| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Blackland Research Center,, 808 E.Blackland Rd. Temple, TX, 76502
Dep. of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843-2474
* Corresponding author (gerik{at}brcsun0.tamu.edu).
Water stress reduces net CO2 assimilation (A) and yield of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), but our knowledge of the physiology, of water stress on A and assimilation capacity is incomplete. Experiments were conducted in a rain shelter-lysimeter facility in 1990 and 1991 to determine if the yields of two short-season cotton cultivars with common ancestry, TAMCOT HQ95 (HQ95) and G&P74 + (GP74), resulted from intrinsic differences in A and assimilation capacity. Water stress was imposed by withholding 0, 50 or 75, and 100% of the depleted soil water after flowering. Results indicated that both stomatal and nonstomatal factors were important in controlling A. HQ95 bad higher A and g than GP74 over leaf water potentials (
L) ranging from – 1.0 to – 3.2 MPa. Nonstomatal limitations to A were more important than stomatal factors when L was > – 1.5 MPa. Stomatal factors limited A when L was < – 1.5 MPa for both cultivars. The initial slope (Si) and the maximum A at high ci (Amax)declined with increasing water stress for both cultivars. The Si was greater for HQ95 than GP74 over the range in L and suggest that HQ95 had higher ribulose-l,5-bisphosphate carboxylase-oxygenase activity than GP74. Increasing water stress reduced Amax equally in both cultivars. This suggests that electron transport processes for ribulose-l,5-bisphosphate regeneration of the cultivars did not differ. Therefore, stomatal and nonstomatal CO2 assimilation processes are important in limiting A of water stressed cotton. Intrinsic differences in these processes enable some cotton cultivars to better tolerate water stress.
Received for publication March 27, 1995.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. T. Baker, D. C. Gitz, P. Payton, D. F. Wanjura, and D. R. Upchurch Using Leaf Gas Exchange to Quantify Drought in Cotton Irrigated Based on Canopy Temperature Measurements Agron. J., April 4, 2007; 99(3): 637 - 644. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Ennahli and H. J. Earl Physiological Limitations to Photosynthetic Carbon Assimilation in Cotton under Water Stress Crop Sci., September 23, 2005; 45(6): 2374 - 2382. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. N. Stiller, J. J. Read, G. A. Constable, and P. E. Reid Selection for Water Use Efficiency Traits in a Cotton Breeding Program: Cultivar Differences Crop Sci., May 6, 2005; 45(3): 1107 - 1113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. T. Pettigrew Physiological Consequences of Moisture Deficit Stress in Cotton Crop Sci., July 1, 2004; 44(4): 1265 - 1272. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. MEDRANO, J. M. ESCALONA, J. BOTA, J. GULIAS, and J. FLEXAS Regulation of Photosynthesis of C3 Plants in Response to Progressive Drought: Stomatal Conductance as a Reference Parameter Ann. Bot., June 15, 2002; 89(7): 895 - 905. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. FLEXAS and H. MEDRANO Drought-inhibition of Photosynthesis in C3 Plants: Stomatal and Non-stomatal Limitations Revisited Ann. Bot., February 1, 2002; 89(2): 183 - 189. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| The SCI Journals | Agronomy Journal | Vadose Zone Journal | |||
| Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education |
Soil Science Society of America Journal | ||||
| Journal of Plant Registrations | Journal of Environmental Quality |
The Plant Genome | |||
