Agricultural Science; Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 ISSN 2690-5396 E-ISSN 2690-4799 https://doi.org/10.30560/as.v1n1p18 18 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Evaluation of Drought Tolerance Indices and Nitrogen Fertilization for Some Groundnut (Arachis Hypogaea L.) Genotypes Iancu Paula1, Păniță Ovidiu1 & Soare Marin1 1 Faculty of Agronomy, University of Craiova, Romania Correspondence: Ovidiu Păniță, Faculty of Agronomy, University of Craiova, Libertății Street, No. 19, Romania. E-mail: ovixfp@yahoo.com Received: November 7, 2019 Accepted: December 2, 2019 Online Published: December 23, 2019 Abstract Water is essential to maximize crop yield and quality. This natural resource has assumed huge importance, especially in the warmest areas, where drought and environmental degradation has affected agricultural production. In order to identify drought tolerance of some groundnut genotypes and to investigate the relationships between seed yield, quality and drought tolerance indices a study was made using 10 promising genotypes. The experiment was carried out during 2014-2017 and sowed under randomized block design with four replicates. It included three factors: two levels of irrigation (a1 – non - irrigated and a2 - irrigated), two levels of fertilization (b1 – non-fertilized and b2 - 100 active Nitrogen/ha) and genotype (C1-C10). Seed yield depending on the influence of the factor, varied from 535.95 Kg/ha (non-irrigated) to 2020.95 Kg/ha (irrigated); from 1055.30 Kg/ha (non-fertilized) to 1501 Kg/ha (fertilized) and from 1111.30 Kg/ha to 1388 Kg/ha depending on genotype. Same influence factors for protein content varied from 25.65% (irrigated) to 28.61% (non-irrigated); from 26.33% (non-fertilized) to 27.93% (fertilized) and from 25.59% to 28.52% depending on genotype. Stress susceptibility index (SSI) varied from 0.964 to 1.040; Stress Tolerance Index (STI) from 0.138 to 0.435; Mean Productivity (MP) from 883.5 to 1616.0; Geometric Mean Productivity (GMP) from 750.3 to 1332.7; Tolerance index (TOL) from 933.0 to 1844.0; Harmonic Mean (HM) from 637.2 to 1099.0; Yield Index (YI) 0.777 to 1.308 and Yield Stability Index (YSI) from 0.236 to 0.309. High values of SSI, STI, YI, DI, RDI and SSPI indicate drought tolerance and those variants present high stability. Keywords: fertilization, irrigation, PCA analysis, sandy soils 1. Introduction Groundnut is a self-pollinating species and an annual herbaceous legume crop (Adinya et al., 2010). They have the potential to fix atmospheric nitrogen at the rate of 21 to 206 kg/ha annually in soils through root nodule bacterium. They belongs to the genus Rhizobium, thus improves soil fertility (Yakubu et al., 2010). The amount of N-fixed in nodulated legumes is highly variable due to environmental conditions such as: solar irradiance (Izaguirre-Mayoral & Sinclair, 2009, pp. 807-818), drought (Sinclair & Vadez, 2012, pp. 501-512), soil temperature Divito & Sadras, 2014, pp. 161–171) or other deficiencies. Nitrogen is an important element for efficient production of groundnut. Adequate supply of nitrogen fertilizer is essential for obtaining better plants growth and yield. An application of 10kgN/ha at the time of sowing is recommended for soils with moderate to low nitrogen (Fagbemigun & Oguntola, 2019, pp. 86-94). Lack of nitrogen is observed when leaves turn into yellow and eventually, the plant’s growth stops. In other cases, too much nitrogen is provided for the plant, it normally leads to watering of protoplasm and brittleness of the plant itself which would result in becoming vulnerable to diseases and pests (Awadalla & Abbas, 2017, pp. 40-46). Fertilizers and variety represents adequate agricultural practices to increase yield and quality to groundnut crop (Iancu Paula et al., 2014). The selection of high yielding genotypes is important for any crop productivity per unit area (Seadh, S.E. et al., 2017). Although groundnuts are known to be more tolerant to drought stress than most other related plant species (Wan et al., 2014), drought seems to become one of the important abiotic stresses for crop productivity. High temperatures from the summer months can destroy many of the heat-sensitive species. Groundnuts are plants that grow on large areas in warm regions but may be affected by drought in certain phases of growth such as flowering and pods formation. as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 19 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Groundnut consumption is in continuous increase in Romania so adapting or creating new resistant/tolerance varieties is an important theme for researchers. Also, high yielding and of quality genotypes are preferred in the context of climate change. So, given the economic potential of groundnut, optimal fertilizer use, appropriate crop and soil fertility management practices could enhance productivity, food security and income of smallholder farmers from South region. Groundnut research experiences are set up in highly variable, low to medium rainfall and poor soil. Generally, the historical average annual rainfall is below 500 mm (occasionally 700 mm). In agricultural policy terms, this region is considered to be less favored area (Soare et al., 2016). The aim of this study is to investigate growth and yield response of groundnut genotypes as influenced by nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation. 2. Method To evaluate yield and its quality, ten groundnut genotypes subjected to the influence of two irrigation levels and two different doses of Nitrogen, in a field experiment was conducted at Tamburesti Research Station, of University of Craiova, Romania, during 2014-2017, located at latitude of 44°1'40'' N, longitude 23°56'9'' E. The sandy soil contains 6-8% physical clay. The depth of the phreatic water is approximately at 7m from the surface of dunes. The difference of the levels between dunes and interdunes varies between 2- m. The quantity of humus is low (0.3- 0.5% at the sand of dune and 0.6-1.2 at the sand of interdune). The reaction of these sands varies from weak acid till neutral (D.H. = 6.3-7.1), while the total capacity of cation exchange is reduced (3-5m is at 100/g soil in the dune and 5-7m is at 100/g soil at interdune). The sands are very poor in nitrogen and phosphor and mediocre supplied with potassium (0.03-0.05% total nitrogen; 2-5 mg/100 g soil phosphor assimilable and approximately 12 mg/100g soil assimilable potassium) (sand analysis made in Chemistry Laboratory of Faculty of Agronomy). The experiment was carried out during 2014-2017 and sowed in randomized block design with three replicates. It included three factors: two levels of irrigation (a1 – non - irrigated and a2 - irrigated), two levels of fertilization (b1 – non-fertilized and b2 - 100 active Nitrogen/ha) and genotype (C1-C10). Data were statistically analyzed and means were compared by least significant differences (LSD), P=0.05. Drought tolerance indices were calculated using the formulas: Stress susceptibility index (SSI) = (1- Ys/Yp) / (1- (Ys/Yp) Tolerance (TOL) = Yp -Ys Mean productivity (MP) = (Yp-Ys) / 2 Geometric mean productivity (GMP) = Yp − Ys Stress tolerance index (STI) = (Ys x Yp) / Yp 2 Yield index (YI) = Ys / Ys Yield stability index (YSI) = Ys / Yp Harmonic mean (HM) = (2xYsxYp) / (Yp+Ys) Sensitivity drought index (SDI) = (Yp-Ys) / Yp Drought resistance index (DI) = Ys 2 / (𝑌s x Yp) Relative drought index (RDI) = (Ys/Yp) / (Ys/Yp) Stress susceptibility percentage index (SSPI) = (Yp-Ys) x 100 / (2 x Yp) In order to analyze the yield potential under irrigation or drought conditions, the Yp values were considered the values of the AxBxC interaction from A2 level (irrigation), being of a2bici type. The Ys values were considered the values of the AxBxC interaction from A1 level (drought), being of a1bici type. Correlation analysis yield, protein content and drought tolerance indices was performed to determine the best drought-tolerant genotypes and indices. Principal component analysis (PCA) was performed based on the analyzed indices. Both correlation and PCA were performed by IBM SPSS Version 2011 and MS Office Excel 2016. 3. Results and Discussions Agriculture uses 11% of the world’s land surface for crop production. It also uses 70% of all water withdrawn from aquifers, streams and lakes (FAO, 2011). For increasing agricultural yield it must use rationally doses of fertilizer as well as research for the possibility of water supplying. Tamburesti Research Station is often subjected to unpredictable periods of water deficit and high temperatures in various stages of plants development. Mostly, the climate of the region is arid, characterized by cold winters and as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 20 Published by IDEAS SPREAD hot/dry summers. Three of the four experimentation years (2014-2017) were considered with drought, average temperatures being of 26°C and 400mm rain water, with 4 degrees above, respective 300mm under the average of the last 30 years. Factor A: Analysis of yield under the influence of this factor, indicate that the mean of the irrigated variants recorded significant differences compared to the average of non-irrigated variants. In case of protein content, the average of variants in non-irrigated registered significant differences compared to the average of irrigation variants (table 1). It can see that drought can lead to a substantial decline in yield and this reduction depends on the genotype. Water stress causes a significant reduction in groundnut lines pod yield/ha and other characteristics (Nassar et al., 2018), so that water availability is a critical factor for a successful groundnut production. Factor B: Analysis of yield from the average of the fertilized variants showed significant differences compared to the mean of non-fertilized variants. In the case of protein content, also the average of fertilized variants recorded significant differences compared to the mean of the non-fertilized variants. Table 1. Factor A analysis influence on yield and protein content Factor Factor Level A B Yield (kg/ha) Protein (%) Yield (kg/ha) Protein (%) First level 535.95+85.641b 28.61+4.82a 1055.30+599.83b 26.33+2.05b Second level 2020.95+405.976a 25.65+1.08b 1501.60+912.34a 27.93+1.70a Mean 1278.45+245.809 27.13+2.95 1278.45+756.09 27.13+1.87 LSD 5 % 35.70 2.61 76.440 0.673 *Mean followed by similar letters in each column, are not significantly different at the 5% level of probability. Applying nitrogen fertilizer dose of N90 twice, before sowing and in vegetation, leads to the obtaining of a very significant increase of production 1321 kg/ha (Dima et al., 2013). Same authors reported a protein content ranging from 21.3% in the control variant unfertilized and 23.9% in the variant fertilized with N60P60K60 and nitrogen was given 1/3 at sowing + 2/3 in vegetation. The effects of N fertilization in oil seeds increase protein content but also have an adverse effect on oil content (Maheswari et al., 2017). Romania is being placed in the north limit of cultivation areal of groundnut, where the interaction genotype x environment is very high, making difficult the identification of some cultivars easily adaptable to the sudden change of temperature which appears along vegetation period and to different levels of ensuring the heat factor from one year to another (Soare and Iancu, 2011). As concern the method of irrigation, it seems that the application of micro-irrigation in groundnut has shown that the technique results in high water use efficiency, saves water, reduces fertilization requirement, provides better quality crop and higher pods yield (Jeetendra, K.S. et all., 2016). Factor C: Analysis on yield of this factor leaded to a best result by genotype C10 which, along with the second genotype C9, recorded significant differences compared to the last 7 classified genotypes. In the analysis of factor C influence on protein content, the first classified genotype, C1, shows significant differences compared to all other analyzed genotypes (table 2). as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 21 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Table 2. Factor C analysis on yield and protein content Index C level Yield (kg/ha) Protein (%) C1 1111.75+742.76 f 28.52+2.33 a C2 1215.50+809.22 e 27.75+2.09 b C3 1232.25+813.72 de 27.50+2.18 bc C4 1246.25+826.87 cde 27.34+1.90 bcd C5 1275.75+831.99 cd 27.24+1.88 cd C6 1281.25+834.08 cd 27.05+2.04 de C7 1304.25+844.81 bc 26.92+1.97 def C8 1351.25+857.26 ab 26.78+2.10 e C9 1378.25+861.46 a 26.55+1.95 f C10 1388.00+872.16 a 25.59+0.99 f Mean 1278.45+829.43 27.12+1.94 LSD 5 % 58.357 0.443 *Mean followed by similar letters in each column, are not significantly different at the 5% level of probability Referring to the analysis of the influence of factors AxB on yield, the differences between the variants are significant, the best result being obtained by a2b2 variant, fertilized and irrigated. The last classified variant is a1b1, non-fertilized and non-irrigated variant. In the case of protein content, the differences between variants are significant, the best result being realized by a1b2 variant, non-irrigated and fertilized. The last classified variant is a2b1, non-fertilized and irrigated (table 3). Ghanbari et al., 2011, reported that yield, plant growth and nutrient uptake reduces under conditions of drought. Junjittakarn et al., 2013 sustain that water regimes can significantly affects nutrient uptakes of peanut, but selection of genotypes for high nutrient uptakes could be done under in any water regimes because the interactions between genotype and water regimes were not significant, showing the consistency of the nutrient uptakes across water regimes. Table 3. Factors A and B interaction analysis influence on yield and protein content Indices Factors level Yield (kg/ha) Protein (%) A level B level a1 a2 a1 a2 b1 470.40+38.63d 1640.20+151.27b 27.96+1.64b 24.69+0.57d b2 601.50+74.49c 2401.70+141.62a 29.25+1.45a 26.61+0.39c Mean 1278.45+101.50 27.13+1.01 LSD 5 % 108.102 0.952 *Mean followed by similar letters in each column, are not significantly different at the 5% level of probability In the case of the analysis of the AxC interaction factor influence on the yield, between the first three variants (a2C10, a2C9 and a2C8), genotypes with high potential under irrigation, there were not found significant differences, first two differentiating significant from the last 17 ranked variants. The last variant (a1c1), C10 genotype under irrigation, recorded significant negative differences compare with the first 12 ranked variants. In the case of protein content, the first ranked variant (a1c1), C1 genotype under irrigation, recorded significant differences compare with all others variants. The last two ranked variants (a2c9 and a2c10) recorded significant differences compare with the first 14 ranked variants (table 4). as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 22 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Table 4. Factors A and C interaction analysis influence on yield and protein content Indices Factors level Yield (kg) Protein (%) A level C level a1 a2 a1 a2 c1 466.00+91.09j 1757.50+452.39f 30.61+0.97a 26.45+0.84fghi c2 493.50+85.07ij 1937.50+426.98e 29.43+1.32b 26.09+1.11fghi c3 507.00+68.67hij 1957.50+435.46de 29.13+1.77bc 25.89+1.02fghi c4 508.00+58.23hij 1984.50+439.02cde 28.88+1.20cd 25.82+0.97ghij c5 527.00+59.20ghij 2024.50+416.96cde 28.75+1.21cd 25.74+0.96hijk c6 530.00+60.91ghij 2032.50+415.08cd 28.56+1.62cde 25.54+1.07ijk c7 552.00+80.28ghi 2056.50+453.41bc 28.38+1.50de 25.47+1.13ijk c8 577.50+93.79gh 2125.00+413.66ab 28.31+1.59de 25.26+1.27jk c9 600.00+105.64g 2156.50+409.71a 27.96+1.43e 25.15+1.28k c10 598.50+114.14g 2177.50+405.56a 26.08+0.57fghi 25.12+1.14k Mean 1278.450+254.26 27.13+1.20 LSD 5 % 82.529 0.627 *Mean followed by similar letters in each column, are not significantly different at the 5% level of probability In the case of the analysis of the BxC interaction factors influence on the yield, between the first four ranked variants (b2c10, b2c9, b2c8 and b2c7) there were no statistical differences, the first two differentiating significant from the last 16 ranked variants. The last ranked variants (b1c1) recorded significant negative differences compare with all others genotypes (table 5). Concerning the protein content, the first ranked variant (b2c1) recorded significant differences compare with all others differences, except with the next two ranked variants (b2c3 and b2c3). The last ranked variants (b1c10) recorded significant negative differences compare with the first 18 ranked variants. Table 5. Factors B and C interaction analysis influence on yield and protein content Indices Factors level Yield (kg/ha) Protein (%) B level C level b1 b2 b1 b2 c1 883.50+513.685i 1340.00+728.60d 28.170+2.815 bcde 28.880+1.951 a c2 991.50+513.68h 1439.50+908.20c 26.750+1.919 gh 28.765+1.875 ab c3 1017.50+616.25h 1447.00+969.77c 26.520+1.769 hi 28.490+2.235abc c4 1028.50+618.72h 1464.00+981.43bc 26.475+1.800 hi 28.220+1.715bcde c5 1061.50+635.69gh 1490.00+993.11bc 26.425+1.880 hijk 28.060+1.632cde c6 1068.50+640.01fgh 1494.00+1001.54bc 26.200+2.237 hijk 27.900+1.577cdef c7 1069.00+643.32fgh 1539.50+1004.00ab 26.085+2.190 ijk 27.760+1.450def c8 1125.50+643.81efg 1577.00+1011.35ab 25.840+2.261 jk 27.725+1.584ef c9 1147.50+687.56ef 1609.00+1010.80a 25.695+2.224 kl 27.405+1.312fg c10 1160.00+708.47e 1616.00+1001.45a 25.115+1.129l 26.075+0.590ijk Mean 1278.450+1008.88 27.128+1.81 LSD 5 % 82.529 0.627 *Mean followed by similar letters in each column, are not significantly different at the 5% level of probability as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 23 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Table 6 indicate the influence of the 3 factors on yield and the first ranking variants are the most productive genotypes, C7, C8, C9 and C10, under irrigation and with fertilization, those ones differentiating significantly from all other variants, except the next three ranked under them. The last ranking variants are all without fertilization and irrigation in order of their yield potential. Table 6. Analysis of influence of the factors A, B and C interaction on yield and protein content Indices Factors level Yield (kg/ha) Protein (%) A level BXC level a1 a2 a1 a2 b1c1 417.00+29.4418 1350.00+77.1112 30.64+1.201 25.70+0.2715-16 b1c2 432.00+55.4318 1551.00+84.8711 28.40+1.005-7 25.10+0.1716-17 b1c3 455.00+60.6217-18 1580.00+64.3710 28.05+0.836-8 24.99+0.3316-18 b1c4 457.00+20.7817-18 1600.00+173.2110 28.00+1.066-9 24.95+0.0916-18 b1c5 478.00+31.1816-18 1645.00+40.739-10 27.95+1.326-9 24.90+0.3616-18 b1c6 482.00+38.4616-18 1655.00+51.969-10 27.82+2.156-9 24.58+0.1417-19 b1c7 483.00+22.5216-18 1655.00+74.329-10 27.68+2.046-9 24.49+0.4317-19 b1c8 500.00+17.3216-18 1751.00+88.338-9 27.57+1.947-10 24.11+0.1918-19 b1c9 505.00+12.1216-18 1790.00+127.588 27.39+1.918-11 24.00+0.3419 b1c10 508.00+59.7716-18 1825.00+21.707-8 27.35+0.198-11 24.10+0.3118-19 b2c1 515.00+112.5816-18 2165.00+112.586 30.57+0.951 27.19+0.208-12 b2c2 555.00+60.6215-17 2324.00+60.625 30.45+0.431 27.08+0.299-13 b2c3 559.00+45.7315-17 2335.00+108.735 30.20+1.911-2 26.78+0.2910-14 b2c4 559.00+15.5915-17 2369.00+105.594-5 29.76+0.401-3 26.68+0.2910-14 b2c5 576.00+24.2515-16 2404.00+240.253-5 29.54+0.072-3 26.58+0.2911-15 b2c6 578.00+48.5015-16 2410.00+408.502-5 29.30+0.523-4 26.50+0.2611-15 b2c7 621.00+36.3714-15 2458.00+360.371-4 29.07+0.023-5 26.45+0.3212-15 b2c8 655.00+60.6214-15 2499.00+60.621-3 29.05+0.973-5 26.40+0.2612-15 b2c9 695.00+25.9814 2523.00+25.981-2 28.52+0.714-6 26.29+0.2713-15 b2c10 702.00+20.7813 2530.00+20.781 26.02+0.9014-15 26.13+0.2314-15 Mean 1278.78+46.92 27.16+0.65 LSD 5 % 116.714 0.900 *Mean followed by similar numbers in each column, are not significantly different at the 5% level of probability Regarding the influence of the three factors on the protein content, the first ranking variants are the ones of the C1 genotype with fertilization and no fertilization, respectively C2, C3 and C4 genotypes variants with fertilization. The last two variants are the ones of the C9 and C10 genotypes with no fertilization and under irrigation. Drought indices are considered a measure to provide information about drought based on loss of yield in drought conditions in comparison to normal conditions and are used for screening drought tolerant genotypes. In order to analyze the yield potential both under irrigation or drought conditions, the Yp values were considered the values of the AxBxC interaction from A2 level (irrigation), being of a2bici type. The Ys values were considered the values of the AxBxC interaction from A1 level (drought), being of a1bici type. The values are shown in table 7. Thus, the MP, GMP and HM show the yield potential under irrigation or drought conditions. In the comparative analysis, based on the absolute value of those indices it can be seen the variants with the highest yield potential both under irrigation and in drought conditions, high values emphasizing the variants with highest potential. TOL, as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 24 Published by IDEAS SPREAD YSI and SDI show the drought tolerance, in the comparative analysis based on the values of those indices, being able to identify the variants with the highest yield stability, lowest values indicated them. SSI, STI, YI, DI, RDI and SSPI show the drought tolerance of each variant reported on the average of the all variants, high values showing variants with high stability. Table 7. Analysis of drought indexes values Index Variants Y s ( a 1 b i c i) Y p ( a 2 b i c i) P s (a 1b ic i ) P p (a 2b ic i ) SS I TO L M P G M P ST I Y I Y SI H M SD I D I RD I SS PI aib1c1 417.0 1350.0 30.6 25.7 0.941 933.0 883.5 750.3 0.138 0.777 0.309 637.2 0.691 0.240 1.163 23.1 aib1c2 432.0 1551.0 28.4 25.1 0.982 1119.0 991.5 818.6 0.164 0.805 0.279 675.8 0.721 0.224 1.049 27.7 aib1c3 455.0 1580.0 28.1 25.0 0.969 1125.0 1017.5 847.9 0.176 0.848 0.288 706.5 0.712 0.244 1.085 27.8 aib1c4 457.0 1600.0 28.0 25.0 0.973 1143.0 1028.5 855.1 0.179 0.852 0.286 710.9 0.714 0.243 1.076 28.3 aib1c5 478.0 1645.0 28.0 24.9 0.966 1167.0 1061.5 886.7 0.193 0.891 0.291 740.8 0.709 0.259 1.094 28.9 aib1c6 482.0 1655.0 27.8 24.6 0.965 1173.0 1068.5 893.1 0.195 0.898 0.291 746.6 0.709 0.262 1.097 29.0 aib1c7 483.0 1655.0 27.7 24.5 0.964 1172.0 1069.0 894.1 0.196 0.900 0.292 747.8 0.708 0.263 1.099 29.0 aib1c8 500.0 1751.0 27.6 24.1 0.973 1251.0 1125.5 935.7 0.214 0.932 0.286 777.9 0.714 0.266 1.075 31.0 aib1c9 505.0 1790.0 27.4 24.0 0.977 1285.0 1147.5 950.8 0.221 0.941 0.282 787.8 0.718 0.266 1.063 31.8 aib1c10 508.0 1825.0 27.4 24.1 0.983 1317.0 1166.5 962.9 0.227 0.947 0.278 794.8 0.722 0.264 1.048 32.6 aib2c1 515.0 2165.0 30.6 27.2 1.038 1650.0 1340.0 1055.9 0.273 0.960 0.238 832.1 0.762 0.228 0.896 40.8 aib2c2 555.0 2324.0 30.5 27.1 1.036 1769.0 1439.5 1135.7 0.316 1.034 0.239 896.0 0.761 0.247 0.899 43.8 aib2c3 559.0 2335.0 30.2 26.8 1.036 1776.0 1447.0 1142.5 0.320 1.042 0.239 902.0 0.761 0.249 0.902 43.9 aib2c4 559.0 2369.0 29.8 26.7 1.040 1810.0 1464.0 1150.8 0.324 1.042 0.236 904.6 0.764 0.246 0.889 44.8 aib2c5 576.0 2404.0 29.5 26.6 1.035 1828.0 1490.0 1176.7 0.339 1.073 0.240 929.3 0.760 0.257 0.902 45.2 aib2c6 578.0 2410.0 29.3 26.5 1.035 1832.0 1494.0 1180.2 0.341 1.077 0.240 932.4 0.760 0.258 0.903 45.3 aib2c7 621.0 2458.0 29.1 26.5 1.018 1837.0 1539.5 1235.5 0.374 1.157 0.253 991.5 0.747 0.292 0.952 45.4 aib2c8 655.0 2499.0 29.1 26.4 1.005 1844.0 1577.0 1279.4 0.401 1.221 0.262 1037.9 0.738 0.320 0.987 45.6 aib2c9 695.0 2523.0 28.5 26.3 0.986 1828.0 1609.0 1324.2 0.429 1.295 0.275 1089.8 0.725 0.357 1.037 45.2 aib2c10 702.0 2530.0 26.0 26.1 0.984 1828.0 1616.0 1332.7 0.435 1.308 0.277 1099.0 0.723 0.363 1.045 45.2 Mean 536.6 2021.0 28.7 25.7 0.995 1484.4 1278.8 1040.4 0.273 1.000 0.269 847.0 0.731 0.267 1.013 36.7 Max 702.0 2530.0 30.6 27.2 1.040 1844.0 1616.0 1332.7 0.435 1.308 0.309 1099.0 0.764 0.363 1.163 45.6 Min 417.0 1350.0 26.0 24.0 0.941 933.0 883.5 750.3 0.138 0.777 0.236 637.2 0.691 0.224 0.889 23.1 Std. dev. 82.5 409.0 1.3 1.1 0.032 334.7 242.9 181.8 0.094 0.154 0.023 137.0 0.023 0.038 0.088 8.3 Analyzing the correlation coefficients values for the drought tolerance indices, it can be seen that some of them show the same thing, because of the high correlation values between them. Those types of correlation with values almost equal with 1 or -1 were found between: YI and Ys; SSI and YSI; SSI and SDI; SSI and RDI; TOL and SSPI; YSI and SDI; YSI and RDI and between SDI and RDI. The yield recorded under irrigation conditions (Yp) is in very strong correlation with the next indices: Ys, SSI, TOL, MP, GMP, STI, Yi, HM, SDI and SSPI. The correlation between Yp and Ys suppose that the genotypes with as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 25 Published by IDEAS SPREAD high potential under irrigation conditions obtain the highest yield values on drought. Ys is in high strong correlation with: TOL, MP, GMP, STI, HM, DI and SSPI. The indices that show high yield potential under irrigation conditions are in high positive correlation between them. There are strongly negative correlations between indices that show yield potential and indices that show yield stability on drought (table 8). Table 8. Analysis of correlations between drought indices Ys (a1bici) Yp (a2bici) Ps (a1bici) Pp (a2bici) SSI TOL MP GMP STI YI YSI HM SDI DI RDI Yp (a2) 0.919 Ps (a1) -0.058 0.238 Pp (a2) 0.551 0.759 0.715 SSI 0.467 0.776 0.575 0.790 TOL 0.876 0.995 0.305 0.791 0.832 MP 0.943 0.998 0.190 0.732 0.732 0.986 GMP 0.974 0.984 0.110 0.681 0.654 0.962 0.994 STI 0.982 0.974 0.097 0.679 0.614 0.948 0.987 0.998 Yi 1.000 0.919 -0.058 0.551 0.467 0.876 0.943 0.974 0.982 YSI -0.467 -0.776 -0.575 -0.790 -1.000 -0.832 -0.732 -0.654 -0.614 -0.467 HM 0.995 0.954 0.015 0.612 0.553 0.920 0.972 0.992 0.995 0.995 -0.553 SDI 0.467 0.776 0.575 0.790 1.000 0.832 0.732 0.654 0.614 0.467 -1.000 0.553 DI 0.841 0.559 -0.439 0.125 -0.084 0.476 0.614 0.697 0.729 0.841 0.084 0.782 -0.084 RDI -0.467 -0.776 -0.575 -0.790 -1.000 -0.832 -0.732 -0.654 -0.614 -0.467 1.000 -0.553 -1.000 0.084 SSPI 0.876 0.995 0.305 0.791 0.832 1.000 0.986 0.962 0.948 0.876 -0.832 0.920 0.832 0.476 -0.832 *P 5 %=0.44 Significant positive correlations among YS and (YP, STI, YI, MP, YSI, GMP and HM), YP and (TOL, YR, STI, YI, MP, GMP and HM) reported others authors (Abejide et al., 2017). Same authors concluded that drought tolerance indices such as STI, MP, GMP, YI and HM which showed significantly high positive correlations with yield in both stressed and non-stressed conditions are good indicators which can be used for the screening and selection of drought tolerant genotypes also in Bambara groundnut. Also, Ilker et al., 2011 concluded that MP, GMP and STI values are convenient parameters to select high yielding wheat genotypes both in stress and non- stress conditions. PCA analysis: Concerning the PCA analysis, the first component reaches over 74% from total variance, while the second component reaches over 21% from total variance. Together they have more than 95% from total variance. The first component shows the yield potential both under irrigation and under drought conditions and low stability of the yield, the indices that quantify this potential being DI, YI, HM, GMP, STI, MP, SDI, SSI and SSPI. The second component shows the variants with high protein content both under irrigation or drought conditions, the indices that quantify this being YSI and RDI. The correlation coefficients values of the two components and the analyzed indices are shown in table 9. All indices have at least 1 positive value for the correlation with the two components. In the case of the first component, 12 of the analyzed indices are in very high positive correlation, while only two indices, YSI and RDI, are in very high negative correlation with the second component. as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 26 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Table 9. Variation of correlation coefficients values between the two components and the analyzed indices Ei ge nv al ue s % o f Cu m ul at iv e Y s ( a 1 b i c i) Y p ( a 2 b i c i) P s (a 1b ic i ) P p (a 2b ic i ) SS I M P G M P ST I Y I Y SI H M SD I D I RD I SS PI C1 11 .9 0 74 .3 8 74 .3 8 0. 88 5 0. 99 6 0. 31 0 0. 80 5 0. 82 0 0. 98 9 0. 96 7 0. 95 4 0. 88 5 -0 .8 20 0. 92 7 0. 82 0 0. 49 4 -0 .8 20 0. 99 9 C2 3. 39 21 .1 9 95 .5 7 0. 46 4 0. 08 2 -0 .7 69 -0 .3 73 -0 .5 43 0. 14 8 0. 25 5 0. 29 3 0. 46 4 0. 54 3 0. 37 4 -0 .5 43 0. 86 0 0. 54 3 -0 .0 14 In the case of the second component, 9 of the analyzed indices have positive values, from which only DI is in strongly positive correlation with these one. Concerning the indices that are in negative correlation with the second component, only the correlation between one and Ps has a high negative value. The variants ranking according to components score is shown in table 10 and figure 1. Table 10. The variants ranking according to components score based on PCA analysis The component sign Index Variants Yield (kg/ha) Protein (%) C1 C2 ai bici a1bici (Ys) a2bici (Yp) Yp-Ys (%) a1bici (Ys) (%) a2bici (Yp) (%) + + aib2C7 621.0014-15 2458.001-4 74.74 29.073-5 26.4512-15 aib2C8 655.0014-15 2499.001-3 73.79 29.053-5 26.4012-15 aib2C9 695.0014 2523.001-2 72.45 28.524-6 26.2913-15 aib2C10 702.0013 2530.001 72.25 26.0214-15 26.1314-15 Mean 668.25 2502.5 73.31 28.17 26.32 + - aib2C1 515.0016-18 2165.006 76.21 30.571 27.198-12 aib2C2 555.0015-17 2324.005 76.12 30.451 27.089-13 aib2C3 559.0015-17 2335.005 76.06 30.201-2 26.7810-14 aib2C4 559.0015-17 2369.004-5 76.40 29.761-3 26.6810-14 aib2C5 576.0015-16 2404.003-5 76.04 29.542-3 26.5811-15 aib2C6 578.0015-16 2410.002-5 76.02 29.303-4 26.5011-15 Mean 557 2334.5 76.14 29.97 26.80 - - aib1C1 417.0018 1350.0012 69.11 30.641 25.7015-16 aib1C2 432.0018 1551.0011 72.15 28.40-7 25.1016-17 aib1C3 455.0017-18 1580.0010 71.20 28.056-8 24.9916-18 b1C4 457.0017-18 1600.0010 71.44 28.006-9 24.9516-18 Mean 440.25 1520.25 70.97 28.77 25.19 - + aib1C5 478.0016-18 1645.009-10 70.94 27.956-9 24.9016-18 aib1C6 482.0016-18 1655.009-10 70.88 27.826-9 24.5817-19 aib1C7 483.0016-18 1655.009-10 70.82 27.686-9 24.4917-19 aib1C8 500.0016-18 1751.008-9 71.44 27.577-10 24.1118-19 aib1C9 505.0016-18 1790.008 71.79 27.398-11 24.0019 aib1C10 508.0016-18 1825.007-8 72.16 27.358-11 24.1018-19 Mean 492.67 1720.17 71.34 27.63 24.36 *Mean followed by similar numbers in each column, are not significantly different at the 5% level of probability Principal component analysis accounted 95.57% with the first PC of 74.38 % whereas the second PC of 21.19%. Regarding the variants ranking, the variants that have both components with high values are the variants where there were cropped C7 to C10 genotypes and there were applied the fertilization, those ones proving under irrigation and drought conditions the highest yield potential and the lowest drought tolerance and high protein content on drought and the lowest protein content under irrigation. as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 27 Published by IDEAS SPREAD The variants with first component with high value and second component with low value are the variants where there were cropped C1 to C6 genotypes and there were applied the fertilization, those ones proving under irrigation conditions high yield potential and on drought conditions low yield potential, low yield drought tolerance and the highest protein content on drought and low protein content under irrigation. The variants that have both components with low values are the variants where there were cropped C1 to C4 genotypes and there were not applied fertilization, those ones proving under irrigation and drought conditions the lowest yield potential and the highest drought tolerance and the highest protein content. The variants with first component with low value and second component with high value are the variants where there were cropped C5 to C10 genotypes and there were not applied fertilization, proving under drought conditions the low yield potential and high yield potential under irrigation and medium protein content both under irrigation and drought conditions and also good yield drought tolerance. In another experiment with winter wheat, principal component analysis was found of 96.063% from the variance which indicated limited variation in the response to reduced N fertilization and vice versa (Iancu Paula et al. 2019). Others authors also observed that the rank of genotypes for some studied traits under water stress changes from that under well watering conditions (Nassar et al. 2018). Figure 1. Biplot for drought or combine effect of all factors 4. Conclusions For groundnut crops, water support is the most important factor, then fertilization and nitrogen factors. Some computed indices for the drought tolerance have very high values of the correlation coefficients, which proves that those ones are similar in determining the drought tolerance. The yield under irrigation (Yp) is in positive correlation with the next indices: Ys, SSI, TOL, MP, GMP, STI, Yi, HM, SDI and SSPI. The high correlation between Yp and Ys means that the genotypes with high yield potential under irrigation conditions have also high yield potential under drought conditions compare with the ones with low potential under irrigation. The indices that indicate high yield potential under irrigation conditions are in high correlation between them. On the PCA analysis, the first component shows the variants that have the highest yield potential both under irrigation or drought conditions and low tolerance under drought, those indices being: DI, YI, HM, GMP, STI, MP, aib1C1 aib1C2 aib1C3 aib1C4 aib1C5 aib1C6 aib1C7 aib1C8 aib1C9 aib1C10 aib2C1 aib2C2 aib2C3 aib2C4 aib2C5 aib2C6 aib2C7 aib… aib2C9 aib2C10 YI Yp Ps Pp TOL MP GMP STIYs Y… HM SDI SSI DI R… SSPI -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 -1.8 -1.3 -0.8 -0.3 0.3 0.8 1.3 Co m po ne nt 2 (2 1. 19 % ) Component 1 (74.38 %) as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 28 Published by IDEAS SPREAD SDI, SSI and SSPI. The second component shows the variants with high protein content both under irrigation or drought conditions, the indices that quantify this being YSI and RDI. References Abejide, D. R., Falusi, A. O., Adebola, M. O., Gana, A. S., Muhammad, L. M., & Gado, A. A. (2017). Evaluation of drought tolerance indices in some nigerian bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea L. VERDC.) landraces. IJABR, 8(2), 142-148. Adinya, I. B., Enun, E. E., & Ijoma, J. U. (2010). Exploring profitability potentials in groundnut production through agroforestry practices: a case study in Nigeria. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 20(2), 123 – 131. Awadalla, A. O., & Abbas, M. T. (2017). Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Yield and its components as affected by N-fertilization and diazotroph inoculation in Toshka desert soil-South Valley-Egypt. Environ Risk Assess Remediat. 1(3), 40-46. https://doi.org/10.4066/2529-8046.100023 Dima, M., Croitoru, M., & Drăghici, R. (2013). Research on application of NPK fertilizers in peanuts grown on sandy soils. Scientific Papers. Series A. Agronomy, LVI, 223-225. Divito, G. A., & Sadras, V. O. (2014). How do phosphorus, potassium and sulphur affect plant growth and biological nitrogen fixation in crop and pasture legumes? A meta-analysis. F. Crop Res., 156, 161- 171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.11.004 Fagbemigun, O. V., & Oguntola, E. A. (2019). Effect of organomineral nitrogen starter fertilizer on the growth and yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.). Advances in Plants & Agriculture Research, 9(9), 86-94. FAO. (2011). The state of the world’s land and water resources for food and agriculture (SOLAW) – Managing systems at risk. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome and Earthscan, London. Ghanbari, A., Siahsar, B., Tovassoli, A., Esmaeilian, Y., & Babaeian, M. (2011). Effect of uniconazole and cycocel on growth, yield and nutrient uptake of pearl millet under drought stress condition. Am-Euras J. Agric. Environ. Sci., 10, 857-862. Iancu, P., Păniță, O., Soare, M. (2019). Response of some new wheat genotypes to nitrogen fertilization and prospects of yield breeding based on yield elements. Romanian Agricultural Research, 36, 41-49. Iancu, P., Soare, M., & Matei, G. (2014). The influence of chemical fertilizers and soil upon the crop formation to groundnuts and the correlation with the phenomenon of withering. Analele Universității din Craiova, seria Agricultură – Montanologie – Cadastru (Annals of the University of Craiova – Agriculture, Montanology, Cadastre Serie), XLIV, 107-112. Ilker, E., Tatar, O., Aykut, T. F., Tosun, M., & Turk, J. (2011). Determination of tolerance level of some wheat genotypes to post anthesis drought. Turkish Journal of Field crops, 16(1), 59-63. Izaguirre-Mayoral, M. L., & Sinclair, T. R. (2009). Irradiance regulates genotype-specific responses of Rhizobium - nodulated soybean to increasing iron and two manganese concentrations in solution culture. J. Plant Physiol, 166(8), 807-818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2008.10.006 Jeetendra, K. S., Kumar, A., Kumar, V., Rani, S., & Banerjee, A. (2016). Response of groundnut under micro irrigation - a review. Progressive Research – An International Journal, 11(Special-VII), 4455-4459. Junjittakarn, J., Pimratch, S., Jogloy, S., Hotoon, W. N., Singkham, N., Vorasoot, N., Toomsan, B., Holbrook, C. C., & Patanothai, A. (2013). Nutrient uptake of peanut genotypes under different water regimes. International Journal of Plant Production, 7(4), 677-692. Maheswari, M., Murthy, A. N. G., & Shanker, A. K. (2017). Nitrogen Nutrition in Crops and Its Importance in Crop Quality. Sources of Reactive Nitrogen, Environmental and Climate Effects, Management Options and Policies, 175-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811836-8.00012-4 Nassar, S. M. A., Al-Kady, A. M. A., & El-Saka, Z. I. (2018). Effect of Drought Stress on Yield and Yield Components of 20 Peanut Genotypes Grown under Newly Reclaimed Soil. Egypt. J. Agro., 40(1), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.21608/agro.2018.2275.1088 Seadh, S. E., Abido, W. A. E., Abd, El-Al., A. N., & Ibrahim, Z. A. A. (2017). Effect of NPK levels on productivity and quality of some groundnut genotypes under newly reclaimed sandy soils conditions. J. Plant Production, Mansoura Univ., 8(5), 605-609. Sinclair, T. R., & Vadez, V. (2012). The future of grain legumes in cropping systems. Crop Pasture Sci., 63, 501- 512. https://doi.org/10.1071/CP12128 as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 1, No. 1; 2019 29 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Soare, M., & Iancu, P. (2011). Selection indices used to groundnut for choosing the initial material of breeding by irradiation. Analele Universitatii din Craiova, seria Agricultura - Montanologie – Cadastru, XLI(2), 231-236. Soare, M., Iancu, P., & Matei, G. (2016). Drought and its influence upon groundnut crop. SGEM 16th International Multidisciplinary Scientific Geoconference. Advances in Biotechnology. Book 6(1), 517-524. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2016/b61/s25.068. Wan, L., Wu, Y., Huang, J., Dai, X., Lei, Y., Yan, L., Jiang, H., Zhang, J., Varshney, R. K., & Liao, B. (2014). Identification of ERF genes in peanuts and functional analysis of AhERF008 and AhERF019 in abiotic stress response. Funct. Integr. Genom., 14, 467–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10142-014-0381-4 Yakubu, H., Kwari, J. D., & Tekwa, J. A. (2010). Nodulation and N2 – fixation by grain legumes as affected by Boron Fertilizers in Sudano – Sahelian Zone of North eastern Nigeria. American Eurasian Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Science, 8(5), 514-519. Copyrights Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). << /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Error /CompatibilityLevel 1.4 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.0000 /ColorConversionStrategy /CMYK /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize true /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments true /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 300 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 300 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile () /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False /CreateJDFFile false /Description << /ARA /BGR /CHS /CHT /CZE /DAN /DEU /ESP /ETI /FRA /GRE /HEB /HRV (Za stvaranje Adobe PDF dokumenata najpogodnijih za visokokvalitetni ispis prije tiskanja koristite ove postavke. Stvoreni PDF dokumenti mogu se otvoriti Acrobat i Adobe Reader 5.0 i kasnijim verzijama.) /HUN /ITA /JPN /KOR /LTH /LVI /NLD (Gebruik deze instellingen om Adobe PDF-documenten te maken die zijn geoptimaliseerd voor prepress-afdrukken van hoge kwaliteit. De gemaakte PDF-documenten kunnen worden geopend met Acrobat en Adobe Reader 5.0 en hoger.) /NOR /POL /PTB /RUM /RUS /SKY /SLV /SUO /SVE /TUR /UKR /ENU (Use these settings to create Adobe PDF documents best suited for high-quality prepress printing. Created PDF documents can be opened with Acrobat and Adobe Reader 5.0 and later.) >> /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ << /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >> << /AddBleedMarks false /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks false /AddPageInfo false /AddRegMarks false /ConvertColors /ConvertToCMYK /DestinationProfileName () /DestinationProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /PresetSelector /MediumResolution >> /FormElements false /GenerateStructure false /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles false /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UseDocumentBleed false >> ] >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [612.000 792.000] >> setpagedevice