HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Reddall, A. A. Articles by Sadras, V. O. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Reddall, A. A. Articles by Sadras, V. O. Agricola Articles by Reddall, A. A. Articles by Sadras, V. O. Related Collections Cotton Pest Management Systems Plant and Environment Interactions

Photosynthetic Response of Cotton to Spider Mite Damage: Interaction with Light and Compensatory Mechanisms

^a CSIRO Plant Industry and Cotton Catchment Communities CRC, Locked Bag 59, Narrabri NSW 2390, Australia
^b The Univ. of New England and Cotton Catchment Communities CRC, Armidale NSW 2351, Australia
^c South Australian Research and Development Institute–School of Agriculture, Food & Wine, The Univ. of Adelaide, Waite Campus, Australia

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Number of adult female T. urticae per leaf for L1 leaves in mite-infested and control plants grown in pots in the field. Error bars 2 SEM, and are not shown when smaller than the symbol.

View larger version (25K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. Relationship between net photosynthesis and photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) for mite-infested (+M) and control (–M) leaves of cotton plants grown in pots in the field. Effect of mite treatment for each PPFD level is ns = not significant; ** P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001. Boxes show parameters (mean ± SE) of the light-response curve (Eq. [1]), i.e., light-saturated photosynthesis (Pmax, µmol CO2 m–2 s–1), respiration (R, µmol CO2 m–2 s–1), and a fitted parameter of curvature [b, (µmol m–2 s–1) –1]. DAS, days after sowing.

View larger version (18K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. Number of adult female T. urticae in top (L1), medium (L2), and low (L3) canopy positions of mite-infested crops during two seasons. Error bars are 2 SEM and are not shown when smaller than the symbol. DAS, days after sowing.

View larger version (24K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. Net photosynthetic rate of leaves in top (L1), medium (L2), and low (L3) canopy positions in Season 1. Measurements were taken in basal and distal leaf sections. Error bars are 2 SEM and asterisks indicate mite effects: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001.

View larger version (20K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 5. Net photosynthetic rate of leaves in top (L1), and medium (L2) canopy positions in Season 2. Measurements were taken in basal and distal leaf sections. Error bars are 2 SEM and asterisks indicate mite effects: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 6. Dynamics of photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) incident at the leaf surface for leaves in mid (L2) and bottom (L3) canopy positions in mite-infested (+M) and uninfested controls (–M) in Season 1. Measurements were taken in basal and distal leaf sections. Error bars 2 SEM, and asterisks indicate significance on mite effects: *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 7. Relative chlorophyll content of leaves in top (L1), medium (L2), and low (L3) canopy positions of mite-infested (+M) and control (–M) crops in Season 1. Measurements were taken in basal and distal leaf sections. Error bars are 2 SEM and asterisks indicate mite effects: *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001. See "Methods" for an explanation of SPAD units.

View larger version (21K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 8. Relative chlorophyll content of leaves in top (L1), medium (L2), and low (L3) canopy positions of mite-infested (+M) and control (–M) crops in Season 2. Measurements were taken in basal and distal leaf sections. Error bars are 2 SEM and asterisks indicate mite effects: *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01. See "Methods" for an explanation of SPAD units.