Effect of waterlogging duration on germination, physiological characteristics, and yield of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.)

ntent (RWC), SPAD value, 
and Fv/Fm index of mungbean 
Leaf relative water content (RWC), SPAD, 
and Fv/Fm index of all mungbean varieties under 
waterlogging conditions are demonstrated in 
Table 3. All parameters of RWC, SPAD, and 
Fv/Fm decreased with an increased waterlogging 
duration. The values of RWC at waterlogging 
treatments of the three mungbean varieties were 
Cassava farmers’ perception on climate changes: A case study in Van Yen district, Yen Bai province 
940 Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Sciences 
Notes: (0): Control treatment; (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5): 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72h of waterlogging, respectively. 
Figure 1. Comparison of germination percentages between the control and waterlogging treatments of three mungbean varieties at 
84h after sowing 
below 85%. The highest reduction in RWC was 
observed at 9 days of waterlogging, followed by 
6 days. Waterlogging also caused a significant 
decrease in SPAD values and Fv/Fm indexes of 
mungbean varieties with an increase in the 
waterlogging duration. The lowest values of both 
parameters were obtained at 9 days of 
waterlogging. SPAD values and Fv/Fm indexes of 
the three mungbean varieties at 3 days of 
waterlogging were lower than the control but did 
not differ significantly. Among the three 
mungbean varieties, the highest values of RWC, 
SPAD, and Fv/Fm index were observed in 
DXVN7 mungbean variety, followed by DXVN5 
mungbean variety. The lowest was found in 
DX11 mungbean variety. 
Vu Tien Binh & Sorgan S. K. Tai (2020) 
https://vjas.vnua.edu.vn/ 941 
Effect of waterlogging duration on 
photosynthesis and total dry weight of 
mungbean 
Waterlogging also inhibited the 
photosynthesis and total dry weight of all 
mungbean varieties. Both parameters declined 
when the duration of waterlogging increased. 
The values at 6 and 9 days of waterlogging 
significantly decreased compared with the 
control. At 3 days of waterlogging, the 
photosynthesis and total dry weight also 
decreased but did not differ significantly 
compared with the control. The lowest in both 
parameters were observed at 9 days of 
waterlogging, followed by 6 days. Among the 
three varieties, photosynthesis and total dry 
weight of DXVN7 were higher than the other 
varieties. The lowest figures were observed in 
DX11 variety (Table 4). 
 Table 2. Effect of waterlogging duration on plant height and root dry weight of mungbean at the recovery period 
Varieties Waterlogging (days) Plant height (cm) 
Root dry weight 
(gram) 
Adventitious root 
formation 
DX11 
0 41.8ab 0.26cd - 
3 39.6bc 0.24ef + 
6 35.2e 0.23f + 
9 33.2ef 0.21g ++ 
DXVN5 
0 40.5b 0.27bc - 
3 38.2cd 0.26cd + 
6 33.6e 0.24ef ++ 
9 30.5f 0.23f ++ 
DXVN7 
0 43.9a 0.29a - 
3 42.1ab 0.28ab + 
6 38.4cd 0.26cd ++ 
9 35.7de 0.25de +++ 
CV% 3.9 1.4 
LSD0.05 (V) 4.6 0.021 
LSD0.05 (W) 3.1 0.018 
LSD0.05 (VxW) 2.8 0.015 
Note: Values followed by the same letter in each treatment column are not significantly different at the 5% level. (V): Variety; (W): 
Waterlogging treatment. (-): Non; (+): Little; (++): Many; (+++): So many. 
Figure 2. Comparative adventitious root formation in DXVN7 variety after 3 (A), 6 (B), and 9 (C) days of waterlogging 
Effects of waterlogging duration on germination, physiological characteristics, and yield of mungbean 
942 Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Sciences 
Waterlogging caused some physiological 
disturbances, including reductions in RWC, 
SPAD, Fv/Fm index, photosynthesis, and total dry 
weight of mungbean. Wilting in crops under 
waterlogging has been ascribed to higher 
resistance to the mass flow of water through the 
roots (Jackson & Drew, 1984). Waterlogging-
tolerant plant varieties develop adaptive 
mechanisms to maintain better water 
relationships using stomatal conductance (Malik 
et al., 2001). In our research, waterlogging 
treatments decreased RWC of all mungbean 
varieties. The same results have also been shown 
in pineapples at the flowering stage (Min & 
Bartholomew, 2005) and in mungbean genotypes 
(Kumar et al., 2013) after 6 days of waterlogging. 
According to our experiment, yellow leaves 
of mungbean plants (a reduction in the 
chlorophyll content through SPAD index) 
(Figure 3) might be due to a decrease in leaf 
nitrogen, nodulation, N fixation, and production 
of toxic substances such as nitrites and sulfides 
which move from the soil through roots to the 
leave if carried upward in large quantities (Ezin 
et al., 2010). In addition, chlorophyll has an 
important role in light absorption during the 
photosynthetic process. The decrease in the 
chlorophyll content could lower the efficiency of 
plants to convert light energy into chemical 
energy, thereby suppressing the photosynthetic, 
reducing the total amount of organic synthesis, 
and ultimately leading to a reduction in the 
biomass of plants (Zhang et al., 2015). 
Moreover, Ahmed et al. (2006) showed that a 
reduction in photosynthesis is regulated by 
internal damages to photosystem II (PSII) and 
ultimately limits light interception. Reductions in 
the chlorophyll content (SPAD index), 
photosynthesis, and total dry matter of plants 
under waterlogging stress were also reported by 
Ahmed et al. (2006) and Kumar et al. (2013) in 
mungbean; by Wang et al. (2017) in cotton; and 
by Vu Tien Binh & Nguyen Viet Long (2015) in 
soybean. 
Effect of waterlogging duration on yield 
components and seed yield mungbean 
Yield components and seed yield of 
mungbean varieties were affected by the 
waterlogging conditions (Table 5). There were 
significant reductions in the number of pods per 
plant, 100-seed weight, and seed yield between 
the waterlogged and control treatments in all 
mungbean varieties. The highest decreases in 
yield components and seed yield were at 9 days 
of waterlogging that reduced the yield of DX11, 
Figure 3. DX11 mungbean variety at the recovery period in the control treatment (A); 6 days of waterlogging treatment (B); and 9 
days of waterlogging treatment (C) 
Vu Tien Binh & Sorgan S. K. Tai (2020) 
https://vjas.vnua.edu.vn/ 943 
Table 3. Effect of waterlogging duration on RWC, SPAD, and Fv/Fm index of mungbean at the recovery period 
Varieties Waterlogging (days) RWC (%) 
SPAD 
index 
Fv/Fm 
index 
DX11 
0 88.57 42.9ab 0.79a 
3 84.64 40.6b 0.75ab 
6 79.35 31.1de 0.62cd 
9 75.14 28.5e 0.57f 
DXVN5 
0 90.07 45.2a 0.80a 
3 84.49 42.8ab 0.75ab 
6 80.26 34.9c 0.65c 
9 78.53 31.3de 0.61cd 
DXVN7 
0 90.17 44.3a 0.82a 
3 85.32 42.6ab 0.76a 
6 81.83 35.2c 0.68bc 
9 80.52 33.6cd 0.64cd 
CV% 3.1 2.7 
LSD0.05 (V) 2.4 0.04 
LSD0.05 (W) 2.5 0.07 
LSD0.05 (VxW) 2.8 0.07 
Note: Values followed by the same letter in each treatment column are not significantly different at the 5% level. (V): Variety; (W): 
Waterlogging treatment. 
 Table 4. Effect of waterlogging duration on photosynthesis and total dry weight of mungbean at recovery period 
Varieties Waterlogging (days) 
Photosynthesis 
(µmol CO2/m
2 leaf/s) 
Total dry weight 
(gram) 
DX11 
0 29.33ab 3.97bc 
3 27.51c 3.76cd 
6 22.08de 3.04e 
9 21.40de 2.93e 
DXVN5 
0 30.26a 4.22ab 
3 29.11a 4.01bc 
6 22.96d 3.36de 
9 20.54e 3.07e 
DXVN7 
0 29.52ab 4.59a 
3 28.47bc 4.26ab 
6 23.14d 3.61cd 
9 22.62d 3.20e 
CV% 3.4 3.8 
LSD0.05 (V) 2.1 0.23 
LSD0.05 (W) 2.3 0.47 
LSD0.05 (VxW) 1.7 0.42 
Note: Values followed by the same letter in each treatment column are not significantly different at the 5% level. (V): Variety; (W): 
Waterlogging treatment. 
Effects of waterlogging duration on germination, physiological characteristics, and yield of mungbean 
944 Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Sciences 
 Table 5. Effect of waterlogging duration on yield components and seed yield of mungbean 
Varieties 
Waterlogging 
(days) 
Pods per plant Seeds per pod 
100-seed 
weight (g) 
Seed yield 
(g plant-1) 
Yield 
reduction (%) 
DX11 
0 14.3ab 7.1a 5.05 5.12ab 
3 11.6cd 6.9a 4.83 4.67b 8.9 
6 7.1ef 6.7a 4.53 3.34cd 33.9 
9 6.6f 6.7a 4.32 3.08d 39.1 
DXVN5 
0 14.8a 7.1a 5.11 5.27a 
3 12.3bc 6.9a 5.03 4.86ab 7.8 
6 8.4ef 6.8a 4.65 3.73c 29.2 
9 8.2ef 6.8a 4.57 3.41cd 35.3 
DXVN7 
0 15.1a 7.2a 5.19 5.33a 
3 13.8ab 7.1a 5.06 5.02ab 5.6 
6 9.3de 6.9a 4.74 3.81c 28.5 
9 8.5ef 6.8a 4.68 3.65c 31.4 
CV% 2.3 2.6 3.5 
LSD0.05 (V) 1.9 0.8 0.22 
LSD0.05 (W) 2.7 1.2 0.45 
LSD0.05 (VxW) 2.4 1.3 0.48 
Note: Values followed by the same letter in each treatment column are not significantly different at the 5% level. (V): Variety; (W): 
Waterlogging treatment. 
DXVN5, and DXVN7 by 39.1%, 35.3%, and 
31.4%, respectively; followed by 6 days of 
waterlogging. Seed yield also declined at 3 days 
of waterlogging but did not differ significantly 
compared to the control. Among three mungbean 
varieties, the highest values of yield components 
and seed yield were observed in DXVN7 variety 
under waterlogging conditions, followed by 
DXVN5 variety. The lowest values of yield 
components and seed yield were recorded in 
DX11 under waterlogging conditions. 
Plant yield was also affected under 
waterlogging stress. In our experiment, 
waterlogging at the seedling stage decreased seed 
yield primarily by reducing the number of pods 
per plant and 100-seed weight. On the other 
hand, the reductions in root growth, leaf water 
potential, and leaf photosynthesis under 
waterlogging in mungbean might have resulted 
in decreasing yield components and seed yield. It 
was reported in mungbean with a waterlogging 
duration of more than 6 days (Kumar et al., 2013; 
Ahmed et al., 2002) and at 4 days of 
waterlogging (Amin et al., 2017; Amin et al., 
2016). 
Conclusions 
Waterlogging duration affected the 
germination of mungbean varieties. The 
germination percentages and fresh radicle 
weights of waterlogging treatments were lower 
than those in the control treatment. Seed 
germination at 12 and 24h of waterlogging did 
not decreased significantly; whilst germination 
percentages and fresh radicle weight decreased 
the most significantly at 48 and 72h of 
waterlogging. 
Waterlogging treatments also inhibited the 
growth and development of three mungbean 
varieties at the seedling stage. A longer 
waterlogging duration caused a higher decrease 
in the height of plant, root dry weight, RWC, 
SPAD, Fv/Fm index, leaf photosynthesis rate, 
Vu Tien Binh & Sorgan S. K. Tai (2020) 
https://vjas.vnua.edu.vn/ 945 
total dry weight, and seed yield of all mungbean 
varieties. At 9 days of waterlogging, the highest 
reduction in physiological traits and seed yield 
was observed, followed by 6 days of 
waterlogging. Among the three mungbean 
varieties, DXVN7 had the highest figures in the 
above parameters, whereas the lowest figures 
were seen in the DX11 variety. 
Acknowledgements 
The authors would like to thank the Vietnam 
National University of Agriculture for providing 
equipment and facilities needed to conduct the 
research. 
References 
Ahmed S., Nawata E. & Sakuratani T. (2002). Effect of 
waterlogging at vegetative and reproductive growth 
stages on photosynthesis, leaf water potential and yield 
in Mungbean. Plant Production Science. 5(2): 117-
123. 
Ahmed S., Nawata E. & Sakuratani T. (2006). Changes of 
endogenous ABA and ACC, and their correlations to 
photosynthesis and water relations in mungbean 
(Vigna radiata L. Wilczek cv. KPS1) during 
waterlogging. Environmental and Experimental 
Botany. 57(3): 278-284. 
Amin M., Karim M., Islam S. & Hossain M. (2016). Effect 
of flooding on growth and yield of mungbean 
genotypes. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural 
Research. 41(1): 151-162. 
Amin M., Karim M., Khaliq Q., Islam M. & Aktar S. 
(2017). The influence of waterlogging period on yield 
and yield components of mungbean. The 
Agriculturists. 15(2): 88-100. 
Chippendale G. (2008). The effect of soaking in water on 
the seed of some gramineae. Annals of Applied 
Biology. 21(2): 225-232. 
Dat F., Capelli N., Folzer H., Bourgeade P. & Badot P. 
(2004). Sensing and signaling during plant flooding. 
Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 42(4): 273-282. 
Ezin V., Pena R. & Ahanchede A. (2010). Flooding 
tolerance of tomato genotypes during vegetative and 
reproductive stages. Brazilian Journal of Plant 
Physiology. 22(1): 131-142. 
Islam R., Hamid A., Khaliq A., Haque M., Ahmed U. & 
Karim A. (2010). Effects of soil flooding on roots, 
photosynthesis and water relations in mungbean 
(Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek). Bangladesh Journal of 
Botany. 39(2): 241-243. 
Jackson M. & Drew M. (1984). Effects of flooding on the 
growth and metabolism of herbaceous plants. In: 
Kozlowski T. (Ed.). Flooding and plant growth. 
Academic, London. 47-128. 
Kumar P., Pal M., Joshi R. & Sairam R. (2013). Yield, 
growth and physiological responses of mung bean 
[Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek] genotypes to 
waterlogging at vegetative stage. Physiology and 
Molecular Biology of Plants. 19(2): 209-220. 
Malik A., Colmer T., Lambers H. & Schortemeyer M. 
(2001). Changes in the physiological and 
morphological traits of roots and shoots of wheat in 
response to different depths of waterlogging. 
Australian Journal of Plant Physiology. 28(11): 1121-
1131. 
Min X. & Bartholomew D. (2005). Effects of flooding and 
drought on ethylene metabolism, titratable acidity and 
fruiting of pineapple. Acta Horticulturae. 666: 135-
148. 
Sairam K., Kumutha D., Ezhilmathi K., Deshmukh S. & 
Srivastava C. (2008). Physiology and biochemistry of 
waterlogging tolerance in plants. Biologia Plantarum. 
52(3): 401-412. 
Singh D. & Singh B. (2011). Breeding for tolerance to 
abiotic stresses in mungbean. Journal of Food 
Legumes. 24(2): 83-90. 
Ullah J. (2006). Effect of waterlogging on germination, 
emergence and subsequent development of mungbean 
(Vigna radiata) cv. Kanti. Karnataka Journal of 
Agricultural Sciences. 19(3): 513-516. 
Vu Tien Binh & Nguyen Viet Long (2015). 
Characterization of agronomical and physiological 
traits related to nitrogen fixation of nodule bacteria 
(Rhizobium) in soybean at flowering stage under 
waterlogging conditions. Journal of Science and 
Development, Vietnam National University of 
Agriculture. 13(4): 485-494. 
Wang X., Deng Z., Zang W., Meng Z., Chang X. & 
Mouchao L. (2017). Effect of waterlogging duration at 
different growth stages on the growth, yield and 
quality of Cotton. Journal of Plos ONE. 12(1): 1-14. 
Weatherley P. (1950). Studies in water relations of cotton 
plants. The field measurement of water deficit in 
leaves. New Phytologist. 49: 81-87. 
Zhang J., Song Z., Yang Z., Li H., Lu Q. & Kong Q. (2015). 
Physiological and molecular adjustment of cotton to 
waterlogging at peak-flowering in relation to growth 
and yield. Field Crops Research. 179: 164-172.