LEAF EXPANSION IN FIELD-GROWN SUNFLOWER IN RESPONSE TO SOIL AND LEAF WATER STATUS

Citation
Vo. Sadras et al., LEAF EXPANSION IN FIELD-GROWN SUNFLOWER IN RESPONSE TO SOIL AND LEAF WATER STATUS, Agronomy journal, 85(3), 1993, pp. 564-570
Citations number
30
Categorie Soggetti
Agriculture
Journal title
ISSN journal
00021962
Volume
85
Issue
3
Year of publication
1993
Pages
564 - 570
Database
ISI
SICI code
0002-1962(1993)85:3<564:LEIFSI>2.0.ZU;2-A
Abstract
Leaf responses to soil water deficits in controlled environments may b e mediated by nonhydraulic root signals (RS). The aim of this study wa s to evaluate in the field the effects of RS and leaf water potential (psi(l)) on leaf expansion rate (LER) of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Two experiments were performed on a deep sandy-loam soil (Typic X erofluvent) in a Mediterranean environment under spring (Exp. 1) and s ummer conditions (Exp. 2). WET and DRY treatments were established at the 16th-leaf stage in both experiments. WET plots were irrigated dail y with an amount of water equal to the reference evapotranspiration of the previous day. DRY plots received no water during the treatment pe riod which was maintained until LER declined to about 30% of the WET c ontrols. A split-root (SR) treatment with the root zone divided in dry and wet sections was included in Exp. 2. Soil water content (theta(a) ), LER and psi(l) were measured. Responses of LER to soil drying were better described by psi(l) than by plant available water (PAW); i.e., the response of LER to PAW depended on evaporative demand, whereas a s ingle regression of psi(l) on LER fitted all the data (P < 0.001). Lea f expansion rate and psi(l) of DRY plants began to decline with respec t to that Of WET plants at similar PAW thresholds. The soil water cont ent in the dry soil zone of the SR plots WaS Similar to that in the DR Y plots during the first week of treatment whereas theta(a) in the wet zone allowed SR plants to maintain a water status similar to that Of WET controls. Split-rooted plants did not behave as DRY controls, as e xpected in the case of a significant root signal effect, but maintaine d LER similar to the WET plants. It is concluded that, under the condi tions of the present experiments, hydraulic effects were probably of m ore importance than nonhydraulic root signals in the regulation of sun flower leaf expansion.