Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-sv6ng Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T18:25:22.272Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The course and magnitude of water stress in Lolium perenne and Dactylis glomerata

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. K. Jackson
D. K. Jackson
Affiliation:
Botany Department, Imperial College, London, S.W.7*
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Simulated swards of Dactylis glomerata (var. S.37) and Lolium perenne (var. S.23) were grown in large lysimeters or vertical pipes of 15 cm diameter, both sufficiently deep to allow largely unrestricted root development.

Rainfall was excluded, and the effect of a drying cycle on the plant water balance was compared with irrigated controls in a sequence of sampling harvests at increasing soil water deficits.

Leaf water potential (ΨL) fell during the day, both in treatments and controls, to levels which might be expected to reduce extension growth and, frequently, stomatal diffusion. Rapid recovery occurred in the evening to levels which might allow normal functioning of growth processes not dependent on sunlight. Defoliation reduced plant stress and stomatal restriction.

The amelioration of plant water stress appeared to require a reduction in atmospheric evaporative demand, and irrigation had relatively little effect. The possibility is discussed that the major benefits of irrigation are other than through the relief of water stress within the plant. The significance of this is considered in relation to conventional irrigation techniques.

The leaf water status was more sensitive to drought, transpiration was reduced more, and the root system extended more slowly in Dactylis than in Lolium. Consequently, the onset of permanent wilting due to exhaustion of water from the profile was delayed compared with Lolium. It is deduced that this characteristic might enhance the survival of Dactylis in prolonged drought, but prove disadvantageous in terms of growth during short droughts, when reduced stomatal opening might limit CO2 uptake. This would not be an impediment, however, if investigations suggesting that partial closure has a minor effect on CO2 uptake compared with that on transpiration were to be confirmed.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 82 , Issue 1 , February 1974 , pp. 19 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Acevedo, E., Hsiao, T. C. & Henderson, D. W. (1971). Immediate and subsequent growth responses of maize leaves to change in water status. Plant Physiology, Lancaster 48, 631–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyer, J. S. (1970). Leaf enlargement and metabolic rates in corn, soybean and sunflower at various leaf water potentials. Plant Physiology, Lancaster 46, 233–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carr, M. K. V. (1971). The internal water status of the tea plant (Camellia sinensis): some results illustrating the use of the pressure chamber technique. Agricultural Meteorology 9, 447–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, I. R. & Troughton, J. H. (1971). The relative role of stomata in transpiration and assimilation. Planta 97, 325–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ehlig, C. F. & Gardner, W. R. (1964). Relationship between transpiration and the internal water relations of plants. Agronomy Journal 56, 127–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ethertngton, J. R. (1962). The growth of Alopecurus pratensis L. and Agrostis tenuis SIBTH in relation to soil moisture conditions. Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Gaastra, P. (1963). Climatic control of photosynthesis and respiration. In Environmental Control of Plant Growth (ed. Evans, L. T.). New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Garwood, E. A. (1971). Reportofthe Grassland Research Institute, 1970.Google Scholar
Garwood, E. A. & Williams, T. E. (1967). Growth, water use and nutrient uptake from the subsoil by grass swards. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 69, 125–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goode, J. E. (1971). Report of the East Mailing Research Station, 1970.Google Scholar
Hoffman, E. J. & Rawlins, S. L. (1971). Growth and water potential of root crops as influenced by salinity and relative humidity. Agronomy Journal 63, 877–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itai, C. & Vaadia, Y. (1971). Cytokinin activity in water stressed shoots. Plant Physiology, Lancaster 47, 87–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackson, D. K. (1971). The effects of drought on the growth and water balance of Lolium perenne and Dactylis glomerata. Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. K. (1974). Some characteristics of perlite as an experimental growth medium. Plant and Soil (in Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawlor, D. W. (1972 a). Reportof the Rothamsted Experimental Station, 1971, part 1, pp. 109–10.Google Scholar
Lawlor, D. W. (1972 b). Growth and water use of Lolium perenne. I. Water transport. Journal of Applied Ecology 9, 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meidner, H. & Mansfield, T. A. (1968). Physiology of Stomata. London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Newbould, P. (1968). Ecological Aspects of the Mineral Nutrition of Plants (ed. Rorison, I. H.). In British Ecological Society Symposium 9, 177–91.Google Scholar
Newman, E. I. (1966). A method of estimating the total length in a root sample. Journal of Applied Ecology 3, 139–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, E. I. (1969). Resistance to water flow in soil and plant. I. Soil resistance in relation to amounts of root; theoretical estimates. Journal of Applied Ecology 6, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passioura, J. B. (1972). The effect of root geometry on the yield of wheat growing on stored water. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 23, 745–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pisek, A. & Winkler, E. (1956). Water saturation, deficit, stomatal movement and photosynthesis. Protoplasma 46, 597–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarth, G. W. & Shaw, M. (1951). Stomatal movement and photosynthesis in Pelargonium. II. Effects of water deficit and of chloroform: photosynthesis in guard cells. Plant Physiology, Lancaster 26, 581–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholander, P., Hammel, H. T., Bradstreet, E. D. & Hammingsen, E. A. (1965). Sap pressure in vascular plants. Science, New York 148, 339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slatyer, R. O. (1967). Plants–Water Relationships. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Slavik, B. (1965). The influence of decreasing hydration level on photosynthetic rate in the thalli of the hepatic Conocephallum conicum. In Water Stress in Plants (ed. Slavik, B.). Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiles, W. & Williams, T. E. (1965). The response of a ryegrass-white clover sward to various irrigation regimes. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 65, 351–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waring, R. H. & Cleaby, B. C. (1967). Plant water stress: evaluation by pressure bomb. Science, New York 155, 1248–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiersum, L. K. (1957). The relationship of the size and structural rigidity of pores to their penetration by roots. Plant Soil 9, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar