Advertisement

Photosynthetica

, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 561–568 | Cite as

Changes of leaf water potential and gas exchange during and after drought in triticale and maize genotypes differing in drought tolerance

  • M.T. GrzesiakEmail author
  • S. Grzesiak
  • A. Skoczowski
Original Papers

Abstract

Influence of drought (D) on changes of leaf water potential (Ψ) and parameters of gas exchange in D-resistant and D-sensitive genotypes of triticale and maize was compared. Soil D (from −0.01 to −2.45 MPa) was simulated by mannitol solutions. At −0.013 MPa significant differences in Ψ, net photosynthetic rate (P N), transpiration rate (E), stomatal conductance (g s), and internal CO2 concentration (C i) of D-resistant and D-sensitive triticale and maize genotypes were not found. Together with the increase in concentration of the mannitol solution the impact of D on E and g s for D-sensitive genotypes (CHD-12, Ankora) became lower than for the D-resistant ones (CHD-247, Tina). Inversely, impact of D on Ψ was higher in D-sensitive than D-resistant genotypes. From 1 to 3 d of D, a higher decrease in P N was observed in D-resistant genotypes than in the D-sensitive ones. Under prolonged D (5–14 d) and simultaneous more severe D the decrease in P N was lower in D-resistant than in D-sensitive genotypes. Changes in Ψ, P N, E, and g s caused by D in genotypes differing in the drought susceptibility were similar for triticale and maize. Compared to control plants, increase of C i was different for triticale and maize genotypes. Hence one of the physiological reasons of different susceptibility to D between sensitive and resistant genotypes is more efficient protection of tissue water status in resistant genotypes reflected in higher decrease in g s and limiting E compared to the sensitive ones. Other reason, observed in D-resistant genotypes during the recovery from D-stress, was more efficient removal of detrimental effects of D.

Additional key words

internal CO2 concentration net photosynthetic rate osmotic drought stomatal conductance transpiration Zea 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baker, N.R.: Light-use efficiency and photoinhibition of photosynthesis in plants under environmental stress.-In: Smith, J.A.C., Griffiths, H. (ed.): Water Deficits. Plant Responses From Cell to Community. Pp. 221–235. BIOS Scientific Publ., Oxford 1993.Google Scholar
  2. Berkowitz, G.A., Chen, C., Gibbs, M.: Stromal acidification mediates in vivo water stress inhibition of nonstomatalcontrolled photosynthesis.-Plant Physiol. 72: 1123–1126, 1983.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blum, A., Ebercon, A.: Cell membrane stability as a measure of drought and heat tolerance in wheat.-Crop Sci. 21: 43–47, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyer, J.S.: Plant productivity and environment.-Science 218: 443–448, 1982.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradford, K.J., Hsiao, T.C.: Physiological responses to moderate water stress.-In: Lange, O.L., Nobel, P.S., Osmond, C.B., Ziegler, H. (ed.): Physiological Plant Ecology II. Pp. 263–324. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1982.Google Scholar
  6. Bunce, J.A.: Nonstomatal inhibition of photosynthesis by water stress. Reduction in photosynthesis at high transpiration rate without stomata closure in field-grown tomato.-Photosynth. Res. 18: 357–362, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chaves, M.M., Pereira, J.S., Maroco, J., Rodrigues, M.L., Ricardo, C.P.P., Osório, M.L., Carvalho, I., Faria, T., Pinheiro, C.: How plants cope with water stress in the field? Photosynthesis and growth.-Ann. Bot. 89: 907–916, 2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cornic, G., Briantais, J.-M.: Partitioning of photosynthetic electron flow between CO2 and O2 reduction in a C3 leaf (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) at different CO2 concentrations and during drought stress.-Planta 183: 178–184, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cornic, G., Fresnau, C.: Photosynthetic carbon reduction and carbon oxidation cycles are the main electron sinks for photosystem II activity during a mild drought.-Ann. Bot. 89: 887–894, 2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cornic, G., Massacci, A.: Leaf photosynthesis under drought stress.-In: Baker, N.R. (ed.): Photosynthesis and the Environment. Pp. 347–366. Kluwer Academic Publ., Dordrecht-Boston-London 1996.Google Scholar
  11. Day, T.A., Vogelmann, T.C.: Alternations in photosynthesis and pigment distributions in pea leaves following UV-B exposure.-Physiol. Plant. 94: 433–440, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fischer, R.A., Maurer, R.: Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. I. Grain yield responses.-Aust. J. agr. Res. 29: 897–912, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Giardi, M.T., Cona, A., Geiken, B., Kučera, T., Masojídek, J., Mattoo, A.K.: Long-term drought stress induces structural and functional reorganization of photosystem II.-Planta 199: 118–125, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graan, T., Boyer, J.S.: Very high CO2 partially restores photosynthesis in sunflower at low water potentials.-Planta 181: 378–384, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grzesiak, M.T.: [Effect of Drought Stress on Photosynthetic Apparatus and Productivity of Triticale and Maize Genotypes Differing in Drought Tolerance.]-Dr. Thesis. Cracow Agricultural University, Cracow 2004. [In Polish.]Google Scholar
  16. Grzesiak, S.: Genotypic variation between maize (Zea mays L.) single cross hybrids in response to drought stress.-Acta Physiol. Plant. 23: 443–456, 2001.Google Scholar
  17. Grzesiak, S., Grzesiak, M.T., Filek, W., Stabryła, J.: Evaluation of physiological screening tests for breeding drought resistant triticale (× Triticosecale Wittmack).-Acta Physiol. Plant. 25: 29–37, 2003.Google Scholar
  18. He, J.X., Wang, J., Liang, H.G.: Effect of water stress on photochemical function and protein metabolism of photosystem II in wheat leaves.-Physiol. Plant. 93: 771–777, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Janáček, J.: Stomatal limitation of photosynthesis as affected by water stress and CO2 concentration.-Photosynthetica 34: 473–476, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keutgen, N., Chen, K., Lenz, F.: Responses of strawberry leaf photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence and macronutrient contents to elevated CO2.-J. Plant Physiol. 150: 395–400, 1997.Google Scholar
  21. Kicheva, M.I., Tsonev, T.D., Popova, L.P.: Stomatal and nonstomatal limitations to photosynthesis in two wheat cultivars subjected to water stress.-Photosynthetica 30: 107–116, 1994.Google Scholar
  22. Kriedemann, P.E., Dowton, W.J.S.: Photosynthesis.-In: Paleg, L.G., Aspinall, D. (ed.): The Physiology and Biochemistry of Drought Resistance in Plants. Pp. 283–314. Academic Press, Sydney-New York-London-Toronto-San Francisco 1981.Google Scholar
  23. Lauer, M.J., Boyer, J.S.: Internal CO2measured directly in leaves. Abscisic acid and low leaf water potential cause opposing effects.-Plant Physiol. 98: 1310–1316, 1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lawlor, D.W., Cornic, G.: Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plans.-Plant Cell Environ. 25: 275–294, 2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lorens, G.F., Bennett, J.M., Loggale, L.B.: Differences in drought resistance between two corn hybrids. II. Component analysis and growth rates.-Agron. J. 79: 808–813, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mansfield, T.A., Davies, W.J.: Stomata and stomatal mechanisms.-In: Paleg, L.G., Aspinall, D. (ed.). The Physiology and Biochemistry of Drought Resistance in Plants. Pp. 315–346. Academic Press, Sydney-New York-London-Toronto-San Francisco 1981.Google Scholar
  27. Martiniello, P., Lorenzoni, C.: Response of maize genotypes to drought tolerance tests.-Maydica 30: 361–370, 1985.Google Scholar
  28. Matthews, M.A., Boyer, J.S.: Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water potentials.-Plant Physiol. 74: 161–166, 1984.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Medrano, H., Escalona, J.M., Bota, J., Gulías, J., Flexas, J.: Regulation of photosynthesis of C3 plants in response to progressive drought: Stomatal conductance as a reference parameter.-Ann. Bot. 89: 895–905, 2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Menconi, M., Sgherri, C.L.M., Pinzino, C., Navari-Izzo, F.: Activated oxygen production and detoxification in wheat plants subjected to a water deficit programme.-J. exp. Bot. 46: 1123–1130, 1995.Google Scholar
  31. Michel, B.E., Wiggins, K.O., Outlow, W.H.J.: A guide to establishing water potential for aqueous two-phase solutions (polyethylene glycol plus dextran) by amendment with mannitol.-Plant Physiol. 72: 60–65, 1983.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Moran, J.F., Becana, M., Iturbe-Ormaetxe, I., Frechilla, S., Klucas, R.V., Aparicio-Trejo, P.: Drought induces oxidative stress in pea plants.-Planta 194: 346–352, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mullet, J.E., Whitsitt, M.S.: Plant cellular responses to water deficit.-Plant Growth Regul. 20: 119–124, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Neill, S.J., Desikan, R., Clarke, A., Hurst, R.D., Hancock, J.T.: Hydrogen peroxide and nitric oxide as signalling molecules in plants.-J. exp. Bot. 53: 1237–1247, 2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Passioura, J.B., Condon, A.G., Richards, R.A.: Water deficits, the development of leaf area and crop productivity.-In: Smith, J.A.C., Griffiths, H. (ed.). Water Deficits Plant Responses from Cell to Community. Pp. 253–264. BIOS Scientific Publ., Oxford 1993.Google Scholar
  36. Šesták, Z., Šiffel, P.: Leaf-age related differences in chlorophyll fluorescence.-Photosynthetica 33: 347–369, 1997.Google Scholar
  37. Sgherri, C.L.M., Navari-Izzo, F.: Sunflower seedlings subjected to increasing water deficit stress: oxidative stress and defence mechanisms.-Physiol. Plant. 93: 25–30, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sgherri, C.L.M., Pinzino, C., Navari-Izzo, F.: Chemical changes and O2 production in thylakoid membranes under water stress.-Physiol. Plant. 87: 211–216, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sgherri, C.L.M., Pinzino, C., Navari-Izzo, F.: Sunflower seedlings subjected to increasing water stress by water deficit: Changes in O2 production related to the composition of thylakoid membranes.-Physiol. Plant. 96: 446–452, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shangguan, Z., Shao, M., Dyckmans, J.: Interaction of osmotic adjustment and photosynthesis in winter wheat under soil drought.-J. Plant Physiol. 154: 753–758, 1999.Google Scholar
  41. Trapani, N., Gentinetta, E.: Screening of maize genotypes using drought tolerance tests.-Maydica 29: 89–100, 1984.Google Scholar
  42. Tripathy, P.C., Eastin, J.A., Schrader, L.E.: A comparison of 14C-labeled photosynthate export from two leaf positions in a corn (Zea mays L.) canopy.-Crop Sci. 12: 495–497, 1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Westgate, M.E., Boyer, J.S.: Carbohydrate reserves and reproductive development at low leaf water potentials in maize.-Crop Sci. 25: 762–769, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Winter, S.R., Musick, J.T., Porter, K.B.: Evaluation of screening techniques for breeding drought resistant winter wheat.-Crop Sci. 28: 512–516, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Experimental Botany, ASCR 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Franciszek Górski Institute of Plant PhysiologyPolish Academy of SciencesCracowPoland

Personalised recommendations