 80 ethanol and were centrifuged at 4000

g for 10 minutes and were estimated according to the procedure described in chapter 1

22110 Proline content

The proline contents were determined through Bates et al (1973) Each dried leaf powder

sample (01 g) was grinded and homogenized in 5 ml of 3 (wv) sulphosalicylic acid and

were centrifuged at 5000 g for 20 minutes 2ml supernatant was boiled by adding 2 ml

glacial acetic acid and 2 ml ninhydrin reagent (prepared by dissolving 125 g ninhydrin in

30 ml of glacial acetic acid and 20 ml 6 M phosphoric acid) in caped test tube The tubs

were kept in boiling water bath (100oC) for 1 hour After cooling 4 ml of toluene was

added to each tube and vortex Two layers were appeared the chromophore layer of

toluene was removed and their absorbance was recorded at 590nm against reference blank

of pure toluene The proline concentrations in leaves were determined from a standard

curve prepared from extra pure proline of (Sigma Aldrich) and were calculated from the

equation and were expressed in mgg-1 of leaf dry weight

Proline (microgmL-1) = -074092 + 1660767 (OD) plusmn054031

64

22111 Soluble phenols

The dried leaf powder (01g) was milled in 3ml of 80 methanol and was centrifuged at

10000g for 15 min (Abideen et al 2015) Final volume (5ml) were adjusted by adding

80 methanol Soluble phenols were determined by using Singleton and Rossi (1965) ie

5 ml of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent (19 ratio in distilled water) and 4 ml of 75 Na2CO3

were added to 01 ml supernatant The absorbance was recorded at 765 nm after incubation

of 30 minutes at room temperature The soluble phenols concentration in leaf tissues was

determined from a standard curved prepared from Gallic acid

22112 Total soluble proteins


Bovine Serum Albumin as standards (Bradford 1976) Procedure was followed as given

in chapter 1

22113 Enzymes Assay

Enzyme extract prepared as given below was used for study of enzymes mentioned in text

The juvenile and expended leaf excised was frozen in liquid nitrogen and were stored at -

20 degC These leaf samples (100mg) was firmed in liquid nitrogen and were mills in 3 ml

of ice chilled potassium phosphate buffer (pH = 7 01 M) with 1mM EDTA and 1 PVP

(wv) The homogenate was filtered through a four layers of cheesecloth and were

centrifuged at 21000 g using refrigeration centrifuge (Micro 17 TR Hanil Science

Industrial Co Ltd South Korea) at 4 degC for 20 min The supernatant was separated and

stored at -20 degC and used for investigation on following enzymes

i Superoxide dismutase (SOD)

SOD (EC 11511) antioxidant enzymeactivity was measured through Beauchamp and

Fridovich (1971) derived on the inhibition of nitroblue tetrazolium (NBT) reduction by

produced O2minus using riboflavin photo-reduction 50 mM of pH 78 phosphate buffer (with

01mM EDTA 13 mM methionine) 75 microM nitroblue tetrazolium (NBT) 2 microM riboflavin

and 100 microl of enzyme extract was added to 3ml reaction mixture Riboflavin was added at

the last before the reaction was initiated under fluorescent lamps for 10 min Exposed and

un-exposed to florescence lamp without enzyme extract were used to serve as calibration

65

standards Activity was measured at 560nm Unit of SOD activity was defined as the

amount of enzyme required for 50 inhibition of NBT conversion

ii Catalase (CAT)

CAT (EC 11116) antioxidant enzyme activity was precise according to Aebi (1984)

derived on H2O2 reduction at 240nm for 30 s (ε = 36 M-1 cm-1)100mM potassium

phosphate buffer (pH=7) with 30mM H2O2 and 50 microl of diluted enzyme extract (adding in

last) was added to 3ml reaction mixture The decrease in absorbance due to H2O2 reduction

was measured at 240 nm and expressed in micromol of H2O2 reduced m-1g-1 fresh weight at 25

degC

iii Ascorbate peroxidase (APX)

Nakano and Asada (1981) method was used for APX (EC 111111) antioxidant

enzymeactivity by measuring the decrease in ascorbate oxidation by H2O2 The reaction

mixture (3ml) contained potassium phosphate buffer (50mM pH=7) 01mM H2O2 050

mM Ascorbate and 100 microl of enzyme extract and were observed 290 nm for 1 min 25 degC

(extinction coefficient 28 mM-1cm-1)

iv Guaiacol peroxidase (GPX)

GPX (EC 11117) antioxidant enzymeactivity was estimated through Anderson et al

(1995) 3ml of 50 mM potassium phosphate buffer (pH 7) guaiacol 75 mM H2O2 10 mM

reaction mixture with 20 microl of enzyme extract adding at last Increase in absorbance was

observed due to the formation of tetra-guaiacol at 470 nm for 2 min (extinction coefficient

266 mM-1cm-1)

v Nitrate reductase (NR)

The NR activity in leaves was observed through Long and Oaks 1990 Fresh leaf samples

(01g) were placed in 5ml of 100mM potassium phosphate pH 75 (added to 10

Isopropanol and 25mM KNO3) Tubes were vacuumed for 10 min to remove air from the

mixture and were placed in water bath shaker at 33oC for 60 min in dark The tubes were

placed in hot water (100oC) for 5 min 15 mL from the reaction mixture were added in 05

mL 20 sulphanilamide (wv dissolve in 5N HCl) and 025 mL 008 N-1-Napthylene-

66

diamine dihydrochloride Final volume up to 60 ml was made by adding distilled water

Color developed over the next 20 min Absorbance was measured at 540 nm using

spectrophotometer

67


Sole and intercropped Ziziphus mauritiana

2221 Vegetative growth

Growth of Z mauritiana in terms of shoot root and plant length and number of leaves in

two different cropping system (sole and intercrop with C cajan) in two different irrigation

intervals has been presented in Figure 21 Appendix-XII A significant increase (plt0001)

in plant length was observed in 8th day irrigation in both the cropping systems in Z

mauritiana At 4th day of irrigation interval a non-significant increase in length was

observed in intercropped plants compared to sole crop Similarly at 8th day of irrigation

plants attain almost same heights in both the cropping systems

A significant increase (plt001) in root length was observed in sole Z mauritiana

at 8th day of irrigation compared to other treatments Smallest root length revealed in plants

that were irrigated at 4th day under sole crop system

The shoot length was significantly increase (plt0001) in plants which were

irrigated at 8th day under intercropped system However shoot length remains unaffected

when comparing the different cropping system at both the irrigation intervals

A significant increase (plt0001) in number of leaves was observed in intercropped

Z mauritiana plants compared to plants cultivated according to sole system However

more increase was observed in 4th day irrigated intercropped plant as compared to 8th day

The difference in number of leaves in sole crop at both irrigating intervals remains same

i Fresh weight

Figure 22 Appendix-XII showed fresh and dry weight of stem root and leaf of Z

mauritiana plant in two different cropping system (sole and intercrop with C cajan) in

two different irrigation intervals A significant increase (plt0001) in fresh weights of leaf

stem and root was observed in intercropping (with C cajan) 4th and 8th day of irrigation

interval compared to individual cropping of Z mauritiana In 4th day of irrigation the

increment was more pronounced in fresh weights of root (7848) leaves (4130) and

stem (4047) respectively with comparison to the crop growing alone Similarly

intercropping in 8th day of irrigation showed better growth of leaves (28) stem (12)

68

and root (31) against sole crop Whereas decrease in leaves 33 (plt005) stem 70

(plt0001) and root 60 (plt0001) fresh weights were observed in 8th day of irrigation

compared to 4th day intercropping However the difference was non-significant between

two sole crops irrigated at 4th and 8th day interval

ii Dry weight

Intercropping with comparison to the sole crop showed significant (plt0001) increase in

dry weights of leaves root and stem of Z mauritiana at 4th and 8th day of irrigation (Figure

22 Appendix-XII) At 4th day of irrigation intercropping showed an increment in dry

weights of Leaves (4366) stem (4109) and root (754) compared to the sole crop

Similar increase was observed in leaves (plt0001) stem (plt0001) and root (plt0001)

weights after 8th day of irrigation However intercropping at 8th day irrigation showed an

increment in root (19) stem (11) whereas a slight decrease (1) in leaves dry weight

When comparing irrigation time an increase in stem dry weight at 4th day whereas decline

in leaves dry weight was observed Root dry weights were more or less similar at both


iii Leaf weight ratio (LWR) root weight ratio (RWR) stem weight

ratio (SWR)

Leaf weight ratio (LWR) root weight ratio (RWR) stem weight ratio (SWR) of Z

mauritiana plant grown in two different cropping system (sole and intercrop with C cajan)

in two different irrigation intervals has been presented in Figure 23 Appendix-XII An

increased in LWR and SWR was recorded at 8th day of irrigation compared to 4th day of

irrigation in both cropping systems whereas decrease in RWR was observed LWR and

SWR remained un-change in sole and inter crop system However RWR increased in

intercrop system compared to sole crop system

iv Specific shoot length (SSL) specific root length (SRL)

Specific shoot length (SSL) specific root length (SRL) of Z mauritiana plant grown in


intervals has been presented in Figure 23 Appendix-XII SSL was observed higher in 8th

day of irrigation compared to 4th day in both the cropping systems However the increase

69

in SSL was lesser in sole crop compared to intercropping Similarly SRL was recorded

lesser in 4th day of irrigation compared to 8th day of irrigation in both cropping systems

Intercropped plants showed decline in SRL compared to sole crop plants Greatest SRL

revealed in plants that were irrigated after 8th day and planted according to sole crop

system

v Plant moisture

The moisture content of Z mauritiana plant grown in two different cropping system (sole

and intercrop with C cajan) in two different irrigation intervals has been presented in

Figure 23 Appendix-XII The moisture content of plants was significantly decreased

(plt005) in sole crop while increased (plt005) in intercropping at 8th day of irrigation

compared to 4th day At 4th day moisture remained same in both cropping system

However significant increase in moisture contents was observed in inter-crop system

compared to sole crop system after 8th day of irrigation

vi Plant Succulence

Succulence of Z mauritiana plant grown in two different cropping system (sole and

intercrop with C cajan) in two different irrigation intervals has been presented in Figure

23 Appendix-XII Plant succulence in 8th day was significantly reduced in sole crop

whereas increased in intercropping system In 4th day irrigated plants decrease in

succulence was noticed compared to plants that were irrigated at 8th day under sole crop

system However significant increase (plt0001) was observed in intercropped plants

irrigated at 4th day compared to 8th day

vii Relative growth rate (RGR)

Relative growth rate (RGR) of Z mauritiana plant grown in two different cropping system

(sole and intercrop with C cajan) in two different irrigation intervals has been presented

in Figure 23 Appendix-XII Relative growth rate remains unchanged at both irrigation

times under sole crop system However decline in 8th day was observed compared to 4th

day of irrigation under intercrop system Greatest RGR was recorded in plants that were

irrigated at 4th day under intercrop system

70


Photosynthetic pigments including Chlorophyll a chlorophyll b total chlorophyll

Chlorophyll ab ratio and carotinoids of Z mauritiana plant grown in two different

cropping system (sole and intercrop with C cajan) in two different irrigation intervals has

been presented in Figure 24 Appendix-XII

i Chlorophyll contents

A significant increase (plt0001) in chlorophyll a b and total chlorophyll was observed in

plants growing as sole crop compared to intercropped system at both the irrigation

intervals Higher chlorophyll contents were also recorded in plants that were irrigated at

8th day compared to 4th day of irrigation The chlorophyll ab ratio increased in 4th day

while decline in 8th day in intercropped system compared to sole crop However overall

results showed non-significant changes

ii Carotinoids

A significant increase (p lt 0001) in leaf carotinoids was observed in sole crop compare

to intercropped system at both irrigation times in Z mauritiana Least carotene content

was estimated in plants that were irrigated at 4th day under intercrop system


Electrolyte leakage percentage (EL) of Z mauritiana plant grown in two different


been presented in Figure 25 Appendix-XII A non-significant result was observed in

electrolyte leakage in plant growing at varying cropping system and irrigating intervals

2224 Phenols

Total phenolic contents in leaves of Z mauritiana plant grown in two different cropping

system (sole and intercrop with C cajan) in two different irrigation intervals has been

presented in Figure II25 Appendix-XII A significant increase (plt001) in total phenolic

contents was observed in intercropped growing at both irrigation interval compared to sole

crop However the increase was more pronounced at 8th day of irrigation Maximum

phenolic contents were measured in plants irrigated at 8th day under intercropped plants

71

2225 Proline

Total proline contents in leaves of Z mauritiana plant grown in two different cropping


presented in Figure 25 Appendix-XII A significant decreased (plt0001) was observed

in Z mauritiana cultivated according to intercropped system in both irrigation intervals

Maximum decrease was observed in intercropped plants irrigated at 8th day whereas

highest phenolic contents were observed in plants irrigated at 4th day under sole crop

system

2226 Protein and sugars

Protein and sugar contents in leaves of Z mauritiana plant grown in two different cropping


presented in Figure 26 Appendix-XII A nonsignificant difference in total protein and

sugar contents in Z mauritiana plants was observed in two different (4th and 8th day)

irrigation intervals However the interaction with time and irrigation interval also showed

nonsignificant result

2227 Enzyme essays

Antioxidant enzymes like Catalase (CAT) Ascorbate peroxidase (APX) Guaiacol

peroxidase (GPX) Superoxide dismutase (SOD) and Nitrate reductase activity in leaf of

Z mauritiana plant grown in two different cropping system (sole and intercrop with C

cajan) in two different irrigation intervals has been presented in Figure 27 and 28

Appendix-XII

i Catalase (CAT)

A significant decreased (plt0001) in catalase activities was observed in Z mauritiana

leaves in intercropped system in both time interval with compare to sole crop at 4th day

irrigated plant However maximum decline was in sole plants irrigated at 8th day interval

However their interaction with time was nonsignificant

72

ii Ascorbate peroxidase (APX)

A significant increase (plt0001) in APX activity was observed in 8th day irrigation in both

sole and intercropped plants with compare to sole and intercropped at 4th day irrigation

interval More increase (plt0001) was observed in intercropped Z mauritiana at 8th day

Whereas nonsignificant decrease was observed in two different cropping system in 4th day

irrigation interval However interaction between time and the treatments shows significant

values

iii Guaiacol peroxidase (GPX)

A significant (plt0001) increase in GPX was observed in 8th day intercropped Z

mauritiana plant with compare to irrigation intervals as well as cropping system However

at 4th day both cropping system showed nonsignificant difference Whereas more decline

was observed in 8th day sole crop The ANOVA reflects significant (plt005) interaction

between time and the cropped system

iv Superoxide dismutase (SOD)

A nonsignificant increase in SOD was observed in intercropped at 8th day irrigation

interval Whereas there was nonsignificant differences in 4th day intercropped and at both

time intervals of sole crop However interaction between time interval and the two

cropping system shows nonsignificant result

v Nitrate and Nitrate reductase

A significant increase (plt0001) in nitrate content and activity of nitrate reductase was

observed in intercropped plants of both irrigation intervals Increase in activity was

observed (plt0001) in intercropped Z mauritiana at 4th day

73

Sole and intercropped Cajanus cajan


Growth of C cajan in terms of shoot root and plant length and number of leaves was

observed in two different cropping system (sole and intercrop with Z mauritiana) in two

different irrigation intervals has been presented in Figure 21 Appendix-XIII XIV A

significant increase (plt001) in plant length was observed in intercropped C cajan

compared to sole crop at both irrigation interval Whereas sole crop at 8th day interval

showed better results as compare to sole of 4th day Similarly root length remains

unaffected and showed non-significant change in both cropping systems and even at two

different irrigation intervals While shoot length was significantly (Plt001) decreased in

sole crop compared to intercropped at 4th day irrigation Whereas non-significant

difference be observed in rest of cropping systems growing at different irrigation interval

A significant increase (plt001) in leaves number was observed in intercropped

plants compared to sole crop at 4th and 8th day irrigation interval However most

significant decrease (plt0001) was observed in sole crop at 4th day

i Fresh weight

Figure 22 Appendix-XIV showed fresh and dry weight of stem root and leaf of C cajan

plant in two different cropping system (sole and intercrop with C cajan) in two different

irrigation intervals A significant increase (plt001) in fresh weight of leaf was observed in

intercropping (with Z mauritiana) at 4th and 8th day of irrigation interval compared to

individual cropping of C cajan The increase in intercropped system compared to sole

crop was more pronounced at 4th day (42) of irrigation than the 8th day (1701) Plants

showed higher leaves fresh weights in 8th day of irrigation compared to 4th day Similarly

the interaction between cropping system and the irrigation interval was significant

(Plt005)

An insignificant difference was observed in stem at 4th (15) and 8th (12) days

fresh weights in both intercropping system at two different irrigation intervals The

interaction between cropping system and the irrigation interval also showed non-

significant result

74

A non-significant difference in root fresh weight was observed in two different

cropping systems (sole and intercropped) in 4th and 8th day of irrigation intervals However

fresh weight of crop at 8th day irrigation interval was significantly increase (plt0001) over

4th day irrigation interval Similar pattern was observed in 4th day irrigated sole and

intercropped C cajan

ii Dry weight

A significant increase in leaves (42) stem (24) and root (18) dry weights were

observed in 4th day irrigation under intercropped system compared to sole However in 8th

day of irrigation this increase of dry weights was not much prominent Under sole crop

system dry weights of leaves stem and root was increased markedly in 8th day compared

to 4th day However in intercrop system the difference in dry weights was insignificant

between 8th and 4th day of irrigation


ratio (SWR)

Leaf weight ratio (LWR) root weight ratio (RWR) stem weight ratio (SWR) of C cajan

grown in two different cropping system (sole and intercrop with Z mauritiana) in two

different irrigation intervals has been presented in Figure 23 Appendix-XIV A

significant increase (plt0001) in LWR was observed at 8th day of irrigation compared to

4th day intercropped Similar pattern was noticed in RWR however SWR showed

insignificant difference between 4th and 8th day of irrigation A slight increase in LWR was

noticed in intercropped plants compared to sole Whereas RWR declined in intercrop

compared to sole and SWR remains un-changed

iv Specific shoot (SSL) root length (SRL)

Specific shoot length (SSL) specific root length (SRL) of C cajan grown in two different

cropping system (sole and intercrop with Z mauritiana) in two different irrigation

intervals has been presented in Figure 23 Appendix-XIV SSL and SRL were observed

to increase in sole crop compared to intercrop at 4th day of irrigation However increase

SSL and SRL was recorded in intercropped compared to sole at 8th day of irrigation A

general decline in SSL and SRL was noticed in 8th day of irrigation compared to 4th day

75

v Plant moisture

The moisture content of C cajan plant grown in two different cropping system (sole and

intercrop with Z mauritiana) in two different irrigation intervals has been presented in

Figure 23 Appendix-XIV The moisture content of plants was decreased significantly

(plt005) at 8th day irrigation interval compared to 4th day in sole crop Whereas non-

significant increase was observe in intercrop plants at 8th day of water irrigation

vi Plant succulence

Succulence of C cajan plant grown in two different cropping system (sole and intercrop

with Z mauritiana) in two different irrigation intervals has been presented in Figure 23

Appendix-XIV A significant increase (plt001) was observed in intercropped plants of C

cajan compared to sole crop at both irrigation interval However succulence increased in

sole crop and decreased in intercrop plants at 8th day of irrigation compared to 4th day


Relative growth rate (RGR) of C cajan plant grown in two different cropping system (sole

and intercrop with Z mauritiana) in two different irrigation intervals has been presented

in Figure 23 Appendix-XIV A significant increase in RGR was observed in 8th day

compared to 4th day in both the cropping systems Highest increase was observed in

intercropped at 8th day irrigation At 4th day irrigation intervals intercropped plants

showed better RGR compared to Sole crop



Chlorophyll ab ratio and carotinoids of C cajan plant grown in two different cropping

system (sole and intercrop with Z mauritiana) in two different irrigation intervals has been

presented in Figure 24 Appendix-XIV


A significant increase (plt005) in Chlorophyll a b and total chlorophyll was observed in

intercrop plants at 8th day irrigation interval Whereas at 4th day irrigation interval Sole

76

plants showed better results as compare to intercrop plants Plants at 8th day significantly

increase chlorophyll a b and total chlorophyll compared to 4th day of irrigation

Interactions between cropping systems and irrigation intervals were found significant

(chlorophyll a (plt001) chlorophyll b (plt001) and total chlorophyll (plt0001)

respectively) However the ratio of chlorophyll ab showed non-significant values in

cropping irrigation interval and their interaction

ii Carotenoids

A significant increase (plt001) in carotinoids was observed in intercropped C cajan at 8th

day of irrigation Whereas non-significant increase was observed in sole crop at 4th day

irrigation interval with compare to intercrop However the irrigation intervals showed

significant (plt0001) difference Whereas interaction of cropping system with irrigation

time also showed significant correlation (plt0001)


Electrolyte leakage percentage (EL) of C cajan plant grown in two different cropping


presented in Figure 25 Appendix-XIV A non-significant increase in EL percentage was

observed in sole crop compared to intercrop plants growing at 4th and 8th day of irrigation

No significant change was noticed between the irrigation times to C cajan The interaction

between cropping system (sole and intercropped) and irrigation interval (4th and 8th day)

also showed non-significant

22211 Phenols

Total phenolic contents in leaves of C cajan plant grown in two different cropping system

(sole and intercrop with Z mauritiana) in two different irrigation intervals has been

presented in Figure 25 Appendix-XIV A nonsignificant result was observed in total

phenolic contents of C cajan growing as sole and intercropped system at two different

irrigation intervals However the interaction between irrigation intervals with crop system

showed significant (p lt 005) results

77

22212 Proline

Total proline contents in leaves of C cajan plant grown in two different cropping system


presented in Figure 25 Appendix-XIV Proline contents in leaves of C cajan showed

nonsignificant increase at 4th day of irrigation interval in both sole and intercropped

system Whereas the interaction between irrigation intervals showed significant (Plt001)

results

22213 Protein and Sugars

Protein and sugar contents in leaves of C cajan plant grown in two different cropping


presented in Figure 26 Appendix-XIV A less significant difference (plt005) was

observed in two different (4th and 8th day) irrigation intervals However there was

nonsignificant difference in two cropped system More decrease was observed at 4th day

intercropped plants Whereas nonsignificant increase in 8th day intercropped and 4th day

sole plants were observed However interaction between crop and time of irrigation

showed significant results (plt0001)

22214 Enzyme assay



C Cajan plant grown in two different cropping system (sole and intercrop with Z

mauritiana) in two different irrigation intervals has been presented in Figure II27

Appendix-XIV

i Catalase (CAT)

A significant increase (plt001) in catalase activity was observed in intercropped C cajan

at 8th day of irrigation with compare to other irrigation time and cropped system Whereas

increase was observed in sole crop at 4th day irrigation interval with compare to 8th day

However the irrigation intervals and the interaction between cropping system with

irrigation interval also showed nonsignificant correlation

78


A non-significant increase in APX was observed in intercropped plant in 4th and 8th day

irrigation interval with compare to sole crops Sole crop at 8th day showed maximum

decline However the difference between cropping system and their interaction with

irrigation interval also showed nonsignificant results


A significant increase (plt005) in GPX activity was observed in 8th day sole crop

However there was nonsignificant difference among intercropped at two time interval and

sole crop at 4th day irrigation Whereas interaction with time to irrigation interval also

showed less significant results


A significant decrease (plt0001) in SOD activity was observed in intercropped at 8th day

irrigation interval with compare to 4th day Maximum decrease was observed in 8th day

intercropped Whereas sole crop at 8th day also showed better result to 4th day sole crop

However ANOVA showed significant correlation among crop system at two time interval

and 4th day irrigation


Nitrate content and activity of nitrate reductase was nonsignificant in both cropping

system using both irrigation intervals However nonsignificant increase was observed in

nitrate content and activity of nitrate reductase in intercropped Z mauritiana at 8th day

79

Sole IntercropSole Intercrop

No o

f le

aves

0

20

40

60

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

2404

th day

Cajanus cajan

a

RootShoot

ab

a

a

b

a

a

8th

day

Figure 21 Vegetative parameters of Z mauritiana and C cajan at grand period of growth under sole and

intercropping system at 4th and 8th day irrigation intervals (Bars represent means plusmn standard error

of each treatment and significance among the treatments was recorded at p lt 005)


No of

leav

es

0

200

400

600

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

Ziziphus mauritiana

RootShoot

4th

day 8th

days

b b

a a

a

b

cc

80

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fre

sh w

eight

(g)

100

200

300

400

500

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

a

b

c

a

b b aa

b

b

c c

a

bc

a

c

ba

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

2

4

6

8

10

12

Fre

ah w

eight

(g)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

aa

b

a

a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

a

c

b

a a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Cajanus cajan

Figure 22 Fresh and dry weight of Z mauritiana and C cajan plants under sole and intercropping system

at 4th and 8th day irrigation intervals (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment

and significance among the treatments was recorded at p lt 005)

81

Figure 23 Leaf weight ratio (LWR) root weight ratio(RWR) shoot weight ratio(SWR)specific shoot

length (SSL) specific root length (SRL) plant moisture Succulence and relative growth rate (RGR) of

Zmauritiana and C cajan grow plants under sole and intercropping system at 4th and 8th

day irrigation

intervals (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and significance among the treatments


Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

01

02

03

04

05

06

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

005

010

015

020

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

05

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

b

a

bb

a

b

aa

a aa

b

a

bb

c

b

a

bb

b

aa a

ba

bc

4th day

8th day

82

(Figure 23 continuedhellip)

Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

2

4

6

8

10

12

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

002

004

006

008

010

012

014

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

5

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Cajanus cajan

a aab

a aaa

a

bba

a

b b

c

a aab

a

bbb

abbb

aa

bc

8th day

4th day

83

Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

Ch

loro

phyll

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25Chl ab

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

a

b

a

b

a ab

b

Chl aChl b

Figure 24 Leaf pigments of Zmauritiana and C cajan grow plants under sole and intercropping system at

4th and 8th

day irrigation intervals (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and

significance among the treatments was recorded at p lt 005)

Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15ab

ab

Cajanus cajan

bb b

a

a

b

cc

bb b

a

84

Ele

ctro

lyte

lea

kag

e(

)

0

5

10

15

4th

day 8th

dayP

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

Sole Intercrop

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a a

a

b b ba

a

b

c

d

Figure 25 Electrolyte leakage phenols and prolein of Z mauritiana and C cajan at grand period of growth

plants under sole and intercropping system at 4th and 8

th day irrigation intervals (Bars represent

means plusmn standard error of each treatment and significance among the treatments was recorded at

p lt 005)

85


E

lect

roly

te l

eakag

e(

)

0

20

40

60

80

4th

day 8th

day

Phen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

000

003

006

009

012

015

018

Sole Intercrop

Cajanus cajan

a aa

a

a a aa

aa a

a

86

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

20

40

60

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a aa a

a

a a a

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

4th

day 8th

dayCajanus cajan

ab

a

c

a

b

cc

Figure 26 Total protein and sugars in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan plants under sole and

intercropping system at 4th and 8th

day irrigation intervals (Bars represent means plusmn standard

error of each treatment and significance among the treatments was recorded at p lt 005)

87

Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

AP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

GP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

bc

c

a

b

cc

a

c

b

b

b bb

a

Figure 27 Enzymes activities in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan plants under sole and intercropping

system at 4th and 8th

day irrigation intervals (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each

treatment and significance among the treatments was recorded at p lt 005)

88


Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

4th

day 8th

dayG

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

Cajanus cajan

aA

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

bb

b

aaa

b

a

bbb

a

c

a

b

89

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

14

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

4th

day

Nitrate reductaseNO

3

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

b

c

cb

b

b

a

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

4th

dayCajanas cajan

a

bb

b

aa

aa

Nitrate reductase NO3

Figure 28 Nitrate reductase activity and nitrate concentration in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan plants

under sole and intercropping system at 4th and 8th

dayirrigation intervals (Values represent means

plusmn standard error of each treatment and significance among the treatments was recorded at p lt

005)

90

23 Experiment No 8

Investigations of intercropping Ziziphus mauritiana with Cajanus cajan

on marginal land under field conditions


2311 Selection of plants

Ziziphus mautitiana and Cajanus cajan were selected for this study as described in chapter

1

2312 Experimental field

Field of Fiesta Water Park was selected to investigate intercropping of Z mauritiana with

Ccajan It is situated about 50 km from University of Karachi at super highway toward

HyderabadThe area of study has subtropical desert climate with average annual rain fall

is ~20 cmmost of which is received during the monsoon or summer seasonSince summer

temperature (April to October) are approx 30-35 degC and the winter months (November to

March) are ~20 degC Wind velocity is generally high all the year Topography of the area

was uneven with clay- loam soil having gravels Xerophytic plants are pre-dominantly

present in the area including Prosopis spp Acacia spp Euphorbia spp Caparus

deciduas etc

2313 Soil analysis

Before conducting experiment soil of Fiesta Water Park field was randomly sampled at

three locationsatone feet of depthusing soil augerThese soil samples were analyzed in

Biosaline Research Laboratory Department of Botany University of Karachi to

determine its physical and chemical properties

i Bulk density

Bulk density was determinedin accordance with Blake and Hartge (1986) by using the

following formula

Bulk density = Oven dried soil (g) volume of soil (cm3)

91

ii Soil porosity

Soil porosity was calculated in accordance with Brady and Weil (1996) by using the

following formula

Soil porosity = 1- (bulk density Particle density) times 100

Where particle density = 265 gcm3

iii Soil texture and particle size

Soil particle size was determined by Bouyoucos hydrometric method in accordance with

Gee and Or (1986)On the basis of clay silt and sand percentages soil texture was

determined by using soil texture triangle presented in Figure 31

iv Water holding capacity

Water holding capacity in percentages was calculatedaccording to George et al (2013)

v pH and Electrical conductivity of soil (ECe)

Soil saturated paste was made with de-ionized water and leave for 24 hours Soil solution

was extracted through Buckner funnel and suction pump (Rocker 300) pH of soil

solution was taken on Adwa AD1000 pHMV meter and ECe was taken on electrical

conductivity meter (4510 Jenway)


Six months old grafted Ziziphus mauritiana saplings were carefully transported in field of

Fiesta Water Park

Three equal size plots of 100times10 sq ft were prepared for this experiment

Plot ldquoArdquo = Ziziphus mauritiana (Sole crop)

Plot ldquoBrdquo = Cajanus cajan (Sole crop)

Plot ldquoCrdquo = Ziziphus mauritiana + Cajanus cajan (intercropped)

In plot lsquoArsquo and lsquoCrsquo pits of two cubic feet depth were prepared in two parallel rows

at a distance of 10 feet (Yaragattikar amp Itnal 2003)so that the distance of pits within the

row and the distance of pits between the rows were same Each row bears nine pits

Eighteen healthy saplings of nearly equal height and vigor of Z mauritiana were

92

transplanted in the pits and were fertilized with cow-dong manure Plants were irrigated

with underground (pumped) water initially on alternate day for two weeks older leaves

fall down completely and new leaves appeared in this establishment period Later the

irrigation interval was kept fortnightly Electrical conductivity of irrigated water (ECiw)

was 24 plusmn 05 dSm-1

After establishment of Z mauritiana water soaked seeds of intercropping plant (C

cajan) were sown in plot lsquoCrsquo Three vertical lines (strips design) of equal distance were

made between the rows of Z mauritiana The distance between the line was one feet

Eleven C cajan were maintained in each line at a distance of one feet which constitute a

total of 33 C cajan in 3 lines There were 264 plants of C cajan arranged in strip pattern

as intercrop for eighteen Z mauritiana A sole crop of C cajan in plot lsquoBrsquo was arranged

with the same manner to serve as control Similarly plot lsquoArsquo was served as control of Z

mauritianaThe experiment was observed up to reproductive yield of each plant

Field diagram Theoritical model of intercropping system used in this study showing sole crop in Plot lsquoArsquo

(Z Mauritiana) and Plot lsquoBrsquo (C cajan) while Plot lsquoCrsquo represents intercropping of both

species at marginal land

Six Z mauritiana plants were randomly selected from their two rows of block lsquoCrsquo

which were facing two rows of C cajan on either sides Similarly ten plants of C cajan

facing Z mauritiana were randomly selected for further study At the same manner six Z

mauritiana from block lsquoArsquo and ten C cajan from block lsquoBrsquo grown as sole crop were

selected as control for further study

93


Vegetative growth of Z mauritiana plant was noted in terms of height volume of canopy

while height and number of branches in Ccajan bimonthly after establishment Fresh and

dry weightsof leaves stem and root were observed at final harvest in both plant species

growing as sole or intercropping

Reproductive growth of Z mauritiana such as number length and diameter fruit

weight per ten plant and average fruit yield was measured at termination of the experiment

Whereas reproductive growth in C cajan was monitored in terms of number of pods

number of seeds weight of pods and weight of seed

2316 Analyses on some biochemical parameters

Following biochemical analysis was conducted in Fully expended leavesof Z mauritiana

and C cajan growing as sole and as intercropped at grand period of growth Additionally

fruits of Z mauritiana were also analyzed for their protein soluble and insoluble sugars

and total phenolic contents


Photosynthetic pigments including chlorophyll a chlorophyll b and total chlorophyll were

estimated in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan according to procedure described in

chapter 1

ii Protein in leaves

Protein contents were estimated in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan according to

procedure described in chapter 1

iii Total soluble sugars in leaves

Total soluble sugars were estimated in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajanaccording to


94

iv Phenolic contents in leaves

Phenolic content were estimated in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan according to


2317 Fruit analysis

i Protein in fruit

Protein content in fruit of Z mauritiana was estimated according to procedure described

in chapter 1

ii Total soluble sugars in fruits

Total soluble sugars in ripe fruits of Z mauritiana were estimated according to procedure

described in chapter 1

iii Phenolic contents in fruits

Phenolic contents in fruits of Z mauritiana were estimated according to procedure


2318 Nitrogen estimation

Nitrogen was also estimated in root zone soil as well as in fully expended leaves of Z

mauritiana and C cajan plants

Total nitrogen in leaves and soil was estimated through AOAC method 95504

(2005) One g of dried powdered sample in round bottle flask was digested in presence of

20 mL H2SO4 15 mL K2SO4 and 07g CuSO4 at 400oC heating mental After digestion 80

ml distilled water was added in digest Then distillation was done at 100oC by adding 100

mL of 45 NaOH (drop wise) in digested solution Steam was collected in 35 mL of 01M

HCl in a flask Three samples of 10 mL each steam collected solution were taken and 2-3

drops of methyl orange was added as indicator Titration was made with 01M NaOH

Changeappearance of color indicates the completion of reactionPercent nitrogen was

calculated through following equation

N = (mL of acid times molarity) ndash (mL of base times molarity) times 14007

95

2319 Land equivalent ratio and Land equivalent coefficient

The LER defined the total land area needed for sole crop system to give yield obtained

mixed crop It is mainly used to evaluate the performance of intercropping (Willey 1979)

Land equivalent ratio (LER) of two crops was estimated according to (Willey 1979) by

using formula

Whereas partial LER of Z mauritiana calculated according to

Similarly Partial LER of Ccajan were calculated as

Land equivalent coefficient (LEC) an assess of dealings the effectiveness of relationship

of two crops (Alhassan et al 2012) was calculated by using (Adetiloye et al 1983)

equation as

Yield was calculated in gram fresh weight LER and LEC of height and total chlorophyll

were also calculated by using above formula by substituting their values with yield (fruits

of Z mauritiana and seeds of C cajan) to height fruits and chlorophyll respectively

23110 Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed by using (ANOVA) and the significant differences between treatment

means wereexamined by least significant difference (Zar 2010) All statistical analysis

was performed using SPSS for windows version 14 and graphs were plotted using Sigma

plot 2000

LER= Yield of Z mauritiana + Yield of C cajan (in intercropped) + Yield of C cajan + Yield of Z mauritiana (in intercropped)

Yield of Z mauritiana (sole) Yield of C cajan (sole)

Partial LER = Yield of Z mauritiana + Yield of C cajan (in intercropped)

Yield of Z mauritiana (sole)

Partial LER = Yield of C cajan + Yield of Z mauritiana (in intercropped)

Yield of C cajan (sole)

LEC = Partial LER of Z mauritiana times Partial LER of C cajan

96


2321 Vegetative parameters

Vegetative growth parameters of Z mauritiana include plant height volume of canopy

grown individually as well as intercropped with C cajan is presented in Figure 29

Appendix-XV A significant increase in height and canopy volume of Z mauritiana with

time (p lt 0001) and cropping system (p lt 005) was observed However the interaction

between time and cropping system showed non-significant results In general the

intercropped plants were showed higher values in all vegetative parameters than sole crop

and this increase was more pronounced after 60 days

Figure 29 Appendix-XVII showed the vegetative growth parameters of C cajan

including height and number of branches Height of C cajan was significantly increased

(plt0001) with increasing time in plants growing sole and as intercropped with Z

mauritiana The interaction with time to crop height also showed significant (plt0001)

results in both cropping systems However slight decline in height of intercropped C

cajan was noticed at 120 days compared to sole crop Number of branches was significant

increased (plt0001) in both crops with increasing time The interaction of time with

branches also showed significant (plt0001) results in both cropping systems However

number of branches was slightly increased in intercropped plants at 120 days compared to

sole crop

2322 Reproductive parameters

i Fruit number and weight (fresh and dry)

Reproductive parameters of Z mauritiana and C cajan at grand period of growth under

sole and intercropping system has been presented in Figure 210 Appendix-XVI XVIII

Individual and interactive effect of time (p lt0001) and treatment (plt001) on number and

fresh weight of fruits of Z mauritiana was showed significant results Similarly plants

grown with C cajan showed significant increase (p lt0001) in fresh weight of fruits (p

lt005) whereas fruit dry weight and circumference was non-significant in comparison to

sole crop

97

In C cajan flowers were appeared only at blooming phase (during 60 days of treatment)

and no difference in number of flowers was observed in both cropping systems (sole and

with Z mauritiana (Figure 210 XVII)

Leguminous pods were initiated soon after flowering period (during 60 days) and

last till end of the experiment (120 days) A significant increase (plt0001) in pod numbers

was observed with increasing time in both sole and intercropped system But non-

significant differences in number of pods of both cropping system and their interaction

with time were observed

Similarly number and weight of C cajan seeds were showed non-significant difference

in both cropping systems



Leaf pigments of Zmauritiana and C cajan grow plants under sole and intercropping has

been presented in Figure 211 Appendix-XVI XVIII In Z muritiana leaves A significant

increase (plt005) in chlorophyll a chlorophyll b total chlorophyll and carotinoids was

observed when grown as intercrop whereas the effect on chlorophyll ab ratio was non-

significant as that of sole one

In C cajan a slight decrease (plt005) in chlorophyll lsquobrsquo and total chlorophyll

(plt001) was observed in intercropped plants compare to sole one Whereas chlorophyll

lsquoarsquo chlorophyll ab ratio and carotinoids showed nonsignificant difference between sole

and intercropped C cajan

ii Total proteins sugar phenols

Sugars protein and phenols in leaves of Z mauritianaand C cajan at grand period of

growth under sole and intercropping system is presented in Figure 212 Appendix-XVI

XVIII Total proteins and soluble and insoluble sugar content of Z mauritiana leaves was

unaffected throughout the experiment However an increase in total phenolic content

(plt001) was observed in intercropped Z mauritiana plants than grown individually

98

In C cajan total soluble sugars protein and phenols in leaves showed non-

significant differences between sole to intercropped plants

Sugars protein and phenols in fruits of Z mauritiana grown under sole and

intercropping system is presented in Figure 213 Appendix-XVI A non-significant

increase was observed in phenolic as well as in soluble insoluble and total sugar contents

in fruits of Z mauritiana plants grown with C cajan (intercrop) as compare to the fruits

of sole crop

2324 Nitrogen Contents

Nitrogen in leaves and in soil of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing under sole and

intercrop system is presented in Figure 214 Appendix-XVI XVIII ANOVA showed a

non significant effect on nitrogen content of leaf as well as root zone soil of Z mauritiana

and C cajan grown individually or as intercropping system

2225 Land equivalent ratio (LER) and land equivalent coefficient

(LEC)

Land equivalent ratio (LER) Land equivalent coefficient (LEC) of height chlorophyll and

yield of of Z 98auritiana and C cajan growing as sole and intercropping system in has

been presented in Table 22 The LER using height of both species was nearly 2 in which

PLER of Z mutitania was 48 and PLER of C cajan was 519 Whereas the calculated

values of the land equivalent coefficient (LEC) of Z mauritiana and C cajan remained

9994

The LER using yield of both species was above 2 in which PLER of Z mauritiana

was 46 Whereas PLER of C cajan was 543 However the calculated values of LEC

of both species were 100

The LER using total chlorophylls of both species were more than 25 in which

PLER of Z mauritiana was 344 and as that of PLER of C cajan was 655 Whereas

the calculated values of LEC was 999 of both the species

99

Table 21 Soil analysis data of Fiesta Water Park experimental field

Serial number Parameters Values

1 ECe (dSm-1) 4266plusmn0536

2 pH 8666plusmn0136

3 Bulk density (gcm3) 123plusmn0035

4 Porosity () 53666plusmn1333

5 Water holding capacity () 398plusmn2811

6 Soil texture Clay loam

7 Sand () 385plusmn426

8 Silt () 3096plusmn415

9 Clay () 305plusmn1

Ece is the electrical conductivity of saturated paste of soil sample

Figure 29 Soil texture triangle (Source USDA soil classification)

100

Ziziphus mauritiana

Days

0 60 120

Volu

me

(m3)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Sole Intercrop

a

a

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c

Cajanus cajan

Days

0 60 120

Bra

nch

es (

)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Sole Intercrop

aa

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c

Figure 210 Vegetative growth of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing under sole and intercropping

system (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and significance among the

treatments was recorded at p lt 005)

101

Ziziphus mauritiana

Fresh Dry

Fru

it w

eig

ht

(g)

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120 180

Nu

mb

er o

f F

ruit

s

0

100

200

300

Sole Intercrop

a

b

a

b

c

c

dd

Cajanus cajan

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Pods

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Flo

wer

s

0

50

100

150

Sole Intercrop

Days

aa

bb

c c

Sole Intercrop

Num

ber

of

See

ds

0

100

200

300

400

500

See

d W

eight

(g)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60Number of seedsSeed weight

Figure 211 Reproductive growth of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing under sole and intercropping



102

Ziziphus mauritiana

Cajanus cajan

Figure 212 Leaf pigments of Zmauritiana and C cajan growing under sole and intercropping (Bars

represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and significance among the treatments was

recorded at p lt 005)

Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

noid

s (m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03C

hlo

rophyl

l (m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

no

ids

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

ab

rat

io

0

1

2

3

4ab

ab

103

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f S

ug

ars

(mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35SoluableInsoluable

Figure 213 Sugars protein and phenols in leaves of Z mauritiana and C cajan at grand period of growth under

sole and intercropping system (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and


104


Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

05

10

15

20

Lea

f S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

105

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Fru

it P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Fru

it P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

Fru

it S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35 SoluableInsoluable

Figure 214 Sugars protein and phenols in fruits of Z mauritiana grown under sole and intercropping



106

Z mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil

Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil

Figure 215 Nitrogen in leaves and in soil of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing under sole and intercrop



107

Table 22 Land equivalent ratio (LER) and Land equivalent coefficient (LEC) with reference to height chlorophyll and yield of of Z mauritiana and C cajan growing


Plant species Parameters Formulated with

reference to Height

Formulated with

reference to Total

Chlorophyll

Formulated with reference to Yield

(fresh weight of Z mauritiana fruit

and seed of C cajan)

Z mauritiana Partial LER 1027 1666 1159

C cajan Partial LER 0950 0877 0993

Intercropped

Total LER 1977 2543 2152

Z mauritiana amp C cajan

(Sole and intercropped) LEC 0975 1461 1151

107

108

24 Discussion

Intercropping is a common practice used to obtain better yield on a limited area through

efficient utilization of given resources which may not be achieved by growing each crop

independently (Mucheru-Muna et al 2010) In this system selection of appropriate crops

planting rates and their spatial arrangement can reduce competition for light water and

nutrients (Olowe and Adeyemo 2009) In general increased growth (biomass height

volume circumference biomass succulence SSL SRL SSR LWR SWR RWR and

RGR) of each species is a good indicator of successful intercropping The SRL and SSL

measure the ratio between the lengths of root or shoot per unit dry weight of respective

tissues (Wright and Westoby 1999) The weight ratio of leaf stem and root to total plant

weight (LWR SWR and RWR) describes the allocation of biomass towards each organ to

maximize overall relative growth rate (RGR) which explains how plant responds to certain

type of condition (Reynolds and Antonio 1996) In this study height and canopy volume

of Z mauritiana and height and branches of C cajan were increased when grown together

in comparison to sole crop in field experiment (Figure 29) Whereas in drum pot culture

biomass generally the length of plant canopy volume number of leaves RGR LWR

SWR RWR SSL and SRL were either higher or unaffected in both species growing in

intercropping at 4th and 8th days intervals (Figure 21-23) Similar beneficial effects on

growth of other intercrops have also been reported under different conditions (Yamoah

1986 Atta-Krah 1990 Kass et al 1992 Singh et al 1997) Dhyani and Tripathi (1998)

observed increased height stem diameter crown width and timber volume of three

intercropped species than sole crop Bhat et al (2013) also revealed significant

improvement in annual extension height and spread in apple plants intercropped with

leguminous plants

The increased growth of both intercropped plants of this study was well reflected

by their biochemical parameters Leaf pigments like chlorophyll a chlorophyll b and total

chlorophyll were either higher or remained unaffected (Figure 211) in both intercropped

plants than sole crops of field experiments Whereas in drum pot culture chlorophyll

content (Figure 24) was higher only in intercropped C cajan (specially in 8th days) Bhatt

et al(2008) and Massimo and Mucciarelli (2003) also reported the increased accumulation

of chlorophyll a b and total chlorophylls in leaves of soybean and peppermint when

109

grown with their respective intercrops Our results are also in agreement with Liu et al

(2014) and Otusanya et al (2008) reported similar results in Lycopersican esculentum and

later in Capsicum annum as well Some other reports are also available which shows non-

significant effect on leaf pigments in both cropping systems (Shi-dan 2012 Luiz-Neto-

Neto et al 2014)The synthesis and activity of chlorophyll depends on severity and type

of applied stress it generally increase in low saline mediums (Locy et al 1996) or

remained unaffected however sometimes stimulated (Kurban et al 1999 Parida et al

2004 Rajesh et al 1998)

Proteins and carbohydrates (sugars) perform vast array of functions which are

necessary for plant growth and reproduction (Copeland and McDonald 2012) Variation

in their contents helps to predict plant health which is usually decreased with applied stress

(Arbona et al 2013) Both are also the compulsory factors of animals diet since they

cannot manufacture sugars and some of the components of proteins which must be

obtained from food (Bailey 2012) In our experiment protein content was either remained

unchanged or increased which indicated a good coordination of both intercrops in field

and drum pot experiments (Figure 26 and 212) Liu et al (2014) also found that protein

and sugars were not affected in tomatogarlic intercrops In another experiment similar

results were found when corn was grown with and without intercropping (Borghi et al

2013)

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are produced as a spinoff of regular metabolism

however under stress the overproduction of ROS may lead to oxidative damage (Baxter et

al 2014) In low concentrations ROS worked as messengers to regulate several plant

processes and also helps to improve tolerance to various biotic and abiotic stresses (Miller

et al 2009 Nishimura and Dangl 2010 Suzuki et al 2011) but when the concentration

goes beyond the critical limit ROS would become self-threatening at every level of

organization (Foreman et al 2003) To maintain a proper workable redox state an

efficient scavenging system of enzymatic (SOD CAT GPX and APX) andor non-

enzymatic (polyphenols sugars glutathione and ascorbic acid) antioxidants is required

which would be of critical importance when plant undergoes stress (Sharma et al 2012)

Among these enzymes SOD is a first line of defense which converts dangerous superoxide

radicals into less toxic product (H2O2) In further CAT APX and GPX worked in

association to get rid off from the excessive load of other oxygen radicals or ions (H2O2

110

OH- ROO etc) In this study antioxidant enzymes (SOD CAT GPX and APX) were

found to work in harmony which was not affected during 4th day treatment in both species

in comparison to sole crop (Fig 27) showing strong antioxidant defense which was not

compromised by cropping system When comparing in 8th day treatment a significant

general increase in all enzyme activities were observed in both species except for SOD

and GPX of C cajan (Fig 27) These results displayed relatively better performance and

tight control over the excessive generation of ROS which would be predicted in this case

due to less availability of water than in 4th day treatment (Karatas et al 2014 Doupis et

al 2013) Similarly by coping oxidative burst and maintaining cellular redox equilibrium

plants were able to improve growth performance especially in Z mauritiana (Fig 21)

Water deficit affect stomatal conductance which could bring about changes in

photosynthetic performance hence overproduction of ROS is usually found among

different crops (Moriana et al 2002 Miller et al 2010) As a response tolerant plants

overcome this situation by increased activity of antioxidant enzymes which was evident in

Wheat Rice olive etc (Zhang and Kirkham 1994 Sharma and Dubey 2005 Guo et al

2006 Sofo et al 2005)

Phenolic compounds despite their role in physiological plant processes are

involved in adsorbing and neutralizing reactive oxygen species (ROS Ashraf and Harris

2004) The overproduction of ROS may cause several plant disorders Plants produce

secondary compounds like polyphenols to maintain balance between ROS generation and

detoxification (Posmyk et al 2009) Increased synthesis and accumulation of phenolic

compounds is reported to safeguard cellular structures and molecules especially under

biotic abiotic constraints (Ksouri et al 2007 Oueslati et al 2010) In this study

intercropped Z mauritiana of field and both species in drum pot culture showed higher

phenolic content than individual crop (Figure 25 and 212) which may be attributed to

adaptive mechanism for scavenging free radicals to prevent cellular damage (Rice-Evans

1996)

In terms of fruit yield we observed that Z mauritiana is suitable for intercropping

as suggested by Yang et al (1992) Number of flowers fruits and fruit fresh weight of

both species either increased considerably or no-affected in intercropped plants compared

to individual ones (Figure 210) Moreover fruit quality of Z mauritiana includes proteins

phenols and soluble extractable and total sugars were also higher in intercropped plants

111

(Figure 213) Results of this study are better than other experiments reported by

Sharma (2004) Kumar and Chaubey (2008) and Kumar et al (2013) who did not find

influence of other understory forage crops (like Aonla) on the yield of Z mauritiana

However in other case the yield of intercropped ber was some time higher (Liu 2002)

Singh et al 2013 found no adverse effects on the yield of pigeonpea when intercropped

with mungbean however it improved the grain yield of associated species

A leguminous plant C cajan is used in this experiment as secondary crop which

can supplement Z mauritiana by improving soil fertility Results of both experiments

showed that the nitrogen was higheror un-affected (Figure 214) in soils of intercropped

plants which supports our hypothesis that leguminous intercrop increase N supply This

can be achieved by acquisition of limited resources to manage rootrhizosphere

interactions which can improve resource-use efficiency (Zhang et al 2010

Shen et al 2013 White et al 2013b Ehrmann and Ritz 2014 Li et al 2014) As a

consequence it impact on overall plant performance which starts from high photosynthetic

activity by increasing chlorophyll results in more availability of photoassimilate for

growth and reproductive allocation (Eghball and Power 1999) Use of C cajan in tree

intercropping proved beneficial for producing high yield crops and for the environment

(Gilbert 2012 Glover et al 2012)

Land equivalent ratio (LER) is commonly used to evaluate the effectiveness of

intercropping by using the resources of same environment compared with sole crop

(Vandermeer 1992 Rao et al 1990 1991 Cao et al 2012) It is the ratio of area for sole

crop to intercrop required to produce the equal amount of yield at the same management

level (Mead and Willey 1980 Dhima et al 2007) On the other hand land equivalent

coefficient (LEC) describe an association that concern with the strength of relationship It

is the proportion of biomassyield of one crop explained by the presence of the other crop

The LER 1 or more indicate a beneficial effect of both species on each other which increase

the yield of both crops as compare to single one (Zada et al 1988) In this experiment all

LER values were about 2 or more than 2 while LEC values were around 1 or more than

one in ZizyphusCajnus intercropping Both LER and LEC values were in descending

order of chlorophylls gt yield gt height (Table 22) However the partial LER was higher in

Zizyphus than Cajanus in all cases These results describe the superiority of intercropping

over sole cropping where LER values are even gt2 Some other studies reported LER from

112

09-14 (Bests 1976) 12-15 (Cunard 1976) and up to 2 (Andrews and Kassam 1976)

Similar results were reported in poplarsoybean system (Rivest et al 2010) black

locustMedicago sativa (Gruenewald et al 2007) wheatjujube (Zhang et al 2013)

Acacia salignasorghum (Droppelmann et al 2000 Raddad and Luukkanen 2007) The

high LER values in our system indicating a harmony in resource utilization in both species

which was also corroborated with their respective LEC values The greater LEC values (gt

025) suggesting an inbuilt tendency of studied crops to give yield advantage (Kheroar and

Patra 2013) Experiments based on traditional practices of growing legumes with cereals

demonstrated greater and continuous cash returns than individual-crops (Baker 1978) In

addition the same authors found further increase in cash returns by increasing the

proportion of cereal and incorporating maize with sorghum and millet In agreement with

our findings similar reports are also available from different intercropping systems

including sesamegreengram (Mandal and Pramanick 2014) maizeurdbean (Naveena et

al 2014) and pegionpeasorghum (Egbe and Bar-Anyam 2010)

After detailed investigations of both species using two different experiment designs

(drum pot and field) it is evident that intercropping had beneficial effects on growth

physiology biochemisty and yield of both species Furthermore by using this system

higher outcome interms of edible biomass and green fodder using marginal lands can be

obtained in a same time using same land and water resources which can help to eliminate

poverty and uplift socio-economic conditions

113

3 Chapter 3

Investigations on rang of salt tolerance in Carissa carandas

(varn karonda) for determining possibility of growing at waste

saline land

31 Introduction

Carissa carandas commonly known as Karonda or lsquoChrist thornrsquo belonging to family

Apocynaceae shows capability of growing under haloxeric conditions It is an important

plant which has established well at tropical and subtropical arid zone under high

temperatures It is large evergreen shrub and having short stem It has fork thorn and hence

used as hedges or fence around fields The leaves are oval or elliptic 25 to 75 cm long

dark green leathery and secrete white milk if detached The fruits are oblong broad- ovoid

or round 125- 25 cm long It has thin but tough epicarp Fruits are in clusters of 3-10

Young fruits are pinkish white and become red or dark purple on maturation

The plant is propagated through seed in August and September Budding and cutting

could also be undertaken Planting is started after first shower of monsoon Plants raised

from seeds are able to flower within two years Flowering starts in March and fruit ripen

from July to September (Kumar et al 2007) The fruit possess good amount of pectin and

acidity hence used in prickle jelly jam squash syrup and in chutney by the commercial

name lsquoNakal cherryrsquo (Mandal et al 1992) They are rich in vitamin C and good source

of Anthocyanin (Lindsey et al 2000) Its fruits also are one of the richest source of iron

(391 mg 100gm) (Tyagi et al 1999) Juice of its root is also used to treat various

microbial diseases such as diarrhea dysentery and skin disease (Taylor et al 1996)

Hence its range of salt and suitability for cultivation at waste saline land or with saline

water irrigation is being undertaken for commercial exploitation by preparing jams jellies

and prickles (Kumar 2014) Investigations on its growth and development at higher range

of salinities are being undertaken with an interest to cultivate it if profitable at highly saline

waste land

114

32 Experiment No 9

Investigation on the effect of higher range of salinities on growth of




3211 Drum Pot Culture


Abdullah (1982) was used for the present investigation which was been already described

in Chapter 1 earlier

3212 Plant material

About six months old sapling of Carissa carandas (varn Karonda) having almost equal

height and volume poted in polythene bag in 3kg of soil fertilized with cow-dong manure

were purchased from the Noor nursery Gulshan-e-Iqbal Karachi Sindh and were

transported to the Biosaline research field department of Botany University of Karachi

3213 Experimental setup

Plants were transplanted in drum pot (Homemade lysimeter) filled with sandy loam mixed

with cow dung manure (91) Each drum pot was irrigated weekly during summer and

fortnightly during winter months with 20 liters tap water (Eciw= 0 6 dSm-1) or water of

sea salt concentrations of various ie 03 (Eciw = 42 dSm-1) 04 (Eciw =61 dSm-1)

06 (Eciw = 99 dSm-1) and 08 (Eciw = 129 dSm-1) The plants were established initially

by irrigation with tap water for two weeks and later salinity was gradually increased till

desired percentage is achieved for different treatments by dessolving of sea salt in

irrigation water Three replicates were maintained for each treatment Urea DAP and

KNO3 were the source of NPK provided in the ratio 312 50g granules Osmocot (Scotts-

Sierra Horticulture Products) and 50g Mericle-Gro (Scotts Miracle-Gro Products Inc)

were dissolved in irrigation water per drum after six months at six monthly intervals

Height and volume of canopy of these plants were recorded prior to the starting the

experiment and then after every six months interval

115

Since the vegetative growth performance in plants irrigated with 03 sea salt (Eciw = 42

dSm-1) was found comparatively better than control and only 26 decrease was noticed

in volume of canopy at plant irrigated with 04 sea salt (Eciw = 61 dSm-1) (Table III41)

the onward investigations were focused at higher salinity levels and plants were irrigated

with 06 (Eciw = 99 dSm-1) and 08 (Eciw = 129 dSm-1) sea salt in rest of experiment


Vegetative growth on the basis of plant height and volume were recorded while

reproductive growth was observed on the basis of number of flowers and number and

weight of fruits per plant Length and diameter of fruit were also recorded in ten randomly

selected fruits


Following biochemical analysis of leaves was performed at grand period of growth (onset

of flowers)


Fresh fully expended leaves (01g) was crushed in 80 chilled acetone Further procedure

was followed described in chapter 1

ii Soluble sugars


g for 10 minutes Same procedure was followed as described in chapter 1

iii Protein content


Bovine Serum Albumin which was taken for standard (Bradford 1976) as described in

chapter 1

iv Soluble phenols


10000g for 15 min Further procedure has been described in chapter 2

116

3216 Mineral Analysis

Estimation of Na+ and K+ were made according to Chapman and Pratt (1961) Oven dried

grinded Leaves (1g) furnace at 550ordmC for 6 hours and were digested in 5 ml of 2N HCl

Diluted and filtered solution was used to estimated Na+ and K+ in flame photometer

(Petracourt PFP I) The concentration of these ions was calculated against the following

standard curve equations

Na+ (ppm) = 0016135x1879824

K+ (ppm) = 0244346x1314603

117

322 Observations and Result


Vegetative growth in terms of height and volume of canopy of C carandas growing under

salinities created by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt is presented in Table 32

Appendix-XIX A significant increase (plt0001) in plant height and volume of canopy

was observed with increasing time but the increase was rapid at early period of growth

However there was significant (plt0001) reduction under salinity stress The interaction

of time and salinity also showed significant (plt001) effect on plant parameters but the

increase in height and volume of canopy at Eciw= 42dSm-1of sea salt salinity was more

than control Plants irrigated with Eciw= 61 dSm-1 and Eciw= 99 dSm-1sea salt solution

showed decrease in height with respect to control but the difference between their

treatments was insignificantly higher decrease was observed in Eciw= 129 dSm-1 sea salt

irrigated plants


Reproductive growth in terms of flowers and fruits numbers flower shedding percentage

fresh and dry weight of ten fruit their length and diameter under salinities created by

irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt is presented in Table 33 Appendix-XX Number

of flowers and fruits significantly (plt0001) decreased with increasing salinity treatment

Difference in flower initiation seems non-significant at early growth period in controls and

salinity treatments However drastic decrease was observed in plants irrigated beyond

Eciw= 99 dSm-1 with increase in salinity

Flowers shedding percentage (Table 33 Appendix-XX) show an increase directly

proportional with increase in salinity however the difference in number of flowers

between the plants irrigated with Eciw= 99 dSm-1 and Eciw= 129 dSm-1 sea salt solution

is of little significance level (plt001)

Fresh and dry weight of average fruits (plt001) and their diameter (plt001) showed

decrease with increasing salinity whereas diameter and length of fruits showed non-

significant difference

118


i Photosynthetic Pigments

Photosynthetic Pigments including Chlorophyll a chlorophyll b total chlorophyll

chlorophyll a b ratio and carotenoids of C carandas growing under salinities created by

irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt is presented in Figure 31 Appendix-XX The

chlorophyll contents of leaves significantly decreased (plt0001) over control with

increasing salinity however Chlorophyll rsquobrsquo at Eciw= 99 dSm-1salinity shows significant

increase (plt0001) over control Similarly Carotenoids at Eciw= 99 dSm-1 salinity show a

bit less significant increase (plt001) compare to control while at higher salinity (Eciw=

129 dSm-1) the decline is observed at all above mentioned parameters

iii Protein Sugars and phenols

Some biochemical parameters including Protein sugars and phenolic contents of C

carandas growing under salinities created by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt is

presented in Figure 31 Appendix-XX Soluble proteins in leaves show non-significant

decrease at Eciw= 99 dSm-1salinity as compared with controls but a significant decrease

(plt005) was noted at Eciw= 129 dSm-1 salinity Sugars also showed non-significant

decrease at both the salinity whereas on contrary soluble phenols showed significant

increase (plt0001) with increasing salinity

3225 Mineral analysis

Mineral analysis including Na and K ions performed in leaves of C carandas growing

under salinities created by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt is presented in Figure

32 Appendix-XX Sodium significantly increased (plt0001) all the way with increasing

salinity of growth medium Whereas significant decrease (plt0001) was observed in

Potassium with increasing salinity K+Na+ ratio show continuous increase with increasing

salinity

119

Table 31 Electrical conductivities of different sea salt concentration used for determining

their effect on growth of C carandas

Treatment

Sea salt ()

ECiw of irrigation water (dSm-1) ECe of soil saturated paste

(dSm-1)

Non-saline control 06 09

03 42 48

04 61 68

06 99 112

08 129 142

Whereas ECiw and ECe are the electrical conductivities of irrigation water and soil saturated past measured in deci semen per meter

120

Table 32Vegetative growth in terms of height and volume of canopy of C carandas growing under salinities created by irrigation of different dilutions of

sea salt

Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)

Initial values prior to

starting saline water

irrigation

Growth at different salinities after 06 months

Height Volume Height Volume of canopy

cm m3 cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3 increase over

initial values

increase

decrease

over control

Control 3734plusmn455 0029plusmn0001 8227plusmn4919 5363plusmn830 - 014plusmn0015 7952plusmn269 -

42 3674plusmn1415 0026plusmn0003 9930plusmn6142 6280plusmn205 +1710 019plusmn0017 8593plusmn098 +806

61 3752plusmn1243 0026plusmn0001 6490plusmn5799 4132plusmn485 -2305 012plusmn0010 7740plusmn117 -282



LSD0 05

Salinity

Time Fisherrsquos least significant difference

91

172

002

0005

Values represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment and significance among the treatments was recorded at p lt 005

120

121

Table 33 Vegetative growth in terms of height and volume of canopy of C carandas growing under salinities


Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)


Height Volume of canopy

cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

Control 16214 plusmn633 7674plusmn307 - 077plusmn012 9689plusmn449 -

99 9736plusmn1048 6056plusmn561 -2109 034plusmn006 9367plusmn412 -333


Table 33 continuedhellip

Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

Control 1676plusmn1135 7776plusmn756 - 094plusmn011 9701plusmn578 -




122


Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

Control 1911plusmn6

05 8055plusmn941 - 121plusmn015 9837plusmn522 -

99 1110plusmn5

31 6557plusmn543 -1859 053plusmn002 9509plusmn1032 -334

129 8754plusmn10



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control




LSD0 05 Salinity 77 007

Time 168 016



123

Table 34 Reproductive growth in terms of flowers and fruits numbers flower shedding percentage fresh and dry weight of ten fruit and their totals

perplant fruit length and diameter of C carandas growing under salinities created by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt

Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

Flower Fruits Flower

shedding

Weight of

Ten

fruit(fresh)

Weight of

Ten

fruit(dry)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(fresh)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(dry)

length

fruit

diameter

fruit

Numbers Numbers g g g g mm mm

Control 19467plusmn203 16600plusmn231 1468plusmn208 2282plusmn022 605plusmn009 37891plusmn891 10047plusmn283 1800plusmn003 1423plusmn006

99 12050plusmn202 7267plusmn491 3980plusmn307 1880plusmn035 530plusmn029 13695plusmn1174 3880plusmn469 1732plusmn037 1297plusmn011


LSD0 05 Salinity 1514 1417 929 115 097 3785 1494 0971 097



123

124

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Car

ote

nio

ds

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35

ab

Chl a Chl b

a

a

a a

b

bcbc

a

b

c

a a

b

Figure 31 Chlorophyll a chlorophyll b total chlorophyll chlorophyll a b ratio carotenoids contents of C

carandas growing under salinities created by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt (Bars



125

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ph

eno

ls (

mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

1

2

3

4

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

30

60

90

120

150Soluble Insoluble

a

a

a

a

a

a

b

b

b

c

ab

a

a

b

Figure 32 Total protein sugars and phenolic contents of C carandas growing under salinities created by

irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each treatment


126

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ions

(mg

g-1

DW

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

KN

a ra

tio

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Na K KNa

c

a

b

b

a

c

a

b

c

Figure 33 Mineral analysis including Na and K ions was done on leaves of C carandas growing under salinities

created by irrigation of different dilutions of sea salt (Bars represent means plusmn standard error of each


127

33 Discussion

The volume and height of plants were increased per unit time under saline conditions This

increase was observed after six months in 03 sea salt (ECiw = 42 dSm-1) treated plants in

comparison to control (Table 32) Slight decrease was observed at 04 sea salt

(ECiw=61dSm-1) irrigation after which (Eciw= 99 dSm-1 and Eciw = 129 dSm-1sea salt) the

growth was significantly inhibited (Table 33) Noble and Rogers (1994) also noticed a general

decrease in growth of some of the glycophytes Humaira and Ahmad (2004) and Rivelli et al

(2004) also reported a proportional decrease in height of canola with increasing salinity

Cotton plants irrigated with saline water or those grown at saline soil are reported to increase

Na+ content in leaves accompanied by significant reduction in vegetative biomass (Meloni et

al 2001) Bayuelo-Jimenez et al (2003) observed salt induced growth inhibition of tomato

plant which was higher in shoot than root

Reproductive growth in terms of number of flowers number of fruits fruit length and

diameter were decreased and percent flower shedding increased with increasing salinity

(Table 34) These effects were higher at Eciw= 99 dSm-1and then maintained with further

salinity increment However weight of fruits (fresh and dry) and total fruits per plant were

linearly decreased with increasing medium salt concentrations A decrease in different phases

of reproductive growth like flowering fertilization fruit setting yield and quality of seeds etc

are reported to be seriously affected at different level of salinity by various workers (Lumis et

al 1973 Waisel 1991 Shannon et al 1994 Tayyab et al 2016) Cole and Mclead (1985)

and Howie and Lloyd (1989) reported severe effects of different salinity treatments on

flowering intensity fruit setting and number of fruits of Citrus senensis Walker et al (1979)

also reported reduction in the fruit weight during early ripening stage of Psidium guajava

Decrease in fruit diameter of strawberries (Fragaria times ananassa) has been reported with

salinity (Ehlig and Bernstein 1958)

In this study photosynthetic pigments of C carandas were decreased with salinity and

this decrease was more sever at Eciw = 129 dSm-1sea salt salinity (Figure 31) Such a decline

in amount of leaf pigments across different salinity regimes was also reported in cotton

(Ahmed and Abdullah 1979) Pea (Hernandez et al 1995 and Hernandez et al 1999) Vicia

128

faba (Gadallah 1999) Mulberry genotype (Agastian et al 2000) and B parviflora (Parida et

al 2004)

Leaf sugars and protein were decreased in both salinity levels (Figure 32) which could

be attributed to inhibition in transport of photosynthetic product (Levit 1980) Decrease

synthesis and mobilization of glucose fructose and sucrose has been demonstrated in number

of plants growing under salt stress (Kerepesi and Galiba 2000) Inhibition in the protein and

nucleic acid synthesis in Pisum sativum and Tamarix tetragyna plants were also reported by

Bar-Nun and Poljahoff-Mayber (1977) Melander and Harvath (1977) suggested that salt

induced reduction in protein is due to increase in protein hydrolysis

A significant increase in leaves phenol with increase in salinity (Figure 32) was

observed in present investigation was also demonstrated previously in Achilleacollina (Giorgi

et al 2009) Lactuca sativa (Kim et al 2008) and B parviflora (Parida et al 2004)

Inspite of over irrigation of saline water and maintaining leaching fraction of about

40 in drum pots accumulation of salts in rhizosphere soil was not completely avoided which

was evident in the differences between ECiw and ECe values (Table 31) Deposition of salts

in rhizosphere soil interferer absorption of minerals in plants For instance leaf Na+ content

of C carandas was significantly increased while K+ decreased with increasing soil salinity

(Figure 33) Over accumulation of toxic ions disturbed plant water status which directly

affects plant growth (Flowers et al 1977 Greenway and Munns 1980) A negative

relationship between Na+ and K+ concentration in roots and leaves of guava was also reported

by Ferreira et al (2001) Increase in Na+ content decreased K+ availability and K+Na+ ratio

in Vicia taba (Gadallah 1999) and also affect the uptake of other essential minerals in

Casurina equsetifolia (Dutt et al 1991)

Carissa carandas found to be a good tolerant to salinity and drought and it can produce

edible fruits from marginal lands of arid areas Fruits of this species can be consumed in a raw

form as well as in industrial products like pickles jams jellies and marmalades

129

4 Conclusions

In the light of above mentioned investigations it appears that pre-soaking treatment of Cajanus

cajan seeds has initiated metabolic processes at faster rate earlier which has helped seeds to

start germinative metabolism prior to be effected by toxic Na+ ions at higher salinities Cajanus

cajan and Ziziphus mauritiana were found to be the good companions for intercropping These

species synergistically enhanced the growth and biochemical performance of each other by

improving fertility of marginal land and maintaining harmony among different physiological

parameters which was missing in their sole crop Their intercropping could produce fodder

and delicious fruits even from under moderately saline substrate up to profitable extant

Carissa carandas also tolerated low and moderately salinities well by adjusting proper

regulation of physiological and biochemical parameters of growth It can provide protein rich

edible fruits jams jellies and pickles of commercial importance for benefit of poor farmer

from moderately saline barren land

130

5 References

Abdel-Wahab H H and H H Zahran (1979) Salt tolerance of Rhizobium species in broth

culture Z Allg Mikrobiol 19681ndash685

Abideen Z M Qasim A Rasheed MY Adnan B Gul and MA Khan (2015) Antioxidant

activity and polyphenol content of Phragmites karka under saline conditions Pak J

Bot 47 813-818

Abideen Z HW Koyro B Huchzermeyer MZ Ahmed B Gul and MA Khan (2014)

Moderate salinity stimulates growth and photosynthesis of Phragmites karka by water

relations and tissue specific ion regulation Environ Exp Bot 105 70-76

ADB [Asian Development Bank] (2002) Water Resources Strategy Study Draft Report

Vol 1 Islamabad Pakistan ADB

Adetiloye PO FOC Ezedinma and BN Okigbo (1983) A land equivalent coefficient

(LEC) concept for the evaluation of competitive and productive interactions in simple

to complex crop mixtures Ecol Model 19 27-39

Aebi H (1984) [13] Catalase in vitro Meth Enzymol 105 121-126

Agastian P S Kingsley and M Vivekanandan (2000) Effect of salinity on photosynthesis

and biochemical characteristics in mulberry genotypes Photosynthetica 38 287-290

Agrawal R S Gupta NK Gupta SK Khandelwal and R Bhargava (2013) Effect of

sodium chloride on gas exchange antioxidative defense mechanism and ion

accumulation in different cultivars of Indian jujube (Ziziphus mauritiana

L) Photosynthetica 51 95-101

Agronomy Monograph Number 9 American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society

of America Madison Wisconsin USA

131

Ahmad M and G Sandhu (1988) Response of legumes to salt stress Effect on growth and

nitrogen status of Soybean Pak J Agric Res 9 463-468

Ahmad M A Rauf and MI Makhdum (1991) Growth performance of cotton under saline-

sodic field conditions J Drain Reclam 3 43-47

Ahmad P and S Umar (2011) Oxidative Stress Role of Antioxidants in Plants Studium

Press New Delhi India

Ahmad R and S Ismail (1993) Studies on selection of salt-tolerant plants for food fodder

and fuel from world flora In (Ed) Towards the rational use of high salinity tolerant

plants (pp 295-304) Springer Netherlands

Ahmad R and Z Abdullah (1979) Saline agriculture under desert conditions In A Bilshay

and W McGinnies (Eds) Advances in desert and arid-land technology and

development Volume I Harwood Academic Publishers New York USA pp 593-

618

Ahmad R and Z Abdullah (1982) Biomass production of food and fiber crops using highly

saline water for under desert conditions In A San Peitro (Ed) Biosaline Research

A look to the future Plenum Press New York USA pp 149-163

Ahmad R M Azeem and N Ahmed (2009) Productivity of ginger (Zingiber officinale) by

amendment of vermicompost and biogass slurry in saline soils Pak J Bot 41 3107-

3116

Ahmed R and Z Abdullah (1979) Saline agriculture under desert condition In A Bishay

and WG Mc Ginnies (Eds) Advances in Desert and Arid Land technology and

Development (pp 593 ndash 618) Harwood Academic Publication NY

Ajaiyeoba E O Ogbole O Abiodun J Ashidi P Houghton and C Wright (2013)

Cajachalcone An antimalarial compound from Cajanus cajan leaf extract J

Parasitol Res 2013 1-5 (Article ID 703781)

132

Alamgir ANM and MY Ali (1999) Effect of salinity on leaf pigments sugar and protein

concentrations and chloroplast ATPase activity of rice (Oryza sativa L) Bangladesh

J Bot 28 145-149

Alhassan GA BA Kalu and OM Egbe (2012) Influence of planting densities on the

performance of intercropped bamabra groundnut with cowpea in Makurdi Benue

State Nigeria Int J Develop Sustain 1 1-20

Ali Z D Khan and N Ahmed (2013a) Physiological parameters of salt tolerance in three

cultivars of Sorghum bicolor (L) Moench at seedling stage under single salt (NaCl)

salinity Int J Biol Biotechnol 10 125-142

Ali Z D Khan and N Ahmed (2013b) Salt tolerance of three Sorghum cultivars during

germination and early seedling growth Int J Biol Biotech 10 193-202

Al-Khanjari S A Al-Kathiri and H Esechie (2002) Variation in chlorophyll meter

readings nodulation and dry matter yields of Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L) cultivars

differing in salt tolerance Crop Res -Hisar- 24 350-356

Almansouri M J-M Kinet and S Lutts (2001) Effect of salt and osmotic stresses on

germination in durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf) Plant Soil 231 243-254

Altieri MA (1991) Traditional farming in Latin America The Ecologist 2 93-96

Altieri MA (1999) The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems Agric Ecosyst

Environ 74 19-31

Altieri MA FR Funes-Monzote and P Petersen (2012) Agroecologically efficient

agricultural systems for smallholder farmers contributions to food

sovereignty Agron Sustain Develop 32 1ndash13

Anderson MD TK Prasad and CR Stewart (1995) Changes in isozyme profiles of

catalase peroxidase and glutathione reductase during acclimation to chilling in

mesocotyls of maize seedlings Plant Physiol 109 1247-1257

133

Andrews DJ and AH Kassam (1976) The importance of multiple cropping in increasing

world food supplies American Society of Agronomy pp 1-10

AOAC (2005) Official methods of analysis (Sixteenthth edition) Washington Association

of Official Analytical Chemists

AOSA (1990) Rules for Testing Seeds USA J Seed Technol 12 1-112

Arabhanvi F and AM Pujar (2015) Integrated nutrient management practices for

enhancing growth and yield of pigeonpea A Review Agric Rev 36(2)

Arbona V M Manzi CD Ollas and A Gomez-Cadenas (2013) Metabolomics as a tool to

investigate abiotic stress tolerance in plants Int J Mol Sci 14(3) 4885-4911

Ashraf M (1994) Salt tolerance of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan (L) Millsp) at three growth

stages Ann Appl Biol 124 153-164

Ashraf M and A Waheed (1993) Responses of some localexotic accessions of lentil

(Lens culinaris Medic) to salt stress J Agron Crop Sci 170 103-112

Ashraf M and MR Foolad (2005) Pre‐sowing seed treatmentmdashA shotgun approach to

improve germination plant growth and crop yield under saline and non‐saline

conditions Adv Agron 88 223-271

Ashraf M and PJC Harris (2004) Potential biochemical indicators of salinity tolerance in

plants Plant Sci 166 3-16

Ashraf M HR Athar PJC Harris and TR Kwon (2008) Some prospective strategies

for improving crop salt tolerance Adv Agron 97 45-110

Atta-Krah AN (1990) Alley farming with Leucaena effect of short grazed fallows on soil

fertility and crop yields Exp Agric 261 1ndash10

Azam-Ali S E Bonkoungou C Bowe C deKock A Godara and JT William (2006) Ber

and Other Jujubes Page 228 httpsbooksgooglecompkbooksisbn=0854328580

134

Azeem M and Ahmad R (2011) Foliar application of some essential minerals on tomato

(Lycopersicon esculentum) plant grown under two different salinity regimes Pak J

Bot 43 1513-1520

Azeem M and R Ahmad (2011) Foliar application of some essential minerals on tomato


Bot 43 1513-1520

Bailey PS (2012) Ozonation in Organic Chemistry V2 Nonolefinic Compounds Elsevier

Baker EFI (1978) Mixed cropping in northern Nigeria I Cereals and Groundnuts Exp

Agric 14 293-298

Bal JS and SS Mann (1978) Ascorbic acid content of ber Ziziphus mauritiana during

growth and maturity Sci Cult 44 5 238-239

Bar-Nun N and A Poljakoff-Mayber (1977) Salinity stress and the content of proline in

roots of Pisum sativum and Tamarix tetragyna Ann Bot 41 173-179

Bates LS RP Waldren and ID Teare (1973) Rapid determination of free proline for

water-stress studies Plant Soil 39 205-207

Baxter A R Mittler and N Suzuki (2014) ROS as key players in plant stress signalling J

Exp Bot 65 1229-1240

Bayuelo-Jimenez JS DG Debouck and JP Lynch (2003) Growth gas exchange water

relations and ion composition of Phaseolus species grown under saline conditions

Field Crop Res 80 207-222

Becana M D A Dalton J F Moran I Iturbe‐Ormaetxe M A Matamoros and M C-Rubio

(2000) Reactive oxygen species and antioxidants in legume nodules Physiol Plant

109 372-381

135

Bennett AE TJ Daniell and PJ White (2013) Benefits of breeding crops for yield

response to soil organisms In FJ de Bruijn ((Ed) Molecular microbial ecology of

the rhizosphere Vol 1 Hoboken NJ USA Wiley pp 17ndash27

Bewley JD and M Black (1985) Seeds Physiology of development and germination New

York USA Plenum Press

Bhandari DC PR Meghwal and S Lodha (2014) Horticulture based production systems

in Indian arid regions In (Eds) Sustainable Horticultural Systems (pp 19-49)

Springer International Publishing

Bhat R WM Wani FA Banday and MK Sharma (2013) Effect of intercrops on growth

productivity quality and relative economic yield of Apple cv Red Delicious SKUAST

J Res 15 35-40

Bhatnagar-Mathur P V Vadez and KK Sharma (2008) Transgenic approaches for

abiotic stress tolerance in plants retrospect and prospects Plant Cell Rep 27 411-

424

Bhatt MJ AD Patel PM Bhatti and AN Pandey (2008) Effect of soil salinity on

growth water status and nutrient accumulation in seedlings of Ziziphus mauritiana

(rhamnaceae) J Fruit Ornam Plant Res 16 383-401

Bhattacharyya A TR Harris R Narayanan and K Raffiee (1995) Specification and

estimation of the effect of ownership on the economic efficiency of the water utilities

Reg Sci Urb Econom 25 759-784

Bhutta MN (1999) Vision on Water for Food and Agriculture Pakistan Perspective

Regional South Asia Meeting on Water for Food and Rural Development New Delhi

June 13 1999

Blake GR and KH Hartge (1986) Bulk density In A Klute (Ed) Methods of soil

analysis (Part 1) Physical and mineralogical methods (pp 363-375) Second edition

136

Borghi E CAC Crusciol GP Mateus AS Nascente and PO Martins (2013)

Intercropping time of corn and palisadegrass or guineagrass affecting grain yield and

forage production Crop Sci 53 629-636

Boyko H (1966) Salinity and aridity New approaches to old problems Eds W Junk Pp

408 The University of California USA

Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram

quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding Anal Biochem 72

248-254


quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding Ana Biochem 72

248-254

Brady NC and RR Weil (1996) The nature and properties of soils 11th edition Prentice

Hall Inc New Jersey

Breedveld MW LPTM Zevenhuizen and AJB Zehnder (1991) Osmotically-regulated

trehalose accumulation and cyclic beta-(12)-glucan excreted by Rhizobium

leguminosarum bv trifolii TA-1 Arch Microbiol 156 501ndash506

Caldwell MM TE Dawson and JH Richards (1998) Hydraulic lift consequences of

water efflux from the roots of plants Oecologia 113 151-161

Cao FL JP Kimmins and JR Wang (2012) Competitive interactions in Ginkgo and crop

species mixed agroforestry systems in Jiangsu China Agrofor Sys 84 401-415

Cappuccino JC and N Sherman (1992) In Microbiology A Laboratory Manual New

York pp 125-179

Cardinale BJ JP Wright MW Cadotte ITCarroll A Hector DSSrivastava and JJ

Weis (2007) Impacts of plant diversity on biomass production increase through time

because of species complementarity Pro Nat Acad Sci 104 18123-18128

137

Chapman HD and PF Pratt (1961) Chlorine In HD Chapman and PF Pratt (Eds)

Methods of Analysis for Soil Plants and Water (pp 97-100) Company and country

Cha-um S K Supaibulwatana and C Kirdmanee (2004) Biochemical and physiological

responses of Thai Jasmine rice (Oryza sativa L Ssp Indica cv Kdml105) to salt stress

Sci Asia 30 247-253

Cheeseman JM (1988) Mechanisms of salinity tolerance in plants Plant Physiol 87 547-

550

Chen G X Fu SH Lips and M Sagi (2003) Control of plant growth resides in the shoot

and not in the root in reciprocal grafts of flacca and wildtype tomato (Lycopersicon

esculentum) in the presence and absence of salinity stress Plant Soil 256 205-215

Chrovatia RS DS Patel and GV Patel (1993) Performance of ber Ziziphus mauritiana

(Lamk) under arid conditions Ann Arid Zones 32 215ndash217

Cokkizgin A and H Cokkizgin (2010) Effects of lead (PbCl2) stress on germination of lentil

(Lens culinaris Medic) lines Afr J Biotechnol 9 8608-8612

Cole PJ and PI McLeod 1985 Salinity and climatic effects on the yield of citrus Aust J

Exp Agric 25 711-717

Colla G Y Roupahel M Cardarelli and E Rea (2006) Effect of salinity on yield fruit

quality leaf gas exchange and mineral composition of grafted watermelon plants

HortScience 41 622-627

Copeland LO M McDonald (2012) Principles of seed science and technology Springer

Science and Business Media

Costanzo A and P Bagraverberi (2014) Functional agrobiodiversity and agroecosystem

services in sustainable wheat production A review Agron Sust Develop 34 327-

348

138

Craig GF DT Bell and CA Atkins (1990) Response to salt and waterlogging stress of

ten taxa of Acacia selected from naturally saline areas of Western Australia Aus J

Bot 38 619-630

Cunard AC (1976) Interplanting The Influence of Interplanting on Yield Parameters of

Component Plants (high-lypine Corn and Edible Soybeans) (No 3) J Ruttle (Ed)

Rodale Press

Dahiru D JM Sini and L John-Africa (2006) Antidiarrhoeal activity of Ziziphus

mauritiana root extract in rodents Afri J Biotech 5 941-945

Dayal D S Mangalassery SL Meena and B Ram (2015) Productivity and profitability

of legumes as influenced by integrated nutrient management with fruit crops under hot

arid ecology Indian J Agron 60 297-300

De Barros I T Gaiser FM Lange and V Romheld (2007) Mineral nutrition and water

use patterns of a maizecowpea intercrop on a highly acidic soil of the tropic

semiarid Field Crop Res 101 26-36

De Pascale S and G Barbieri (1997) Effects of soil salinity and top removal on growth and

yield of Broadbean as a green vegetable Sci Horti 71 147-165

Del Amor F V Martinez and A Cerda (2001) Salt tolerance of tomato plants as affected

by stage of plant development Hort Science 36 1260-1263

Delgado M F Ligero and C Lluch (1994) Effects of salt stress on growth and nitrogen

fixation by pea Faba-bean common bean and Soybean plants Soil Biol Biochem

26 371-376

Demiroglu G MA Khalvati and R Avcioglu (2001) Effect of different salt concentrations

on the resistance of Maize cultivars 2 Some physiological characteristics and ion

accumulation in early growth Turk J Field Crop 6 55-60

139

Dhima KV AS Lithourgidis IB Vasilakoglou and CA Dordas (2007) Competition

indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratio Field Crop

Res 100 249-256

Dhyani SK and RS Tripathi (1998) Tree growth and crop yield under agrisilvicultural

practices in north-east India Agrofor Sys 44 1-12

Dodd IC and F Peacuterez-Alfocea (2012) Microbial amelioration of crop salinity stress J

Exp Bot 63 3415-3428

Doupis G M Bertaki G Psarras I Kasapakis and K Chartzoulakis (2013) Water

relations physiological behavior and antioxidant defence mechanism of olive plants

subjected to different irrigation regimes Sci Hortic 153 150-156

Droppelmann KJ JE Ephrath and PR Berliner (2000) Treecrop complementarity in an

arid zone runoff agroforestry system in northern Kenya Agrofor Sys 50 1-16

Du T S Kang J Zhang and WJ Davies (2015) Deficit irrigation and sustainable water-

resource strategies in agriculture for Chinarsquos food security J Exp Bot 66 2253-

2269

Dubey RC DK Maheshwari V Kumar and RR Pandey (2012) Growth enhancement

of Sesamum indicum L by rhizosphere-competent Azotobacter chroococcum AZO2

and its antagonistic activity against Macrophomina phaseolina Arch Phytopath Plant

Prot 45 437-454

Dupraz C and F Liagre (2011) Agroforesterie ndash des arbres et des

cultures 2nd eacutedn Paris France Groupe France Agricole

Dutt SK AR Bal and AK Bandyopadhyay (1991) Salinity induced chemical changes in

Casuarina equisetifolia Forst Egyp J Soil Sci 31 57ndash63

Duxbury AC and CS Yentsch (1956) Plankton pigment monography J Marine Res 15

92-101

140

Eckardt NA (2009) A new chlorophyll degradation pathway The Plant Cell Online 21

700-700

Egbe OM and MN Bar-Anyam (2010) Pigeonpeasorghum intercropping in southern

Guinea savanna effects of planting density of pigeonpea Nat Sci 8 156-167

Eghball B and JF Power (1999) Phosphorus-and nitrogen-based manure and compost

applications corn production and soil phosphorus Soil Sci Soc Amer J 63 895-901

Ehlig CF and L Bernstein (1958) Salt tolerance of strawberries Proc Amer Soc Horti

Sci72198ndash206

Ehrmann J and K Ritz (2014) Plant soil interactions in temperate multi-cropping

production systems Plant Soil 376 1ndash29

Ellis R and E Roberts (1981) The quantification of ageing and survival in orthodox seeds

Seed Sci Technol 9 373ndash409

El-Sharkawy MA (2014) Global warming causes and impacts on agroecosystems

productivity and food security with emphasis on cassava comparative advantage in the

tropicssubtropics Photosynthetica 52 161-178

Elsheikh E and M Wood (1990) Effect of salinity on growth nodulation and nitrogen yield

of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L) J Exp Bot 41 1263-1269

El-Shinnawi MM NA El-Saify and TM Waly (1989) Influence of the ionic form of

mineral salts on growth of faba bean and Rhizobium leguminosarum World J

Microbiol Biotechnol 5247ndash254

El-Swaify SA AKF Lo R Joy L Shinshiro and RS Yost (1988) Achieving

conservation effectiveness in the tropics using legume-intercrops Soil Technol 1 1-

12

141

Embalomatis A DK Papacosta and P Katinakis (1994) Evaluation of Rhizobium meliloti

strains isolated from indigenous populations northern Greece J Agric Crop Sci 172

73ndash80

Fahong W W Xuqing and K Sayre (2004) Comparison of conventional flood irrigated

flat planting with furrow irrigated raised bed planting for winter wheat in China Field

Crop Res 87 35-42

Fales FW (1951) The assimilation and degradation of carbohydrates by yeast cells J

Biol Chem 193 113-124

Fang Z JC Bouwkamp and T Solomos (1998) Chlorophyllase activities and chlorophyll

degradation during leaf senescence in non-yellowing mutant and wild type of

Phaseolus vulgaris L J Exp Bot 49 503-510

FAO I (2014) WFP The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2014 strengthening the

enabling environment for food security and nutrition FAO Rome Italy

FAO (2009) The state of food insecurity in the world Economic crisesmdashImpacts and

lessons learned httpwwwfaoorgdocrep 012i0876ei0876e00htm Accessed 07

June 2012

FAO (2010) The state of food insecurity in the world Addressing food insecurity in

protracted crises httpwwwfaoorg publicationssofi-2010en Accessed 07 June

2012

FAO (2011) The state of food insecurity in the world How does international price

volatility affect domestic economies and food security

httpwwwfaoorgpublicationssofien Accessed 07 June 2012

FAOSTAT 2013 httpfaostatfaoorgfaostatcollectionsversion=extamphasbulk=0ampsubset=

agriculture

142

Ferreira RG FJAF Tavora and FF Ferreyra-Hernandez (2001) Dry matter partitioning

and mineral composition of roots stems and leaves of guava grown under salt stress

conditions Pesq Agro Brasil 36 79-88

Flowers T P Troke and A Yeo (1977) The mechanisms of salt tolerance in halophytes

Annu Rev Plant Physiol 28 89ndash121

Flowers TJ (2004) Improving crop salt tolerance J Exp Bot 55 307-319

Foreman J V Demidchik JH Bothwell P Mylona H Miedema MA Torres and L

Dolan (2003) Reactive oxygen species produced by NADPH oxidase regulate plant

cell growth Nature 422 442-446

Francis CA (1986) Distribution and importance of multiple cropping In CA Francis (Ed)

Multiple Cropping Systems MacMillan Publishing Company New York USA

Fujita K KG Ofosu-Budu and S Ogata (1992) Biological nitrogen fixation in mixed

legume-cereal cropping systems Plant Soil 141 155-175

Fustec J F Lesuffleur S Mahieu and JB Cliquet (2010) Nitrogen rhizode position of

legumes A review Agron Sustain Dev 30 57-66

Gadallah MAA (1999) Effects of proline and glycine betaine on Vicia faba responses to

salt stress Biol Plant 42 249-257

Galiana A P Balle AG Kanga and AM Domenach (2002) Nitrogen fixation estimated

by the 15 N natural abundance method in Acacia mangium Willd inoculated with

Brady Rhizobium sp and grown in silvicultural conditions Soil Biol Biochem 34

251-262

Gee GW and D Or (2002) 24 Particle-size analysis Methods of soil analysis

Part 4(598) 255-293

143

George TS C Hawes AC Newton BM McKenzie PD Hallett and TA Valentine

(2014) Field phenotyping and long-term platforms to characterise how crop genotypes

interact with soil processes and the environment Agronomy 4 242-278

Ghittoni NE and MA Bueno (1996) Changes in the cellular content of trehalose in four

peanut rhizobia strains cultured under hypersalinity Symbiosis 20 117ndash127

Gilbert N (2012) African agriculture Dirt poor Nature 483 525-527

Gill K and P Sharma (1993) Mechanism of salt injury at seedling and vegetative growth

stages in Cajanus cajan (L) millsp Plant Physiol Biochem-New Delhi- 20 49-49

Giller KE and KJ Wilson (1991) Nitrogen Fixation in Tropical Cropping Systems CAB

International Wallingford UK (1991) p 313

Giller KE (2001) Nitrogen fixation in tropical cropping systems Cabi

Greenway H and R Munns 1980 Mechanisms of salt tolerance in nonhalophytes Ann Rev

Plant Physiol 31 149-190

Grover A PK Aggarwal A Kapoor S Katiyar-Agarwal M Agarwal and A

Chandramouli (2003) Addressing abiotic stresses in agriculture through transgenic

technology Curr Sci 84 335-368

Grover JK S Yadav and V Vats (2002) Medicinal plants of India with anti-diabetic

potential J Ethno pharmacol 81 81-100

Gruenewald H BK Brandt BU Schneider O Bens G Kendzia and RF Huumlttl (2007)

Agroforestry systems for the production of woody biomass for energy transformation

purposes Eco Engin 29 319-328

Guasch-Vidal B A van Brussel J Estevez R Bellogiacuten F Ollero M Espuny and M

Megias 2013 Nod factor production and abiotic stress in Rhizobium In MBR

144

Gonzaacutelez and J Gonzalez-Lopez (Eds) Beneficial Plant-microbial Interactions

Ecology and Applications CRC Press Taylor and Francis USA pp 70-98

Guo Z W Ou S Lu Q Zhong (2006) Differential responses of antioxidative system to

chilling and drought in four rice cultivars differing in sensitivity Plant Physiol

Biochem 44 828-836

Gupta RK (1993) Multipurpose Trees for Agroforestry and Wasteland Utilization

WinrockndashOxford amp IBH Series International Science Publishers New York

Hansen S (1996) Effects of manure treatment and soil compaction on plant production of a

dairy farm system converting to organic farming practice Agric Ecosys Environ 56

173-186

Harb A A Krishnan MM Ambavaram and A Pereira (2010) Molecular and

physiological analysis of drought stress in Arabidopsis reveals early responses leading

to acclimation in plant growth Plant Physiol 154 1254-1271

Hasegawa PM RA Bressan J-K Zhu and HJ Bohnert (2000) Plant cellular and

molecular responses to high salinity Ann Rev Plant Biol 51 463-499

Haub C (2013) 2014 World Population Data Sheet

Hauggaard-Nielsen H and ES Jensen (2005) Facilitative root interactions in

intercrops Plant Soil 274 237ndash250

Helemish FA SM Abdel-Wahab MT El-Mokadem and MM Abou-El-Nour (1991)

Effect of sodium chloride salinity on the growth survival and tolerance response of

some rhizobial strains Ain Shams Sci Bull 28B 423ndash440

Hernandez JA A Campillo A Jimenez JJ Alacon and F Sevilla (1999) Response of

antioxidant systems and leaf water relations to NaCl stress in pea plants New Phytol

141 241ndash251

145

Hill J (1996) Breeding components for mixture performance Euphytica 92 135-138

Howie H and J Lloyd (1989) Response of orchard Washington navel orange Citrus

sinensis (L) Osbeck to saline irrigation water 2 Flowering fruit set and fruit growth

Aust J Agric Res 40 371-380

Humaira G and R Ahmed (2004) Effect of different irrigation intervals on growth of canola

(Brassica napus L) under different salinity levels Pak J Bot 36 359-372

Huston MA (1997) Hidden treatments in ecological experiments re-evaluating the

ecosystem function of biodiversity Oecologia 110 449-460

Ismail S R Ahmad and NJ Davidson (1993) Design and analysis of provenance trials in

Pakistan In (Ed) ACIAR proceedings (pp 38-38) Australian Centre for

international agricultural research

James RA C Blake CS Byrt and R Munns (2011) Major genes for Na+ exclusion

Nax1 and Nax2 (wheat HKT1 4 and HKT1 5) decrease Na+ accumulation in bread

wheat leaves under saline and waterlogged conditions J Exp Bot 62 2939-2947

Jamil M C C Lee S U Rehman D B Lee M Ashraf and E S Rha (2005) Salinity

(NaCl) tolerance of Brassica species at germination and early seedling growth Elec

J Environ Agric Food Chem 4 970-976

Jamil M M Ashraf S Rehman M Ahmad and ES Rha (2014) Salinity induced changes

in cell membrane stability protein and RNA contents Afr J Biotech 11 6476-6483

Jani PP SPS Tanwar and SM Singhi (2008) Performance of durum wheat (Triticum

durum Desf) varieties under varying sowing methods and input levels Indian J

Fertil 4 71ndash74

Jat ML S Singh HK Rai RS Chhokar SK Sharma and RK Gupta (2005) Furrow

irrigated raised bed planting technique for diversification of rice-wheat system of

Indo-Gangetic Plains J Japan Ass Int Coop Agric Forest 28 25-42

146

Kafi FM and M Goldani (2001) Effects of water potential and type of osmoticum on seed

germination of three crop species of wheat sugarbeet and chikpea Agric Sci

Technol 15 121-133

Karatas I L Ozturk Y Demir A Unlukara A Kurunccedil and O Duzdemir (2014)

Alterations in antioxidant enzyme activities and proline content in pea leaves under

long-term drought stress Toxicol Ind Health 30 693-700

Kass DL SJS Arya JO Sanchez LS Pinto and P Ferreira (1992) Ten years experience

with alley farming in Central America Plant Soil 63 165ndash179

Katsuhara M T Mimura and M Tazawa (1990) ATP-regulated ion channels in the plasma

membrane of a Characeae alga Nitellopsis obtusa Plant Physiol 93 343-346

Kaymakanova M (2009) Effect of salinity on germination and seed physiology in bean

(Phaseolus vulgaris L) Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 23 326-329

Keiffer CH and IA Ungar (1997) The effect of extended exposure to hypersaline

conditions on the germination of five inland halophyte species Ameri J Bot 104-

111

Kerepesi I and G Galiba (2000) Osmotic and salt stress-induced alteration in soluble

carbohydrate content in wheat seedlings Crop Sci 40 482-487

Khan AN RH Qureshi and N Ahmad (1998) Performance of cotton cultivars as affected

by types of salinity I Growth and yield Sarhad J AgricSci 14 73ndash77

Khan D and R Ahmad (1998) Effects of saline water irrigation on germination growth and

mineral distribution in Indigofera oblongifolia Forssk Hamdard Medicus XLI 81 -

93

Khan D and R Ahmad (2007) Effects of irrigation with amended dilutions of seawater on

germination growth and cation distribution in Panisetum divisum ndash A psammophytic

graminoid Int J Biol Biotech 4 347 ndash 355

147

Khan D and ZA Sahito (2014) Growth of Vachellia nilotica sub sp Indica (Benth) Kyal

amp Boatwr (Mimosaceae) seedlings in relation to sea salt stress and changes in

biochemical and ionic composition of leaves Int J Biol Biotech 11 35-50

Khan MA IA Ungar and AM Showalter (2000) Effects of salinity on growth water

relations and ion accumulation of the subtropical perennial halophyte Atriplex

griffithii var stocksii Ann Bot 85 225-232

Khan NA R Nazar and NA Anjum (2009) Growth photosynthesis and antioxidant

metabolism in mustard (Brassica juncea L) cultivars differing in ATP-sulfurylase

activity under salinity stress Sci Horti 122 455-460

Kheroar S and BC Patra (2013) Advantages of maize-legume intercropping systems J

Agric Sci Tech B 3 733-744

Kim HJ JM Fonseca JH Choi C Kubota and DY Kwon (2008) Salt in irrigation water

affects the nutritional and visual properties of romaine lettuce (Lactuca sativa L) J

Agric Food Chem 56 3772ndash3776

Ksouri R W Megdiche A Debez H Falleh C Grignon and C Abdelly (2007) Salinity

effects on polyphenol content and antioxidant activities in leaves of the halophyte

Cakile maritima Plant Physiol Biochem 45 244-249

Kumar D V Pandey and V Nath (2007) Karonda (Carissa conjesta) - An underutilized

fruit crop Pp 313- 325 In KV Peter (Ed) Underutilized and underexploited

horticultural crops New India Publishing Agency New Dehli India

Kumar S (2014) A critical review on Karamarda Carissa carandas Linn Int J Pharma

Biolog Arch 4 637 ndash 642

Kumar S and BK Choubey (2008) Performance of aonla (Emblica officinalis)-based

hortipastoral system in semi-arid region under rainfed situation Indian J Agric

Sci 78 748-751

148

Kumar S AK Shukla and HV Singh (2013) Intercropping of pearl millet + cowpea as

rainfed fodder crops with aonla based Agri-horti-system Int J Horti 3

Kumar V V Shriram PK Kishor N Jawali and MG Shitole (2010) Enhanced proline

accumulation and salt stress tolerance of transgenic indica rice by over-expressing

P5CSF129A gene Plant Biotech Report 4 37-48

Kurban H H Saneoka K Nehira R Adilla GS Premachandra and K Fujita (1999) Effect

of salinity on growth photosynthesis and mineral composition in leguminous plant

Alhagi pseudoalhagi (Bieb) Soil Sci Plant Nutri 45 851-862

Lauchli A and S Grattan (2007) Plant growth and development under salinity stress In

Advances in molecular breeding toward drought and salt tolerant crops Springer

Netherlands pp 1-32

Levitt J (1980) Responses of plant to environmental stress chilling freezing and high

temperature stresses 1 23-64 (second ed) Academic Press New York

Li L L-Z Zhang and F-Z Zhang (2013) Crop mixtures and the mechanisms of over

yielding In SA Levin (Ed) Encyclopedia of biodiversity 2nd edn vol 2 Waltham

MA USA Academic Press pp 382ndash395

Li L D Tilman H Lambers and FS Zhang (2014) Biodiversity and overyielding insights

from below-ground facilitation of intercropping in agriculture New Phytol 203 63ndash

69

Li TY Y Zhang H Liu Y Wu W Li and H Zhang (2010) Stable expression of

arabidopsis vacuolar na+h+ antiporter gene atnhx1 and salt tolerance in transgenic

soybean for over six generations Chinese Sci Bull 55 1127-1134

Lindsey EA Y Berry JF Jamie and JB Brremnar (2000) Antibacterial compound from

Carissa lenceolata Phytochem 55 403-406

149

Liu MJ (2002) High Quality and high yield cultivation technique of Chinease jujube with

color picture illustration (in chinease) The Agricultural Publ House of China Beijing

P 1-22 275- 323

Liu T Z Cheng H Meng I Ahmad and H Zhao (2014) Growth yield and quality of

spring tomato and physicochemical properties of medium in a tomatogarlic

intercropping system under plastic tunnel organic medium cultivation Sci Horti 170

159-168



intercropping system under plastic tunnel organic medium cultivation Sci

Hortic 170 159-168

Locy RD CC Chang BL Nielsen and NK Singh (1996) Photosynthesis in salt-adapted

heterotrophic tobacco cells and regenerated plants Plant Physiol 110 321-328

Long DM and A Oaks (1990) Stabilization of nitrate reductase in maize roots by

chymostatin Plant Physiol 93 846-850

Loreau M and A Hector (2001) Partitioning selection and complementarity in

biodiversity experiments Nature 412 72-76

Lunnan T (1989) Barley-pea mixtures for whole crop forage Effect of different cultural

practices on yield and quality Nor J Agr Sci 357-71

Maas EV GJ Hoffman 1977 Crop salt tolerance Current assessment Journal of the

Irrigation and Drainage Division ASCE 103 115ndash134

Maguire JD (1962) Speed of germination-aid in selection and evaluation for seedling

emergence and vigor Crop Sci 2 176-177

Manchanda G and N Garg (2008) Salinity and its effects on the functional biology of

legumes Acta Physiol Plant 30 595-618

150

Mandal MK and M Pramanick (2014) Competitive behaviour of component crops in

sesame greengram intercropping systems under different nutrient management The

Bioscan 3 1015-1018

Mandal U S Sinha Roy and BC Mazundar (1992) A recently developed agroindustry in

the southern Suberb of Culcutta city utilizing a bramble fruit Indian J Land Sc Syst

Ecol Stud 15 100-102

Mansour MMF (2000) Nitrogen containing compounds and adaptation of plants to salinity

stress Biol Plant 43 491-500

Marschner P (2012) Marschners Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants 3rd Edn Academic

Press London

Massimo M and M Mucciarelli (2003) Essential oil yield in peppermintsoybean strip

intercropping Field Crop Res 84 229-240

Mead R and RW Willey (1980) The concept of a lsquoland equivalent ratiorsquoand advantages

in yields from intercropping Exp Agric 16 217-228

Melander W and C Horvath (1977) Salt effects on hydrophobic interactions in precipitation

and chromatography of proteins an interpretation of the lyotropic series Arch

Biochem Biophys 183 200-215

Meloni DA MA Oliva HA Ruiz and CA Martinez (2001) Contribution of proline and

inorganic solutes to osmotic adjustment in cotton under salt stress J Plant Nutr 24

599-612

Mhadhbi H N Djebali S Chihaoui MJebara and R Mhamdi (2011) Nodule senescence

in Medicago truncatulandashSinorhizobium symbiosis under abiotic constraints

biochemical and structural processes involved in maintaining nitrogen-fixing capacity

J plant grow Regul 30 480-489

151

Mhadhbi H MJebara AZitoun F Limam and M E Aouani (2008) Symbiotic

effectiveness and response to mannitol-mediated osmotic stress of various chickpeandash

rhizobia associations World J Microbiol and Biotechnol 24 1027-1035Miller

GAD N Suzuki S Ciftci-Yilmaz and RON Mittler (2010) Reactive oxygen

species homeostasis and signalling during drought and salinity stresses Plant Cell

Environ 33 453-467

Mhadhbi H M Jebara F Limam and M E Aouani (2004) Rhizobial strain involvement

in plant growth nodule protein composition and antioxidant enzyme activities of

chickpea-rhizobia symbioses modulation by salt stress Plant Physiol and Biochem

42 717-722

Mohammad RM M Akhavan-Kharazian WF Campbell and M D Rumbaugh (1991)

Identification of salt-and drought-tolerant Rhizobium meliloti L strains Plant Soil

134 271ndash276

Moinuddin M S Gulzar MZ Ahmed B Gul HW Koyro and MA Khan (2014)

Excreting and non-excreting grasses exhibit different salt resistance strategies AoB

Plant doi101093aobplaplu038

Morris RA and DP Garrity (1993) Resource capture and utilization in intercropping

water Field Crop Res 34 303-317

Morton J (1987) Indian jujube Fruits of warm climates 272-275

Moud AM and K Maghsoudi (2008) Salt stress effects on respiration and growth of

germinated seeds of different wheat (Triticum aestivum L) cultivars World J Agric

Sci 4 351-358

Moya JL FR Tadeo A Gomez-Cadenas E Primo-Millo and M Talon (2002)

Transmissible salt tolerance traits identified through reciprocal grafts between

sensitive Carrizo and tolerant Cleopatra citrus genotypes J Plant Physiol 159 991-

998

152

Mpepereki S F Makonese and A G Wollum (1997) Physiological characterization of

indigenous rhizobia nodulating Vigna unguiculata in Zimbabwean soils Symbiosis

22 275ndash292

Mucheru-Muna M P Pypers D Mugendi J Kungrsquou J Mugwe R Merckx and B

Vanlauwe (2010) A staggered maize-legume intercrop arrangement robustly

increases crop yields and economic returns in the highlands of Central Kenya Field

Crop Res 115 132-139

Munns R (2002) Comparative physiology of salt and water stress Plant Cell Environ 25

239-250

Munns R (2005) Genes and salt tolerance bringing them together New Phytol 167 645-

663

Munns R and M Tester (2008) Mechanisms of salinity tolerance Ann Rev Plant

Biol 59 651-681

Munns R and M Tester (2008) Mechanisms of salinity tolerance Annu Rev Plant

Biol 59 651-681

Munns R RA James and A Lauchli (2006) Approaches to increasing the salt tolerance of

wheat and other cereals J Exp Bot 57 1025-1043

Munns R RA James and A Laumluchli (2006) Approaches to increasing the salt tolerance

of wheat and other cereals J Exp Bot 57 1025-1043

Murakeozy EP Z Nagy C Duhaze A Bouchereau and Z Tuba (2003) Seasonal changes

in the levels of compatible osmolytes in three halophytic species of inland saline

vegetation in Hungary J Plant Physiol 160 395-401

Muthukumarasamy M and R Panneerselvam 1997 Amelioration of NaCl stress by

triadimefon in peanut seedlings Plant Growth Regul 22 157-162

153

Nakano Y and K Asada (1981) Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific

peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts Plant Cell Physiol 22 867-880

Naveena K GB Mallikarjuna S Madagavi VM Kumar and ST Bhairappanavar (2014)

Statistical evaluation of maize (Zea mays) urdbean (Vigna mungo) intercropping

system using land equivalent coefficient (LEC) Environ Ecol 32 63-66

Nerd A and Y Mizrahi (1998) Fruit development and ripening in yellow pitaya J Am

Soc Horti Sci 123 560-562

Ngwira AR JB Aune and S Mkwinda (2012) On-farm evaluation of yield and

economic benefit of short term maize legume intercropping systems under

conservation agriculture in Malawi Field Crop Res 132 149-157

Nishimura MT and JL Dangl (2010) Arabidopsis and the plant immune system The Plant

J 61 1053-1066

Noble CL ME Rogers (1994) Response of temperate forage legumes to waterlogging and

salinity In M Pessarakli (Ed) Handbook of Plant and Crop Stress Marcel Dekker

New York pp 473- 496

Nyanga LK MJ Nout TH Gadaga T Boekhout and MH Zwietering (2008)

Traditional processing of masau fruits (Ziziphus mauritiana) in Zimbabwe Ecol Food

Nutr 47 95-107

Nyanga LK TH Gadaga MJ Nout EJ Smid T Boekhout and MH Zwietering

(2013) Nutritive value of masau (Ziziphus mauritiana) fruits from Zambezi Valley in

Zimbabwe Food Chem 138 168-172

Olowe VIO and AY Adeyemo (2009) Enhanced crop productivity and compatibility

through intercropping of sesame and sunflower varieties Ann Appl Biol 155 285-

291

154

Othman Y (2005) Evaluation of barley cultivars grown in Jordan for salt tolerance Thesis

Jordan University of Science and Technology Jordan

Otusanya OO OW Ikonoh and OJ Ilori (2008) Allelopathic potentials of Tithonia

diversifolia (Hemsl) A Gray effect on the germination growth and chlorophyll

accumulation of Capsicum annum L and Lycopersicon esculentum Mill Int Bot 4

471-175

Oueslati S N Karray-Bouraoui H Attia M Rabhi R Ksouri and M Lachaal (2010)

Physiological and antioxidant responses of Mentha pulegium (Pennyroyal) to salt

stress Acta Physiol Plant 32 289-296

Pandey SD RK Pathak and R Dwivedi (1991) Effect of sodicity and salinity levels on

chlorophyll free proline and amino acid content in ber leaves Hort J 4 33-36

Pandey I S Tiwari R Pandey and R Kumar (2014) Effect of bed configuration fertilizer

levels and placement method on the productivity of long duration Pigeon pea (Cajanus

cajan (L) Millsp) under rainfed condition J Food Legumes 27 206-209

Panuccio MR SE Jacobsen SS Akhtar and A Muscolo (2014) Effect of saline water on

seed germination and early seedling growth of the halophyte quinoa AoB Plant doi

101093aobplaplu047

Pareek S (2013) Nutritional composition of jujube fruit Emir J Food Agric 25 463-470

Parida A AB Das and P Das (2002) NaCl stress causes changes in photosynthetic

pigments proteins and other metabolic components in the leaves of a true mangrove

Bruguiera parviflora in hydroponic cultures J Plant Biol 45 28-36

Parida AK and AB Das (2005) Salt tolerance and salinity effects on plants a

review Ecotoxicol Env Safety 60 324-349

155

Parida AK AB Das and B Mittra (2004) Effects of salt on growth ion accumulation

photosynthesis and leaf anatomy of the mangrove Bruguiera parviflora Trees 18

167-174

Parida AK AB Das and P Mohanty (2004) Investigations on the antioxidative defence

responses to NaCl stress in a mangrove Bruguiera parviflora differential regulations

of isoforms of some antioxidative enzymes Plant Grow Reg 42 213-226

Parida AK AB Das B Mittra and B Mohanty (2004) Salt-stress induced alterations in

protein profile and protease activity in the mangrove Bruguiera parviflora Z

Naturforsch 59 408-414

Parvaiz A and S Satyawati (2008) Salt stress and phyto-biochemical responses of plants-a

review Plant Soil Environ 54 89

Parvaiz A and S Satyawati (2008) Salt stress and phytochemical responses of plants-a

review Plant Soil Env 54 89ndash99

Peoples M D Herridge and J Ladha (1995) Biological nitrogen fixation an efficient

source of nitrogen for sustainable agricultural production Plant Soil 174 3-28

Perfecto I and J Vandermeer (2010) The agroecological matrix as alternative to the land-

sparingagriculture intensification model Pro Nat Acad Sci 107 5786-5791

Pessarakli M and J Huber (1991) Biomass production and protein synthesis by alfalfa under

salt stress J Plant Nutr 14 283-293

Pimratch S S Jogloy N Vorasoot B Toomsan A Patanothai and C C Holbrook (2008)

Relationship between biomass production and nitrogen fixation under drought‐stress

conditions in Peanut genotypes with different levels of drought resistance J Agro and

Crop Sci 194 15-25

156

Prieto I C Armas and FI Pugnaire (2012) Water release through plant roots new

insights into its consequences at the plant and ecosystem level New Phytol 193 830-

841

Pujol JA JF Calvo and L Ramirez-Diaz (2000) Recovery of germination from different

osmotic conditions by four halophytes from southeastern Spain Ann Bot 85 279-

286

Qados A (2010) Effect of arginine on growth nutrient composition yield and nutritional

value of mung bean plants grown under salinity stress Nature 8 30-42

Qasim M S Gulzar and MA Khan 2011 Halophytes as medicinal plants In M Ozturk

AR Mermut and A Celik (Eds) Urbanisation Land Use Land Degradation and

Environment Daya Publishing House Dehli India pp 330-343

Qasim M S Gulzar ZK Shinwari I Aziz and MA Khan (2010) Traditional

ethnobotanical uses of halophytes from hub Balochistan Pak J Bot 42 1543-1551

Qasim M Z Abideen MY Adnan R Ansari B Gul and M Khan (2014) Traditional

ethnobotanical uses of medicinal plants from coastal areas of Pakistan J Coast Life

Med 2 22-30

Qureshi AS MN Asghar S Ahmad and I Masih 2004 Sustaining crop production

under saline groundwater conditions a case study from Pakistan Aus J Agric Sci

54 421ndash431

Qureshi MT (1993) Rehabilitation and management of mangrove forests of Pakistan

In (Ed)Towards the rational use of high salinity tolerant plants (pp 89-95)

Springer Netherlands

Qureshi RH and EGBarrett-Lennard (1998) Saline Agriculture for Irrigated Land in

Pakistan A Handbook ACIAR monograph No 50 vi + 142p Canberra Australia

157

Raddad EY and O Luukkanen (2007) The influence of different Acacia senegal

agroforestry systems on soil water and crop yields in clay soils of the Blue Nile region

Sudan Agric Water Manag 87 61-72

Rahnama A RA James K Poustini and R Munns (2010) Stomatal conductance as a

screen for osmotic stress tolerance in durum wheat growing in saline soil Func Plant

Biol 37 255-263

Rajesh A R Arumugam and V Venkatesalu (1998) Growth and photosynthetic

characteristics of Ceriops roxburghiana under NaCl stress Photosynthetica 35 285-

287

Ram SN S Kumar MM Roy (2005) Performance of jujube (Ziziphus mauritiana)-based

hortipasture system in relation to pruning intensities and grass-legume associations

under rainfed conditions Indian J Agron 50 181-183

Ramanjulu S K Veeranjaneyulu and C Sudhakar (1993) Physiological changes induced

by NaCl in Mulberry var Mysore local Indian J Plant Physiol 36 273-273

Randalls S (2010) History of the 2 C climate target Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews

Climate Change 1 598-605

Rao G and GR Rao (1981) Pigment composition and chlorophyllase activity in Pigeon pea

(Cajanus indicus Spreng) and Gingelley (Sesamum indicum L) under NaCl salinity

Indian J Exp Biol 19 768-770

Rao MR MM Sharma and CK Ong (1990) A study of the potential of hedgerow

intercropping in semi-arid India using a two-way systematic design Agrofore

Sys 11 243-258

Rao MR MM Sharma and CK Ong (1991) A treecrop interface design and its use for

evaluating the potential of hedgerow intercropping Agrofore Sys 13 143-158

158

Reddy M and A Vora (1985) Effect of salinity on protein metabolism in bajra (Pennisetum

typhoides S and H) leaves Indian J Plant Physiol 28 190-195

Reynolds HL and C dAntonio (1996) The ecological significance of plasticity in root

weight ratio in response to nitrogen opinion Plant soil 185 75-97

Rice-Evans CA NJ Miller and G Paganga (1996) Structure-antioxidant activity

relationships of flavonoids and phenolic acids Free Radi Biol Med 20 933-956

Rivelli AR RA James R Munns and AG Condon (2004) Effect of salinity on water

relations and growth of wheat genotypes withcontrasting sodium uptake Func Plant

Biol 29 1065ndash74

Rivero R M J M Ruiz and L Romero (2003) Role of grafting in horticultural plants under

stress conditions Food Agric Environ 1 70-74

Rivest D A Cogliastro RL Bradley and A Olivier (2010) Intercropping hybrid poplar

with soybean increases soil microbial biomass mineral N supply and tree

growth Agrofor Sys 80 33-40

Rozema J and T Flowers (2008) Crops for a salinized world Science 322 1478-1480

Rusinamhodzi L M Corbeels J Nyamangara and KE Giller (2012) Maizendashgrain

legume intercropping is an attractive option for ecological intensification that reduces

climatic risk for smallholder farmers in central Mozambique Field Crop Res 136

12-22

Saeed R R Ahmad AA Mirbahar and B Jehan (2014) Germination indices of egg plant

(Solanum melongena l) under sea salt salinity Int J Biol Biotech 11 51-55

Sairam RK and A Tyagi (2004) Physiology and molecular biology of salinity stress

tolerance in plants Cur Sci-Bangalore 86 407-421

159

Santa-Cruz MM F Martinez-Rodriguez R Perez-Alfocea R Romero-Aranda and MC

Bolarin (2002) The rootstock effect on the tomato salinity response depends on the

shoot genotype Plant Sci 162 825-831

Sauvage D J Hamelia and F Lacher (1983) Glycine betaine and other structurally related

compounds improve the salt tolerance of Rhizobium meliloti Plant Sci Lett 31291ndash

302

Sawada H LD Kuykendall and JM Young (2003) Changing concepts in the systematics

of bacterial nitrogen-fixing legume symbionts J Gen App Microbiol 49 155-179

Sayre KD and PR Hobbs (2004) The raised-bed system of cultivation for irrigated

production conditions Sustainable agriculture and the international rice-wheat

system New York (USA) Marcel Dekker Inc p 337-355

Scholberg J and S Locascio (1999) Growth response of snap bean and tomato as affected

by salinity and irrigation method HortScience 34 259-264

Schubert S A Neubert A Schierholt A Suumlmer and C Zoumlrb (2009) Development of salt-

resistant maize hybrids The combination of physiological strategies using

conventional breeding methods Plant Sci 177 196-202

Seran TH and I Brintha (2010) Review on maize based intercropping J Agron 9 135ndash

145

Shannon MC CM Grieve and LE Francois (1994) Whole-plant response to salinity In

RE Wilkinson (Ed) Plant-Environment Interactions Marcel Dekker New York

pp 199ndash244

Sharma SK 2004 Hortipastoral based land use systems for enhancing productivity of

degraded lands under rainfed and partially irrigated conditions Uganda J Agric Sci

9 320-325

160

Sharma KD OP Pareek and HP Singh (1982) Effect of runoff concentration on growth

and yield of jujube Agric Water Manag 5

Sharma P and RS Dubey (2005) Drought induces oxidative stress and enhances the

activities of antioxidant enzymes in growing rice seedlings Plant Grow Reg 46 209-

221

Sharma P AB Jha RS Dubey and M Pessarakli (2012) Reactive oxygen species

oxidative damage and antioxidative defense mechanism in plants under stressful

conditions J Bot 2012 1-26

Sharma P HS Gujral and B Singh (2012) Antioxidant activity of barley as affected by

extrusion cooking Food Chem 131 1406-1413

Sharma P V Sardana and S Banga (2013) Salt tolerance of Indian mustard (Brassica

juncea) at germination and early seedling growth Environ Exp Biol 11 39-46

Sharma PK and DO Hall (1991) Interaction of salt stress and photoinhibition on

photosynthesis in Barley and Sorghum J Plant Physiol 138 614-619

Shen JB CJ Li GH Mi L Li LX Yuan RF Jiang and FS Zhang (2013) Maximizing

rootrhizosphere efficiency to improve crop productivity and nutrient use efficiency in

intensive agriculture of China J Exp Bot 64 1181ndash1192

Shi-dan W (2012) Growth and photosynthesis characteristics in leaves of mulberry and

soybean in intercropping and mixed cropping systems J Anhui Agric Sci 28 070

Shipley B and M Parent (1991) Germination responses of 64 wetland species in relation to

seed size minimum time to reproduction and seedling relative growth rate Funct

Ecol 5 111-118

Sidari M C Santonoceto U Anastasi G Preiti and A Muscolo (2008) Variations in four

genotypes of lentil under NaCl-salinity stress Am J Agric and Biol Sci 3 410

161

Silveira J A Melo R Viegas and J Oliveira (2001) Salinity-induced effects on nitrogen

assimilation related to growth in cowpea plants Environ Exp Bot 46 171-179

Simpson FB (1987) The hydrogen reactions of nitrogenase Physiol Plant 69 187-190

Singh G NT Singh JC Dagar H Singh and VP Sharma (1997) An evaluation of

agriculture forestry and agroforestry practices in a moderately alkali soil in

northwestern India Agrofor Sys 37 279ndash295

Singh R JK Malik OVS Thenua and HS Jat (2013) Effect of phosphorus and bio-

fertilizer on productivity nutrient uptake and economics of pigeonpea (Cajanus

cajan)+ mungbean (Phaseolus Radiatus) intercropping system Legume Res -An Int

J 36 41-48

Singh Y and N Lal (2015) In vitro screening of salt tolerant Bacillus from rhizosphere of

tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) showing plant growth promoting traits Indian J

Biol 2 55-60

Singla R and N Garg (2005) Influence of salinity on growth and yield attributes in chickpea

cultivars Turk J Agric Forest 29(4) 231-235

Singleton VL and JA Rossi (1965) Colorimetry of total phenolics with

phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents Am J Enol Viticul 16 144-158

Sivasankaramoorthy S (2013) Effect of NaCl salinity on germination growth and

photosynthetic pigments of (Cajanus cajan L) Int J Res Plant Sci 3 68-71

Somashekar K B Shekara K Kalyanamurthy B Lalitha A Kumar V K Singh and U

Verma green fodder augmentation for increasing animal productivityndasha review

Soussi M A Ocana and C Lluch (1998) Effects of salt stress on growth photosynthesis

and nitrogen fixation in chick-pea (Cicer arietinum L) J Exp Bot 49 1329-1337

162

Srivastava N V Vadez H D Upadhyaya and K B Saxena (2006) Screening for intra

and inter specific variability for salinity tolerance in pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) and its

related wild species J SAT Agric Res 2 1-12

Strain HH BT Cope and W A Svec (1971) Analytical procedures for the isolation

identification estimation and investigation of the chlorophylls Meth Enzymol 23

452-476

Strogonov BP (1973) Structure and function of plant cells in saline habitats New trends in

the study of salt tolerance New York J Wiley

Sudhakar C S Ramanjulu P Reddy and K Veeranjaneyulu (1997) Response of some

calvin cycle enzymes subjected to salinity shock in vitro Indian J Exp Biol 35 665-

667

Suzuki N G Miller J Morales V Shulaev MA Torres and R Mittler (2011) Respiratory

burst oxidases the engines of ROS signaling Cur Opin Plant Biol 14 691-699

Tavakkoli E F Fatehi S Coventry P Rengasamy and G K McDonald (2011) Additive

effects of Na+ and Clndash ions on barley growth under salinity stress J Exp Bot 62

2189-2203

Taylor RSL JB Hudson NP Manandhar and GHN Towers (1996) Antiviral activities

of medicinal plants of southern Nepal J Ethnophormocol 53 97-104

Tayyab R Ahmed M Azeem and N Ahmed (2015) Seed germination and seedling growth

of Pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan (L) Millspaugh) at different salinity regimes Int J

Biol Biotech 12 155-160

Tayyab M Azeem M Qasim and R Ahmad (2016) Effect of sea salt irrigation on plant

growth yield potential and some biochemical attributes of Carissa carandas Pak J

Bot 48 853-859

163

Tayyab M Azeem M Qasim N Ahmed and R Ahmad (2016) Salt stress responses of

pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) on growth yield and some biochemical attributes Pak J

Bot 48 48 1353-1360

Thomson LAJ (1987) Australian acacias for saline alkaline soils in the hot dry

Subtropics and Tropics In JW Turnbull (Ed) Australian Acacias in Developing

Countries (pp 66-69) Company and Country

Torabi F M Ahmad S Enteshari S Irian and M Nabiuni (2013) Effects of salinity on the

development of hydroponically grown borage (Borago officinalis L) male

gametophyte Notulae Bot Horti Agrobot Cluj-Napoca 41 65-72

Tyagi S KK Misra and HR Jaiswal (1999) Effect of auxin on rooting of softwood stem

cutting of Carissa under mist Sci Hort 6 37-43

US Census Bureau (2014) Geography Federal Register notices

httpwwwcensusgovgeoreferencefrnhtml (last accessed 30 September 2014)

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division

Population Estimates and Projections Section 2011 World population prospects The

2012 revision httpesaunorgunpdwppDocu mentationpublicationshtm (last

accessed 2 November 2014)

Vadez V L Krishnamurthy R Serraj P Gaur H Upadhyaya D Hoisington R Varshney

N Turner and K Siddique (2007) Large variation in salinity tolerance in chickpea is

explained by differences in sensitivity at the reproductive stage Field Crop Res 104

123-129

Van Duivenbooden N M Pala C Studer CL Bielders and DJ Beukes (2000)

Cropping systems and crop complementarity in dryland agriculture to increase soil

water use efficiency a review NJAS-Wageningen J Life Sci 48 213-236

Vandermeer J (2011) The ecology of agroecosystems Jones amp Bartlett Learning

164

Vandermeer JH (1989) The Ecology of Intercropping Cambridge Univ Press (1989)

Vandermeer JH (1992) The ecology of intercropping Cambridge University Press

Cambridge UK

Vashisth A and S Nagarajan (2010) Effect on germination and early growth characteristics

in sunflower (Helianthus annuus) seeds exposed to static magnetic field J Plant

Physiol 167 149-156

Velagaleti RR S Marsh D Krames D Fleischman and J Corbin (1990) Genotypic

differences in growth and nitrogen fixation among soyabean (Glycine max (L) Merr)

cultivars grown under salt stress Trop Agric 67 169ndash177

Venkateswarlu B and AK Shanker (2009) Climate change and agriculture adaptation

and mitigation stategies Indian J Agron 54 226

Waisel Y (1991) The glands of Tamarix aphylla a system for salt recreation or for carbon

concentration Physiol Plant 83 506ndash510

Walker RR PE Kriedemann and DH Maggs (1979) Growth leaf physiology and fruit

development in salt-stressed guavas Aus J of Agric Res 30 477 ndash 488

Wardill T J GC Graham M Zalucki WA Palmer J Playford and KD Scott (2006)

The importance of species identity in the biocontrol process identifying the subspecies

of Acacia nilotica (Leguminosae Mimosoideae) by genetic distance and the

implications for biological control J Biogeograph 32 2145-2159

White PJ and DJ Greenwood (2013) Properties and management of cationic elements

for crop growth Soil Cond Plant Growth 160-194

White PJ and DJ Greenwood (2013b) Properties and management of cationic elements

for crop growth In PJ Gregory and S Nortcliff (Eds) Soil conditions and plant

growth Oxford UK Blackwell Publishing pp 160ndash194

165

White PJ TS George PJ Gregory AG Bengough PD Hallett and

BM McKenzie (2013a) Matching roots to their environment Ann Bot 112 207ndash

222

Willey RW (1979) Intercropping its Importance and Research Needs Part 1 Competition

and Yield Advantages Vol-32

Wojtkowski PA (2006) Introduction to agroecology principles and practices Food

Products Press

Wright IJ and M Westoby (1999) Differences in seedling growth behaviour among species

trait correlations across species and trait shifts along nutrient compared to rainfall

gradients J Ecol 87 85ndash97

World Bank (2006) Managing food price risks and instability in an environment of market

liberalization World Bank Washington DC

Xu BC FM Li and L Shan (2008) Switchgrass and milkvetch intercropping under 2 1

row-replacement in semiarid region northwest China Aboveground biomass and

water use efficiency Eur J Agron 28 485-492

Yamoah CF AA Agboola and GF Wilson (1986) Nutrient contribution and maize

performance in alley cropping systems Agrofor Sys 4 247ndash254

Yaragattikar AT and CJ Itnal (2003) Studies on Ber Based Intercropping Systems in the

Northern Dry Zone of Karnataka Karnataka J Agric Sci 16 22-25

Yang B Xin N Li and JG Wang (2010) Planting modes of intercroped seed-using

watermelon and jujube in dry sandy land Nonwood Forest Res 3 026

Yang J W Zheng Y Tian Y Wu and D Zhou (2011) Effects of various mixed salt-

alkaline stresses on growth photosynthesis and photosynthetic pigment

concentrations of Medicago ruthenica seedlings Photosynthetica 49 275-284

166

Yelton MM SS Yang SA Edie and ST Lim (1983) Characterization of an effective

salt-tolerant fast-growing strain of Rhizobium japonicum J Gen Microbiol 129

1537ndash1547

Zada K S Ahmad and MS Nazar (1988) Land equivalent ratios relative yields and

relative yield totals of intercropped maize and soyabean Pak J Agric Res 9 453-

457

Zahran HH (1991) Conditions for successful Rhizobium-legume symbiosis in saline

environments Biol Fertil Soils 12 73ndash80

Zahran HH (1999) Rhizobium-legume symbiosis and nitrogen fixation under severe

conditions and in an arid climate Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 63 968-989

Zahran HH and JI Sprent (1986) Effects of sodium chloride and polyethylene glycol on

root hair infection and nodulation of Vicia faba L plants by Rhizobium

leguminosarum Planta 167 303ndash309

Zegada-Lizarazu W Y Izumi and M Iijima (2006) Water competition of intercropped

pearl millet with cowpea under drought and soil compaction stresses Plant Prod

Sci 9 123-132

Zhang F J Shen J Zhang Y Zuo L Li and X Chen (2010) Chapter one-rhizosphere

processes and management for improving nutrient use efficiency and crop

productivity implications for China Adv Agron 107 1-32

Zhang J and MB Kirkham (1994) Drought-stress-induced changes in activities of

superoxide dismutase catalase and peroxidase in wheat species Plant Cell

Physiol 35 785-791

Zhang W P Ahanbieke BJ Wang WL Xu LH Li P Christie and L Li (2013) Root

distribution and interactions in jujube treewheat agroforestry system Agrofor

Sys 87 929-939

167

Zhu J-K (2001) Plant salt tolerance Trends Plant Sci 6 66-71

Zomer RJ A Trabucco R Coe and F Place (2009) Trees on Farm Analisys of Global

Extent and Geographical Patterns of Agroforestery Nairobi World Agroforestry

Centre ICRAF Working Paper No 89

168

6 THESIS APENDECES

Appendix-I One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solution of seed germination of pre-soaked seeds of C cajan in non-saline water prior to germination under various salinity regimes

Variables Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-value P

Mean

germination rate

(GR)

Salinity treatment 4422 20 221133 21015 0000

Error 441949 42 10522

Total 4864 62

Mean germination

velocity (GV)


Error 169671 42 40398

Total 588484 62

Mean

germination

time (GT)


Error 0064 42 0002

Total 0335 62

Mean germination

Index (GI)


Error 441949 42 10523

Total 4864607 62

Final

germination

(FG)


Error 2666 42 63492

Total 34774 62

Appendix-II Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solution of seed germination of pre-soaked seeds of C cajan in non-saline water prior to germination under various salinity regimes


Germination percentage per

day


Time 53156 9 5906 4663 0002

Salinity treatment times time 251743 180 1398576 1053 ns

Error 531130 400 1327825

Total 1375283 629

Germination

rate per day

Salinity treatment

Time 761502 9 84611 83129 0000

Salinity treatment times time 442265 20 22113 24630 0000

Error 359117 400 0898

Total 2108622 629

Appendix-III One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solution of seed

germination of pre-soaked seeds of C cajan in respective saline water prior to germination under various salinity regimes


Final mean germination

velocity (GV)


Error 0035 14 0003

Total 0573

Final mean

germination time (GT)


Error 1854 14 0132

Total 22716 20


index (GI)


Error 1356 14 0097

Total 111869 20

Final

germination percentage (GP)


Error 400 14 28571

Total 7257 20

Appendix-IV Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solution of seed




day


Time 23378 6 3896 136373 0000


Error 2800 98 28571

Total 115540 146

Germination rate

per day


Time 128408 6 21401 394636 0000


Error 5314 98 0054

Total 309855 146

169

Appendix-V One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solution on seedling

emergence and height of germinating seeds of C cajan under various salinity regimes


Seedling height of C cajan


Error 2833 12 0236

Total 203115 17

Seedling

emergence of C cajan


Error 9070 14 647867

Total 33875 20

Appendix-VI Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solution on growth and

development of C cajan in lysemeter (Drum pot) under various salinity regimes


Plant height of

C cajan


Time 126015 8 15751 132488 0000


Error 11413 96 118893

Total 477028 161

Appendix-VII One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for effect of irrigation water of different sea salt solution on growth

and development of C cajan in lysemeter (Drum pot) under various salinity regimes


Number of

Flowers of C

cajan


Error 264 8 33

Total 419625 11

Number of pods

of C cajan


Error 170 8 2125

Total 1643 11

Number of

seedspod of C cajan

Salinity treatment 3 3 1

Error 0 8 0

Total 3 11

Number of seeds plant of

C cajan


Error 1130 8 14125

Total 20462 11

Weight of

seeds plant of C cajan


Error 18478 8 2309

Total 611455 11

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan


Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0121 11

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan


Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0005 11

Total chlorophyll of

C cajan


Error 0002 8 0000

Total 0162 11

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan


Error 0692 8 0086

Total 3112 11

Carotenoids of

C cajan


Error 0009 8 0001

Total 0025 11

Soluble sugars

of C cajan


Error 00178 8 0002

Total 0061 11

Insoluble

sugars of C

cajan


Error 0008 8 0001

Total 0127 11

Total sugars of

C cajan


Error 0012 8 0001

Total 0031 11

Protein of C cajan


Error 0036 8 0004

Total 0248 11

170

Appendix-VIII One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for range of salt tolerance of nitrogen fixing symbiotic bacteria



Nodule

associated

Rhizobial colonies of C

cajan


Error 1409 18 0078

Total 37337 20

Appendix-IX Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for growth and development of Z mauritiana in large size clay pot being irrigated with water of two different sea salt concentration


Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 91030 2 45515 839 0000


Time times Salinity treatment 1533 4 383 238 ns

Error 6751 42 161

Total 104554 71

Number of

branches of

Z mauritiana

Time 25525 2 127625 25333 0000



Error 16425 42 3910

Total 6575 71

Number of

flowers of

Z mauritiana

Time 73506 2 36753 167777 0000


Time times Salinity treatment 27824 4 6956 28736 0000

Error 10166 42 242063

Total 127759 71

Fresh weight of

Shoot of

Z mauritiana

Time 3056862 2 1528431 340777 0000



Error 251167 56 4485

Total 3515820 71

Dry weight of Shoot of

Z mauritiana

Time 784079 2 392039 338932 0000



Error 64774 56 1156690

Total 913855 71

Succulence of

Z mauritiana

Time 0002 2 0001 0214 ns

Salinity treatment 0006 2 0003 0682 ns


Error 0199 45 0004

Total 51705 54

Spacific shoot

length of Z mauritiana

Time 0000 2 914 0176 0000



Error 0023 45 0001

Total 6413 54

Moisture

contents of Z mauritiana

Time 1264 2 0632 0243 ns



Error 117146 45 2603

Total 131675 54

Relative growth

rate of Z mauritiana

Time 1584206 1 1584206 532968 ns



Error 89172 30 2972

Total 4034 36

Appendix-X One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for growth and development of Z mauritiana in large size clay pot

being irrigated with water of two different sea salt concentration


Chlorophyll a

of Z mauritiana


Error 0006 21 0000

Total 0010 23

Chlorophyll b of Z mauritiana


Error 0080 21 0003

Total 0117 23

171

Total

chlorophyll of

Z mauritiana


Error 0038 21 0002

Total 0182 23

Chlorophyll ab ratio of

Z mauritiana


Error 0471 21 0022

Total 1969 23

Total soluble

sugars of

Z mauritiana


Error 107952 21 5140

Total 486223 23

Total protein contents of

Z mauritiana


Error 238268 21 11346

Total 371274 23

Appendix-XI Three way ANOVA for split-split plot design for physiological investigations on growth of Z mauritiana and C cajan in

drum pot being irrigated with water of sea salt concentration at two irrigation intervals


Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 4499 2 2249 28888 0004

Crop 448028 1 448028 2208 ns

Irrigation intervals 2523 1 2523 2774 ns

Time times Crop 928088 2 464044 2288 ns

Time times irrigation interval 1120400 2 560200 0615 ns

Crop times irrigation interval 2690151 1 2690 2957 ns

Time times Crop times irrigation interval 171927 2 85963 0094 ns

Error 10916 12 909732

Total 35

Canopy volume of Z mauritiana

Time 7943 2 3971 6554 ns

Crop 0382 1 0382 0579 ns






Error 8043 12 0670

Total 29439 35

Appendix-XII Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for physiological investigations on growth of Z mauritiana and C

cajan in drum pot being irrigated with water of sea salt concentration at two irrigation intervals


Plant length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 2986 1 2986 75322 0000

Irrigation interval 2986 1 2986 75322 0000

Crop times Irrigation interval 15336 1 153367 3868 ns

Error 317166 8 39645

Total 292428 12

Shoot length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 1069741 1 1069741 30890 0000


Crop times Irrigation interval 253001 1 253001 73058 0026

Error 27704 8 3463

Total 103376 12

Root length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 19763 1 19763 2671 ns



Error 59186 8 7398

Total 49165 12

Main branches

of Z mauritiana

Crop 33333 1 33333 5797 0042



Error 46 8 575

Total 2888 12

Lateral

branches of Z mauritiana

Crop 1344083 1 1344083 41356 0000



Error 26 8 325

Total 22465 12

Leaf numbers of

Z mauritiana

Crop 22465 12 98283 96482 0000



Error 8149 8 1018667

172

Total 2037850 12

Shootroot ratio

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 1842 ns

Irrigation interval 0001 1 0001 0097 ns


Error 0120 8 0015

Total 27776 12

Plant fresh

weight of Z mauritiana

Crop 398107 1 398107 577818 0000



Error 5511 8 688982

Total 7248659 12

Plant dry weight of Z mauritiana

Crop 87808 1 87808 471436 0000



Error 14900 8 186257

Total 1875710 12

Stem fresh

weight of

Z mauritiana

Crop 46687 1 46687 227539 0000



Error 16414 8 205185

Total 1718530 12

Root fresh weight of

Z mauritiana

Crop 58450 1 58450 2295 0000



Error 203746 8 25468

Total 357145 12

Leaf fresh weight of

Z mauritiana

Crop 29970 1 29970 19089 0000



Error 125596 8 15699

Total 699711 12

Stem dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 13587 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 50188 8 62735

Total 4689795 12

Root dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 1358787 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 100993 8 12624

Total 124421 12

Leaf dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 2374 1 2374 135380 0000



Error 140313 8 17539

Total 127170 12

Plant moisture of Z mauritiana

Crop 22082 1 22082 5608 0045



Error 31496 8 3937

Total 29872 12

Stem moisture of Z mauritiana

Crop 0005 1 0005 0000 ns



Error 73633 8 9204

Total 28532 12

Root moisture of Z mauritiana

Crop 235266 1 235266 16502 0003



Error 114051 8 14256

Total 17572 12

Leaf moisture

of Z mauritiana

Crop 130413 1 130413 47746 0000



Error 21850 8 2731

Total 38888 12

173

Relative growth


Crop 0000 1 0000 287467 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0009 12

Relative water

contents of Z

mauritiana

Crop 37381 1 37381 1380 ns



Error 216649 8 27081

Total 50855 12

Chlorophyll a of Z mauritiana

Crop 0103 1 0103 32466 0000



Error 0025 8 0003

Total 1498 12

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 196164 0000



Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0456 12

Total chlorophyll

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0257 1 0257 53469 0000



Error 0038 8 0004

Total 3736 12

Chlorophyll a b ratio of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0002 1 0002 0028 ns



Error 0799 8 0099

Total 43067 12

Carotenoids of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0018 1 0018 42747 0000



Error 0003 8 0000

Total 0451 12

Phenol of

Z mauritiana

Crop 24641 1 24641 13168 000



Error 14969 8 1871

Total 6289 12

Proline of Z mauritiana

Crop 0001 1 0001 52288 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0005 12

Protein of Z mauritiana

Crop 200001 1 200001 296 ns



Error 540367 8 67545

Total 814086 11

CAT enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 74171 1 74171 11404 0009



Error 52029 8 65036

Total 441467 11

APX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 191918 1 191918 6693 0032



Error 229383 8 28672

Total 5423 11

GPX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0000 1 0000 0020 ns



Error 0140 8 0017

Total 0353 11

SOD enzyme Crop 8471 1 8471 1364 ns

174

of

Z mauritiana



Error 49664 8 6208

Total 85498 11

NR enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 7520 1 75208333333 37253364154 0003



Error 1615 8 0201

Total 10512 11

Nitrate of

Z mauritiana

Crop 003 1 003 3028 ns



Error 0079 8 0009

Total 0130 11

Appendix-XIII Three way ANOVA for split-split design for physiological investigations on growth of Z mauritiana and C cajan in drum

pot being irrigated with water of sea salt concentration at two irrigation intervals


Height of

C cajan

Time 14990 2 7495 235059 0000

Crop 7848 1 7848 42235 0000

Irrigation intervals 749056 1 749056 9676 0009

Time times Crop 2638 2 1319140 7098 00262




Error 928935 12 77411

Total 29065 35

Apendix-XIV Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for physiological investigations on growth of Z mauritiana and C



Plant length of C cajan

Crop 1056563 1 1056563 12331 0007



Error 68544 8 8568

Total 334030 12

Shoot length of C cajan

Crop 808520 1 808520 36580 0000



Error 17682 8 22102

Total 224013 12

Root length of C cajan

Crop 16567 1 16567 0674 ns



Error 196453 8 24556

Total 11133 12

Main branches

of C cajan

Crop 80083 1 80083 64066 0000



Error 10 8 125

Total 335 12

Letral branches

of C cajan

Crop 0 1 0

Irrigation interval 0 1 0

Crop times Irrigation interval 0 1 0

Error 0 8 0

Total 0 12

Leaf numbers

of C cajan

Crop 1776333 1 1776333 16679 0003



Error 852 8 1065

Total 22342 12

Shootroot ratio of C cajan

Crop 0385 1 0385 0638 0447



Error 4825 8 0603

Total 264061 12

Crop 76816 1 76816 7494853 0025

175

Plant fresh

weight of

C cajan



Error 81993 8 102491

Total 25941 12

Plant dry weight of C cajan

Crop 38270 1 38270 1150145 0009



Error 26619 8 3327

Total 4150 12

Stem fresh weight of

C cajan

Crop 16100 1 16100 1462 ns



Error 8806 8 11007

Total 3318 12


C cajan

Crop 0190 1 0190 0248 ns



Error 6115 8 0764

Total 432050 12

Leaf fresh

weight of C cajan

Crop 541363 1 541363 13825 0005



Error 313246 8 39155

Total 7236 12

Stem dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 10323 1 10323 11530 0009



Error 7162 8 0895

Total 125151 12

Root dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 0007 1 0007 012 ns



Error 05 8 0062

Total 3515 12

Leaf dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 9363 1 9363 15649 0004



Error 4786 8 0598

Total 95072 12

Plant moisture of C cajan

Crop 199182 1 19918 6011 0039



Error 265079 8 33134

Total 38272 12

Stem moisture

of C cajan

Crop 100814 1 10081 3290 0107246



Error 245119 8 30639

Total 31036 12

Root moisture

of C cajan

Crop 26266 1 26266 1389 ns



Error 151272 8 18909

Total 58346 12

Leaf moisture

of C cajan

Crop 2623 1 2623 39350 0000



Error 533411 8 66676

Total 36263 12

Relative growth

rate of C cajan

Crop 0000 1 0000 17924 0002



Error 0000 8 0000

Total

Crop 256935 1 256935 1560 ns


176

Electrolyte

leakage of C

cajan


Error 1316923 8 16461

Total 50381 12

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan

Crop 0101 1 0101 7957 0022



Error 0102 8 0012

Total 5060 12

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan

Crop 0017 1 0017 7758 0023



Error 0017 8 0002

Total 1727 12

Total

chlorophyll of C cajan

Crop 0178 1 0178 14819 0004



Error 0096 8 0012

Total 13217 12

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan

Crop 0065 1 0065 0691 ns



Error 0756 8 0094

Total 35143 12

Carotenoids of C cajan

Crop 0021 1 0021 19599 0002



Error 0008 8 0001

Total 1443 12

Phenol of C cajan

Crop 0799 1 0799 3171 ns



Error 2016 8 0252

Total 970313 12

Proline of C cajan

Crop 0008 1 0008 14867 0004



Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0155 12

Protein of C

cajan

Crop 116376 1 116376 3990 ns



Error 233303 8 29163

Total 817371 11

CAT enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0249 1 0249 0121 ns



Error 16362 8 2045

Total 28654 11

APX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 855939 1 855939 4073 ns



Error 1681112 8 210139

Total 17137 11

GPX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0965 1 0965 9265 0160



Error 0833 8 0104

Total 3854 11

SOD enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 4125 1 4125 9731 0142



Error 3391 8 0423

Total 32804 11

Nitrate

reductase

enzyme

Crop 0053 1 0053 0034 ns



177

of C cajan Error 12424 8 1553

Total 22808 11

Nitrate of

C cajan

Crop 0039 1 0039 0576 ns



Error 0545 8 0068

Total 0668 11

Appendix-XV Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for physiological investigations on growth of Z mauritiana and C

cajan intercropped on marginal land under field condition


Height of Z mauritiana

Time 79704 3 26568 77303 0000

Treatment 979209 1 979209 4702 0455

Time times Treatment 756019 3 252006 1210 3381 ns

Error 3332 16 208259

Total 90366 39


Time 1049 3 3498 115444 0000

Treatment 3509 1 3509 5966 0266


Error 9413 16 5883

Total 1284 39

flowers numbers of Z

mauritiana

Time 1794893 3 598297 770043 0000

Treatment 19980 1 19980 10152 0057

Time times Treatment 21017 3 7005 3559 0381

Error 31488 16 1968

Total 1882468 39

Fruits numbers

of Z mauritiana

Time 324096 3 108032 297941 0000

Treatment 10824 1 10824 64081 0000


Error 2702 16 168913

Total 351833 39

Appendix-XVI One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for physiological investigations on growth of Z mauritiana and C cajan intercropped on marginal land under field condition


Weight of ten

fruits (FW) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 557113 1 557113 6663 0032

Error 668923 8 83615

Total 1226036 9

Weight of ten fruits (DW) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 4356 1 4356 0321 ns

Error 10862 8 13577

Total 112976 9

diameter of fruit of Zmauritiana

Treatment 0534 1 0534 0946 ns

Error 4514 8 0564

Total 5048 9

Fruit weight per plant of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0739 1 0739 4022 ns

Error 1471 8 0184

Total 2211 9

Fruit sugar

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 5041 1 5041 0081 ns

Error 497328 8 62166

Total 502369 9

Fruit sugar (extractable) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 32041 1 32041 0424 ns

Error 604384 8 75548

Total 636425 9

Total fruit

sugars of Z mauritiana

Treatment 16 1 16 0780 ns

Error 164 8 205

Total 18 9

Chlorophyll a of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0082 1 0082 1384 0020

Error 0024 4 0006

Total 0105 5

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Treatment 0011 1 0011 8469 0043

Error 0005 4 0001

Total 0016 5


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0152 1 0152 11927 0025

Error 0051 4 0013

Total 0203 5

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0867 ns

Error 0067 4 0017

178

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of Z mauritiana

Total 0082 5

Carotinoids of Z mauritiana

Treatment 0011 1 0011 9719 0035

Error 0004 4 0001

Total 0015 5

Leaf protein of

Z mauritiana


Error 0106 4 0027

Total 0213 5

Leaf sugars

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana


Error 848 4 212

Total 8534 5

Leaf sugars

(Extractable) of Z mauritiana

Treatment 486 1 486 8055 0046

Error 2413 4 0603

Total 7273 5

Total sugars in

leaf of Z

mauritiana


Error 83333 4 20833

Total 85493 5

Leaf phenols of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 8166 1 8166 5665 ns

Error 5766 4 1442

Total 13933 5

Leaf nitrogen of Z mauritiana


Error 3093 4 0773333

Total 4593 5

Soil nitrogen of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0375 1 0375 21634 ns

Error 0693 4 0173

Total 1069 5

Appendix-XVII Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for physiological investigations on growth of Z mauritiana and C



Height of Ccajan

Time 700196 2 350098 2716 0000

Treatment 594405 1 594405 16017 0000


Error 1001996 27 37111

Total 705495 59

Number of branches of

Ccajan

Time 8353 2 4176 1050050 0000

Treatment 24066 1 24066 18672 0000


Error 348 27 1288

Total 8572 59

Number of flowers of

Ccajan

Time 289297 2 144648 301277 0000

Treatment 365066 1 365066 0701 ns

Time times Treatment 730133 2 365066 0701 ns

Error 14059 27 520733

Total 317415 59

Number of pods

of Ccajan

Time 347682 2 173841 70559 0000

Treatment 159135 1 159135 1558 ns


Error 27574 27 1021276

Total 447407 59

Appendix-XVIII One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for physiological investigations on growth of Z mauritiana and C



Shoot weight

(FW) of

Ccajan


Error 87444 4 21861

Total 87444 5

Shoot weight

(RW) of Ccajan


Error 13808 4 3452

Total 13808 5

Number of

seeds of

Ccajan


Error 940182 18 52232

Total 940427 19

Weight of seeds

of Ccajan


Error 7585 18 421406

Total 7585 19

179

Chlorophyll a of

Ccajan

Treatment 0001 1 0001 5442 ns

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0002 5

Chlorophyll b

of Ccajan

Treatment 0006 1 0006 9079 0039

Error 0002 4 0001

Total 0008 5

Total

chlorophyll of

Ccajan

Treatment 0017 1 0017 51558 0001

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0019 5


Ccajan

Treatment 0183 1 0183 5532 ns

Error 0132 4 0033

Total 0316 5

Leaf protein of Ccajan

Treatment 0001 1 0001 0017 ns

Error 0228 4 0057

Total 0228 5

Leaf sugars of

Ccajan

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0003 ns

Error 1624 4 406

Total 16255 5

Leaf phenols of

Ccajan

Treatment 0201 1 0201 0140 ns

Error 5746 4 1436

Total 5948 5

Leaf nitrogen

of Ccajan

Treatment 1306 1 1306 3062 ns

Error 1706 4 04266

Total 3013 5

Appendix-XIX Two way ANOVA for completely randomized design for investigations on determining range of salt tolerance in Carissa

carandas


Height of C carandas

Time 72042 5 14408 55957 0000



Error 3009 24 125385

Total 143777 53

Volume of

canopy of

C carandas

Time 3329 4 0832 38126 000



Error 0207 20 0010

Total 5969 44

Appendix-XX One way ANOVA for completely randomized design for investigations on determining range of salt tolerance in Carissa carandas


Number of

flowers of C carandas


Error 229833 6 38305

Total 10518 8

Number of fruits of

C carandas


Error 201333 6 33555

Total 18201 8

Flower shedding

percentage of C carandas


Error 86519 6 144199

Total 1628166 8

Weight of ten fruits (FW) of

C carandas


Error 1321 6 0220

Total 83953 8

Weight of ten

fruits (DW) of

C carandas


Error 095 6 0158

Total 5305 8

Fruits per plant

(FW) of

C carandas


Error 1435861 6 239310

Total 134563 8

Fruits per plant

(DW) of C carandas


Error 223677 6 37279

Total 9006 8

Size of fruits of C carandas


Error 0946 6 0158

Total 2248 8


180

Diameter of fruit

of C carandas

Error 0956 6 0159

Total 6563 8

Chlorophyll a of C carandas


Error 0003 6 0000

Total 0115 8

Chlorophyll b of

C carandas


Error 0000 6 0000

Total 0005 8

Total chlorophyll of C carandas


Error 0005 6 0001

Total 0164 8

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C carandas


Error 0089 6 0015

Total 9751 8

Carotenoids of C carandas


Error 0003 6 0001

Total 0032 8

Leaf Protein of

C carandas


Error 0833 6 0138

Total 3555 8

Soluble sugar of

C carandas


Error 55333 6 9222

Total 290222 8

In soluble sugars

of C carandas


Error 45689 6 7615

Total 641085 8

Total sugar of

C carandas


Error 120676 6 20113

Total 1697574 8

Phenols of C carandas


Error 0593 6 0099

Total 15268 8

Leaf Na+ of

C carandas


Error 6 6 1

Total 1352 8

Leaf K+ of C carandas


Error 18 6 3

Total 816 8

Leaf K+ Na+

ratio of C carandas


Error 0001 6 0000

Total 0307 8

181

7 Publications

ii




PhD Thesis

Submitted to the Board of advance Studies and Research in fulfillment of

the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Botany


TAYYAB



2015

iii




Thesis Approved


PROF DR RAFIQ AHMAD

FPAS FTWAS





iv

CERTIFICATE














RESEARCH SUPERVISOR

PROF DR RAFIQ AHMAD

FPAS FTWAS






v



MRS ARIFA (LATE)

(MY BELOVED MOTHER)


vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS





this thesis






















vii








viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No Title Page no

Acknowledgement vi

Summary xix



Layout of thesis 11

1 Chapter 1 13

11 Introduction 13
























ix

No Title Page no







nodules of C cajan

41











2 Chapter 2 59

21 Introduction 59














x

No Title Page no







2224 Phenols 70

2225 Proline 71






22211 Phenols 76

22212 Proline 77


















xi

No Title Page no





3 Chapter 3 113

31 Introduction 113















4 Conclusion 129

5 References 130

6 Appendices 168

7 Publications 181

xii

LIST OF FIGURES




27



30



36



36



cajan

37




concentrations

37




38




39



40



42




43

xiii





treatment

47




48



49




mauritiana

49



mauritiana

50




79



intervals

80






81



intervals

83

xiv





84



intervals

86



intervals

87




89




100



101


and intercropping

102



system

103



105



106




124

xv





125




126

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page no



18





regimes

19





20







regimes

21



24





25




duration of time

26

xvii

Table Title Page no



of experiment

30


field

99





107




119




120




121






123

xviii



CAT Catalase



















xix

Summary































xx






















purposes

xxi

لاصہ خ



ر علاق ج

ن ی م ب



کی ف طے

خ


ی ملکوں


وئ عمال ہ



کر ا ھ ملا




مک کے مخ








iwEC =اب




ق



ارت





گئ کھی


ت صدی 05اف

ق





05ق

ی گئ کھی

ت ح طور د


ق


کی ں ا رت ی


کرئ مد خ

ن من روج ی

اب سے (NaCl)ت


گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


گئ کھی


ت

بی ق کے ب




گائ

کر ا ھ ملا



ک غ کی خد ت




سی ت آت



وئ ہ


کر ا ھ ملا



گائ


وں اق

ے دوپ ج گئ





ائ کی می ی

ائ ےجی






کے ب ڑھوب

xxii




ش ھی ی

ت




کر ا ھ ملا




ب ما ب وں

ش دی ی ولی

ے پ

وئ ج خاضل ہ



گائ

کر ا ھ ملا




ائ

ی وئ ں ہ ہی




اف ا اض مات




ط ے ت گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


کی ب ڑھوب





ی وئ ر ہ



ی اور پ

ائ علی

ں ف مک( می



ارت



ائ کی می ی





ں ف ی وں می




ی سے ض ج

ی وئ ر ہ


کرئ زب چ


وئ ےہ





ت ف





گائ

کر ا ھ ملا





کی آمدئ وں




عئصت



ن اور غ مکی

دل ں ے معی


1
































2



























1999)





3










2013 Li et al 2014)








Prieto et al 2012)














4
























development







5

































6








cultural practices























7




















Ismail 1993)












8
























and cellular levels









9

































10













condition

11

LAYOUT OF THESIS
























intervals



12








13

1 Chapter 1




11 Introduction


























14




al 2010 2011 2014)





environment

15

12 Experiment No 1


























16


following formula


days (1 - 7)


(1962)


experiment








17




I)














18




01 09

02 16

03 35

04 42

05 58

06 62

07 79

08 88

09 99

10 101

11 112

12 128

13 131

14 145

15 159

16 168


19




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day



















Time (days) 13322



20




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day



















Time (days) 0378



21





Sea Salt



















LSD005 5344 3312 0064 5344 1313



22

13 Experiment No 2









No 1

















23














24



0 04

005 09

01 16

015 24

02 32

025 39

03 42


25



Sea salt

ECiw (dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day











25

26



Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day











27


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42

Germ

ination Index(s

eedd

ays

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Fin

al germ

ination (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Coeff

icie

nt of

germ

ination v

elo

city

(seedd

ays

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42G

erm

ination tim

e (

Days

)

0

1

2

3

4

LSD005 = 0086

a = 0664 b = 1572

R2 = 0905 n =21

LSD005 = 062

a = 1239

b = 9836

R2 = 0894 n=21

LSD005 = 053

a = 8560b = -2272

R2 = 0969 n=21

RGF = 100-200 (Ke -005) Ke = 030




28

14 Experiment No 3

















29









6578 r = 09810 F = 15358 (p lt 00001)



1422 Shoot height







128893 (p lt 0001)



30



000001)


0 04 05

005 09 161

01 16 278

015 24 354

02 32 433

025 39 483

03 42 552





e f


)

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3

Shoot le

ngth

(cm

)

0

2

4

6

8

10ab

c

de

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3Seedlin

g e

merg

ence (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100a

bb

c

d

A B

31

15 Experiment No 4















()

ECiw ( dSm-1) of

irrigation water


end of experiment














32






Experiment No 1






















33
















iii Protein content











34































35








iii Protein





35dSm-1)

36

Months (2009)


Valu

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


oC)

High Temp (oC)




Time (Weeks)

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Pla

nt heig

ht (c

m)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

43 38 35 28 16 Control




37

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Initial Final

a

b b

c c cab b

c c cC 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht

(g)

012345 a

bb

bc ca a ab b c c

Dry weightMoisture




Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Succu

lance

(

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

RG

R (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

SS

L (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

ab

b b

c c

a

b bc c c

a

b b

c c c

a a a ab

c





38


Control 16 28 35

Tota

l seeds (

Pla

nt-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 Seed w

eig

ht (g

pla

nt -1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 a

b

cc

a

a

b

b

b c

c

a

b

a

c c

Flowers

Pods





005)

39

Sea salt (ECe=dSm-1

)

Control 16 28 35

Caro

tinoid

s (

mg g

-1 F

W)

000

005

010

015

020

025

030

Chlo

rophyll

(mg g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

ab

ratio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

b

a

cd

b

a

c

d

a

b

c

d

a

a

ab

b




40




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 16 28 35

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

a ab b

a a

b b

a ab b

a

b

ab

c

SoluableInsoluable

41

16 Experiment No 5





















C cajan








42










NaCl (ECw= dSm

-1)

06 9 188 242 306 366 423

Rh

izo

bia

l co

lonie

s (l

og

10)

0

1

2

3

4 a a

b

c c

d

e




43



188

423 90

Control

366

306 242

44

17 Experiment No 6


















of irrigation water



irrigation


04 63 72

06 101 111






45












period













46



























47

Control 72 111

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Dry

weig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Num

ber

of bra

nches

3

6

9

12

15

18

Heig

ht (c

m)

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160


AcBb

Ba

AcBb Ba

AcBb Ba

Ac

BbBa





48


uccula

nce (

g g

-1 D

W)

00

03

06

09

12

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

SS

L (

cm

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Control 72 111

Mois

ture

(

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Control 72 111

RG

R (

mg g

-1 d

ay

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

a a aa a a a a a a

a aa a a a a a


b

b b

c





49

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Num

ber

of flow

ers

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 60 days120 days

Ac

BbBa




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(mg g

-1)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

bba

bba

bb

a

chl b chl a ab

ab

ra

tio

00

05

10

15

20




005)

50




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 04 06

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Solu

ble

sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

3

6

9

12

15

18a

a

bb

b b

Control 72 111

51

18 Discussion
































52












developmental stage





















53

































54




stress




























55

































56


































57

















to salt stress















58












responses

59

2 Chapter 2


21 Introduction























60

22 Experiment No 7

























61















period in tap water






rhizosphere










62




























63











chapter 1

















64












in chapter 1

22113 Enzymes Assay

















65



ii Catalase (CAT)






degC












266 mM-1cm-1)








66



spectrophotometer

67





















i Fresh weight









68





ii Dry weight












ratio (SWR)













69





system

v Plant moisture








vi Plant Succulence















70













ii Carotinoids









2224 Phenols







71

2225 Proline







system








2227 Enzyme essays





Appendix-XII

i Catalase (CAT)





72







values
















73
















i Fresh weight









(Plt005)




significant result

74






ii Dry weight








ratio (SWR)
















75

v Plant moisture






vi Plant succulence





















76







ii Carotenoids














22211 Phenols







77

22212 Proline






results










22214 Enzyme assay





Appendix-XIV

i Catalase (CAT)






78





















79


No o

f le

aves

0

20

40

60

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

2404

th day

Cajanus cajan

a

RootShoot

ab

a

a

b

a

a

8th

day





No of

leav

es

0

200

400

600

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

Ziziphus mauritiana

RootShoot

4th

day 8th

days

b b

a a

a

b

cc

80

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fre

sh w

eight

(g)

100

200

300

400

500

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

a

b

c

a

b b aa

b

b

c c

a

bc

a

c

ba

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

2

4

6

8

10

12

Fre

ah w

eight

(g)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

aa

b

a

a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

a

c

b

a a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Cajanus cajan




81




day irrigation



Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

01

02

03

04

05

06

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

005

010

015

020

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

05

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

b

a

bb

a

b

aa

a aa

b

a

bb

c

b

a

bb

b

aa a

ba

bc

4th day

8th day

82


Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

2

4

6

8

10

12

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

002

004

006

008

010

012

014

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

5

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Cajanus cajan

a aab

a aaa

a

bba

a

b b

c

a aab

a

bbb

abbb

aa

bc

8th day

4th day

83

Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

Ch

loro

phyll

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25Chl ab

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

a

b

a

b

a ab

b

Chl aChl b


4th and 8th



Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15ab

ab

Cajanus cajan

bb b

a

a

b

cc

bb b

a

84

Ele

ctro

lyte

lea

kag

e(

)

0

5

10

15

4th

day 8th

dayP

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

Sole Intercrop

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a a

a

b b ba

a

b

c

d





p lt 005)

85


E

lect

roly

te l

eakag

e(

)

0

20

40

60

80

4th

day 8th

day

Phen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

000

003

006

009

012

015

018

Sole Intercrop

Cajanus cajan

a aa

a

a a aa

aa a

a

86

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

20

40

60

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a aa a

a

a a a

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

4th

day 8th

dayCajanus cajan

ab

a

c

a

b

cc





87

Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

AP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

GP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

bc

c

a

b

cc

a

c

b

b

b bb

a





88


Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

4th

day 8th

dayG

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

Cajanus cajan

aA

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

bb

b

aaa

b

a

bbb

a

c

a

b

89

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

14

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

4th

day

Nitrate reductaseNO

3

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

b

c

cb

b

b

a

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

4th

dayCajanas cajan

a

bb

b

aa

aa






005)

90

23 Experiment No 8






1










deciduas etc

2313 Soil analysis





i Bulk density


following formula


91

ii Soil porosity


following formula
















Fiesta Water Park









92






















93


















chapter 1







94




2317 Fruit analysis

i Protein in fruit


in chapter 1




















95





using formula





equation as








plot 2000








96



















sole crop









sole crop

97




























98







of sole crop







(LEC)






9994







99




2 pH 8666plusmn0136










100

Ziziphus mauritiana

Days

0 60 120

Volu

me

(m3)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Sole Intercrop

a

a

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c

Cajanus cajan

Days

0 60 120

Bra

nch

es (

)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Sole Intercrop

aa

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c




101

Ziziphus mauritiana

Fresh Dry

Fru

it w

eig

ht

(g)

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120 180

Nu

mb

er o

f F

ruit

s

0

100

200

300

Sole Intercrop

a

b

a

b

c

c

dd

Cajanus cajan

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Pods

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Flo

wer

s

0

50

100

150

Sole Intercrop

Days

aa

bb

c c

Sole Intercrop

Num

ber

of

See

ds

0

100

200

300

400

500

See

d W

eight

(g)

0

10

20

30

40

50





102

Ziziphus mauritiana

Cajanus cajan




Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

noid

s (m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03C

hlo

rophyl

l (m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

no

ids

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

ab

rat

io

0

1

2

3

4ab

ab

103

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f S

ug

ars

(mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





104


Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

05

10

15

20

Lea

f S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

105

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Fru

it P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Fru

it P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

Fru

it S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





106

Z mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil

Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil




107




reference to Height

Formulated with

reference to Total

Chlorophyll






Intercropped

Total LER 1977 2543 2152



107

108

24 Discussion























leguminous plants








109



















2013)














110
















2006 Sofo et al 2005)











1996)






111

































112





















113

3 Chapter 3



saline land

31 Introduction






















waste land

114

32 Experiment No 9









3212 Plant material



















115










selected fruits



of flowers)




ii Soluble sugars



iii Protein content



chapter 1

iv Soluble phenols



116







Na+ (ppm) = 0016135x1879824

K+ (ppm) = 0244346x1314603

117













irrigated plants
















118

























salinity

119



Treatment

Sea salt ()


(dSm-1)


03 42 48

04 61 68

06 99 112

08 129 142


120


sea salt

Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



irrigation



cm m3 cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3 increase over

initial values

increase

decrease

over control






LSD0 05

Salinity


91

172

002

0005


120

121



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





122


Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

Control 1911plusmn6


99 1110plusmn5


129 8754plusmn10



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Time 168 016



123



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)


shedding

Weight of

Ten

fruit(fresh)

Weight of

Ten

fruit(dry)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(fresh)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(dry)

length

fruit

diameter

fruit





LSD0 05 Salinity 1514 1417 929 115 097 3785 1494 0971 097



123

124

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Car

ote

nio

ds

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35

ab

Chl a Chl b

a

a

a a

b

bcbc

a

b

c

a a

b





125

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ph

eno

ls (

mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

1

2

3

4

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

30

60

90

120


a

a

a

a

a

a

b

b

b

c

ab

a

a

b




126

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ions

(mg

g-1

DW

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

KN

a ra

tio

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Na K KNa

c

a

b

b

a

c

a

b

c




127

33 Discussion





























128


al 2004)

























129

4 Conclusions













130

5 References





Bot 47 813-818


















131













618






3116







132



J Bot 28 145-149
















Environ 74 19-31







133

























134



Bot 43 1513-1520



Bot 43 1513-1520



Agric 14 293-298








Exp Bot 65 1229-1240






109 372-381

135











J Res 15 35-40



424









June 13 1999



136








248-254



248-254


Hall Inc New Jersey









York pp 125-179




137





Sci Asia 30 247-253


550

















348

138



Bot 38 619-630



Rodale Press















26 371-376




139



Res 100 249-256




Exp Bot 63 3415-3428








2269




Prot 45 437-454






92-101

140


700-700






Sci72198ndash206















12

141



73ndash80



Crop Res 87 35-42


Biol Chem 193 113-124








June 2012



2012





agriculture

142





















251-262


Part 4(598) 255-293

143
























144





Biochem 44 828-836





173-186














141 241ndash251

145






















Fertil 4 71ndash74




146



Technol 15 121-133












111







93




147

























Sci 78 748-751

148











Netherlands pp 1-32








69






149



P 1-22 275- 323




159-168




Hortic 170 159-168















150



Bioscan 3 1015-1018







Press London










599-612





151






Environ 33 453-467




42 717-722



134 271ndash276









Sci 4 351-358




998

152



22 275ndash292




Crop Res 115 132-139


239-250


663


Biol 59 651-681


Biol 59 651-681










153












J 61 1053-1066






Nutr 47 95-107






291

154






471-175











101093aobplaplu047







155



167-174




















Crop Sci 194 15-25

156



841



286










Med 2 22-30



54 421ndash431






157






Biol 37 255-263



287













Sys 11 243-258



158









Biol 29 1065ndash74










12-22





159






302












145



pp 199ndash244



9 320-325

160





221

















Ecol 5 111-118



161










J 36 41-48



Biol 2 55-60











162






452-476





667





2189-2203








Bot 48 853-859

163



Bot 48 48 1353-1360


















123-129





164



Cambridge UK



Physiol 167 149-156



















165



222




Products Press


















166



1537ndash1547



457










Sci 9 123-132






Physiol 35 785-791



Sys 87 929-939

167





168

6 THESIS APENDECES



Mean

germination rate

(GR)


Error 441949 42 10522

Total 4864 62

Mean germination

velocity (GV)


Error 169671 42 40398

Total 588484 62

Mean

germination

time (GT)


Error 0064 42 0002

Total 0335 62

Mean germination

Index (GI)


Error 441949 42 10523

Total 4864607 62

Final

germination

(FG)


Error 2666 42 63492

Total 34774 62




day


Time 53156 9 5906 4663 0002


Error 531130 400 1327825

Total 1375283 629

Germination

rate per day

Salinity treatment

Time 761502 9 84611 83129 0000


Error 359117 400 0898

Total 2108622 629





velocity (GV)


Error 0035 14 0003

Total 0573

Final mean



Error 1854 14 0132

Total 22716 20


index (GI)


Error 1356 14 0097

Total 111869 20

Final



Error 400 14 28571

Total 7257 20





day


Time 23378 6 3896 136373 0000


Error 2800 98 28571

Total 115540 146

Germination rate

per day


Time 128408 6 21401 394636 0000


Error 5314 98 0054

Total 309855 146

169






Error 2833 12 0236

Total 203115 17

Seedling



Error 9070 14 647867

Total 33875 20




Plant height of

C cajan


Time 126015 8 15751 132488 0000


Error 11413 96 118893

Total 477028 161




Number of

Flowers of C

cajan


Error 264 8 33

Total 419625 11

Number of pods

of C cajan


Error 170 8 2125

Total 1643 11

Number of

seedspod of C cajan


Error 0 8 0

Total 3 11


C cajan


Error 1130 8 14125

Total 20462 11

Weight of



Error 18478 8 2309

Total 611455 11

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan


Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0121 11

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan


Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0005 11


C cajan


Error 0002 8 0000

Total 0162 11

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan


Error 0692 8 0086

Total 3112 11

Carotenoids of

C cajan


Error 0009 8 0001

Total 0025 11

Soluble sugars

of C cajan


Error 00178 8 0002

Total 0061 11

Insoluble

sugars of C

cajan


Error 0008 8 0001

Total 0127 11

Total sugars of

C cajan


Error 0012 8 0001

Total 0031 11

Protein of C cajan


Error 0036 8 0004

Total 0248 11

170




Nodule

associated


cajan


Error 1409 18 0078

Total 37337 20



Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 91030 2 45515 839 0000



Error 6751 42 161

Total 104554 71

Number of

branches of

Z mauritiana

Time 25525 2 127625 25333 0000



Error 16425 42 3910

Total 6575 71

Number of

flowers of

Z mauritiana

Time 73506 2 36753 167777 0000



Error 10166 42 242063

Total 127759 71

Fresh weight of

Shoot of

Z mauritiana

Time 3056862 2 1528431 340777 0000



Error 251167 56 4485

Total 3515820 71


Z mauritiana

Time 784079 2 392039 338932 0000



Error 64774 56 1156690

Total 913855 71

Succulence of

Z mauritiana

Time 0002 2 0001 0214 ns



Error 0199 45 0004

Total 51705 54

Spacific shoot


Time 0000 2 914 0176 0000



Error 0023 45 0001

Total 6413 54

Moisture


Time 1264 2 0632 0243 ns



Error 117146 45 2603

Total 131675 54

Relative growth


Time 1584206 1 1584206 532968 ns



Error 89172 30 2972

Total 4034 36




Chlorophyll a

of Z mauritiana


Error 0006 21 0000

Total 0010 23



Error 0080 21 0003

Total 0117 23

171

Total

chlorophyll of

Z mauritiana


Error 0038 21 0002

Total 0182 23


Z mauritiana


Error 0471 21 0022

Total 1969 23

Total soluble

sugars of

Z mauritiana


Error 107952 21 5140

Total 486223 23


Z mauritiana


Error 238268 21 11346

Total 371274 23




Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 4499 2 2249 28888 0004

Crop 448028 1 448028 2208 ns






Error 10916 12 909732

Total 35


Time 7943 2 3971 6554 ns

Crop 0382 1 0382 0579 ns






Error 8043 12 0670

Total 29439 35




Plant length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 2986 1 2986 75322 0000



Error 317166 8 39645

Total 292428 12

Shoot length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 1069741 1 1069741 30890 0000



Error 27704 8 3463

Total 103376 12

Root length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 19763 1 19763 2671 ns



Error 59186 8 7398

Total 49165 12

Main branches

of Z mauritiana

Crop 33333 1 33333 5797 0042



Error 46 8 575

Total 2888 12

Lateral


Crop 1344083 1 1344083 41356 0000



Error 26 8 325

Total 22465 12

Leaf numbers of

Z mauritiana

Crop 22465 12 98283 96482 0000



Error 8149 8 1018667

172

Total 2037850 12

Shootroot ratio

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 1842 ns



Error 0120 8 0015

Total 27776 12

Plant fresh


Crop 398107 1 398107 577818 0000



Error 5511 8 688982

Total 7248659 12


Crop 87808 1 87808 471436 0000



Error 14900 8 186257

Total 1875710 12

Stem fresh

weight of

Z mauritiana

Crop 46687 1 46687 227539 0000



Error 16414 8 205185

Total 1718530 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 58450 1 58450 2295 0000



Error 203746 8 25468

Total 357145 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 29970 1 29970 19089 0000



Error 125596 8 15699

Total 699711 12

Stem dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 13587 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 50188 8 62735

Total 4689795 12

Root dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 1358787 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 100993 8 12624

Total 124421 12

Leaf dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 2374 1 2374 135380 0000



Error 140313 8 17539

Total 127170 12


Crop 22082 1 22082 5608 0045



Error 31496 8 3937

Total 29872 12


Crop 0005 1 0005 0000 ns



Error 73633 8 9204

Total 28532 12


Crop 235266 1 235266 16502 0003



Error 114051 8 14256

Total 17572 12

Leaf moisture

of Z mauritiana

Crop 130413 1 130413 47746 0000



Error 21850 8 2731

Total 38888 12

173

Relative growth


Crop 0000 1 0000 287467 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0009 12

Relative water

contents of Z

mauritiana

Crop 37381 1 37381 1380 ns



Error 216649 8 27081

Total 50855 12


Crop 0103 1 0103 32466 0000



Error 0025 8 0003

Total 1498 12

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 196164 0000



Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0456 12

Total chlorophyll

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0257 1 0257 53469 0000



Error 0038 8 0004

Total 3736 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 0002 1 0002 0028 ns



Error 0799 8 0099

Total 43067 12

Carotenoids of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0018 1 0018 42747 0000



Error 0003 8 0000

Total 0451 12

Phenol of

Z mauritiana

Crop 24641 1 24641 13168 000



Error 14969 8 1871

Total 6289 12


Crop 0001 1 0001 52288 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0005 12


Crop 200001 1 200001 296 ns



Error 540367 8 67545

Total 814086 11

CAT enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 74171 1 74171 11404 0009



Error 52029 8 65036

Total 441467 11

APX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 191918 1 191918 6693 0032



Error 229383 8 28672

Total 5423 11

GPX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0000 1 0000 0020 ns



Error 0140 8 0017

Total 0353 11


174

of

Z mauritiana



Error 49664 8 6208

Total 85498 11

NR enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 7520 1 75208333333 37253364154 0003



Error 1615 8 0201

Total 10512 11

Nitrate of

Z mauritiana

Crop 003 1 003 3028 ns



Error 0079 8 0009

Total 0130 11




Height of

C cajan

Time 14990 2 7495 235059 0000

Crop 7848 1 7848 42235 0000


Time times Crop 2638 2 1319140 7098 00262




Error 928935 12 77411

Total 29065 35





Crop 1056563 1 1056563 12331 0007



Error 68544 8 8568

Total 334030 12


Crop 808520 1 808520 36580 0000



Error 17682 8 22102

Total 224013 12


Crop 16567 1 16567 0674 ns



Error 196453 8 24556

Total 11133 12

Main branches

of C cajan

Crop 80083 1 80083 64066 0000



Error 10 8 125

Total 335 12

Letral branches

of C cajan

Crop 0 1 0



Error 0 8 0

Total 0 12

Leaf numbers

of C cajan

Crop 1776333 1 1776333 16679 0003



Error 852 8 1065

Total 22342 12


Crop 0385 1 0385 0638 0447



Error 4825 8 0603

Total 264061 12

Crop 76816 1 76816 7494853 0025

175

Plant fresh

weight of

C cajan



Error 81993 8 102491

Total 25941 12


Crop 38270 1 38270 1150145 0009



Error 26619 8 3327

Total 4150 12


C cajan

Crop 16100 1 16100 1462 ns



Error 8806 8 11007

Total 3318 12


C cajan

Crop 0190 1 0190 0248 ns



Error 6115 8 0764

Total 432050 12

Leaf fresh

weight of C cajan

Crop 541363 1 541363 13825 0005



Error 313246 8 39155

Total 7236 12

Stem dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 10323 1 10323 11530 0009



Error 7162 8 0895

Total 125151 12

Root dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 0007 1 0007 012 ns



Error 05 8 0062

Total 3515 12

Leaf dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 9363 1 9363 15649 0004



Error 4786 8 0598

Total 95072 12


Crop 199182 1 19918 6011 0039



Error 265079 8 33134

Total 38272 12

Stem moisture

of C cajan

Crop 100814 1 10081 3290 0107246



Error 245119 8 30639

Total 31036 12

Root moisture

of C cajan

Crop 26266 1 26266 1389 ns



Error 151272 8 18909

Total 58346 12

Leaf moisture

of C cajan

Crop 2623 1 2623 39350 0000



Error 533411 8 66676

Total 36263 12

Relative growth

rate of C cajan

Crop 0000 1 0000 17924 0002



Error 0000 8 0000

Total

Crop 256935 1 256935 1560 ns


176

Electrolyte

leakage of C

cajan


Error 1316923 8 16461

Total 50381 12

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan

Crop 0101 1 0101 7957 0022



Error 0102 8 0012

Total 5060 12

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan

Crop 0017 1 0017 7758 0023



Error 0017 8 0002

Total 1727 12

Total


Crop 0178 1 0178 14819 0004



Error 0096 8 0012

Total 13217 12

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan

Crop 0065 1 0065 0691 ns



Error 0756 8 0094

Total 35143 12


Crop 0021 1 0021 19599 0002



Error 0008 8 0001

Total 1443 12

Phenol of C cajan

Crop 0799 1 0799 3171 ns



Error 2016 8 0252

Total 970313 12

Proline of C cajan

Crop 0008 1 0008 14867 0004



Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0155 12

Protein of C

cajan

Crop 116376 1 116376 3990 ns



Error 233303 8 29163

Total 817371 11

CAT enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0249 1 0249 0121 ns



Error 16362 8 2045

Total 28654 11

APX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 855939 1 855939 4073 ns



Error 1681112 8 210139

Total 17137 11

GPX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0965 1 0965 9265 0160



Error 0833 8 0104

Total 3854 11

SOD enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 4125 1 4125 9731 0142



Error 3391 8 0423

Total 32804 11

Nitrate

reductase

enzyme

Crop 0053 1 0053 0034 ns



177


Total 22808 11

Nitrate of

C cajan

Crop 0039 1 0039 0576 ns



Error 0545 8 0068

Total 0668 11





Time 79704 3 26568 77303 0000

Treatment 979209 1 979209 4702 0455


Error 3332 16 208259

Total 90366 39


Time 1049 3 3498 115444 0000

Treatment 3509 1 3509 5966 0266


Error 9413 16 5883

Total 1284 39


mauritiana

Time 1794893 3 598297 770043 0000

Treatment 19980 1 19980 10152 0057


Error 31488 16 1968

Total 1882468 39

Fruits numbers

of Z mauritiana

Time 324096 3 108032 297941 0000

Treatment 10824 1 10824 64081 0000


Error 2702 16 168913

Total 351833 39



Weight of ten

fruits (FW) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 557113 1 557113 6663 0032

Error 668923 8 83615

Total 1226036 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 4356 1 4356 0321 ns

Error 10862 8 13577

Total 112976 9


Treatment 0534 1 0534 0946 ns

Error 4514 8 0564

Total 5048 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0739 1 0739 4022 ns

Error 1471 8 0184

Total 2211 9

Fruit sugar

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 5041 1 5041 0081 ns

Error 497328 8 62166

Total 502369 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 32041 1 32041 0424 ns

Error 604384 8 75548

Total 636425 9

Total fruit



Error 164 8 205

Total 18 9

Chlorophyll a of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0082 1 0082 1384 0020

Error 0024 4 0006

Total 0105 5

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Treatment 0011 1 0011 8469 0043

Error 0005 4 0001

Total 0016 5


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0152 1 0152 11927 0025

Error 0051 4 0013

Total 0203 5

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0867 ns

Error 0067 4 0017

178

Chlorophyll a b


Total 0082 5


Treatment 0011 1 0011 9719 0035

Error 0004 4 0001

Total 0015 5

Leaf protein of

Z mauritiana


Error 0106 4 0027

Total 0213 5

Leaf sugars

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana


Error 848 4 212

Total 8534 5

Leaf sugars


Treatment 486 1 486 8055 0046

Error 2413 4 0603

Total 7273 5

Total sugars in

leaf of Z

mauritiana


Error 83333 4 20833

Total 85493 5

Leaf phenols of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 8166 1 8166 5665 ns

Error 5766 4 1442

Total 13933 5



Error 3093 4 0773333

Total 4593 5

Soil nitrogen of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0375 1 0375 21634 ns

Error 0693 4 0173

Total 1069 5




Height of Ccajan

Time 700196 2 350098 2716 0000

Treatment 594405 1 594405 16017 0000


Error 1001996 27 37111

Total 705495 59


Ccajan

Time 8353 2 4176 1050050 0000

Treatment 24066 1 24066 18672 0000


Error 348 27 1288

Total 8572 59


Ccajan

Time 289297 2 144648 301277 0000

Treatment 365066 1 365066 0701 ns


Error 14059 27 520733

Total 317415 59

Number of pods

of Ccajan

Time 347682 2 173841 70559 0000

Treatment 159135 1 159135 1558 ns


Error 27574 27 1021276

Total 447407 59




Shoot weight

(FW) of

Ccajan


Error 87444 4 21861

Total 87444 5

Shoot weight

(RW) of Ccajan


Error 13808 4 3452

Total 13808 5

Number of

seeds of

Ccajan


Error 940182 18 52232

Total 940427 19

Weight of seeds

of Ccajan


Error 7585 18 421406

Total 7585 19

179

Chlorophyll a of

Ccajan

Treatment 0001 1 0001 5442 ns

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0002 5

Chlorophyll b

of Ccajan

Treatment 0006 1 0006 9079 0039

Error 0002 4 0001

Total 0008 5

Total

chlorophyll of

Ccajan

Treatment 0017 1 0017 51558 0001

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0019 5


Ccajan

Treatment 0183 1 0183 5532 ns

Error 0132 4 0033

Total 0316 5


Treatment 0001 1 0001 0017 ns

Error 0228 4 0057

Total 0228 5

Leaf sugars of

Ccajan

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0003 ns

Error 1624 4 406

Total 16255 5

Leaf phenols of

Ccajan

Treatment 0201 1 0201 0140 ns

Error 5746 4 1436

Total 5948 5

Leaf nitrogen

of Ccajan

Treatment 1306 1 1306 3062 ns

Error 1706 4 04266

Total 3013 5


carandas



Time 72042 5 14408 55957 0000



Error 3009 24 125385

Total 143777 53

Volume of

canopy of

C carandas

Time 3329 4 0832 38126 000



Error 0207 20 0010

Total 5969 44



Number of



Error 229833 6 38305

Total 10518 8

Number of fruits of

C carandas


Error 201333 6 33555

Total 18201 8

Flower shedding



Error 86519 6 144199

Total 1628166 8


C carandas


Error 1321 6 0220

Total 83953 8

Weight of ten

fruits (DW) of

C carandas


Error 095 6 0158

Total 5305 8

Fruits per plant

(FW) of

C carandas


Error 1435861 6 239310

Total 134563 8

Fruits per plant

(DW) of C carandas


Error 223677 6 37279

Total 9006 8



Error 0946 6 0158

Total 2248 8


180

Diameter of fruit

of C carandas

Error 0956 6 0159

Total 6563 8



Error 0003 6 0000

Total 0115 8

Chlorophyll b of

C carandas


Error 0000 6 0000

Total 0005 8



Error 0005 6 0001

Total 0164 8

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C carandas


Error 0089 6 0015

Total 9751 8



Error 0003 6 0001

Total 0032 8

Leaf Protein of

C carandas


Error 0833 6 0138

Total 3555 8

Soluble sugar of

C carandas


Error 55333 6 9222

Total 290222 8

In soluble sugars

of C carandas


Error 45689 6 7615

Total 641085 8

Total sugar of

C carandas


Error 120676 6 20113

Total 1697574 8



Error 0593 6 0099

Total 15268 8

Leaf Na+ of

C carandas


Error 6 6 1

Total 1352 8



Error 18 6 3

Total 816 8

Leaf K+ Na+

ratio of C carandas


Error 0001 6 0000

Total 0307 8

181

7 Publications

iii




Thesis Approved


PROF DR RAFIQ AHMAD

FPAS FTWAS





iv

CERTIFICATE














RESEARCH SUPERVISOR

PROF DR RAFIQ AHMAD

FPAS FTWAS






v



MRS ARIFA (LATE)

(MY BELOVED MOTHER)


vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS





this thesis






















vii








viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No Title Page no

Acknowledgement vi

Summary xix



Layout of thesis 11

1 Chapter 1 13

11 Introduction 13
























ix

No Title Page no







nodules of C cajan

41











2 Chapter 2 59

21 Introduction 59














x

No Title Page no







2224 Phenols 70

2225 Proline 71






22211 Phenols 76

22212 Proline 77


















xi

No Title Page no





3 Chapter 3 113

31 Introduction 113















4 Conclusion 129

5 References 130

6 Appendices 168

7 Publications 181

xii

LIST OF FIGURES




27



30



36



36



cajan

37




concentrations

37




38




39



40



42




43

xiii





treatment

47




48



49




mauritiana

49



mauritiana

50




79



intervals

80






81



intervals

83

xiv





84



intervals

86



intervals

87




89




100



101


and intercropping

102



system

103



105



106




124

xv





125




126

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page no



18





regimes

19





20







regimes

21



24





25




duration of time

26

xvii

Table Title Page no



of experiment

30


field

99





107




119




120




121






123

xviii



CAT Catalase



















xix

Summary































xx






















purposes

xxi

لاصہ خ



ر علاق ج

ن ی م ب



کی ف طے

خ


ی ملکوں


وئ عمال ہ



کر ا ھ ملا




مک کے مخ








iwEC =اب




ق



ارت





گئ کھی


ت صدی 05اف

ق





05ق

ی گئ کھی

ت ح طور د


ق


کی ں ا رت ی


کرئ مد خ

ن من روج ی

اب سے (NaCl)ت


گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


گئ کھی


ت

بی ق کے ب




گائ

کر ا ھ ملا



ک غ کی خد ت




سی ت آت



وئ ہ


کر ا ھ ملا



گائ


وں اق

ے دوپ ج گئ





ائ کی می ی

ائ ےجی






کے ب ڑھوب

xxii




ش ھی ی

ت




کر ا ھ ملا




ب ما ب وں

ش دی ی ولی

ے پ

وئ ج خاضل ہ



گائ

کر ا ھ ملا




ائ

ی وئ ں ہ ہی




اف ا اض مات




ط ے ت گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


کی ب ڑھوب





ی وئ ر ہ



ی اور پ

ائ علی

ں ف مک( می



ارت



ائ کی می ی





ں ف ی وں می




ی سے ض ج

ی وئ ر ہ


کرئ زب چ


وئ ےہ





ت ف





گائ

کر ا ھ ملا





کی آمدئ وں




عئصت



ن اور غ مکی

دل ں ے معی


1
































2



























1999)





3










2013 Li et al 2014)








Prieto et al 2012)














4
























development







5

































6








cultural practices























7




















Ismail 1993)












8
























and cellular levels









9

































10













condition

11

LAYOUT OF THESIS
























intervals



12








13

1 Chapter 1




11 Introduction


























14




al 2010 2011 2014)





environment

15

12 Experiment No 1


























16


following formula


days (1 - 7)


(1962)


experiment








17




I)














18




01 09

02 16

03 35

04 42

05 58

06 62

07 79

08 88

09 99

10 101

11 112

12 128

13 131

14 145

15 159

16 168


19




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day



















Time (days) 13322



20




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day



















Time (days) 0378



21





Sea Salt



















LSD005 5344 3312 0064 5344 1313



22

13 Experiment No 2









No 1

















23














24



0 04

005 09

01 16

015 24

02 32

025 39

03 42


25



Sea salt

ECiw (dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day











25

26



Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day











27


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42

Germ

ination Index(s

eedd

ays

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Fin

al germ

ination (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Coeff

icie

nt of

germ

ination v

elo

city

(seedd

ays

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42G

erm

ination tim

e (

Days

)

0

1

2

3

4

LSD005 = 0086

a = 0664 b = 1572

R2 = 0905 n =21

LSD005 = 062

a = 1239

b = 9836

R2 = 0894 n=21

LSD005 = 053

a = 8560b = -2272

R2 = 0969 n=21

RGF = 100-200 (Ke -005) Ke = 030




28

14 Experiment No 3

















29









6578 r = 09810 F = 15358 (p lt 00001)



1422 Shoot height







128893 (p lt 0001)



30



000001)


0 04 05

005 09 161

01 16 278

015 24 354

02 32 433

025 39 483

03 42 552





e f


)

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3

Shoot le

ngth

(cm

)

0

2

4

6

8

10ab

c

de

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3Seedlin

g e

merg

ence (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100a

bb

c

d

A B

31

15 Experiment No 4















()

ECiw ( dSm-1) of

irrigation water


end of experiment














32






Experiment No 1






















33
















iii Protein content











34































35








iii Protein





35dSm-1)

36

Months (2009)


Valu

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


oC)

High Temp (oC)




Time (Weeks)

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Pla

nt heig

ht (c

m)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

43 38 35 28 16 Control




37

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Initial Final

a

b b

c c cab b

c c cC 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht

(g)

012345 a

bb

bc ca a ab b c c

Dry weightMoisture




Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Succu

lance

(

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

RG

R (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

SS

L (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

ab

b b

c c

a

b bc c c

a

b b

c c c

a a a ab

c





38


Control 16 28 35

Tota

l seeds (

Pla

nt-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 Seed w

eig

ht (g

pla

nt -1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 a

b

cc

a

a

b

b

b c

c

a

b

a

c c

Flowers

Pods





005)

39

Sea salt (ECe=dSm-1

)

Control 16 28 35

Caro

tinoid

s (

mg g

-1 F

W)

000

005

010

015

020

025

030

Chlo

rophyll

(mg g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

ab

ratio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

b

a

cd

b

a

c

d

a

b

c

d

a

a

ab

b




40




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 16 28 35

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

a ab b

a a

b b

a ab b

a

b

ab

c

SoluableInsoluable

41

16 Experiment No 5





















C cajan








42










NaCl (ECw= dSm

-1)

06 9 188 242 306 366 423

Rh

izo

bia

l co

lonie

s (l

og

10)

0

1

2

3

4 a a

b

c c

d

e




43



188

423 90

Control

366

306 242

44

17 Experiment No 6


















of irrigation water



irrigation


04 63 72

06 101 111






45












period













46



























47

Control 72 111

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Dry

weig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Num

ber

of bra

nches

3

6

9

12

15

18

Heig

ht (c

m)

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160


AcBb

Ba

AcBb Ba

AcBb Ba

Ac

BbBa





48


uccula

nce (

g g

-1 D

W)

00

03

06

09

12

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

SS

L (

cm

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Control 72 111

Mois

ture

(

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Control 72 111

RG

R (

mg g

-1 d

ay

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

a a aa a a a a a a

a aa a a a a a


b

b b

c





49

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Num

ber

of flow

ers

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 60 days120 days

Ac

BbBa




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(mg g

-1)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

bba

bba

bb

a

chl b chl a ab

ab

ra

tio

00

05

10

15

20




005)

50




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 04 06

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Solu

ble

sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

3

6

9

12

15

18a

a

bb

b b

Control 72 111

51

18 Discussion
































52












developmental stage





















53

































54




stress




























55

































56


































57

















to salt stress















58












responses

59

2 Chapter 2


21 Introduction























60

22 Experiment No 7

























61















period in tap water






rhizosphere










62




























63











chapter 1

















64












in chapter 1

22113 Enzymes Assay

















65



ii Catalase (CAT)






degC












266 mM-1cm-1)








66



spectrophotometer

67





















i Fresh weight









68





ii Dry weight












ratio (SWR)













69





system

v Plant moisture








vi Plant Succulence















70













ii Carotinoids









2224 Phenols







71

2225 Proline







system








2227 Enzyme essays





Appendix-XII

i Catalase (CAT)





72







values
















73
















i Fresh weight









(Plt005)




significant result

74






ii Dry weight








ratio (SWR)
















75

v Plant moisture






vi Plant succulence





















76







ii Carotenoids














22211 Phenols







77

22212 Proline






results










22214 Enzyme assay





Appendix-XIV

i Catalase (CAT)






78





















79


No o

f le

aves

0

20

40

60

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

2404

th day

Cajanus cajan

a

RootShoot

ab

a

a

b

a

a

8th

day





No of

leav

es

0

200

400

600

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

Ziziphus mauritiana

RootShoot

4th

day 8th

days

b b

a a

a

b

cc

80

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fre

sh w

eight

(g)

100

200

300

400

500

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

a

b

c

a

b b aa

b

b

c c

a

bc

a

c

ba

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

2

4

6

8

10

12

Fre

ah w

eight

(g)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

aa

b

a

a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

a

c

b

a a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Cajanus cajan




81




day irrigation



Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

01

02

03

04

05

06

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

005

010

015

020

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

05

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

b

a

bb

a

b

aa

a aa

b

a

bb

c

b

a

bb

b

aa a

ba

bc

4th day

8th day

82


Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

2

4

6

8

10

12

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

002

004

006

008

010

012

014

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

5

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Cajanus cajan

a aab

a aaa

a

bba

a

b b

c

a aab

a

bbb

abbb

aa

bc

8th day

4th day

83

Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

Ch

loro

phyll

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25Chl ab

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

a

b

a

b

a ab

b

Chl aChl b


4th and 8th



Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15ab

ab

Cajanus cajan

bb b

a

a

b

cc

bb b

a

84

Ele

ctro

lyte

lea

kag

e(

)

0

5

10

15

4th

day 8th

dayP

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

Sole Intercrop

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a a

a

b b ba

a

b

c

d





p lt 005)

85


E

lect

roly

te l

eakag

e(

)

0

20

40

60

80

4th

day 8th

day

Phen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

000

003

006

009

012

015

018

Sole Intercrop

Cajanus cajan

a aa

a

a a aa

aa a

a

86

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

20

40

60

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a aa a

a

a a a

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

4th

day 8th

dayCajanus cajan

ab

a

c

a

b

cc





87

Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

AP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

GP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

bc

c

a

b

cc

a

c

b

b

b bb

a





88


Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

4th

day 8th

dayG

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

Cajanus cajan

aA

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

bb

b

aaa

b

a

bbb

a

c

a

b

89

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

14

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

4th

day

Nitrate reductaseNO

3

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

b

c

cb

b

b

a

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

4th

dayCajanas cajan

a

bb

b

aa

aa






005)

90

23 Experiment No 8






1










deciduas etc

2313 Soil analysis





i Bulk density


following formula


91

ii Soil porosity


following formula
















Fiesta Water Park









92






















93


















chapter 1







94




2317 Fruit analysis

i Protein in fruit


in chapter 1




















95





using formula





equation as








plot 2000








96



















sole crop









sole crop

97




























98







of sole crop







(LEC)






9994







99




2 pH 8666plusmn0136










100

Ziziphus mauritiana

Days

0 60 120

Volu

me

(m3)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Sole Intercrop

a

a

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c

Cajanus cajan

Days

0 60 120

Bra

nch

es (

)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Sole Intercrop

aa

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c




101

Ziziphus mauritiana

Fresh Dry

Fru

it w

eig

ht

(g)

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120 180

Nu

mb

er o

f F

ruit

s

0

100

200

300

Sole Intercrop

a

b

a

b

c

c

dd

Cajanus cajan

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Pods

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Flo

wer

s

0

50

100

150

Sole Intercrop

Days

aa

bb

c c

Sole Intercrop

Num

ber

of

See

ds

0

100

200

300

400

500

See

d W

eight

(g)

0

10

20

30

40

50





102

Ziziphus mauritiana

Cajanus cajan




Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

noid

s (m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03C

hlo

rophyl

l (m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

no

ids

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

ab

rat

io

0

1

2

3

4ab

ab

103

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f S

ug

ars

(mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





104


Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

05

10

15

20

Lea

f S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

105

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Fru

it P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Fru

it P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

Fru

it S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





106

Z mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil

Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil




107




reference to Height

Formulated with

reference to Total

Chlorophyll






Intercropped

Total LER 1977 2543 2152



107

108

24 Discussion























leguminous plants








109



















2013)














110
















2006 Sofo et al 2005)











1996)






111

































112





















113

3 Chapter 3



saline land

31 Introduction






















waste land

114

32 Experiment No 9









3212 Plant material



















115










selected fruits



of flowers)




ii Soluble sugars



iii Protein content



chapter 1

iv Soluble phenols



116







Na+ (ppm) = 0016135x1879824

K+ (ppm) = 0244346x1314603

117













irrigated plants
















118

























salinity

119



Treatment

Sea salt ()


(dSm-1)


03 42 48

04 61 68

06 99 112

08 129 142


120


sea salt

Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



irrigation



cm m3 cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3 increase over

initial values

increase

decrease

over control






LSD0 05

Salinity


91

172

002

0005


120

121



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





122


Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

Control 1911plusmn6


99 1110plusmn5


129 8754plusmn10



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Time 168 016



123



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)


shedding

Weight of

Ten

fruit(fresh)

Weight of

Ten

fruit(dry)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(fresh)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(dry)

length

fruit

diameter

fruit





LSD0 05 Salinity 1514 1417 929 115 097 3785 1494 0971 097



123

124

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Car

ote

nio

ds

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35

ab

Chl a Chl b

a

a

a a

b

bcbc

a

b

c

a a

b





125

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ph

eno

ls (

mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

1

2

3

4

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

30

60

90

120


a

a

a

a

a

a

b

b

b

c

ab

a

a

b




126

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ions

(mg

g-1

DW

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

KN

a ra

tio

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Na K KNa

c

a

b

b

a

c

a

b

c




127

33 Discussion





























128


al 2004)

























129

4 Conclusions













130

5 References





Bot 47 813-818


















131













618






3116







132



J Bot 28 145-149
















Environ 74 19-31







133

























134



Bot 43 1513-1520



Bot 43 1513-1520



Agric 14 293-298








Exp Bot 65 1229-1240






109 372-381

135











J Res 15 35-40



424









June 13 1999



136








248-254



248-254


Hall Inc New Jersey









York pp 125-179




137





Sci Asia 30 247-253


550

















348

138



Bot 38 619-630



Rodale Press















26 371-376




139



Res 100 249-256




Exp Bot 63 3415-3428








2269




Prot 45 437-454






92-101

140


700-700






Sci72198ndash206















12

141



73ndash80



Crop Res 87 35-42


Biol Chem 193 113-124








June 2012



2012





agriculture

142





















251-262


Part 4(598) 255-293

143
























144





Biochem 44 828-836





173-186














141 241ndash251

145






















Fertil 4 71ndash74




146



Technol 15 121-133












111







93




147

























Sci 78 748-751

148











Netherlands pp 1-32








69






149



P 1-22 275- 323




159-168




Hortic 170 159-168















150



Bioscan 3 1015-1018







Press London










599-612





151






Environ 33 453-467




42 717-722



134 271ndash276









Sci 4 351-358




998

152



22 275ndash292




Crop Res 115 132-139


239-250


663


Biol 59 651-681


Biol 59 651-681










153












J 61 1053-1066






Nutr 47 95-107






291

154






471-175











101093aobplaplu047







155



167-174




















Crop Sci 194 15-25

156



841



286










Med 2 22-30



54 421ndash431






157






Biol 37 255-263



287













Sys 11 243-258



158









Biol 29 1065ndash74










12-22





159






302












145



pp 199ndash244



9 320-325

160





221

















Ecol 5 111-118



161










J 36 41-48



Biol 2 55-60











162






452-476





667





2189-2203








Bot 48 853-859

163



Bot 48 48 1353-1360


















123-129





164



Cambridge UK



Physiol 167 149-156



















165



222




Products Press


















166



1537ndash1547



457










Sci 9 123-132






Physiol 35 785-791



Sys 87 929-939

167





168

6 THESIS APENDECES



Mean

germination rate

(GR)


Error 441949 42 10522

Total 4864 62

Mean germination

velocity (GV)


Error 169671 42 40398

Total 588484 62

Mean

germination

time (GT)


Error 0064 42 0002

Total 0335 62

Mean germination

Index (GI)


Error 441949 42 10523

Total 4864607 62

Final

germination

(FG)


Error 2666 42 63492

Total 34774 62




day


Time 53156 9 5906 4663 0002


Error 531130 400 1327825

Total 1375283 629

Germination

rate per day

Salinity treatment

Time 761502 9 84611 83129 0000


Error 359117 400 0898

Total 2108622 629





velocity (GV)


Error 0035 14 0003

Total 0573

Final mean



Error 1854 14 0132

Total 22716 20


index (GI)


Error 1356 14 0097

Total 111869 20

Final



Error 400 14 28571

Total 7257 20





day


Time 23378 6 3896 136373 0000


Error 2800 98 28571

Total 115540 146

Germination rate

per day


Time 128408 6 21401 394636 0000


Error 5314 98 0054

Total 309855 146

169






Error 2833 12 0236

Total 203115 17

Seedling



Error 9070 14 647867

Total 33875 20




Plant height of

C cajan


Time 126015 8 15751 132488 0000


Error 11413 96 118893

Total 477028 161




Number of

Flowers of C

cajan


Error 264 8 33

Total 419625 11

Number of pods

of C cajan


Error 170 8 2125

Total 1643 11

Number of

seedspod of C cajan


Error 0 8 0

Total 3 11


C cajan


Error 1130 8 14125

Total 20462 11

Weight of



Error 18478 8 2309

Total 611455 11

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan


Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0121 11

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan


Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0005 11


C cajan


Error 0002 8 0000

Total 0162 11

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan


Error 0692 8 0086

Total 3112 11

Carotenoids of

C cajan


Error 0009 8 0001

Total 0025 11

Soluble sugars

of C cajan


Error 00178 8 0002

Total 0061 11

Insoluble

sugars of C

cajan


Error 0008 8 0001

Total 0127 11

Total sugars of

C cajan


Error 0012 8 0001

Total 0031 11

Protein of C cajan


Error 0036 8 0004

Total 0248 11

170




Nodule

associated


cajan


Error 1409 18 0078

Total 37337 20



Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 91030 2 45515 839 0000



Error 6751 42 161

Total 104554 71

Number of

branches of

Z mauritiana

Time 25525 2 127625 25333 0000



Error 16425 42 3910

Total 6575 71

Number of

flowers of

Z mauritiana

Time 73506 2 36753 167777 0000



Error 10166 42 242063

Total 127759 71

Fresh weight of

Shoot of

Z mauritiana

Time 3056862 2 1528431 340777 0000



Error 251167 56 4485

Total 3515820 71


Z mauritiana

Time 784079 2 392039 338932 0000



Error 64774 56 1156690

Total 913855 71

Succulence of

Z mauritiana

Time 0002 2 0001 0214 ns



Error 0199 45 0004

Total 51705 54

Spacific shoot


Time 0000 2 914 0176 0000



Error 0023 45 0001

Total 6413 54

Moisture


Time 1264 2 0632 0243 ns



Error 117146 45 2603

Total 131675 54

Relative growth


Time 1584206 1 1584206 532968 ns



Error 89172 30 2972

Total 4034 36




Chlorophyll a

of Z mauritiana


Error 0006 21 0000

Total 0010 23



Error 0080 21 0003

Total 0117 23

171

Total

chlorophyll of

Z mauritiana


Error 0038 21 0002

Total 0182 23


Z mauritiana


Error 0471 21 0022

Total 1969 23

Total soluble

sugars of

Z mauritiana


Error 107952 21 5140

Total 486223 23


Z mauritiana


Error 238268 21 11346

Total 371274 23




Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 4499 2 2249 28888 0004

Crop 448028 1 448028 2208 ns






Error 10916 12 909732

Total 35


Time 7943 2 3971 6554 ns

Crop 0382 1 0382 0579 ns






Error 8043 12 0670

Total 29439 35




Plant length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 2986 1 2986 75322 0000



Error 317166 8 39645

Total 292428 12

Shoot length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 1069741 1 1069741 30890 0000



Error 27704 8 3463

Total 103376 12

Root length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 19763 1 19763 2671 ns



Error 59186 8 7398

Total 49165 12

Main branches

of Z mauritiana

Crop 33333 1 33333 5797 0042



Error 46 8 575

Total 2888 12

Lateral


Crop 1344083 1 1344083 41356 0000



Error 26 8 325

Total 22465 12

Leaf numbers of

Z mauritiana

Crop 22465 12 98283 96482 0000



Error 8149 8 1018667

172

Total 2037850 12

Shootroot ratio

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 1842 ns



Error 0120 8 0015

Total 27776 12

Plant fresh


Crop 398107 1 398107 577818 0000



Error 5511 8 688982

Total 7248659 12


Crop 87808 1 87808 471436 0000



Error 14900 8 186257

Total 1875710 12

Stem fresh

weight of

Z mauritiana

Crop 46687 1 46687 227539 0000



Error 16414 8 205185

Total 1718530 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 58450 1 58450 2295 0000



Error 203746 8 25468

Total 357145 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 29970 1 29970 19089 0000



Error 125596 8 15699

Total 699711 12

Stem dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 13587 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 50188 8 62735

Total 4689795 12

Root dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 1358787 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 100993 8 12624

Total 124421 12

Leaf dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 2374 1 2374 135380 0000



Error 140313 8 17539

Total 127170 12


Crop 22082 1 22082 5608 0045



Error 31496 8 3937

Total 29872 12


Crop 0005 1 0005 0000 ns



Error 73633 8 9204

Total 28532 12


Crop 235266 1 235266 16502 0003



Error 114051 8 14256

Total 17572 12

Leaf moisture

of Z mauritiana

Crop 130413 1 130413 47746 0000



Error 21850 8 2731

Total 38888 12

173

Relative growth


Crop 0000 1 0000 287467 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0009 12

Relative water

contents of Z

mauritiana

Crop 37381 1 37381 1380 ns



Error 216649 8 27081

Total 50855 12


Crop 0103 1 0103 32466 0000



Error 0025 8 0003

Total 1498 12

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 196164 0000



Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0456 12

Total chlorophyll

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0257 1 0257 53469 0000



Error 0038 8 0004

Total 3736 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 0002 1 0002 0028 ns



Error 0799 8 0099

Total 43067 12

Carotenoids of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0018 1 0018 42747 0000



Error 0003 8 0000

Total 0451 12

Phenol of

Z mauritiana

Crop 24641 1 24641 13168 000



Error 14969 8 1871

Total 6289 12


Crop 0001 1 0001 52288 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0005 12


Crop 200001 1 200001 296 ns



Error 540367 8 67545

Total 814086 11

CAT enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 74171 1 74171 11404 0009



Error 52029 8 65036

Total 441467 11

APX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 191918 1 191918 6693 0032



Error 229383 8 28672

Total 5423 11

GPX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0000 1 0000 0020 ns



Error 0140 8 0017

Total 0353 11


174

of

Z mauritiana



Error 49664 8 6208

Total 85498 11

NR enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 7520 1 75208333333 37253364154 0003



Error 1615 8 0201

Total 10512 11

Nitrate of

Z mauritiana

Crop 003 1 003 3028 ns



Error 0079 8 0009

Total 0130 11




Height of

C cajan

Time 14990 2 7495 235059 0000

Crop 7848 1 7848 42235 0000


Time times Crop 2638 2 1319140 7098 00262




Error 928935 12 77411

Total 29065 35





Crop 1056563 1 1056563 12331 0007



Error 68544 8 8568

Total 334030 12


Crop 808520 1 808520 36580 0000



Error 17682 8 22102

Total 224013 12


Crop 16567 1 16567 0674 ns



Error 196453 8 24556

Total 11133 12

Main branches

of C cajan

Crop 80083 1 80083 64066 0000



Error 10 8 125

Total 335 12

Letral branches

of C cajan

Crop 0 1 0



Error 0 8 0

Total 0 12

Leaf numbers

of C cajan

Crop 1776333 1 1776333 16679 0003



Error 852 8 1065

Total 22342 12


Crop 0385 1 0385 0638 0447



Error 4825 8 0603

Total 264061 12

Crop 76816 1 76816 7494853 0025

175

Plant fresh

weight of

C cajan



Error 81993 8 102491

Total 25941 12


Crop 38270 1 38270 1150145 0009



Error 26619 8 3327

Total 4150 12


C cajan

Crop 16100 1 16100 1462 ns



Error 8806 8 11007

Total 3318 12


C cajan

Crop 0190 1 0190 0248 ns



Error 6115 8 0764

Total 432050 12

Leaf fresh

weight of C cajan

Crop 541363 1 541363 13825 0005



Error 313246 8 39155

Total 7236 12

Stem dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 10323 1 10323 11530 0009



Error 7162 8 0895

Total 125151 12

Root dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 0007 1 0007 012 ns



Error 05 8 0062

Total 3515 12

Leaf dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 9363 1 9363 15649 0004



Error 4786 8 0598

Total 95072 12


Crop 199182 1 19918 6011 0039



Error 265079 8 33134

Total 38272 12

Stem moisture

of C cajan

Crop 100814 1 10081 3290 0107246



Error 245119 8 30639

Total 31036 12

Root moisture

of C cajan

Crop 26266 1 26266 1389 ns



Error 151272 8 18909

Total 58346 12

Leaf moisture

of C cajan

Crop 2623 1 2623 39350 0000



Error 533411 8 66676

Total 36263 12

Relative growth

rate of C cajan

Crop 0000 1 0000 17924 0002



Error 0000 8 0000

Total

Crop 256935 1 256935 1560 ns


176

Electrolyte

leakage of C

cajan


Error 1316923 8 16461

Total 50381 12

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan

Crop 0101 1 0101 7957 0022



Error 0102 8 0012

Total 5060 12

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan

Crop 0017 1 0017 7758 0023



Error 0017 8 0002

Total 1727 12

Total


Crop 0178 1 0178 14819 0004



Error 0096 8 0012

Total 13217 12

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan

Crop 0065 1 0065 0691 ns



Error 0756 8 0094

Total 35143 12


Crop 0021 1 0021 19599 0002



Error 0008 8 0001

Total 1443 12

Phenol of C cajan

Crop 0799 1 0799 3171 ns



Error 2016 8 0252

Total 970313 12

Proline of C cajan

Crop 0008 1 0008 14867 0004



Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0155 12

Protein of C

cajan

Crop 116376 1 116376 3990 ns



Error 233303 8 29163

Total 817371 11

CAT enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0249 1 0249 0121 ns



Error 16362 8 2045

Total 28654 11

APX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 855939 1 855939 4073 ns



Error 1681112 8 210139

Total 17137 11

GPX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0965 1 0965 9265 0160



Error 0833 8 0104

Total 3854 11

SOD enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 4125 1 4125 9731 0142



Error 3391 8 0423

Total 32804 11

Nitrate

reductase

enzyme

Crop 0053 1 0053 0034 ns



177


Total 22808 11

Nitrate of

C cajan

Crop 0039 1 0039 0576 ns



Error 0545 8 0068

Total 0668 11





Time 79704 3 26568 77303 0000

Treatment 979209 1 979209 4702 0455


Error 3332 16 208259

Total 90366 39


Time 1049 3 3498 115444 0000

Treatment 3509 1 3509 5966 0266


Error 9413 16 5883

Total 1284 39


mauritiana

Time 1794893 3 598297 770043 0000

Treatment 19980 1 19980 10152 0057


Error 31488 16 1968

Total 1882468 39

Fruits numbers

of Z mauritiana

Time 324096 3 108032 297941 0000

Treatment 10824 1 10824 64081 0000


Error 2702 16 168913

Total 351833 39



Weight of ten

fruits (FW) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 557113 1 557113 6663 0032

Error 668923 8 83615

Total 1226036 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 4356 1 4356 0321 ns

Error 10862 8 13577

Total 112976 9


Treatment 0534 1 0534 0946 ns

Error 4514 8 0564

Total 5048 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0739 1 0739 4022 ns

Error 1471 8 0184

Total 2211 9

Fruit sugar

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 5041 1 5041 0081 ns

Error 497328 8 62166

Total 502369 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 32041 1 32041 0424 ns

Error 604384 8 75548

Total 636425 9

Total fruit



Error 164 8 205

Total 18 9

Chlorophyll a of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0082 1 0082 1384 0020

Error 0024 4 0006

Total 0105 5

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Treatment 0011 1 0011 8469 0043

Error 0005 4 0001

Total 0016 5


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0152 1 0152 11927 0025

Error 0051 4 0013

Total 0203 5

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0867 ns

Error 0067 4 0017

178

Chlorophyll a b


Total 0082 5


Treatment 0011 1 0011 9719 0035

Error 0004 4 0001

Total 0015 5

Leaf protein of

Z mauritiana


Error 0106 4 0027

Total 0213 5

Leaf sugars

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana


Error 848 4 212

Total 8534 5

Leaf sugars


Treatment 486 1 486 8055 0046

Error 2413 4 0603

Total 7273 5

Total sugars in

leaf of Z

mauritiana


Error 83333 4 20833

Total 85493 5

Leaf phenols of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 8166 1 8166 5665 ns

Error 5766 4 1442

Total 13933 5



Error 3093 4 0773333

Total 4593 5

Soil nitrogen of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0375 1 0375 21634 ns

Error 0693 4 0173

Total 1069 5




Height of Ccajan

Time 700196 2 350098 2716 0000

Treatment 594405 1 594405 16017 0000


Error 1001996 27 37111

Total 705495 59


Ccajan

Time 8353 2 4176 1050050 0000

Treatment 24066 1 24066 18672 0000


Error 348 27 1288

Total 8572 59


Ccajan

Time 289297 2 144648 301277 0000

Treatment 365066 1 365066 0701 ns


Error 14059 27 520733

Total 317415 59

Number of pods

of Ccajan

Time 347682 2 173841 70559 0000

Treatment 159135 1 159135 1558 ns


Error 27574 27 1021276

Total 447407 59




Shoot weight

(FW) of

Ccajan


Error 87444 4 21861

Total 87444 5

Shoot weight

(RW) of Ccajan


Error 13808 4 3452

Total 13808 5

Number of

seeds of

Ccajan


Error 940182 18 52232

Total 940427 19

Weight of seeds

of Ccajan


Error 7585 18 421406

Total 7585 19

179

Chlorophyll a of

Ccajan

Treatment 0001 1 0001 5442 ns

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0002 5

Chlorophyll b

of Ccajan

Treatment 0006 1 0006 9079 0039

Error 0002 4 0001

Total 0008 5

Total

chlorophyll of

Ccajan

Treatment 0017 1 0017 51558 0001

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0019 5


Ccajan

Treatment 0183 1 0183 5532 ns

Error 0132 4 0033

Total 0316 5


Treatment 0001 1 0001 0017 ns

Error 0228 4 0057

Total 0228 5

Leaf sugars of

Ccajan

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0003 ns

Error 1624 4 406

Total 16255 5

Leaf phenols of

Ccajan

Treatment 0201 1 0201 0140 ns

Error 5746 4 1436

Total 5948 5

Leaf nitrogen

of Ccajan

Treatment 1306 1 1306 3062 ns

Error 1706 4 04266

Total 3013 5


carandas



Time 72042 5 14408 55957 0000



Error 3009 24 125385

Total 143777 53

Volume of

canopy of

C carandas

Time 3329 4 0832 38126 000



Error 0207 20 0010

Total 5969 44



Number of



Error 229833 6 38305

Total 10518 8

Number of fruits of

C carandas


Error 201333 6 33555

Total 18201 8

Flower shedding



Error 86519 6 144199

Total 1628166 8


C carandas


Error 1321 6 0220

Total 83953 8

Weight of ten

fruits (DW) of

C carandas


Error 095 6 0158

Total 5305 8

Fruits per plant

(FW) of

C carandas


Error 1435861 6 239310

Total 134563 8

Fruits per plant

(DW) of C carandas


Error 223677 6 37279

Total 9006 8



Error 0946 6 0158

Total 2248 8


180

Diameter of fruit

of C carandas

Error 0956 6 0159

Total 6563 8



Error 0003 6 0000

Total 0115 8

Chlorophyll b of

C carandas


Error 0000 6 0000

Total 0005 8



Error 0005 6 0001

Total 0164 8

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C carandas


Error 0089 6 0015

Total 9751 8



Error 0003 6 0001

Total 0032 8

Leaf Protein of

C carandas


Error 0833 6 0138

Total 3555 8

Soluble sugar of

C carandas


Error 55333 6 9222

Total 290222 8

In soluble sugars

of C carandas


Error 45689 6 7615

Total 641085 8

Total sugar of

C carandas


Error 120676 6 20113

Total 1697574 8



Error 0593 6 0099

Total 15268 8

Leaf Na+ of

C carandas


Error 6 6 1

Total 1352 8



Error 18 6 3

Total 816 8

Leaf K+ Na+

ratio of C carandas


Error 0001 6 0000

Total 0307 8

181

7 Publications

iv

CERTIFICATE














RESEARCH SUPERVISOR

PROF DR RAFIQ AHMAD

FPAS FTWAS






v



MRS ARIFA (LATE)

(MY BELOVED MOTHER)


vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS





this thesis






















vii








viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No Title Page no

Acknowledgement vi

Summary xix



Layout of thesis 11

1 Chapter 1 13

11 Introduction 13
























ix

No Title Page no







nodules of C cajan

41











2 Chapter 2 59

21 Introduction 59














x

No Title Page no







2224 Phenols 70

2225 Proline 71






22211 Phenols 76

22212 Proline 77


















xi

No Title Page no





3 Chapter 3 113

31 Introduction 113















4 Conclusion 129

5 References 130

6 Appendices 168

7 Publications 181

xii

LIST OF FIGURES




27



30



36



36



cajan

37




concentrations

37




38




39



40



42




43

xiii





treatment

47




48



49




mauritiana

49



mauritiana

50




79



intervals

80






81



intervals

83

xiv





84



intervals

86



intervals

87




89




100



101


and intercropping

102



system

103



105



106




124

xv





125




126

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page no



18





regimes

19





20







regimes

21



24





25




duration of time

26

xvii

Table Title Page no



of experiment

30


field

99





107




119




120




121






123

xviii



CAT Catalase



















xix

Summary































xx






















purposes

xxi

لاصہ خ



ر علاق ج

ن ی م ب



کی ف طے

خ


ی ملکوں


وئ عمال ہ



کر ا ھ ملا




مک کے مخ








iwEC =اب




ق



ارت





گئ کھی


ت صدی 05اف

ق





05ق

ی گئ کھی

ت ح طور د


ق


کی ں ا رت ی


کرئ مد خ

ن من روج ی

اب سے (NaCl)ت


گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


گئ کھی


ت

بی ق کے ب




گائ

کر ا ھ ملا



ک غ کی خد ت




سی ت آت



وئ ہ


کر ا ھ ملا



گائ


وں اق

ے دوپ ج گئ





ائ کی می ی

ائ ےجی






کے ب ڑھوب

xxii




ش ھی ی

ت




کر ا ھ ملا




ب ما ب وں

ش دی ی ولی

ے پ

وئ ج خاضل ہ



گائ

کر ا ھ ملا




ائ

ی وئ ں ہ ہی




اف ا اض مات




ط ے ت گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


کی ب ڑھوب





ی وئ ر ہ



ی اور پ

ائ علی

ں ف مک( می



ارت



ائ کی می ی





ں ف ی وں می




ی سے ض ج

ی وئ ر ہ


کرئ زب چ


وئ ےہ





ت ف





گائ

کر ا ھ ملا





کی آمدئ وں




عئصت



ن اور غ مکی

دل ں ے معی


1
































2



























1999)





3










2013 Li et al 2014)








Prieto et al 2012)














4
























development







5

































6








cultural practices























7




















Ismail 1993)












8
























and cellular levels









9

































10













condition

11

LAYOUT OF THESIS
























intervals



12








13

1 Chapter 1




11 Introduction


























14




al 2010 2011 2014)





environment

15

12 Experiment No 1


























16


following formula


days (1 - 7)


(1962)


experiment








17




I)














18




01 09

02 16

03 35

04 42

05 58

06 62

07 79

08 88

09 99

10 101

11 112

12 128

13 131

14 145

15 159

16 168


19




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day



















Time (days) 13322



20




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day



















Time (days) 0378



21





Sea Salt



















LSD005 5344 3312 0064 5344 1313



22

13 Experiment No 2









No 1

















23














24



0 04

005 09

01 16

015 24

02 32

025 39

03 42


25



Sea salt

ECiw (dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day











25

26



Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day











27


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42

Germ

ination Index(s

eedd

ays

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Fin

al germ

ination (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Coeff

icie

nt of

germ

ination v

elo

city

(seedd

ays

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42G

erm

ination tim

e (

Days

)

0

1

2

3

4

LSD005 = 0086

a = 0664 b = 1572

R2 = 0905 n =21

LSD005 = 062

a = 1239

b = 9836

R2 = 0894 n=21

LSD005 = 053

a = 8560b = -2272

R2 = 0969 n=21

RGF = 100-200 (Ke -005) Ke = 030




28

14 Experiment No 3

















29









6578 r = 09810 F = 15358 (p lt 00001)



1422 Shoot height







128893 (p lt 0001)



30



000001)


0 04 05

005 09 161

01 16 278

015 24 354

02 32 433

025 39 483

03 42 552





e f


)

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3

Shoot le

ngth

(cm

)

0

2

4

6

8

10ab

c

de

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3Seedlin

g e

merg

ence (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100a

bb

c

d

A B

31

15 Experiment No 4















()

ECiw ( dSm-1) of

irrigation water


end of experiment














32






Experiment No 1






















33
















iii Protein content











34































35








iii Protein





35dSm-1)

36

Months (2009)


Valu

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


oC)

High Temp (oC)




Time (Weeks)

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Pla

nt heig

ht (c

m)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

43 38 35 28 16 Control




37

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Initial Final

a

b b

c c cab b

c c cC 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht

(g)

012345 a

bb

bc ca a ab b c c

Dry weightMoisture




Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Succu

lance

(

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

RG

R (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

SS

L (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

ab

b b

c c

a

b bc c c

a

b b

c c c

a a a ab

c





38


Control 16 28 35

Tota

l seeds (

Pla

nt-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 Seed w

eig

ht (g

pla

nt -1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 a

b

cc

a

a

b

b

b c

c

a

b

a

c c

Flowers

Pods





005)

39

Sea salt (ECe=dSm-1

)

Control 16 28 35

Caro

tinoid

s (

mg g

-1 F

W)

000

005

010

015

020

025

030

Chlo

rophyll

(mg g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

ab

ratio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

b

a

cd

b

a

c

d

a

b

c

d

a

a

ab

b




40




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 16 28 35

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

a ab b

a a

b b

a ab b

a

b

ab

c

SoluableInsoluable

41

16 Experiment No 5





















C cajan








42










NaCl (ECw= dSm

-1)

06 9 188 242 306 366 423

Rh

izo

bia

l co

lonie

s (l

og

10)

0

1

2

3

4 a a

b

c c

d

e




43



188

423 90

Control

366

306 242

44

17 Experiment No 6


















of irrigation water



irrigation


04 63 72

06 101 111






45












period













46



























47

Control 72 111

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Dry

weig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Num

ber

of bra

nches

3

6

9

12

15

18

Heig

ht (c

m)

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160


AcBb

Ba

AcBb Ba

AcBb Ba

Ac

BbBa





48


uccula

nce (

g g

-1 D

W)

00

03

06

09

12

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

SS

L (

cm

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Control 72 111

Mois

ture

(

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Control 72 111

RG

R (

mg g

-1 d

ay

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

a a aa a a a a a a

a aa a a a a a


b

b b

c





49

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Num

ber

of flow

ers

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 60 days120 days

Ac

BbBa




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(mg g

-1)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

bba

bba

bb

a

chl b chl a ab

ab

ra

tio

00

05

10

15

20




005)

50




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 04 06

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Solu

ble

sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

3

6

9

12

15

18a

a

bb

b b

Control 72 111

51

18 Discussion
































52












developmental stage





















53

































54




stress




























55

































56


































57

















to salt stress















58












responses

59

2 Chapter 2


21 Introduction























60

22 Experiment No 7

























61















period in tap water






rhizosphere










62




























63











chapter 1

















64












in chapter 1

22113 Enzymes Assay

















65



ii Catalase (CAT)






degC












266 mM-1cm-1)








66



spectrophotometer

67





















i Fresh weight









68





ii Dry weight












ratio (SWR)













69





system

v Plant moisture








vi Plant Succulence















70













ii Carotinoids









2224 Phenols







71

2225 Proline







system








2227 Enzyme essays





Appendix-XII

i Catalase (CAT)





72







values
















73
















i Fresh weight









(Plt005)




significant result

74






ii Dry weight








ratio (SWR)
















75

v Plant moisture






vi Plant succulence





















76







ii Carotenoids














22211 Phenols







77

22212 Proline






results










22214 Enzyme assay





Appendix-XIV

i Catalase (CAT)






78





















79


No o

f le

aves

0

20

40

60

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

2404

th day

Cajanus cajan

a

RootShoot

ab

a

a

b

a

a

8th

day





No of

leav

es

0

200

400

600

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

Ziziphus mauritiana

RootShoot

4th

day 8th

days

b b

a a

a

b

cc

80

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fre

sh w

eight

(g)

100

200

300

400

500

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

a

b

c

a

b b aa

b

b

c c

a

bc

a

c

ba

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

2

4

6

8

10

12

Fre

ah w

eight

(g)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

aa

b

a

a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

a

c

b

a a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Cajanus cajan




81




day irrigation



Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

01

02

03

04

05

06

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

005

010

015

020

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

05

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

b

a

bb

a

b

aa

a aa

b

a

bb

c

b

a

bb

b

aa a

ba

bc

4th day

8th day

82


Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

2

4

6

8

10

12

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

002

004

006

008

010

012

014

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

5

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Cajanus cajan

a aab

a aaa

a

bba

a

b b

c

a aab

a

bbb

abbb

aa

bc

8th day

4th day

83

Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

Ch

loro

phyll

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25Chl ab

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

a

b

a

b

a ab

b

Chl aChl b


4th and 8th



Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15ab

ab

Cajanus cajan

bb b

a

a

b

cc

bb b

a

84

Ele

ctro

lyte

lea

kag

e(

)

0

5

10

15

4th

day 8th

dayP

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

Sole Intercrop

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a a

a

b b ba

a

b

c

d





p lt 005)

85


E

lect

roly

te l

eakag

e(

)

0

20

40

60

80

4th

day 8th

day

Phen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

000

003

006

009

012

015

018

Sole Intercrop

Cajanus cajan

a aa

a

a a aa

aa a

a

86

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

20

40

60

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a aa a

a

a a a

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

4th

day 8th

dayCajanus cajan

ab

a

c

a

b

cc





87

Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

AP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

GP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

bc

c

a

b

cc

a

c

b

b

b bb

a





88


Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

4th

day 8th

dayG

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

Cajanus cajan

aA

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

bb

b

aaa

b

a

bbb

a

c

a

b

89

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

14

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

4th

day

Nitrate reductaseNO

3

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

b

c

cb

b

b

a

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

4th

dayCajanas cajan

a

bb

b

aa

aa






005)

90

23 Experiment No 8






1










deciduas etc

2313 Soil analysis





i Bulk density


following formula


91

ii Soil porosity


following formula
















Fiesta Water Park









92






















93


















chapter 1







94




2317 Fruit analysis

i Protein in fruit


in chapter 1




















95





using formula





equation as








plot 2000








96



















sole crop









sole crop

97




























98







of sole crop







(LEC)






9994







99




2 pH 8666plusmn0136










100

Ziziphus mauritiana

Days

0 60 120

Volu

me

(m3)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Sole Intercrop

a

a

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c

Cajanus cajan

Days

0 60 120

Bra

nch

es (

)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Sole Intercrop

aa

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c




101

Ziziphus mauritiana

Fresh Dry

Fru

it w

eig

ht

(g)

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120 180

Nu

mb

er o

f F

ruit

s

0

100

200

300

Sole Intercrop

a

b

a

b

c

c

dd

Cajanus cajan

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Pods

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Flo

wer

s

0

50

100

150

Sole Intercrop

Days

aa

bb

c c

Sole Intercrop

Num

ber

of

See

ds

0

100

200

300

400

500

See

d W

eight

(g)

0

10

20

30

40

50





102

Ziziphus mauritiana

Cajanus cajan




Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

noid

s (m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03C

hlo

rophyl

l (m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

no

ids

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

ab

rat

io

0

1

2

3

4ab

ab

103

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f S

ug

ars

(mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





104


Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

05

10

15

20

Lea

f S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

105

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Fru

it P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Fru

it P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

Fru

it S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





106

Z mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil

Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil




107




reference to Height

Formulated with

reference to Total

Chlorophyll






Intercropped

Total LER 1977 2543 2152



107

108

24 Discussion























leguminous plants








109



















2013)














110
















2006 Sofo et al 2005)











1996)






111

































112





















113

3 Chapter 3



saline land

31 Introduction






















waste land

114

32 Experiment No 9









3212 Plant material



















115










selected fruits



of flowers)




ii Soluble sugars



iii Protein content



chapter 1

iv Soluble phenols



116







Na+ (ppm) = 0016135x1879824

K+ (ppm) = 0244346x1314603

117













irrigated plants
















118

























salinity

119



Treatment

Sea salt ()


(dSm-1)


03 42 48

04 61 68

06 99 112

08 129 142


120


sea salt

Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



irrigation



cm m3 cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3 increase over

initial values

increase

decrease

over control






LSD0 05

Salinity


91

172

002

0005


120

121



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





122


Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

Control 1911plusmn6


99 1110plusmn5


129 8754plusmn10



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Time 168 016



123



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)


shedding

Weight of

Ten

fruit(fresh)

Weight of

Ten

fruit(dry)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(fresh)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(dry)

length

fruit

diameter

fruit





LSD0 05 Salinity 1514 1417 929 115 097 3785 1494 0971 097



123

124

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Car

ote

nio

ds

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35

ab

Chl a Chl b

a

a

a a

b

bcbc

a

b

c

a a

b





125

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ph

eno

ls (

mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

1

2

3

4

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

30

60

90

120


a

a

a

a

a

a

b

b

b

c

ab

a

a

b




126

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ions

(mg

g-1

DW

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

KN

a ra

tio

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Na K KNa

c

a

b

b

a

c

a

b

c




127

33 Discussion





























128


al 2004)

























129

4 Conclusions













130

5 References





Bot 47 813-818


















131













618






3116







132



J Bot 28 145-149
















Environ 74 19-31







133

























134



Bot 43 1513-1520



Bot 43 1513-1520



Agric 14 293-298








Exp Bot 65 1229-1240






109 372-381

135











J Res 15 35-40



424









June 13 1999



136








248-254



248-254


Hall Inc New Jersey









York pp 125-179




137





Sci Asia 30 247-253


550

















348

138



Bot 38 619-630



Rodale Press















26 371-376




139



Res 100 249-256




Exp Bot 63 3415-3428








2269




Prot 45 437-454






92-101

140


700-700






Sci72198ndash206















12

141



73ndash80



Crop Res 87 35-42


Biol Chem 193 113-124








June 2012



2012





agriculture

142





















251-262


Part 4(598) 255-293

143
























144





Biochem 44 828-836





173-186














141 241ndash251

145






















Fertil 4 71ndash74




146



Technol 15 121-133












111







93




147

























Sci 78 748-751

148











Netherlands pp 1-32








69






149



P 1-22 275- 323




159-168




Hortic 170 159-168















150



Bioscan 3 1015-1018







Press London










599-612





151






Environ 33 453-467




42 717-722



134 271ndash276









Sci 4 351-358




998

152



22 275ndash292




Crop Res 115 132-139


239-250


663


Biol 59 651-681


Biol 59 651-681










153












J 61 1053-1066






Nutr 47 95-107






291

154






471-175











101093aobplaplu047







155



167-174




















Crop Sci 194 15-25

156



841



286










Med 2 22-30



54 421ndash431






157






Biol 37 255-263



287













Sys 11 243-258



158









Biol 29 1065ndash74










12-22





159






302












145



pp 199ndash244



9 320-325

160





221

















Ecol 5 111-118



161










J 36 41-48



Biol 2 55-60











162






452-476





667





2189-2203








Bot 48 853-859

163



Bot 48 48 1353-1360


















123-129





164



Cambridge UK



Physiol 167 149-156



















165



222




Products Press


















166



1537ndash1547



457










Sci 9 123-132






Physiol 35 785-791



Sys 87 929-939

167





168

6 THESIS APENDECES



Mean

germination rate

(GR)


Error 441949 42 10522

Total 4864 62

Mean germination

velocity (GV)


Error 169671 42 40398

Total 588484 62

Mean

germination

time (GT)


Error 0064 42 0002

Total 0335 62

Mean germination

Index (GI)


Error 441949 42 10523

Total 4864607 62

Final

germination

(FG)


Error 2666 42 63492

Total 34774 62




day


Time 53156 9 5906 4663 0002


Error 531130 400 1327825

Total 1375283 629

Germination

rate per day

Salinity treatment

Time 761502 9 84611 83129 0000


Error 359117 400 0898

Total 2108622 629





velocity (GV)


Error 0035 14 0003

Total 0573

Final mean



Error 1854 14 0132

Total 22716 20


index (GI)


Error 1356 14 0097

Total 111869 20

Final



Error 400 14 28571

Total 7257 20





day


Time 23378 6 3896 136373 0000


Error 2800 98 28571

Total 115540 146

Germination rate

per day


Time 128408 6 21401 394636 0000


Error 5314 98 0054

Total 309855 146

169






Error 2833 12 0236

Total 203115 17

Seedling



Error 9070 14 647867

Total 33875 20




Plant height of

C cajan


Time 126015 8 15751 132488 0000


Error 11413 96 118893

Total 477028 161




Number of

Flowers of C

cajan


Error 264 8 33

Total 419625 11

Number of pods

of C cajan


Error 170 8 2125

Total 1643 11

Number of

seedspod of C cajan


Error 0 8 0

Total 3 11


C cajan


Error 1130 8 14125

Total 20462 11

Weight of



Error 18478 8 2309

Total 611455 11

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan


Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0121 11

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan


Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0005 11


C cajan


Error 0002 8 0000

Total 0162 11

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan


Error 0692 8 0086

Total 3112 11

Carotenoids of

C cajan


Error 0009 8 0001

Total 0025 11

Soluble sugars

of C cajan


Error 00178 8 0002

Total 0061 11

Insoluble

sugars of C

cajan


Error 0008 8 0001

Total 0127 11

Total sugars of

C cajan


Error 0012 8 0001

Total 0031 11

Protein of C cajan


Error 0036 8 0004

Total 0248 11

170




Nodule

associated


cajan


Error 1409 18 0078

Total 37337 20



Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 91030 2 45515 839 0000



Error 6751 42 161

Total 104554 71

Number of

branches of

Z mauritiana

Time 25525 2 127625 25333 0000



Error 16425 42 3910

Total 6575 71

Number of

flowers of

Z mauritiana

Time 73506 2 36753 167777 0000



Error 10166 42 242063

Total 127759 71

Fresh weight of

Shoot of

Z mauritiana

Time 3056862 2 1528431 340777 0000



Error 251167 56 4485

Total 3515820 71


Z mauritiana

Time 784079 2 392039 338932 0000



Error 64774 56 1156690

Total 913855 71

Succulence of

Z mauritiana

Time 0002 2 0001 0214 ns



Error 0199 45 0004

Total 51705 54

Spacific shoot


Time 0000 2 914 0176 0000



Error 0023 45 0001

Total 6413 54

Moisture


Time 1264 2 0632 0243 ns



Error 117146 45 2603

Total 131675 54

Relative growth


Time 1584206 1 1584206 532968 ns



Error 89172 30 2972

Total 4034 36




Chlorophyll a

of Z mauritiana


Error 0006 21 0000

Total 0010 23



Error 0080 21 0003

Total 0117 23

171

Total

chlorophyll of

Z mauritiana


Error 0038 21 0002

Total 0182 23


Z mauritiana


Error 0471 21 0022

Total 1969 23

Total soluble

sugars of

Z mauritiana


Error 107952 21 5140

Total 486223 23


Z mauritiana


Error 238268 21 11346

Total 371274 23




Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 4499 2 2249 28888 0004

Crop 448028 1 448028 2208 ns






Error 10916 12 909732

Total 35


Time 7943 2 3971 6554 ns

Crop 0382 1 0382 0579 ns






Error 8043 12 0670

Total 29439 35




Plant length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 2986 1 2986 75322 0000



Error 317166 8 39645

Total 292428 12

Shoot length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 1069741 1 1069741 30890 0000



Error 27704 8 3463

Total 103376 12

Root length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 19763 1 19763 2671 ns



Error 59186 8 7398

Total 49165 12

Main branches

of Z mauritiana

Crop 33333 1 33333 5797 0042



Error 46 8 575

Total 2888 12

Lateral


Crop 1344083 1 1344083 41356 0000



Error 26 8 325

Total 22465 12

Leaf numbers of

Z mauritiana

Crop 22465 12 98283 96482 0000



Error 8149 8 1018667

172

Total 2037850 12

Shootroot ratio

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 1842 ns



Error 0120 8 0015

Total 27776 12

Plant fresh


Crop 398107 1 398107 577818 0000



Error 5511 8 688982

Total 7248659 12


Crop 87808 1 87808 471436 0000



Error 14900 8 186257

Total 1875710 12

Stem fresh

weight of

Z mauritiana

Crop 46687 1 46687 227539 0000



Error 16414 8 205185

Total 1718530 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 58450 1 58450 2295 0000



Error 203746 8 25468

Total 357145 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 29970 1 29970 19089 0000



Error 125596 8 15699

Total 699711 12

Stem dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 13587 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 50188 8 62735

Total 4689795 12

Root dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 1358787 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 100993 8 12624

Total 124421 12

Leaf dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 2374 1 2374 135380 0000



Error 140313 8 17539

Total 127170 12


Crop 22082 1 22082 5608 0045



Error 31496 8 3937

Total 29872 12


Crop 0005 1 0005 0000 ns



Error 73633 8 9204

Total 28532 12


Crop 235266 1 235266 16502 0003



Error 114051 8 14256

Total 17572 12

Leaf moisture

of Z mauritiana

Crop 130413 1 130413 47746 0000



Error 21850 8 2731

Total 38888 12

173

Relative growth


Crop 0000 1 0000 287467 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0009 12

Relative water

contents of Z

mauritiana

Crop 37381 1 37381 1380 ns



Error 216649 8 27081

Total 50855 12


Crop 0103 1 0103 32466 0000



Error 0025 8 0003

Total 1498 12

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 196164 0000



Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0456 12

Total chlorophyll

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0257 1 0257 53469 0000



Error 0038 8 0004

Total 3736 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 0002 1 0002 0028 ns



Error 0799 8 0099

Total 43067 12

Carotenoids of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0018 1 0018 42747 0000



Error 0003 8 0000

Total 0451 12

Phenol of

Z mauritiana

Crop 24641 1 24641 13168 000



Error 14969 8 1871

Total 6289 12


Crop 0001 1 0001 52288 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0005 12


Crop 200001 1 200001 296 ns



Error 540367 8 67545

Total 814086 11

CAT enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 74171 1 74171 11404 0009



Error 52029 8 65036

Total 441467 11

APX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 191918 1 191918 6693 0032



Error 229383 8 28672

Total 5423 11

GPX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0000 1 0000 0020 ns



Error 0140 8 0017

Total 0353 11


174

of

Z mauritiana



Error 49664 8 6208

Total 85498 11

NR enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 7520 1 75208333333 37253364154 0003



Error 1615 8 0201

Total 10512 11

Nitrate of

Z mauritiana

Crop 003 1 003 3028 ns



Error 0079 8 0009

Total 0130 11




Height of

C cajan

Time 14990 2 7495 235059 0000

Crop 7848 1 7848 42235 0000


Time times Crop 2638 2 1319140 7098 00262




Error 928935 12 77411

Total 29065 35





Crop 1056563 1 1056563 12331 0007



Error 68544 8 8568

Total 334030 12


Crop 808520 1 808520 36580 0000



Error 17682 8 22102

Total 224013 12


Crop 16567 1 16567 0674 ns



Error 196453 8 24556

Total 11133 12

Main branches

of C cajan

Crop 80083 1 80083 64066 0000



Error 10 8 125

Total 335 12

Letral branches

of C cajan

Crop 0 1 0



Error 0 8 0

Total 0 12

Leaf numbers

of C cajan

Crop 1776333 1 1776333 16679 0003



Error 852 8 1065

Total 22342 12


Crop 0385 1 0385 0638 0447



Error 4825 8 0603

Total 264061 12

Crop 76816 1 76816 7494853 0025

175

Plant fresh

weight of

C cajan



Error 81993 8 102491

Total 25941 12


Crop 38270 1 38270 1150145 0009



Error 26619 8 3327

Total 4150 12


C cajan

Crop 16100 1 16100 1462 ns



Error 8806 8 11007

Total 3318 12


C cajan

Crop 0190 1 0190 0248 ns



Error 6115 8 0764

Total 432050 12

Leaf fresh

weight of C cajan

Crop 541363 1 541363 13825 0005



Error 313246 8 39155

Total 7236 12

Stem dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 10323 1 10323 11530 0009



Error 7162 8 0895

Total 125151 12

Root dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 0007 1 0007 012 ns



Error 05 8 0062

Total 3515 12

Leaf dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 9363 1 9363 15649 0004



Error 4786 8 0598

Total 95072 12


Crop 199182 1 19918 6011 0039



Error 265079 8 33134

Total 38272 12

Stem moisture

of C cajan

Crop 100814 1 10081 3290 0107246



Error 245119 8 30639

Total 31036 12

Root moisture

of C cajan

Crop 26266 1 26266 1389 ns



Error 151272 8 18909

Total 58346 12

Leaf moisture

of C cajan

Crop 2623 1 2623 39350 0000



Error 533411 8 66676

Total 36263 12

Relative growth

rate of C cajan

Crop 0000 1 0000 17924 0002



Error 0000 8 0000

Total

Crop 256935 1 256935 1560 ns


176

Electrolyte

leakage of C

cajan


Error 1316923 8 16461

Total 50381 12

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan

Crop 0101 1 0101 7957 0022



Error 0102 8 0012

Total 5060 12

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan

Crop 0017 1 0017 7758 0023



Error 0017 8 0002

Total 1727 12

Total


Crop 0178 1 0178 14819 0004



Error 0096 8 0012

Total 13217 12

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan

Crop 0065 1 0065 0691 ns



Error 0756 8 0094

Total 35143 12


Crop 0021 1 0021 19599 0002



Error 0008 8 0001

Total 1443 12

Phenol of C cajan

Crop 0799 1 0799 3171 ns



Error 2016 8 0252

Total 970313 12

Proline of C cajan

Crop 0008 1 0008 14867 0004



Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0155 12

Protein of C

cajan

Crop 116376 1 116376 3990 ns



Error 233303 8 29163

Total 817371 11

CAT enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0249 1 0249 0121 ns



Error 16362 8 2045

Total 28654 11

APX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 855939 1 855939 4073 ns



Error 1681112 8 210139

Total 17137 11

GPX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0965 1 0965 9265 0160



Error 0833 8 0104

Total 3854 11

SOD enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 4125 1 4125 9731 0142



Error 3391 8 0423

Total 32804 11

Nitrate

reductase

enzyme

Crop 0053 1 0053 0034 ns



177


Total 22808 11

Nitrate of

C cajan

Crop 0039 1 0039 0576 ns



Error 0545 8 0068

Total 0668 11





Time 79704 3 26568 77303 0000

Treatment 979209 1 979209 4702 0455


Error 3332 16 208259

Total 90366 39


Time 1049 3 3498 115444 0000

Treatment 3509 1 3509 5966 0266


Error 9413 16 5883

Total 1284 39


mauritiana

Time 1794893 3 598297 770043 0000

Treatment 19980 1 19980 10152 0057


Error 31488 16 1968

Total 1882468 39

Fruits numbers

of Z mauritiana

Time 324096 3 108032 297941 0000

Treatment 10824 1 10824 64081 0000


Error 2702 16 168913

Total 351833 39



Weight of ten

fruits (FW) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 557113 1 557113 6663 0032

Error 668923 8 83615

Total 1226036 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 4356 1 4356 0321 ns

Error 10862 8 13577

Total 112976 9


Treatment 0534 1 0534 0946 ns

Error 4514 8 0564

Total 5048 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0739 1 0739 4022 ns

Error 1471 8 0184

Total 2211 9

Fruit sugar

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 5041 1 5041 0081 ns

Error 497328 8 62166

Total 502369 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 32041 1 32041 0424 ns

Error 604384 8 75548

Total 636425 9

Total fruit



Error 164 8 205

Total 18 9

Chlorophyll a of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0082 1 0082 1384 0020

Error 0024 4 0006

Total 0105 5

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Treatment 0011 1 0011 8469 0043

Error 0005 4 0001

Total 0016 5


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0152 1 0152 11927 0025

Error 0051 4 0013

Total 0203 5

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0867 ns

Error 0067 4 0017

178

Chlorophyll a b


Total 0082 5


Treatment 0011 1 0011 9719 0035

Error 0004 4 0001

Total 0015 5

Leaf protein of

Z mauritiana


Error 0106 4 0027

Total 0213 5

Leaf sugars

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana


Error 848 4 212

Total 8534 5

Leaf sugars


Treatment 486 1 486 8055 0046

Error 2413 4 0603

Total 7273 5

Total sugars in

leaf of Z

mauritiana


Error 83333 4 20833

Total 85493 5

Leaf phenols of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 8166 1 8166 5665 ns

Error 5766 4 1442

Total 13933 5



Error 3093 4 0773333

Total 4593 5

Soil nitrogen of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0375 1 0375 21634 ns

Error 0693 4 0173

Total 1069 5




Height of Ccajan

Time 700196 2 350098 2716 0000

Treatment 594405 1 594405 16017 0000


Error 1001996 27 37111

Total 705495 59


Ccajan

Time 8353 2 4176 1050050 0000

Treatment 24066 1 24066 18672 0000


Error 348 27 1288

Total 8572 59


Ccajan

Time 289297 2 144648 301277 0000

Treatment 365066 1 365066 0701 ns


Error 14059 27 520733

Total 317415 59

Number of pods

of Ccajan

Time 347682 2 173841 70559 0000

Treatment 159135 1 159135 1558 ns


Error 27574 27 1021276

Total 447407 59




Shoot weight

(FW) of

Ccajan


Error 87444 4 21861

Total 87444 5

Shoot weight

(RW) of Ccajan


Error 13808 4 3452

Total 13808 5

Number of

seeds of

Ccajan


Error 940182 18 52232

Total 940427 19

Weight of seeds

of Ccajan


Error 7585 18 421406

Total 7585 19

179

Chlorophyll a of

Ccajan

Treatment 0001 1 0001 5442 ns

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0002 5

Chlorophyll b

of Ccajan

Treatment 0006 1 0006 9079 0039

Error 0002 4 0001

Total 0008 5

Total

chlorophyll of

Ccajan

Treatment 0017 1 0017 51558 0001

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0019 5


Ccajan

Treatment 0183 1 0183 5532 ns

Error 0132 4 0033

Total 0316 5


Treatment 0001 1 0001 0017 ns

Error 0228 4 0057

Total 0228 5

Leaf sugars of

Ccajan

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0003 ns

Error 1624 4 406

Total 16255 5

Leaf phenols of

Ccajan

Treatment 0201 1 0201 0140 ns

Error 5746 4 1436

Total 5948 5

Leaf nitrogen

of Ccajan

Treatment 1306 1 1306 3062 ns

Error 1706 4 04266

Total 3013 5


carandas



Time 72042 5 14408 55957 0000



Error 3009 24 125385

Total 143777 53

Volume of

canopy of

C carandas

Time 3329 4 0832 38126 000



Error 0207 20 0010

Total 5969 44



Number of



Error 229833 6 38305

Total 10518 8

Number of fruits of

C carandas


Error 201333 6 33555

Total 18201 8

Flower shedding



Error 86519 6 144199

Total 1628166 8


C carandas


Error 1321 6 0220

Total 83953 8

Weight of ten

fruits (DW) of

C carandas


Error 095 6 0158

Total 5305 8

Fruits per plant

(FW) of

C carandas


Error 1435861 6 239310

Total 134563 8

Fruits per plant

(DW) of C carandas


Error 223677 6 37279

Total 9006 8



Error 0946 6 0158

Total 2248 8


180

Diameter of fruit

of C carandas

Error 0956 6 0159

Total 6563 8



Error 0003 6 0000

Total 0115 8

Chlorophyll b of

C carandas


Error 0000 6 0000

Total 0005 8



Error 0005 6 0001

Total 0164 8

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C carandas


Error 0089 6 0015

Total 9751 8



Error 0003 6 0001

Total 0032 8

Leaf Protein of

C carandas


Error 0833 6 0138

Total 3555 8

Soluble sugar of

C carandas


Error 55333 6 9222

Total 290222 8

In soluble sugars

of C carandas


Error 45689 6 7615

Total 641085 8

Total sugar of

C carandas


Error 120676 6 20113

Total 1697574 8



Error 0593 6 0099

Total 15268 8

Leaf Na+ of

C carandas


Error 6 6 1

Total 1352 8



Error 18 6 3

Total 816 8

Leaf K+ Na+

ratio of C carandas


Error 0001 6 0000

Total 0307 8

181

7 Publications

v



MRS ARIFA (LATE)

(MY BELOVED MOTHER)


vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS





this thesis






















vii








viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No Title Page no

Acknowledgement vi

Summary xix



Layout of thesis 11

1 Chapter 1 13

11 Introduction 13
























ix

No Title Page no







nodules of C cajan

41











2 Chapter 2 59

21 Introduction 59














x

No Title Page no







2224 Phenols 70

2225 Proline 71






22211 Phenols 76

22212 Proline 77


















xi

No Title Page no





3 Chapter 3 113

31 Introduction 113















4 Conclusion 129

5 References 130

6 Appendices 168

7 Publications 181

xii

LIST OF FIGURES




27



30



36



36



cajan

37




concentrations

37




38




39



40



42




43

xiii





treatment

47




48



49




mauritiana

49



mauritiana

50




79



intervals

80






81



intervals

83

xiv





84



intervals

86



intervals

87




89




100



101


and intercropping

102



system

103



105



106




124

xv





125




126

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page no



18





regimes

19





20







regimes

21



24





25




duration of time

26

xvii

Table Title Page no



of experiment

30


field

99





107




119




120




121






123

xviii



CAT Catalase



















xix

Summary































xx






















purposes

xxi

لاصہ خ



ر علاق ج

ن ی م ب



کی ف طے

خ


ی ملکوں


وئ عمال ہ



کر ا ھ ملا




مک کے مخ








iwEC =اب




ق



ارت





گئ کھی


ت صدی 05اف

ق





05ق

ی گئ کھی

ت ح طور د


ق


کی ں ا رت ی


کرئ مد خ

ن من روج ی

اب سے (NaCl)ت


گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


گئ کھی


ت

بی ق کے ب




گائ

کر ا ھ ملا



ک غ کی خد ت




سی ت آت



وئ ہ


کر ا ھ ملا



گائ


وں اق

ے دوپ ج گئ





ائ کی می ی

ائ ےجی






کے ب ڑھوب

xxii




ش ھی ی

ت




کر ا ھ ملا




ب ما ب وں

ش دی ی ولی

ے پ

وئ ج خاضل ہ



گائ

کر ا ھ ملا




ائ

ی وئ ں ہ ہی




اف ا اض مات




ط ے ت گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


کی ب ڑھوب





ی وئ ر ہ



ی اور پ

ائ علی

ں ف مک( می



ارت



ائ کی می ی





ں ف ی وں می




ی سے ض ج

ی وئ ر ہ


کرئ زب چ


وئ ےہ





ت ف





گائ

کر ا ھ ملا





کی آمدئ وں




عئصت



ن اور غ مکی

دل ں ے معی


1
































2



























1999)





3










2013 Li et al 2014)








Prieto et al 2012)














4
























development







5

































6








cultural practices























7




















Ismail 1993)












8
























and cellular levels









9

































10













condition

11

LAYOUT OF THESIS
























intervals



12








13

1 Chapter 1




11 Introduction


























14




al 2010 2011 2014)





environment

15

12 Experiment No 1


























16


following formula


days (1 - 7)


(1962)


experiment








17




I)














18




01 09

02 16

03 35

04 42

05 58

06 62

07 79

08 88

09 99

10 101

11 112

12 128

13 131

14 145

15 159

16 168


19




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day



















Time (days) 13322



20




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day



















Time (days) 0378



21





Sea Salt



















LSD005 5344 3312 0064 5344 1313



22

13 Experiment No 2









No 1

















23














24



0 04

005 09

01 16

015 24

02 32

025 39

03 42


25



Sea salt

ECiw (dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day











25

26



Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day











27


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42

Germ

ination Index(s

eedd

ays

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Fin

al germ

ination (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Coeff

icie

nt of

germ

ination v

elo

city

(seedd

ays

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42G

erm

ination tim

e (

Days

)

0

1

2

3

4

LSD005 = 0086

a = 0664 b = 1572

R2 = 0905 n =21

LSD005 = 062

a = 1239

b = 9836

R2 = 0894 n=21

LSD005 = 053

a = 8560b = -2272

R2 = 0969 n=21

RGF = 100-200 (Ke -005) Ke = 030




28

14 Experiment No 3

















29









6578 r = 09810 F = 15358 (p lt 00001)



1422 Shoot height







128893 (p lt 0001)



30



000001)


0 04 05

005 09 161

01 16 278

015 24 354

02 32 433

025 39 483

03 42 552





e f


)

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3

Shoot le

ngth

(cm

)

0

2

4

6

8

10ab

c

de

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3Seedlin

g e

merg

ence (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100a

bb

c

d

A B

31

15 Experiment No 4















()

ECiw ( dSm-1) of

irrigation water


end of experiment














32






Experiment No 1






















33
















iii Protein content











34































35








iii Protein





35dSm-1)

36

Months (2009)


Valu

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


oC)

High Temp (oC)




Time (Weeks)

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Pla

nt heig

ht (c

m)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

43 38 35 28 16 Control




37

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Initial Final

a

b b

c c cab b

c c cC 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht

(g)

012345 a

bb

bc ca a ab b c c

Dry weightMoisture




Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Succu

lance

(

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

RG

R (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

SS

L (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

ab

b b

c c

a

b bc c c

a

b b

c c c

a a a ab

c





38


Control 16 28 35

Tota

l seeds (

Pla

nt-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 Seed w

eig

ht (g

pla

nt -1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 a

b

cc

a

a

b

b

b c

c

a

b

a

c c

Flowers

Pods





005)

39

Sea salt (ECe=dSm-1

)

Control 16 28 35

Caro

tinoid

s (

mg g

-1 F

W)

000

005

010

015

020

025

030

Chlo

rophyll

(mg g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

ab

ratio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

b

a

cd

b

a

c

d

a

b

c

d

a

a

ab

b




40




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 16 28 35

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

a ab b

a a

b b

a ab b

a

b

ab

c

SoluableInsoluable

41

16 Experiment No 5





















C cajan








42










NaCl (ECw= dSm

-1)

06 9 188 242 306 366 423

Rh

izo

bia

l co

lonie

s (l

og

10)

0

1

2

3

4 a a

b

c c

d

e




43



188

423 90

Control

366

306 242

44

17 Experiment No 6


















of irrigation water



irrigation


04 63 72

06 101 111






45












period













46



























47

Control 72 111

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Dry

weig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Num

ber

of bra

nches

3

6

9

12

15

18

Heig

ht (c

m)

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160


AcBb

Ba

AcBb Ba

AcBb Ba

Ac

BbBa





48


uccula

nce (

g g

-1 D

W)

00

03

06

09

12

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

SS

L (

cm

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Control 72 111

Mois

ture

(

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Control 72 111

RG

R (

mg g

-1 d

ay

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

a a aa a a a a a a

a aa a a a a a


b

b b

c





49

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Num

ber

of flow

ers

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 60 days120 days

Ac

BbBa




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(mg g

-1)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

bba

bba

bb

a

chl b chl a ab

ab

ra

tio

00

05

10

15

20




005)

50




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 04 06

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Solu

ble

sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

3

6

9

12

15

18a

a

bb

b b

Control 72 111

51

18 Discussion
































52












developmental stage





















53

































54




stress




























55

































56


































57

















to salt stress















58












responses

59

2 Chapter 2


21 Introduction























60

22 Experiment No 7

























61















period in tap water






rhizosphere










62




























63











chapter 1

















64












in chapter 1

22113 Enzymes Assay

















65



ii Catalase (CAT)






degC












266 mM-1cm-1)








66



spectrophotometer

67





















i Fresh weight









68





ii Dry weight












ratio (SWR)













69





system

v Plant moisture








vi Plant Succulence















70













ii Carotinoids









2224 Phenols







71

2225 Proline







system








2227 Enzyme essays





Appendix-XII

i Catalase (CAT)





72







values
















73
















i Fresh weight









(Plt005)




significant result

74






ii Dry weight








ratio (SWR)
















75

v Plant moisture






vi Plant succulence





















76







ii Carotenoids














22211 Phenols







77

22212 Proline






results










22214 Enzyme assay





Appendix-XIV

i Catalase (CAT)






78





















79


No o

f le

aves

0

20

40

60

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

2404

th day

Cajanus cajan

a

RootShoot

ab

a

a

b

a

a

8th

day





No of

leav

es

0

200

400

600

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

Ziziphus mauritiana

RootShoot

4th

day 8th

days

b b

a a

a

b

cc

80

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fre

sh w

eight

(g)

100

200

300

400

500

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

a

b

c

a

b b aa

b

b

c c

a

bc

a

c

ba

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

2

4

6

8

10

12

Fre

ah w

eight

(g)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

aa

b

a

a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

a

c

b

a a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Cajanus cajan




81




day irrigation



Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

01

02

03

04

05

06

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

005

010

015

020

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

05

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

b

a

bb

a

b

aa

a aa

b

a

bb

c

b

a

bb

b

aa a

ba

bc

4th day

8th day

82


Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

2

4

6

8

10

12

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

002

004

006

008

010

012

014

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

5

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Cajanus cajan

a aab

a aaa

a

bba

a

b b

c

a aab

a

bbb

abbb

aa

bc

8th day

4th day

83

Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

Ch

loro

phyll

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25Chl ab

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

a

b

a

b

a ab

b

Chl aChl b


4th and 8th



Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15ab

ab

Cajanus cajan

bb b

a

a

b

cc

bb b

a

84

Ele

ctro

lyte

lea

kag

e(

)

0

5

10

15

4th

day 8th

dayP

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

Sole Intercrop

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a a

a

b b ba

a

b

c

d





p lt 005)

85


E

lect

roly

te l

eakag

e(

)

0

20

40

60

80

4th

day 8th

day

Phen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

000

003

006

009

012

015

018

Sole Intercrop

Cajanus cajan

a aa

a

a a aa

aa a

a

86

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

20

40

60

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a aa a

a

a a a

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

4th

day 8th

dayCajanus cajan

ab

a

c

a

b

cc





87

Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

AP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

GP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

bc

c

a

b

cc

a

c

b

b

b bb

a





88


Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

4th

day 8th

dayG

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

Cajanus cajan

aA

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

bb

b

aaa

b

a

bbb

a

c

a

b

89

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

14

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

4th

day

Nitrate reductaseNO

3

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

b

c

cb

b

b

a

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

4th

dayCajanas cajan

a

bb

b

aa

aa






005)

90

23 Experiment No 8






1










deciduas etc

2313 Soil analysis





i Bulk density


following formula


91

ii Soil porosity


following formula
















Fiesta Water Park









92






















93


















chapter 1







94




2317 Fruit analysis

i Protein in fruit


in chapter 1




















95





using formula





equation as








plot 2000








96



















sole crop









sole crop

97




























98







of sole crop







(LEC)






9994







99




2 pH 8666plusmn0136










100

Ziziphus mauritiana

Days

0 60 120

Volu

me

(m3)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Sole Intercrop

a

a

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c

Cajanus cajan

Days

0 60 120

Bra

nch

es (

)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Sole Intercrop

aa

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c




101

Ziziphus mauritiana

Fresh Dry

Fru

it w

eig

ht

(g)

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120 180

Nu

mb

er o

f F

ruit

s

0

100

200

300

Sole Intercrop

a

b

a

b

c

c

dd

Cajanus cajan

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Pods

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Flo

wer

s

0

50

100

150

Sole Intercrop

Days

aa

bb

c c

Sole Intercrop

Num

ber

of

See

ds

0

100

200

300

400

500

See

d W

eight

(g)

0

10

20

30

40

50





102

Ziziphus mauritiana

Cajanus cajan




Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

noid

s (m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03C

hlo

rophyl

l (m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

no

ids

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

ab

rat

io

0

1

2

3

4ab

ab

103

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f S

ug

ars

(mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





104


Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

05

10

15

20

Lea

f S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

105

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Fru

it P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Fru

it P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

Fru

it S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





106

Z mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil

Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil




107




reference to Height

Formulated with

reference to Total

Chlorophyll






Intercropped

Total LER 1977 2543 2152



107

108

24 Discussion























leguminous plants








109



















2013)














110
















2006 Sofo et al 2005)











1996)






111

































112





















113

3 Chapter 3



saline land

31 Introduction






















waste land

114

32 Experiment No 9









3212 Plant material



















115










selected fruits



of flowers)




ii Soluble sugars



iii Protein content



chapter 1

iv Soluble phenols



116







Na+ (ppm) = 0016135x1879824

K+ (ppm) = 0244346x1314603

117













irrigated plants
















118

























salinity

119



Treatment

Sea salt ()


(dSm-1)


03 42 48

04 61 68

06 99 112

08 129 142


120


sea salt

Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



irrigation



cm m3 cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3 increase over

initial values

increase

decrease

over control






LSD0 05

Salinity


91

172

002

0005


120

121



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





122


Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

Control 1911plusmn6


99 1110plusmn5


129 8754plusmn10



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Time 168 016



123



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)


shedding

Weight of

Ten

fruit(fresh)

Weight of

Ten

fruit(dry)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(fresh)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(dry)

length

fruit

diameter

fruit





LSD0 05 Salinity 1514 1417 929 115 097 3785 1494 0971 097



123

124

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Car

ote

nio

ds

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35

ab

Chl a Chl b

a

a

a a

b

bcbc

a

b

c

a a

b





125

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ph

eno

ls (

mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

1

2

3

4

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

30

60

90

120


a

a

a

a

a

a

b

b

b

c

ab

a

a

b




126

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ions

(mg

g-1

DW

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

KN

a ra

tio

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Na K KNa

c

a

b

b

a

c

a

b

c




127

33 Discussion





























128


al 2004)

























129

4 Conclusions













130

5 References





Bot 47 813-818


















131













618






3116







132



J Bot 28 145-149
















Environ 74 19-31







133

























134



Bot 43 1513-1520



Bot 43 1513-1520



Agric 14 293-298








Exp Bot 65 1229-1240






109 372-381

135











J Res 15 35-40



424









June 13 1999



136








248-254



248-254


Hall Inc New Jersey









York pp 125-179




137





Sci Asia 30 247-253


550

















348

138



Bot 38 619-630



Rodale Press















26 371-376




139



Res 100 249-256




Exp Bot 63 3415-3428








2269




Prot 45 437-454






92-101

140


700-700






Sci72198ndash206















12

141



73ndash80



Crop Res 87 35-42


Biol Chem 193 113-124








June 2012



2012





agriculture

142





















251-262


Part 4(598) 255-293

143
























144





Biochem 44 828-836





173-186














141 241ndash251

145






















Fertil 4 71ndash74




146



Technol 15 121-133












111







93




147

























Sci 78 748-751

148











Netherlands pp 1-32








69






149



P 1-22 275- 323




159-168




Hortic 170 159-168















150



Bioscan 3 1015-1018







Press London










599-612





151






Environ 33 453-467




42 717-722



134 271ndash276









Sci 4 351-358




998

152



22 275ndash292




Crop Res 115 132-139


239-250


663


Biol 59 651-681


Biol 59 651-681










153












J 61 1053-1066






Nutr 47 95-107






291

154






471-175











101093aobplaplu047







155



167-174




















Crop Sci 194 15-25

156



841



286










Med 2 22-30



54 421ndash431






157






Biol 37 255-263



287













Sys 11 243-258



158









Biol 29 1065ndash74










12-22





159






302












145



pp 199ndash244



9 320-325

160





221

















Ecol 5 111-118



161










J 36 41-48



Biol 2 55-60











162






452-476





667





2189-2203








Bot 48 853-859

163



Bot 48 48 1353-1360


















123-129





164



Cambridge UK



Physiol 167 149-156



















165



222




Products Press


















166



1537ndash1547



457










Sci 9 123-132






Physiol 35 785-791



Sys 87 929-939

167





168

6 THESIS APENDECES



Mean

germination rate

(GR)


Error 441949 42 10522

Total 4864 62

Mean germination

velocity (GV)


Error 169671 42 40398

Total 588484 62

Mean

germination

time (GT)


Error 0064 42 0002

Total 0335 62

Mean germination

Index (GI)


Error 441949 42 10523

Total 4864607 62

Final

germination

(FG)


Error 2666 42 63492

Total 34774 62




day


Time 53156 9 5906 4663 0002


Error 531130 400 1327825

Total 1375283 629

Germination

rate per day

Salinity treatment

Time 761502 9 84611 83129 0000


Error 359117 400 0898

Total 2108622 629





velocity (GV)


Error 0035 14 0003

Total 0573

Final mean



Error 1854 14 0132

Total 22716 20


index (GI)


Error 1356 14 0097

Total 111869 20

Final



Error 400 14 28571

Total 7257 20





day


Time 23378 6 3896 136373 0000


Error 2800 98 28571

Total 115540 146

Germination rate

per day


Time 128408 6 21401 394636 0000


Error 5314 98 0054

Total 309855 146

169






Error 2833 12 0236

Total 203115 17

Seedling



Error 9070 14 647867

Total 33875 20




Plant height of

C cajan


Time 126015 8 15751 132488 0000


Error 11413 96 118893

Total 477028 161




Number of

Flowers of C

cajan


Error 264 8 33

Total 419625 11

Number of pods

of C cajan


Error 170 8 2125

Total 1643 11

Number of

seedspod of C cajan


Error 0 8 0

Total 3 11


C cajan


Error 1130 8 14125

Total 20462 11

Weight of



Error 18478 8 2309

Total 611455 11

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan


Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0121 11

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan


Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0005 11


C cajan


Error 0002 8 0000

Total 0162 11

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan


Error 0692 8 0086

Total 3112 11

Carotenoids of

C cajan


Error 0009 8 0001

Total 0025 11

Soluble sugars

of C cajan


Error 00178 8 0002

Total 0061 11

Insoluble

sugars of C

cajan


Error 0008 8 0001

Total 0127 11

Total sugars of

C cajan


Error 0012 8 0001

Total 0031 11

Protein of C cajan


Error 0036 8 0004

Total 0248 11

170




Nodule

associated


cajan


Error 1409 18 0078

Total 37337 20



Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 91030 2 45515 839 0000



Error 6751 42 161

Total 104554 71

Number of

branches of

Z mauritiana

Time 25525 2 127625 25333 0000



Error 16425 42 3910

Total 6575 71

Number of

flowers of

Z mauritiana

Time 73506 2 36753 167777 0000



Error 10166 42 242063

Total 127759 71

Fresh weight of

Shoot of

Z mauritiana

Time 3056862 2 1528431 340777 0000



Error 251167 56 4485

Total 3515820 71


Z mauritiana

Time 784079 2 392039 338932 0000



Error 64774 56 1156690

Total 913855 71

Succulence of

Z mauritiana

Time 0002 2 0001 0214 ns



Error 0199 45 0004

Total 51705 54

Spacific shoot


Time 0000 2 914 0176 0000



Error 0023 45 0001

Total 6413 54

Moisture


Time 1264 2 0632 0243 ns



Error 117146 45 2603

Total 131675 54

Relative growth


Time 1584206 1 1584206 532968 ns



Error 89172 30 2972

Total 4034 36




Chlorophyll a

of Z mauritiana


Error 0006 21 0000

Total 0010 23



Error 0080 21 0003

Total 0117 23

171

Total

chlorophyll of

Z mauritiana


Error 0038 21 0002

Total 0182 23


Z mauritiana


Error 0471 21 0022

Total 1969 23

Total soluble

sugars of

Z mauritiana


Error 107952 21 5140

Total 486223 23


Z mauritiana


Error 238268 21 11346

Total 371274 23




Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 4499 2 2249 28888 0004

Crop 448028 1 448028 2208 ns






Error 10916 12 909732

Total 35


Time 7943 2 3971 6554 ns

Crop 0382 1 0382 0579 ns






Error 8043 12 0670

Total 29439 35




Plant length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 2986 1 2986 75322 0000



Error 317166 8 39645

Total 292428 12

Shoot length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 1069741 1 1069741 30890 0000



Error 27704 8 3463

Total 103376 12

Root length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 19763 1 19763 2671 ns



Error 59186 8 7398

Total 49165 12

Main branches

of Z mauritiana

Crop 33333 1 33333 5797 0042



Error 46 8 575

Total 2888 12

Lateral


Crop 1344083 1 1344083 41356 0000



Error 26 8 325

Total 22465 12

Leaf numbers of

Z mauritiana

Crop 22465 12 98283 96482 0000



Error 8149 8 1018667

172

Total 2037850 12

Shootroot ratio

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 1842 ns



Error 0120 8 0015

Total 27776 12

Plant fresh


Crop 398107 1 398107 577818 0000



Error 5511 8 688982

Total 7248659 12


Crop 87808 1 87808 471436 0000



Error 14900 8 186257

Total 1875710 12

Stem fresh

weight of

Z mauritiana

Crop 46687 1 46687 227539 0000



Error 16414 8 205185

Total 1718530 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 58450 1 58450 2295 0000



Error 203746 8 25468

Total 357145 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 29970 1 29970 19089 0000



Error 125596 8 15699

Total 699711 12

Stem dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 13587 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 50188 8 62735

Total 4689795 12

Root dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 1358787 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 100993 8 12624

Total 124421 12

Leaf dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 2374 1 2374 135380 0000



Error 140313 8 17539

Total 127170 12


Crop 22082 1 22082 5608 0045



Error 31496 8 3937

Total 29872 12


Crop 0005 1 0005 0000 ns



Error 73633 8 9204

Total 28532 12


Crop 235266 1 235266 16502 0003



Error 114051 8 14256

Total 17572 12

Leaf moisture

of Z mauritiana

Crop 130413 1 130413 47746 0000



Error 21850 8 2731

Total 38888 12

173

Relative growth


Crop 0000 1 0000 287467 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0009 12

Relative water

contents of Z

mauritiana

Crop 37381 1 37381 1380 ns



Error 216649 8 27081

Total 50855 12


Crop 0103 1 0103 32466 0000



Error 0025 8 0003

Total 1498 12

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 196164 0000



Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0456 12

Total chlorophyll

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0257 1 0257 53469 0000



Error 0038 8 0004

Total 3736 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 0002 1 0002 0028 ns



Error 0799 8 0099

Total 43067 12

Carotenoids of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0018 1 0018 42747 0000



Error 0003 8 0000

Total 0451 12

Phenol of

Z mauritiana

Crop 24641 1 24641 13168 000



Error 14969 8 1871

Total 6289 12


Crop 0001 1 0001 52288 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0005 12


Crop 200001 1 200001 296 ns



Error 540367 8 67545

Total 814086 11

CAT enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 74171 1 74171 11404 0009



Error 52029 8 65036

Total 441467 11

APX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 191918 1 191918 6693 0032



Error 229383 8 28672

Total 5423 11

GPX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0000 1 0000 0020 ns



Error 0140 8 0017

Total 0353 11


174

of

Z mauritiana



Error 49664 8 6208

Total 85498 11

NR enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 7520 1 75208333333 37253364154 0003



Error 1615 8 0201

Total 10512 11

Nitrate of

Z mauritiana

Crop 003 1 003 3028 ns



Error 0079 8 0009

Total 0130 11




Height of

C cajan

Time 14990 2 7495 235059 0000

Crop 7848 1 7848 42235 0000


Time times Crop 2638 2 1319140 7098 00262




Error 928935 12 77411

Total 29065 35





Crop 1056563 1 1056563 12331 0007



Error 68544 8 8568

Total 334030 12


Crop 808520 1 808520 36580 0000



Error 17682 8 22102

Total 224013 12


Crop 16567 1 16567 0674 ns



Error 196453 8 24556

Total 11133 12

Main branches

of C cajan

Crop 80083 1 80083 64066 0000



Error 10 8 125

Total 335 12

Letral branches

of C cajan

Crop 0 1 0



Error 0 8 0

Total 0 12

Leaf numbers

of C cajan

Crop 1776333 1 1776333 16679 0003



Error 852 8 1065

Total 22342 12


Crop 0385 1 0385 0638 0447



Error 4825 8 0603

Total 264061 12

Crop 76816 1 76816 7494853 0025

175

Plant fresh

weight of

C cajan



Error 81993 8 102491

Total 25941 12


Crop 38270 1 38270 1150145 0009



Error 26619 8 3327

Total 4150 12


C cajan

Crop 16100 1 16100 1462 ns



Error 8806 8 11007

Total 3318 12


C cajan

Crop 0190 1 0190 0248 ns



Error 6115 8 0764

Total 432050 12

Leaf fresh

weight of C cajan

Crop 541363 1 541363 13825 0005



Error 313246 8 39155

Total 7236 12

Stem dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 10323 1 10323 11530 0009



Error 7162 8 0895

Total 125151 12

Root dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 0007 1 0007 012 ns



Error 05 8 0062

Total 3515 12

Leaf dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 9363 1 9363 15649 0004



Error 4786 8 0598

Total 95072 12


Crop 199182 1 19918 6011 0039



Error 265079 8 33134

Total 38272 12

Stem moisture

of C cajan

Crop 100814 1 10081 3290 0107246



Error 245119 8 30639

Total 31036 12

Root moisture

of C cajan

Crop 26266 1 26266 1389 ns



Error 151272 8 18909

Total 58346 12

Leaf moisture

of C cajan

Crop 2623 1 2623 39350 0000



Error 533411 8 66676

Total 36263 12

Relative growth

rate of C cajan

Crop 0000 1 0000 17924 0002



Error 0000 8 0000

Total

Crop 256935 1 256935 1560 ns


176

Electrolyte

leakage of C

cajan


Error 1316923 8 16461

Total 50381 12

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan

Crop 0101 1 0101 7957 0022



Error 0102 8 0012

Total 5060 12

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan

Crop 0017 1 0017 7758 0023



Error 0017 8 0002

Total 1727 12

Total


Crop 0178 1 0178 14819 0004



Error 0096 8 0012

Total 13217 12

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan

Crop 0065 1 0065 0691 ns



Error 0756 8 0094

Total 35143 12


Crop 0021 1 0021 19599 0002



Error 0008 8 0001

Total 1443 12

Phenol of C cajan

Crop 0799 1 0799 3171 ns



Error 2016 8 0252

Total 970313 12

Proline of C cajan

Crop 0008 1 0008 14867 0004



Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0155 12

Protein of C

cajan

Crop 116376 1 116376 3990 ns



Error 233303 8 29163

Total 817371 11

CAT enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0249 1 0249 0121 ns



Error 16362 8 2045

Total 28654 11

APX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 855939 1 855939 4073 ns



Error 1681112 8 210139

Total 17137 11

GPX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0965 1 0965 9265 0160



Error 0833 8 0104

Total 3854 11

SOD enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 4125 1 4125 9731 0142



Error 3391 8 0423

Total 32804 11

Nitrate

reductase

enzyme

Crop 0053 1 0053 0034 ns



177


Total 22808 11

Nitrate of

C cajan

Crop 0039 1 0039 0576 ns



Error 0545 8 0068

Total 0668 11





Time 79704 3 26568 77303 0000

Treatment 979209 1 979209 4702 0455


Error 3332 16 208259

Total 90366 39


Time 1049 3 3498 115444 0000

Treatment 3509 1 3509 5966 0266


Error 9413 16 5883

Total 1284 39


mauritiana

Time 1794893 3 598297 770043 0000

Treatment 19980 1 19980 10152 0057


Error 31488 16 1968

Total 1882468 39

Fruits numbers

of Z mauritiana

Time 324096 3 108032 297941 0000

Treatment 10824 1 10824 64081 0000


Error 2702 16 168913

Total 351833 39



Weight of ten

fruits (FW) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 557113 1 557113 6663 0032

Error 668923 8 83615

Total 1226036 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 4356 1 4356 0321 ns

Error 10862 8 13577

Total 112976 9


Treatment 0534 1 0534 0946 ns

Error 4514 8 0564

Total 5048 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0739 1 0739 4022 ns

Error 1471 8 0184

Total 2211 9

Fruit sugar

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 5041 1 5041 0081 ns

Error 497328 8 62166

Total 502369 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 32041 1 32041 0424 ns

Error 604384 8 75548

Total 636425 9

Total fruit



Error 164 8 205

Total 18 9

Chlorophyll a of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0082 1 0082 1384 0020

Error 0024 4 0006

Total 0105 5

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Treatment 0011 1 0011 8469 0043

Error 0005 4 0001

Total 0016 5


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0152 1 0152 11927 0025

Error 0051 4 0013

Total 0203 5

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0867 ns

Error 0067 4 0017

178

Chlorophyll a b


Total 0082 5


Treatment 0011 1 0011 9719 0035

Error 0004 4 0001

Total 0015 5

Leaf protein of

Z mauritiana


Error 0106 4 0027

Total 0213 5

Leaf sugars

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana


Error 848 4 212

Total 8534 5

Leaf sugars


Treatment 486 1 486 8055 0046

Error 2413 4 0603

Total 7273 5

Total sugars in

leaf of Z

mauritiana


Error 83333 4 20833

Total 85493 5

Leaf phenols of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 8166 1 8166 5665 ns

Error 5766 4 1442

Total 13933 5



Error 3093 4 0773333

Total 4593 5

Soil nitrogen of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0375 1 0375 21634 ns

Error 0693 4 0173

Total 1069 5




Height of Ccajan

Time 700196 2 350098 2716 0000

Treatment 594405 1 594405 16017 0000


Error 1001996 27 37111

Total 705495 59


Ccajan

Time 8353 2 4176 1050050 0000

Treatment 24066 1 24066 18672 0000


Error 348 27 1288

Total 8572 59


Ccajan

Time 289297 2 144648 301277 0000

Treatment 365066 1 365066 0701 ns


Error 14059 27 520733

Total 317415 59

Number of pods

of Ccajan

Time 347682 2 173841 70559 0000

Treatment 159135 1 159135 1558 ns


Error 27574 27 1021276

Total 447407 59




Shoot weight

(FW) of

Ccajan


Error 87444 4 21861

Total 87444 5

Shoot weight

(RW) of Ccajan


Error 13808 4 3452

Total 13808 5

Number of

seeds of

Ccajan


Error 940182 18 52232

Total 940427 19

Weight of seeds

of Ccajan


Error 7585 18 421406

Total 7585 19

179

Chlorophyll a of

Ccajan

Treatment 0001 1 0001 5442 ns

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0002 5

Chlorophyll b

of Ccajan

Treatment 0006 1 0006 9079 0039

Error 0002 4 0001

Total 0008 5

Total

chlorophyll of

Ccajan

Treatment 0017 1 0017 51558 0001

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0019 5


Ccajan

Treatment 0183 1 0183 5532 ns

Error 0132 4 0033

Total 0316 5


Treatment 0001 1 0001 0017 ns

Error 0228 4 0057

Total 0228 5

Leaf sugars of

Ccajan

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0003 ns

Error 1624 4 406

Total 16255 5

Leaf phenols of

Ccajan

Treatment 0201 1 0201 0140 ns

Error 5746 4 1436

Total 5948 5

Leaf nitrogen

of Ccajan

Treatment 1306 1 1306 3062 ns

Error 1706 4 04266

Total 3013 5


carandas



Time 72042 5 14408 55957 0000



Error 3009 24 125385

Total 143777 53

Volume of

canopy of

C carandas

Time 3329 4 0832 38126 000



Error 0207 20 0010

Total 5969 44



Number of



Error 229833 6 38305

Total 10518 8

Number of fruits of

C carandas


Error 201333 6 33555

Total 18201 8

Flower shedding



Error 86519 6 144199

Total 1628166 8


C carandas


Error 1321 6 0220

Total 83953 8

Weight of ten

fruits (DW) of

C carandas


Error 095 6 0158

Total 5305 8

Fruits per plant

(FW) of

C carandas


Error 1435861 6 239310

Total 134563 8

Fruits per plant

(DW) of C carandas


Error 223677 6 37279

Total 9006 8



Error 0946 6 0158

Total 2248 8


180

Diameter of fruit

of C carandas

Error 0956 6 0159

Total 6563 8



Error 0003 6 0000

Total 0115 8

Chlorophyll b of

C carandas


Error 0000 6 0000

Total 0005 8



Error 0005 6 0001

Total 0164 8

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C carandas


Error 0089 6 0015

Total 9751 8



Error 0003 6 0001

Total 0032 8

Leaf Protein of

C carandas


Error 0833 6 0138

Total 3555 8

Soluble sugar of

C carandas


Error 55333 6 9222

Total 290222 8

In soluble sugars

of C carandas


Error 45689 6 7615

Total 641085 8

Total sugar of

C carandas


Error 120676 6 20113

Total 1697574 8



Error 0593 6 0099

Total 15268 8

Leaf Na+ of

C carandas


Error 6 6 1

Total 1352 8



Error 18 6 3

Total 816 8

Leaf K+ Na+

ratio of C carandas


Error 0001 6 0000

Total 0307 8

181

7 Publications

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS





this thesis






















vii








viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No Title Page no

Acknowledgement vi

Summary xix



Layout of thesis 11

1 Chapter 1 13

11 Introduction 13
























ix

No Title Page no







nodules of C cajan

41











2 Chapter 2 59

21 Introduction 59














x

No Title Page no







2224 Phenols 70

2225 Proline 71






22211 Phenols 76

22212 Proline 77


















xi

No Title Page no





3 Chapter 3 113

31 Introduction 113















4 Conclusion 129

5 References 130

6 Appendices 168

7 Publications 181

xii

LIST OF FIGURES




27



30



36



36



cajan

37




concentrations

37




38




39



40



42




43

xiii





treatment

47




48



49




mauritiana

49



mauritiana

50




79



intervals

80






81



intervals

83

xiv





84



intervals

86



intervals

87




89




100



101


and intercropping

102



system

103



105



106




124

xv





125




126

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page no



18





regimes

19





20







regimes

21



24





25




duration of time

26

xvii

Table Title Page no



of experiment

30


field

99





107




119




120




121






123

xviii



CAT Catalase



















xix

Summary































xx






















purposes

xxi

لاصہ خ



ر علاق ج

ن ی م ب



کی ف طے

خ


ی ملکوں


وئ عمال ہ



کر ا ھ ملا




مک کے مخ








iwEC =اب




ق



ارت





گئ کھی


ت صدی 05اف

ق





05ق

ی گئ کھی

ت ح طور د


ق


کی ں ا رت ی


کرئ مد خ

ن من روج ی

اب سے (NaCl)ت


گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


گئ کھی


ت

بی ق کے ب




گائ

کر ا ھ ملا



ک غ کی خد ت




سی ت آت



وئ ہ


کر ا ھ ملا



گائ


وں اق

ے دوپ ج گئ





ائ کی می ی

ائ ےجی






کے ب ڑھوب

xxii




ش ھی ی

ت




کر ا ھ ملا




ب ما ب وں

ش دی ی ولی

ے پ

وئ ج خاضل ہ



گائ

کر ا ھ ملا




ائ

ی وئ ں ہ ہی




اف ا اض مات




ط ے ت گئ ے

گائ

کر ا ھ ملا


کی ب ڑھوب





ی وئ ر ہ



ی اور پ

ائ علی

ں ف مک( می



ارت



ائ کی می ی





ں ف ی وں می




ی سے ض ج

ی وئ ر ہ


کرئ زب چ


وئ ےہ





ت ف





گائ

کر ا ھ ملا





کی آمدئ وں




عئصت



ن اور غ مکی

دل ں ے معی


1
































2



























1999)





3










2013 Li et al 2014)








Prieto et al 2012)














4
























development







5

































6








cultural practices























7




















Ismail 1993)












8
























and cellular levels









9

































10













condition

11

LAYOUT OF THESIS
























intervals



12








13

1 Chapter 1




11 Introduction


























14




al 2010 2011 2014)





environment

15

12 Experiment No 1


























16


following formula


days (1 - 7)


(1962)


experiment








17




I)














18




01 09

02 16

03 35

04 42

05 58

06 62

07 79

08 88

09 99

10 101

11 112

12 128

13 131

14 145

15 159

16 168


19




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day



















Time (days) 13322



20




Sea Salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day



















Time (days) 0378



21





Sea Salt



















LSD005 5344 3312 0064 5344 1313



22

13 Experiment No 2









No 1

















23














24



0 04

005 09

01 16

015 24

02 32

025 39

03 42


25



Sea salt

ECiw (dSm-1)

GP

1st day

GP

2nd day

GP

3rd day

GP

4th day

GP

5th day

GP

6th day

GP

7th day











25

26



Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)

GR

1st day

GR

2nd day

GR

3rd day

GR

4th day

GR

5th day

GR

6th day

GR

7th day











27


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42

Germ

ination Index(s

eedd

ays

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Fin

al germ

ination (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Coeff

icie

nt of

germ

ination v

elo

city

(seedd

ays

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07


)

Contr

ol

09

16

24

32

39

42G

erm

ination tim

e (

Days

)

0

1

2

3

4

LSD005 = 0086

a = 0664 b = 1572

R2 = 0905 n =21

LSD005 = 062

a = 1239

b = 9836

R2 = 0894 n=21

LSD005 = 053

a = 8560b = -2272

R2 = 0969 n=21

RGF = 100-200 (Ke -005) Ke = 030




28

14 Experiment No 3

















29









6578 r = 09810 F = 15358 (p lt 00001)



1422 Shoot height







128893 (p lt 0001)



30



000001)


0 04 05

005 09 161

01 16 278

015 24 354

02 32 433

025 39 483

03 42 552





e f


)

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3

Shoot le

ngth

(cm

)

0

2

4

6

8

10ab

c

de

Contr

ol

16

27

8

35

4

43

3

48

3Seedlin

g e

merg

ence (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100a

bb

c

d

A B

31

15 Experiment No 4















()

ECiw ( dSm-1) of

irrigation water


end of experiment














32






Experiment No 1






















33
















iii Protein content











34































35








iii Protein





35dSm-1)

36

Months (2009)


Valu

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


oC)

High Temp (oC)




Time (Weeks)

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Pla

nt heig

ht (c

m)

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

210

43 38 35 28 16 Control




37

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Cont 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Initial Final

a

b b

c c cab b

c c cC 16 28 35 38 43

Fre

sh w

eig

ht

(g)

012345 a

bb

bc ca a ab b c c

Dry weightMoisture




Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Succu

lance

(

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

RG

R (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Co

nt

16

28

35

38

43

SS

L (

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

ab

b b

c c

a

b bc c c

a

b b

c c c

a a a ab

c





38


Control 16 28 35

Tota

l seeds (

Pla

nt-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 Seed w

eig

ht (g

pla

nt -1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 a

b

cc

a

a

b

b

b c

c

a

b

a

c c

Flowers

Pods





005)

39

Sea salt (ECe=dSm-1

)

Control 16 28 35

Caro

tinoid

s (

mg g

-1 F

W)

000

005

010

015

020

025

030

Chlo

rophyll

(mg g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

ab

ratio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

b

a

cd

b

a

c

d

a

b

c

d

a

a

ab

b




40




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 16 28 35

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

02

04

06

08

a ab b

a a

b b

a ab b

a

b

ab

c

SoluableInsoluable

41

16 Experiment No 5





















C cajan








42










NaCl (ECw= dSm

-1)

06 9 188 242 306 366 423

Rh

izo

bia

l co

lonie

s (l

og

10)

0

1

2

3

4 a a

b

c c

d

e




43



188

423 90

Control

366

306 242

44

17 Experiment No 6


















of irrigation water



irrigation


04 63 72

06 101 111






45












period













46



























47

Control 72 111

Fre

sh w

eig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Dry

weig

ht (g

)

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

Num

ber

of bra

nches

3

6

9

12

15

18

Heig

ht (c

m)

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160


AcBb

Ba

AcBb Ba

AcBb Ba

Ac

BbBa





48


uccula

nce (

g g

-1 D

W)

00

03

06

09

12

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

SS

L (

cm

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Control 72 111

Mois

ture

(

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Control 72 111

RG

R (

mg g

-1 d

ay

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

a a aa a a a a a a

a aa a a a a a


b

b b

c





49

Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Num

ber

of flow

ers

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140 60 days120 days

Ac

BbBa




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

Control 72 111

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(mg g

-1)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

bba

bba

bb

a

chl b chl a ab

ab

ra

tio

00

05

10

15

20




005)

50




Sea salt (ECe= dSm

-1)

C 04 06

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Solu

ble

sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

3

6

9

12

15

18a

a

bb

b b

Control 72 111

51

18 Discussion
































52












developmental stage





















53

































54




stress




























55

































56


































57

















to salt stress















58












responses

59

2 Chapter 2


21 Introduction























60

22 Experiment No 7

























61















period in tap water






rhizosphere










62




























63











chapter 1

















64












in chapter 1

22113 Enzymes Assay

















65



ii Catalase (CAT)






degC












266 mM-1cm-1)








66



spectrophotometer

67





















i Fresh weight









68





ii Dry weight












ratio (SWR)













69





system

v Plant moisture








vi Plant Succulence















70













ii Carotinoids









2224 Phenols







71

2225 Proline







system








2227 Enzyme essays





Appendix-XII

i Catalase (CAT)





72







values
















73
















i Fresh weight









(Plt005)




significant result

74






ii Dry weight








ratio (SWR)
















75

v Plant moisture






vi Plant succulence





















76







ii Carotenoids














22211 Phenols







77

22212 Proline






results










22214 Enzyme assay





Appendix-XIV

i Catalase (CAT)






78





















79


No o

f le

aves

0

20

40

60

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

2404

th day

Cajanus cajan

a

RootShoot

ab

a

a

b

a

a

8th

day





No of

leav

es

0

200

400

600

Len

gth

(cm

)

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

Ziziphus mauritiana

RootShoot

4th

day 8th

days

b b

a a

a

b

cc

80

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fre

sh w

eight

(g)

100

200

300

400

500

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

a

b

c

a

b b aa

b

b

c c

a

bc

a

c

ba

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Dry

wei

ght

(g)

2

4

6

8

10

12

Fre

ah w

eight

(g)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

aa

b

a

a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

a

c

b

a a

b

a

b

c

a

b

c

Leaf Stem Root

Cajanus cajan




81




day irrigation



Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

01

02

03

04

05

06

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

005

010

015

020

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

05

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

b

a

bb

a

b

aa

a aa

b

a

bb

c

b

a

bb

b

aa a

ba

bc

4th day

8th day

82


Sole Intercrop

Mo

istu

re (

)

0

20

40

60

80

SS

L (

cm g

-1)

2

4

6

8

10

12

RW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

002

004

006

008

010

012

014

LW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

Sole Intercrop

Su

ccu

lan

ce

(g H

2O

g-1

DW

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

RG

R

(g g

-1 d

ay-1

)

001

002

003

004

005

SR

L (

cm g

-1)

5

10

15

20

25

SW

R (

g g

-1 D

W)

02

04

06

08

10

Cajanus cajan

a aab

a aaa

a

bba

a

b b

c

a aab

a

bbb

abbb

aa

bc

8th day

4th day

83

Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

Ch

loro

phyll

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25Chl ab

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a

bb

a

b

a

b

a ab

b

Chl aChl b


4th and 8th



Sole Intercrop

Car

oti

noid

s (m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

01

02

03

04

05

Ch

loro

phyll

(m

g g

-1 F

W)

00

03

06

09

12

15

18

Sole Intercrop

4th

day 8th

day

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15ab

ab

Cajanus cajan

bb b

a

a

b

cc

bb b

a

84

Ele

ctro

lyte

lea

kag

e(

)

0

5

10

15

4th

day 8th

dayP

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

40

Sole Intercrop

Ziziphus mauritiana

a a a

a

b b ba

a

b

c

d





p lt 005)

85


E

lect

roly

te l

eakag

e(

)

0

20

40

60

80

4th

day 8th

day

Phen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Sole Intercrop

Pro

line

( g g

-1)

000

003

006

009

012

015

018

Sole Intercrop

Cajanus cajan

a aa

a

a a aa

aa a

a

86

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

20

40

60

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a aa a

a

a a a

Sole Intercrop

Sugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

10

20

30

Sole Intercrop

Pro

tein

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

4th

day 8th

dayCajanus cajan

ab

a

c

a

b

cc





87

Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

AP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

GP

X (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

05

4th

day 8th

day

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

bc

c

a

b

cc

a

c

b

b

b bb

a





88


Sole Intercrop

SO

D (

Unit

s m

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

Sole Intercrop

Cat

alas

e (U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

4th

day 8th

dayG

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

00

05

10

15

20

25

Cajanus cajan

aA

PX

(U

nit

s m

g-1

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

bb

b

aaa

b

a

bbb

a

c

a

b

89

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

14

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

1

2

3

4

4th

day

Nitrate reductaseNO

3

Ziziphus mauritiana

a

b

c

cb

b

b

a

Sole Intercrop

NO

3 (

mM

ol

g-1

)

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

8th

day

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rate

Red

uct

ase

(mM

ol

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

4th

dayCajanas cajan

a

bb

b

aa

aa






005)

90

23 Experiment No 8






1










deciduas etc

2313 Soil analysis





i Bulk density


following formula


91

ii Soil porosity


following formula
















Fiesta Water Park









92






















93


















chapter 1







94




2317 Fruit analysis

i Protein in fruit


in chapter 1




















95





using formula





equation as








plot 2000








96



















sole crop









sole crop

97




























98







of sole crop







(LEC)






9994







99




2 pH 8666plusmn0136










100

Ziziphus mauritiana

Days

0 60 120

Volu

me

(m3)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Sole Intercrop

a

a

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c

Cajanus cajan

Days

0 60 120

Bra

nch

es (

)

0

10

20

30

Days

0 60 120

Hei

ght

(cm

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Sole Intercrop

aa

bb

c c

aa

bb

c c




101

Ziziphus mauritiana

Fresh Dry

Fru

it w

eig

ht

(g)

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120 180

Nu

mb

er o

f F

ruit

s

0

100

200

300

Sole Intercrop

a

b

a

b

c

c

dd

Cajanus cajan

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Pods

0

50

100

150

200

Days

0 60 120

Num

ber

of

Flo

wer

s

0

50

100

150

Sole Intercrop

Days

aa

bb

c c

Sole Intercrop

Num

ber

of

See

ds

0

100

200

300

400

500

See

d W

eight

(g)

0

10

20

30

40

50





102

Ziziphus mauritiana

Cajanus cajan




Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

noid

s (m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03C

hlo

rophyl

l (m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

ab r

atio

00

05

10

15

20

25

ab

ab

Sole Intercrop

Car

ote

no

ids

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

ab

rat

io

0

1

2

3

4ab

ab

103

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg

g-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f S

ug

ars

(mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





104


Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Lea

f P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

Lea

f P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

05

10

15

20

Lea

f S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

105

Ziziphus mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Fru

it P

hen

ols

(m

g g

-1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Fru

it P

rote

ins

(mg g

-1)

00

02

04

06

08

10

Fru

it S

ugar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30





106

Z mauritiana

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil

Cajanus cajan

Sole Intercrop

Nit

rogen

(

)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 LeafSoil




107




reference to Height

Formulated with

reference to Total

Chlorophyll






Intercropped

Total LER 1977 2543 2152



107

108

24 Discussion























leguminous plants








109



















2013)














110
















2006 Sofo et al 2005)











1996)






111

































112





















113

3 Chapter 3



saline land

31 Introduction






















waste land

114

32 Experiment No 9









3212 Plant material



















115










selected fruits



of flowers)




ii Soluble sugars



iii Protein content



chapter 1

iv Soluble phenols



116







Na+ (ppm) = 0016135x1879824

K+ (ppm) = 0244346x1314603

117













irrigated plants
















118

























salinity

119



Treatment

Sea salt ()


(dSm-1)


03 42 48

04 61 68

06 99 112

08 129 142


120


sea salt

Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



irrigation



cm m3 cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3 increase over

initial values

increase

decrease

over control






LSD0 05

Salinity


91

172

002

0005


120

121



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw dSm-1)



cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





122


Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

Control 1911plusmn6


99 1110plusmn5


129 8754plusmn10



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)



Cm

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control

m3

increase

over initial

values

increase

decrease over

control





Time 168 016



123



Treatment

Sea salt

(ECiw= dSm-1)


shedding

Weight of

Ten

fruit(fresh)

Weight of

Ten

fruit(dry)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(fresh)

Weight of

total fruitplant

(dry)

length

fruit

diameter

fruit





LSD0 05 Salinity 1514 1417 929 115 097 3785 1494 0971 097



123

124

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Car

ote

nio

ds

(mg

g-1

)

00

01

02

03

04

Ch

loro

ph

yll

(m

g g

-1)

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

ab

rat

io

00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35

ab

Chl a Chl b

a

a

a a

b

bcbc

a

b

c

a a

b





125

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ph

eno

ls (

mg

g-1

)

0

5

10

15

20

Pro

tein

s (m

g g

-1)

0

1

2

3

4

Su

gar

s (m

g g

-1)

0

30

60

90

120


a

a

a

a

a

a

b

b

b

c

ab

a

a

b




126

Sea Salt (ECiw

= dSm-1

)

Cont 99 129

Ions

(mg

g-1

DW

)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

KN

a ra

tio

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Na K KNa

c

a

b

b

a

c

a

b

c




127

33 Discussion





























128


al 2004)

























129

4 Conclusions













130

5 References





Bot 47 813-818


















131













618






3116







132



J Bot 28 145-149
















Environ 74 19-31







133

























134



Bot 43 1513-1520



Bot 43 1513-1520



Agric 14 293-298








Exp Bot 65 1229-1240






109 372-381

135











J Res 15 35-40



424









June 13 1999



136








248-254



248-254


Hall Inc New Jersey









York pp 125-179




137





Sci Asia 30 247-253


550

















348

138



Bot 38 619-630



Rodale Press















26 371-376




139



Res 100 249-256




Exp Bot 63 3415-3428








2269




Prot 45 437-454






92-101

140


700-700






Sci72198ndash206















12

141



73ndash80



Crop Res 87 35-42


Biol Chem 193 113-124








June 2012



2012





agriculture

142





















251-262


Part 4(598) 255-293

143
























144





Biochem 44 828-836





173-186














141 241ndash251

145






















Fertil 4 71ndash74




146



Technol 15 121-133












111







93




147

























Sci 78 748-751

148











Netherlands pp 1-32








69






149



P 1-22 275- 323




159-168




Hortic 170 159-168















150



Bioscan 3 1015-1018







Press London










599-612





151






Environ 33 453-467




42 717-722



134 271ndash276









Sci 4 351-358




998

152



22 275ndash292




Crop Res 115 132-139


239-250


663


Biol 59 651-681


Biol 59 651-681










153












J 61 1053-1066






Nutr 47 95-107






291

154






471-175











101093aobplaplu047







155



167-174




















Crop Sci 194 15-25

156



841



286










Med 2 22-30



54 421ndash431






157






Biol 37 255-263



287













Sys 11 243-258



158









Biol 29 1065ndash74










12-22





159






302












145



pp 199ndash244



9 320-325

160





221

















Ecol 5 111-118



161










J 36 41-48



Biol 2 55-60











162






452-476





667





2189-2203








Bot 48 853-859

163



Bot 48 48 1353-1360


















123-129





164



Cambridge UK



Physiol 167 149-156



















165



222




Products Press


















166



1537ndash1547



457










Sci 9 123-132






Physiol 35 785-791



Sys 87 929-939

167





168

6 THESIS APENDECES



Mean

germination rate

(GR)


Error 441949 42 10522

Total 4864 62

Mean germination

velocity (GV)


Error 169671 42 40398

Total 588484 62

Mean

germination

time (GT)


Error 0064 42 0002

Total 0335 62

Mean germination

Index (GI)


Error 441949 42 10523

Total 4864607 62

Final

germination

(FG)


Error 2666 42 63492

Total 34774 62




day


Time 53156 9 5906 4663 0002


Error 531130 400 1327825

Total 1375283 629

Germination

rate per day

Salinity treatment

Time 761502 9 84611 83129 0000


Error 359117 400 0898

Total 2108622 629





velocity (GV)


Error 0035 14 0003

Total 0573

Final mean



Error 1854 14 0132

Total 22716 20


index (GI)


Error 1356 14 0097

Total 111869 20

Final



Error 400 14 28571

Total 7257 20





day


Time 23378 6 3896 136373 0000


Error 2800 98 28571

Total 115540 146

Germination rate

per day


Time 128408 6 21401 394636 0000


Error 5314 98 0054

Total 309855 146

169






Error 2833 12 0236

Total 203115 17

Seedling



Error 9070 14 647867

Total 33875 20




Plant height of

C cajan


Time 126015 8 15751 132488 0000


Error 11413 96 118893

Total 477028 161




Number of

Flowers of C

cajan


Error 264 8 33

Total 419625 11

Number of pods

of C cajan


Error 170 8 2125

Total 1643 11

Number of

seedspod of C cajan


Error 0 8 0

Total 3 11


C cajan


Error 1130 8 14125

Total 20462 11

Weight of



Error 18478 8 2309

Total 611455 11

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan


Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0121 11

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan


Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0005 11


C cajan


Error 0002 8 0000

Total 0162 11

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan


Error 0692 8 0086

Total 3112 11

Carotenoids of

C cajan


Error 0009 8 0001

Total 0025 11

Soluble sugars

of C cajan


Error 00178 8 0002

Total 0061 11

Insoluble

sugars of C

cajan


Error 0008 8 0001

Total 0127 11

Total sugars of

C cajan


Error 0012 8 0001

Total 0031 11

Protein of C cajan


Error 0036 8 0004

Total 0248 11

170




Nodule

associated


cajan


Error 1409 18 0078

Total 37337 20



Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 91030 2 45515 839 0000



Error 6751 42 161

Total 104554 71

Number of

branches of

Z mauritiana

Time 25525 2 127625 25333 0000



Error 16425 42 3910

Total 6575 71

Number of

flowers of

Z mauritiana

Time 73506 2 36753 167777 0000



Error 10166 42 242063

Total 127759 71

Fresh weight of

Shoot of

Z mauritiana

Time 3056862 2 1528431 340777 0000



Error 251167 56 4485

Total 3515820 71


Z mauritiana

Time 784079 2 392039 338932 0000



Error 64774 56 1156690

Total 913855 71

Succulence of

Z mauritiana

Time 0002 2 0001 0214 ns



Error 0199 45 0004

Total 51705 54

Spacific shoot


Time 0000 2 914 0176 0000



Error 0023 45 0001

Total 6413 54

Moisture


Time 1264 2 0632 0243 ns



Error 117146 45 2603

Total 131675 54

Relative growth


Time 1584206 1 1584206 532968 ns



Error 89172 30 2972

Total 4034 36




Chlorophyll a

of Z mauritiana


Error 0006 21 0000

Total 0010 23



Error 0080 21 0003

Total 0117 23

171

Total

chlorophyll of

Z mauritiana


Error 0038 21 0002

Total 0182 23


Z mauritiana


Error 0471 21 0022

Total 1969 23

Total soluble

sugars of

Z mauritiana


Error 107952 21 5140

Total 486223 23


Z mauritiana


Error 238268 21 11346

Total 371274 23




Height of

Z mauritiana

Time 4499 2 2249 28888 0004

Crop 448028 1 448028 2208 ns






Error 10916 12 909732

Total 35


Time 7943 2 3971 6554 ns

Crop 0382 1 0382 0579 ns






Error 8043 12 0670

Total 29439 35




Plant length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 2986 1 2986 75322 0000



Error 317166 8 39645

Total 292428 12

Shoot length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 1069741 1 1069741 30890 0000



Error 27704 8 3463

Total 103376 12

Root length of

Z mauritiana

Crop 19763 1 19763 2671 ns



Error 59186 8 7398

Total 49165 12

Main branches

of Z mauritiana

Crop 33333 1 33333 5797 0042



Error 46 8 575

Total 2888 12

Lateral


Crop 1344083 1 1344083 41356 0000



Error 26 8 325

Total 22465 12

Leaf numbers of

Z mauritiana

Crop 22465 12 98283 96482 0000



Error 8149 8 1018667

172

Total 2037850 12

Shootroot ratio

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 1842 ns



Error 0120 8 0015

Total 27776 12

Plant fresh


Crop 398107 1 398107 577818 0000



Error 5511 8 688982

Total 7248659 12


Crop 87808 1 87808 471436 0000



Error 14900 8 186257

Total 1875710 12

Stem fresh

weight of

Z mauritiana

Crop 46687 1 46687 227539 0000



Error 16414 8 205185

Total 1718530 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 58450 1 58450 2295 0000



Error 203746 8 25468

Total 357145 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 29970 1 29970 19089 0000



Error 125596 8 15699

Total 699711 12

Stem dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 13587 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 50188 8 62735

Total 4689795 12

Root dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 1358787 1 13587 216591 0000



Error 100993 8 12624

Total 124421 12

Leaf dry weight

of Z mauritiana

Crop 2374 1 2374 135380 0000



Error 140313 8 17539

Total 127170 12


Crop 22082 1 22082 5608 0045



Error 31496 8 3937

Total 29872 12


Crop 0005 1 0005 0000 ns



Error 73633 8 9204

Total 28532 12


Crop 235266 1 235266 16502 0003



Error 114051 8 14256

Total 17572 12

Leaf moisture

of Z mauritiana

Crop 130413 1 130413 47746 0000



Error 21850 8 2731

Total 38888 12

173

Relative growth


Crop 0000 1 0000 287467 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0009 12

Relative water

contents of Z

mauritiana

Crop 37381 1 37381 1380 ns



Error 216649 8 27081

Total 50855 12


Crop 0103 1 0103 32466 0000



Error 0025 8 0003

Total 1498 12

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0027 1 0027 196164 0000



Error 0001 8 0000

Total 0456 12

Total chlorophyll

of Z mauritiana

Crop 0257 1 0257 53469 0000



Error 0038 8 0004

Total 3736 12


Z mauritiana

Crop 0002 1 0002 0028 ns



Error 0799 8 0099

Total 43067 12

Carotenoids of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0018 1 0018 42747 0000



Error 0003 8 0000

Total 0451 12

Phenol of

Z mauritiana

Crop 24641 1 24641 13168 000



Error 14969 8 1871

Total 6289 12


Crop 0001 1 0001 52288 0000



Error 0000 8 0000

Total 0005 12


Crop 200001 1 200001 296 ns



Error 540367 8 67545

Total 814086 11

CAT enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 74171 1 74171 11404 0009



Error 52029 8 65036

Total 441467 11

APX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 191918 1 191918 6693 0032



Error 229383 8 28672

Total 5423 11

GPX enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 0000 1 0000 0020 ns



Error 0140 8 0017

Total 0353 11


174

of

Z mauritiana



Error 49664 8 6208

Total 85498 11

NR enzyme of

Z mauritiana

Crop 7520 1 75208333333 37253364154 0003



Error 1615 8 0201

Total 10512 11

Nitrate of

Z mauritiana

Crop 003 1 003 3028 ns



Error 0079 8 0009

Total 0130 11




Height of

C cajan

Time 14990 2 7495 235059 0000

Crop 7848 1 7848 42235 0000


Time times Crop 2638 2 1319140 7098 00262




Error 928935 12 77411

Total 29065 35





Crop 1056563 1 1056563 12331 0007



Error 68544 8 8568

Total 334030 12


Crop 808520 1 808520 36580 0000



Error 17682 8 22102

Total 224013 12


Crop 16567 1 16567 0674 ns



Error 196453 8 24556

Total 11133 12

Main branches

of C cajan

Crop 80083 1 80083 64066 0000



Error 10 8 125

Total 335 12

Letral branches

of C cajan

Crop 0 1 0



Error 0 8 0

Total 0 12

Leaf numbers

of C cajan

Crop 1776333 1 1776333 16679 0003



Error 852 8 1065

Total 22342 12


Crop 0385 1 0385 0638 0447



Error 4825 8 0603

Total 264061 12

Crop 76816 1 76816 7494853 0025

175

Plant fresh

weight of

C cajan



Error 81993 8 102491

Total 25941 12


Crop 38270 1 38270 1150145 0009



Error 26619 8 3327

Total 4150 12


C cajan

Crop 16100 1 16100 1462 ns



Error 8806 8 11007

Total 3318 12


C cajan

Crop 0190 1 0190 0248 ns



Error 6115 8 0764

Total 432050 12

Leaf fresh

weight of C cajan

Crop 541363 1 541363 13825 0005



Error 313246 8 39155

Total 7236 12

Stem dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 10323 1 10323 11530 0009



Error 7162 8 0895

Total 125151 12

Root dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 0007 1 0007 012 ns



Error 05 8 0062

Total 3515 12

Leaf dry weight

of C cajan

Crop 9363 1 9363 15649 0004



Error 4786 8 0598

Total 95072 12


Crop 199182 1 19918 6011 0039



Error 265079 8 33134

Total 38272 12

Stem moisture

of C cajan

Crop 100814 1 10081 3290 0107246



Error 245119 8 30639

Total 31036 12

Root moisture

of C cajan

Crop 26266 1 26266 1389 ns



Error 151272 8 18909

Total 58346 12

Leaf moisture

of C cajan

Crop 2623 1 2623 39350 0000



Error 533411 8 66676

Total 36263 12

Relative growth

rate of C cajan

Crop 0000 1 0000 17924 0002



Error 0000 8 0000

Total

Crop 256935 1 256935 1560 ns


176

Electrolyte

leakage of C

cajan


Error 1316923 8 16461

Total 50381 12

Chlorophyll a

of C cajan

Crop 0101 1 0101 7957 0022



Error 0102 8 0012

Total 5060 12

Chlorophyll b

of C cajan

Crop 0017 1 0017 7758 0023



Error 0017 8 0002

Total 1727 12

Total


Crop 0178 1 0178 14819 0004



Error 0096 8 0012

Total 13217 12

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C cajan

Crop 0065 1 0065 0691 ns



Error 0756 8 0094

Total 35143 12


Crop 0021 1 0021 19599 0002



Error 0008 8 0001

Total 1443 12

Phenol of C cajan

Crop 0799 1 0799 3171 ns



Error 2016 8 0252

Total 970313 12

Proline of C cajan

Crop 0008 1 0008 14867 0004



Error 0004 8 0000

Total 0155 12

Protein of C

cajan

Crop 116376 1 116376 3990 ns



Error 233303 8 29163

Total 817371 11

CAT enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0249 1 0249 0121 ns



Error 16362 8 2045

Total 28654 11

APX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 855939 1 855939 4073 ns



Error 1681112 8 210139

Total 17137 11

GPX enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 0965 1 0965 9265 0160



Error 0833 8 0104

Total 3854 11

SOD enzyme

of C cajan

Crop 4125 1 4125 9731 0142



Error 3391 8 0423

Total 32804 11

Nitrate

reductase

enzyme

Crop 0053 1 0053 0034 ns



177


Total 22808 11

Nitrate of

C cajan

Crop 0039 1 0039 0576 ns



Error 0545 8 0068

Total 0668 11





Time 79704 3 26568 77303 0000

Treatment 979209 1 979209 4702 0455


Error 3332 16 208259

Total 90366 39


Time 1049 3 3498 115444 0000

Treatment 3509 1 3509 5966 0266


Error 9413 16 5883

Total 1284 39


mauritiana

Time 1794893 3 598297 770043 0000

Treatment 19980 1 19980 10152 0057


Error 31488 16 1968

Total 1882468 39

Fruits numbers

of Z mauritiana

Time 324096 3 108032 297941 0000

Treatment 10824 1 10824 64081 0000


Error 2702 16 168913

Total 351833 39



Weight of ten

fruits (FW) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 557113 1 557113 6663 0032

Error 668923 8 83615

Total 1226036 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 4356 1 4356 0321 ns

Error 10862 8 13577

Total 112976 9


Treatment 0534 1 0534 0946 ns

Error 4514 8 0564

Total 5048 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0739 1 0739 4022 ns

Error 1471 8 0184

Total 2211 9

Fruit sugar

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 5041 1 5041 0081 ns

Error 497328 8 62166

Total 502369 9


Z mauritiana

Treatment 32041 1 32041 0424 ns

Error 604384 8 75548

Total 636425 9

Total fruit



Error 164 8 205

Total 18 9

Chlorophyll a of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0082 1 0082 1384 0020

Error 0024 4 0006

Total 0105 5

Chlorophyll b

of Z mauritiana

Treatment 0011 1 0011 8469 0043

Error 0005 4 0001

Total 0016 5


Z mauritiana

Treatment 0152 1 0152 11927 0025

Error 0051 4 0013

Total 0203 5

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0867 ns

Error 0067 4 0017

178

Chlorophyll a b


Total 0082 5


Treatment 0011 1 0011 9719 0035

Error 0004 4 0001

Total 0015 5

Leaf protein of

Z mauritiana


Error 0106 4 0027

Total 0213 5

Leaf sugars

(soluble) of

Z mauritiana


Error 848 4 212

Total 8534 5

Leaf sugars


Treatment 486 1 486 8055 0046

Error 2413 4 0603

Total 7273 5

Total sugars in

leaf of Z

mauritiana


Error 83333 4 20833

Total 85493 5

Leaf phenols of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 8166 1 8166 5665 ns

Error 5766 4 1442

Total 13933 5



Error 3093 4 0773333

Total 4593 5

Soil nitrogen of

Z mauritiana

Treatment 0375 1 0375 21634 ns

Error 0693 4 0173

Total 1069 5




Height of Ccajan

Time 700196 2 350098 2716 0000

Treatment 594405 1 594405 16017 0000


Error 1001996 27 37111

Total 705495 59


Ccajan

Time 8353 2 4176 1050050 0000

Treatment 24066 1 24066 18672 0000


Error 348 27 1288

Total 8572 59


Ccajan

Time 289297 2 144648 301277 0000

Treatment 365066 1 365066 0701 ns


Error 14059 27 520733

Total 317415 59

Number of pods

of Ccajan

Time 347682 2 173841 70559 0000

Treatment 159135 1 159135 1558 ns


Error 27574 27 1021276

Total 447407 59




Shoot weight

(FW) of

Ccajan


Error 87444 4 21861

Total 87444 5

Shoot weight

(RW) of Ccajan


Error 13808 4 3452

Total 13808 5

Number of

seeds of

Ccajan


Error 940182 18 52232

Total 940427 19

Weight of seeds

of Ccajan


Error 7585 18 421406

Total 7585 19

179

Chlorophyll a of

Ccajan

Treatment 0001 1 0001 5442 ns

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0002 5

Chlorophyll b

of Ccajan

Treatment 0006 1 0006 9079 0039

Error 0002 4 0001

Total 0008 5

Total

chlorophyll of

Ccajan

Treatment 0017 1 0017 51558 0001

Error 0001 4 0000

Total 0019 5


Ccajan

Treatment 0183 1 0183 5532 ns

Error 0132 4 0033

Total 0316 5


Treatment 0001 1 0001 0017 ns

Error 0228 4 0057

Total 0228 5

Leaf sugars of

Ccajan

Treatment 0015 1 0015 0003 ns

Error 1624 4 406

Total 16255 5

Leaf phenols of

Ccajan

Treatment 0201 1 0201 0140 ns

Error 5746 4 1436

Total 5948 5

Leaf nitrogen

of Ccajan

Treatment 1306 1 1306 3062 ns

Error 1706 4 04266

Total 3013 5


carandas



Time 72042 5 14408 55957 0000



Error 3009 24 125385

Total 143777 53

Volume of

canopy of

C carandas

Time 3329 4 0832 38126 000



Error 0207 20 0010

Total 5969 44



Number of



Error 229833 6 38305

Total 10518 8

Number of fruits of

C carandas


Error 201333 6 33555

Total 18201 8

Flower shedding



Error 86519 6 144199

Total 1628166 8


C carandas


Error 1321 6 0220

Total 83953 8

Weight of ten

fruits (DW) of

C carandas


Error 095 6 0158

Total 5305 8

Fruits per plant

(FW) of

C carandas


Error 1435861 6 239310

Total 134563 8

Fruits per plant

(DW) of C carandas


Error 223677 6 37279

Total 9006 8



Error 0946 6 0158

Total 2248 8


180

Diameter of fruit

of C carandas

Error 0956 6 0159

Total 6563 8



Error 0003 6 0000

Total 0115 8

Chlorophyll b of

C carandas


Error 0000 6 0000

Total 0005 8



Error 0005 6 0001

Total 0164 8

Chlorophyll a b

ratio of C carandas


Error 0089 6 0015

Total 9751 8



Error 0003 6 0001

Total 0032 8

Leaf Protein of

C carandas


Error 0833 6 0138

Total 3555 8

Soluble sugar of

C carandas


Error 55333 6 9222

Total 290222 8

In soluble sugars

of C carandas


Error 45689 6 7615

Total 641085 8

Total sugar of

C carandas


Error 120676 6 20113

Total 1697574 8



Error 0593 6 0099

Total 15268 8

Leaf Na+ of

C carandas


Error 6 6 1

Total 1352 8



Error 18 6 3

Total 816 8

Leaf K+ Na+

ratio of C carandas


Error 0001 6 0000

Total 0307 8

181

7 Publications

Date post:	12-Jan-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

TAYYAB - prr.hec.gov.pk

Documents