scholarly journals Leaf Water Potentials of Perennial Grasses: Leaf Press and Pressure Chamber Evaluation

1982 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry R. Cox ◽  
H. Glenn Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Chamber ◽  
Leaf Water ◽  
Perennial Grasses ◽  
Water Potentials

Evaluation of the hydraulic press for measurement of leaf water potentials in cassava

1983 ◽  
Vol 101 (2) ◽  
pp. 407-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. Palta
Keyword(s):  
Water Potential ◽  
Leaf Water Potential ◽  
Hydraulic Press ◽  
Pressure Chamber ◽  
Leaf Water ◽  
Moisture Loss ◽  
Total Leaf Area ◽  
Water Potentials ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Poor Relationship

SUMMARYIn the application of the Scholander pressure chamber technique to cassava water relations studies, the leaf water potential measured on central lobules was initially compared with that measured on entire leaves (including petiole). Measurements made using both a Campbell-Brewster hydraulic press and a pressure chamber of the leaf water potential in six different cassava clones were also compared. Although the central lobules showed a greater sensitivity to moisture loss after sampling than entire leaves, their leaf water potential was in close agreement with those measured on the entire leaves (r3 = 0·96). Therefore, for routine and field estimates in cassava, measurements made on the central lobules may be used to avoid the large reduction in total leaf area. The Campbell-Brewster hydraulic press satisfactorily estimated leaf water potential in M.Col. 1684 clone, which had the longest and narrowest lobules, but in other clones the leaf water potential was overestimated at high leaf potential (> -12·5) and underestimated at low water potentials (< -12·5). Over a wide range of leaf water potentials, a poor relationship between leaf water potentials estimated with hydraulic press and with the pressure chamber was observed for cassava because press estimates are influenced by lobule length and lobule width.

Errors Arising From Rapid Water Loss in the Measurement of Leaf Water Potential by the Pressure Chamber Technique

1980 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 527 ◽  
Author(s):  
NC Turner ◽  
MJ Long
Keyword(s):  
Water Potential ◽  
Leaf Water Potential ◽  
Water Loss ◽  
Water Retention ◽  
Pressure Chamber ◽  
Leaf Water ◽  
Diurnal Changes ◽  
Water Potentials ◽  
Retention Characteristics ◽  
Flow Through

In rapidly transpiring leaves, the water potentials of uncovered leaves measured in a pressure chamber were 0.2-0.7 MPa lower than the water potentials of leaves that were covered with a plastic sheath from just prior to their excision to the completion of the measurement. The error in the water potential of uncovered leaves arose from rapid water loss in the first 30 s after excision. The degree to which the water potentials were lowered depended on the rate of transpiration, the leaf water potential at the time of excision, the species, and whether the plants were grown in the glasshouse or field. It is suggested that the variation between species and between glasshouse-grown and field-grown plants arises from differences in water retention characteristics of plant tissue as well as to differences in the rates of transpiration at excision. The size of the error induced by the rapid water loss on diurnal changes in leaf water potential is demonstrated and the effect of the error in the calculation of turgor potentials and in the resistances to water flow through the plant is discussed.

scholarly journals Comparisons of Leaf Water Potential and Xylem Water Potential in tomato Plants

1970 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 485 ◽  
Author(s):  
HD Barrs ◽  
B Freeman ◽  
J Blackwell ◽  
RD Ceccato
Keyword(s):  
Water Potential ◽  
Leaf Water Potential ◽  
Pressure Chamber ◽  
Leaf Water ◽  
Present Communication ◽  
Pressure Potential ◽  
Xylem Water Potential ◽  
Tomato Plants ◽  
Water Potentials ◽  
Xylem Pressure Potential

The rapidity and convenience of the pressure chamber technique for estimating leaf water potentials, especially under field conditions, has been remarked (Boyer 1967; Kaufmann 1968a, 1968b) and demonstrated (Klepper and Ceccato 1969). However, Kaufmann (1968a) showed that it is necessary to exercise caution .in using measurements made with the pressure chamber as direct estimates of leaf water potential. Instead, he recommended that calibration curves should be drawn up for each species, relating measurements of xylem pressure potential obtained with this technique to corresponding known leaf water potentials. The present communication reports such a relation for tomato leaves, which have not previously been studied in this way. Plant age is shown to affect the relation.

Photosynthesis Response of Sunlit and Shade Pepper (Capsicum annuum) Leaves at Different Positions in the Canopy Under Two Water Regimes

1994 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 377 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Alvino ◽  
M Centritto ◽  
FD Lorenzi
Keyword(s):  
Water Potential ◽  
Capsicum Annuum ◽  
Leaf Water Potential ◽  
Co2 Exchange ◽  
Leaf Water ◽  
Predawn Leaf Water Potential ◽  
Water Regimes ◽  
Water Potentials ◽  
Sun And Shade ◽  
Shade Leaves

Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) plants were grown in 1 m2 lysimeters under two different water regimes in order to investigate differences in the spatial arrangements of the leaves and to relate this to daily assimilation rates of leaves of the canopy. The control regime (well-watered (W) treatment) was irrigated whenever the accumulated 'A' pan evaporation reached 4 cm, whereas the water-stressed (S) treatment was watered whenever the predawn leaf water potential fell below -1 MPa. During the growing cycle, equal numbers of sun and shade leaves were chosen from the apical, middle and basal parts of the canopy, corresponding to groups of leaves of increasing age. The CO2 exchange rate (CER) was measured at 0830, 1230 and 1530 hours on 8 days along the crop cycle, on leaves in their natural inclination and orientation. Leaf water potentials were measured on apical leaves before dawn and concurrently with gas exchange measurements. Control plants maintained predawn leaf water potential at -0.3 MPa, but S plants reached values lower than -1.2 MPa. Midday leaf water potentials were about twice as low in the S plants as in the controls. Water stress reduced LA1 during the period of crop growth, and dry matter production at harvest. Stressed apical leaves appeared to reduce stress by changing their inclination. They were paraheliotropic around midday and diaheliotropic at 0830 and 1530 hours. The CER values of the S treatment were significantly lower than those of the W treatment in apical and middle leaves, whereas the CER of basal leaves did not differ in either treatments. In the S treatment, reduction in the CER values of sunlit apical leaves was more evident in the afternoon than at midday or early in the morning, whereas basal leaves were less affected by water than basal stress leaves if sunlit, and negligibly in shaded conditions.

Water stress affects the productivity, growth components, competitiveness and water relations of phalaris and white clover growing in a mixed pasture

1992 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 659 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Guobin ◽  
DR Kemp ◽  
GB Liu
Keyword(s):  
Water Stress ◽  
Soil Water ◽  
White Clover ◽  
Leaf Growth ◽  
Leaf Water ◽  
Water Potentials ◽  
Relative Water ◽  
Dry Conditions ◽  
Leaf Appearance ◽  
Water Contents

The effect of water stress during summer and recovery after rain on herbage accumulation, leaf growth components, stomatal conductance and leaf water relations of white clover (Trifolium repens cv. Haifa) and phalaris (Phalaris aquatica cv. Australian Commercial) was studied in an established mixed pasture under dryland (dry) or irrigated (wet) conditions. Soil water deficits under dry conditions reached 150 mm and soil water potentials in the top 20 cm declined to nearly -2 MPa after 50 days of dry weather. Water stress severely restricted growth of both species but then after rain fell, white clover growth rates exceeded those of phalaris. Under irrigation, white clover produced twice the herbage mass of phalaris but under dry conditions herbage production was similar from both species. Leaf appearance rates per tiller or stolon were slightly higher for white clover than phalaris but were reduced by 20% under water stress in both species. Leaf or petiole extension rates were more sensitive to water stress than leaf appearance rates and declined by 75% in phalaris and 90% in white clover. The ratio of leaf or petiole extension rates on dry/wet treatments was similar for both species in relation to leaf relative water contents, but in relation to leaf water potentials phalaris maintained higher leaf growth rates. Phalaris maintained a higher leaf relative water content in relation to leaf water potentials than did white clover and also maintained higher leaf water potentials in relation to the soil water potential in the top 20 cm. Stomata1 conductances for both species declined by 80-90% with increasing water stress, and both species showed similar stomatal responses to bulk leaf water potentials and leaf relative water contents. It is suggested that the poorer performance of white clover under water stress may be due principally to a shallower root system than phalaris and not due to any underlying major physiological differences. The white clover cultivar used in this study came from the mediterranean region and showed some different responses to water stress than previously published evidence on white clover. This suggests genetic variation in responses to water stress may exist within white clover. To maintain white clover in a pasture under dry conditions it is suggested that grazing practices aim to retain a high proportion of growing points.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document