pp 1–14 | Cite as

A comparative study on physiological responses to drought in walnut genotypes (RX1, Vlach, VX211) commercially available as rootstocks

  • T. KnipferEmail author
  • C. Reyes
  • M. Momayyezi
  • P. J. Brown
  • D. KluepfelEmail author
  • A. J. McElroneEmail author
Original Article


Key message

Walnut production in California depends on the performance of three clonal hybrid rootstocks, and this study provides evidence that roots of genotype RX1 exhibit unique properties to cope with water stress induced by drought.


Three hybrid genotypes RX1 (Juglans microcarpa × J. regia), Vlach and VX211 (both J. hindsii × J. regia) are the most commonly used rootstocks for walnut production in California. These rootstocks provide various levels of disease resistance, but their performance under drought is unknown. Based on our findings on xylem stress physiology of native walnut species, we hypothesize that hybrid genotypes originating from wild species native to drier habitats will exhibit superior root performance under drought stress. Using a whole-plant experimental approach, we evaluated root and canopy physiological characteristics of 2-year-old tree saplings of RX1, Vlach and VX211 under two soil moisture treatments (‘control’ 70–90% and ‘drought’ 20–40% w/w soil moisture). In control saplings, root biomass was twofold smaller in RX1 as compared to VX211, but root system hydraulic conductance (Kro, predominantly cell-to-cell pathway) was more than 50% greater in RX1 and Vlach as compared to VX211. The relatively low Kro of VX211 was related to a larger number of root cortical cell layers and endodermis development. In drought-stressed saplings, root biomass was reduced by 27% (P < 0.05) in VX211 but no significant reduction in root biomass was detected in RX1 and Vlach. Maintenance of root biomass under drought in RX1 and Vlach was associated with an 80% decrease in Kro, a threefold increase in leaf intrinsic water-use efficiency, and maintenance of leaf turgor as compared to control conditions. Drought-induced reductions in Kro were linked to the formation of a multiseriate root endodermis in all three genotypes.


Hydraulic conductance Juglans Root performance Water-use efficiency Water stress 



We would like to thank Sierra Gold Nursery (Yuba City, CA, USA) for providing the plant material and Kenneth Shackel (UC Davis) for his helpful comments on this manuscript. We also want to thank Jackson Grom, Molly Clemens, Sarah Tracy, Elisabeth Forrestel and Idan Reingwirtz for their help with data collection.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

468_2019_1947_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.1 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1177 kb)


  1. Albacete A, Martinez-Andjar C, Martinez-Perez A, Thompson AJ, Dodd IC, Perez-Alfocea F (2015) Unravelling rootstock s scion interactions to improve food security. J Exp Bot 66:2211–2226PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aleta N, Vilanova A, Diaz R, Voltas J (2009) Genetic variation for carbon isotope composition in Juglans regia L.: relationships with growth, phenology and climate origin. Ann For Sci 66:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aroca R, Porcel R, Ruiz-Lozano JM (2012) Regulation of root water uptake under abiotic stress conditions. J Exp Bot 63:43–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barrios-Masias FH, Knipfer T, Walker MA, McElrone AJ (2018) Differences in hydraulic traits of grapevine rootstocks are not conferred to a common Vitis vinifera scion. Funct Plant Biol 46:228–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behrooz A, Vahdati K, Rejali F, Lotfi M, Sarikhani S, Leslie C (2019) Arbuscular mycorrhiza and plant growth-promoting bacteria alleviate drought stress in walnut. HortScience 54:1087–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blum A (2017) Osmotic adjustment is a prime drought stress adaptive engine in support of plant production. Plant Cell Environ 40:4–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown L, Ramos D, Uriu K, Marrangoni B (1977) Walnut moisture stress studies. Report to the California Walnut BoardGoogle Scholar
  8. Buchner R, Fulton A, Gilles C, Lampinen B, Shackel K, Metcalf S, Little C, Prichard T, Schwankl L (2008) Effects of regulated deficit irrigation on walnut (Juglans regia) grafted on Northern California Black (Juglans hindsii) or Paradox Rootstock. Acta Hort 792:141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buzo T, McKenna J, Kaku S, Anwar SA, McKenry MV (2009) VX211, a vigorous new walnut hybrid clone with nematode tolerance and a useful resistance mechanism. J Nematol 41:211–216PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Christensen L (2003) Rootstock selection. In: Christensen PL, Dokoozlian KN, Walker AM, Wolpert JA (eds) Wine grape varieties in California. University of California Agricultural and Natural Resources Publication, Oakland, pp 12–15Google Scholar
  11. Comas L, Becker S, Cruz VMV, Byrne PF, Dierig DA (2013) Root traits contributing to plant productivity under drought. Front Plant Sci 4:442PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Condon AG, Richards RA, Rebetzke GJ, Farquhar GD (2002) Improving intrinsic water-used efficiency and crop yield. Crop Sci 42:122–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Contador ML et al (2015) Root growth dynamics linked to above-ground growth in walnut (Juglans regia). Ann Bot 116:49–60PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cuneo IF, Knipfer T, Brodersen CR, McElrone AJ (2016) Mechanical failure of fine root cortical cells initiates plant hydraulic decline during drought. Plant Physiol 172:1669–1678PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. DeJong TM, Johnson RS, Doyle TF, Basile B (2004) Growth, yield and physiological behavior of size-controlling peach rootstocks developed in California. Acta Hortic 658:449–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. DeJong TM, Lindsay G, Almehdi A, Johnson RS, Day KR (2014) Performance and physiology of the Controller series of peach rootstocks. Acta Hortic 1058:523–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Delmas M, Delzon S, Cochard H, Herbette S (2018) Is there variability for xylem vulnerability to cavitation in walnut tree cultivars and species (Juglans spp.)? Hortic Sci 53:132–137Google Scholar
  18. Dudley SA (1996) Differing selection on plant physiological traits in response to environmental water availability: a test of adaptive hypotheses. Evolution 50:92–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Enstone DE, Peterson CA, Ma F (2003) Root endodermis and exodermis: structure, function and responses to the environment. J Plant Growth Regul 21:335–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Famula RA, Richards JH, Famula TR, Neale DB (2019) Association genetics of carbon isotope discrimination and leaf morphology in a breeding populations of Juglans regia L. Tree Genet Genomes 15:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Farquhar GD, Leary MHO, Berry JA (1982) On the relationship between carbon isotope discrimination and the intercellular carbon dioxide concentration in leaves. Aust J Plant Physiol 9:121–137Google Scholar
  22. Gambetta GA, Knipfer T, Fricke W, McElrone AJ (2017) Aquaporins and root water uptake. In: Tyerman SD (ed) Plant aquaporins. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  23. Goldhamer DA, Beede R, Sibbett S, DeJong TM, Ramos D, Phene RC, Doyle J (1987) Second year effects of deficit irrigation on walnut tree performance. Report to the California Walnut BoardGoogle Scholar
  24. Hasey J (2016) Selecting the right clonal rootstock for managing soil and pest problems. University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources. Accessed 2019
  25. Heschel MS, Riginos C (2005) Mechanisms of selection for drought stress tolerance and avoidance in Impatiens Capensis (Balsaminaceae). Am J Bot 92:37–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jerszurki D, Couvreur V, Maxwell T, de Carvalho Ramos Silva L, Matsumoto N, Shackel K, Moretti de Souza JL, Hopmans J (2017) Impact of root growth and hydraulic conductance on canopy carbon-water relations of young walnut trees (Juglans regia L.) under drought. Sci Hortic 266:342–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johnson R, Cody BA (2015) California agricultural production and irrigated water use. Congressional Research Service, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  28. Jones MM, Turner NC (1978) Osmotic adjustment in leaves of Sorghum in response to water deficits. Plant Physiol 61:122–126PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Knipfer T, Fricke W (2010) Root pressure and a solute reflection coefficient close to unity exclude a purely apoplastic pathway of radial water transport in barley (Hordeum vulgare). New Phytol 187:159–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Knipfer T, Fricke W (2011) Water uptake by seminal and adventitious roots in relation to whole-plant water flow in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). J Exp Bot 62:717–733PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knipfer T, Brodersen CR, Zedan A, Kluepfel DA, McElrone AJ (2015) Patterns of drought-induced embolism formation and spread in living walnut saplings visualized using X-ray microtomography. Tree Physiol 35:744–755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Knipfer T, Barrios-Masias F, Cuneo IF, Bouda M, Albuquerque CP, Brodersen CR, Kluepfel DA, McElrone AJ (2018) Variations in xylem embolism susceptibility under drought between intact saplings of three walnut species. Tree Physiol 38:1180–1192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kramer PJ, Boyer JS (1995) Water relations of plant and soil. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  34. Maurel C, Verducq L, Luu DT, Santoni V (2007) Plant aquaporins: membrane channels with multiple integrated functions. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:595–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McDowell N, Pockman WT, Allen CD et al (2008) Mechanisms of plant survival and mortality during drought: why do some plants survive while others succumb to drought? New Phytol 178:719–739PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Meng D, Fricke W (2017) Changes in root hydraulic conductivity facilitate the overall hydraulic response of rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars to salt and osmotic stress. Plant Physiol Biochem 113:64–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Meyer CJ, James LS, Peterson CA (2009) Environmental effects on the maturation of the endodermis and multiseriate exodermis of Iris germanica roots. Ann Bot 103:687–702PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. North GB, Nobel PS (1991) Changes in hydraulic conductivity and anatomy caused by drying and rewetting roots of Agave deserti (Agavaceae). Am J Bot 78:906–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Passioura JB (2002) Soil conditions and plant growth. Plant, Cell Environ 25:311–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Passioura J (2007) The drought environment: physical, biological and agricultural perspectives. J Exp Biol 58:113–117Google Scholar
  41. Rosati A, Metcalf S, Buchner R, Fulton A, Lampinen B (2006) Tree water status and gas exchange in walnut under drought, high temperature and vapour pressure deficit. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 81:415–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schreiber L, Franke RB (2011) Endodermis and exodermis in roots. In: eLS. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  43. Seibt U, Rajabi A, Griffiths Berry JA (2008) Carbon isotopes and water use efficiency: sense and sensitivity. Oecologia 155:441–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Steudle E, Peterson CA (1998) How does water get through roots? J Exp Bot 49:775–788Google Scholar
  45. Tomos D (2000) The plant cell pressure probe. Biotechnol Lett 22:437–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vahdati K, Lotfi N (2009) Abiotic stress tolerance in plants with emphasizing on drought and salinity stresses in walnut—chapter 10. In: Vahdati K (ed) Abiotic stress—plant responses and applications in agriculture, IntechOpen.
  47. Vahdati K, Lotfi N, Kholdebarin B, Hassani D, Amiri R, Mozaffari MR, Leslie C (2009) Screening for drought-tolerant genotypes of Persian Walnuts (Juglans regia L.) during seed germination. HortScience 44:1815–1819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Williams LE, Araujo FJ (2002) Correlations among predawn leaf, midday leaf, and midday stem water potential and their correlations with other measures of soil and plant water status in Vitis vinifera. J Am Hortic Sci 127:448–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhu J, Brown KM, Lynch JP (2010) Root cortical aerenchyma improves the drought tolerance of maize (Zea mays L.). Plant Cell Environ 33:740–749PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Viticulture and EnologyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Plant SciencesUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  3. 3.Crops Pathology and Genetics Research UnitUSDA-ARSDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations