Advertisement

Imposing and maintaining soil water deficits in drought studies in pots

  • Neil C. TurnerEmail author
Regular Article
  • 112 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Pot studies are frequently used to study the influence of water deficits on plants and to screen genotypes for drought-resistance traits. Limited space and the need to screen large numbers of plants in rapid phenotyping platforms has led to the use of small pots for water-deficit studies. This paper reviews the influence of pot size, pot shape, soil medium, and the method of imposing water deficits on the development of soil water deficits, plant growth and function.

Scope

Small pot size limits plant growth as the small soil volume limits root extension and proliferation. High-frequency deficit irrigation results in uneven distribution of water in the soil with consequent effects on plant growth, root distribution, water and nutrient uptake, and root-shoot interactions. Cycles of slow drying followed by fully rewetting the soil result in a more even distribution of water and roots throughout the pot and responses to water deficits more similar to those in the field.

Conclusions

Small shallow pots and high-frequency deficit irrigation are inappropriate for inducing and maintaining water deficits, particularly when studying roots and root-shoot interactions. Large tall pots and cycles of drying and wetting better simulate water deficits encountered in the field and for identifying drought-resistant traits.

Keywords

Pot size Pot shape Soil medium High-frequency deficit irrigation Drying-wetting cycles Root-shoot interaction 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author is grateful for the support of the Northwest Agricultural and Forestry University in Yangling, China, and the UWA Institute of Agriculture and UWA School of Agriculture and Environment at the University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia, for support to attend the International Symposium on Crop Roots and Rhizosphere Interactions in Yangling, China. Professor Hans Lambers is thanked for suggesting the topic for this paper and Drs Jairo Palta and Yinglong Chen for comments on the manuscript. Dr. Tao Wang, Dr. Yan-Lei Du, Dr. Jin He and Professor Feng-Min Li of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China are thanked for access to unpublished data.

References

  1. Anderson SM, Puertolas J, Dodd IC (2018) Does irrigation frequency affect stomatal response to soil drying? Acta Hortic 1197:18Google Scholar
  2. Ayalew H, Ma X, Yan G (2015) Screening wheat (Triticum spp.) genotypes for root length under contrasting water regimes: potential sources of variability for drought resistance breeding. J Agron Crop Sci 201:189–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Begg JE, Turner NC (1976) Crop water deficits. Adv Agron 28:161–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blum A, Pnuel Y (1990) Physiological attributes associated with drought resistance of wheat cultivars in a Mediterranean environment. Aust J Agric Res 41:799–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyle RKA, McAinsh M, Dodd IC (2016) Daily irrigation attenuates xylem abscisic acid concentration and increases leaf water potential of Pelargonium X hortorum compared with infrequent irrigation. Physiol Plant 158:23–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Damberville A, Griolet M, Rolland G, Dauzat M, Bédiée A, Balsera C, Muller B, Vile D, Granier C (2017) Phenotyping oilseed rape growth-related traits and their responses to water deficit: the disturbing pot size effect. Funct Plant Biol 44:35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Granier C, Aguirrezabal L, Chennu K, Cookson SJ, Dauzat M, Hamard P, Thioux J-J, Rolland G, Bouchier-Combaud S, Lebaudy A, Muller B, Simonneau T, Tardieu F (2006) PHENOPSIS, an automated platform for reproducible phenotyping of plant responses to soil water deficit in Arabidopsis thaliana permitted the identification of an accession with low sensitivity to soil water deficit. New Phytol 169:623–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guo YM, Samans B, Chen S, Kibret KB, Hatzig S, Turner NC, Nelson MN, Cowling WA, Snowdon RJ (2017) Drought-tolerant Brassica rapa shows rapid expression of gene networks for general stress responses and programmed cell death under simulated drought stress. Plant Mol Biol Report 35:416–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. He J, Du Y-L, Wang T, Turner NC, Xi Y, Li F-M (2016) Old and new cultivars of soya bean (Glycine max L.) subjected to soil drying differ in abscisic acid accumulation, water relations characteristics and yield. J Agron Crop Sci 202:372–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. He J, Jin Y, Du Y-L, Wang T, Turner NC, Yang R-P, Siddique KHM, Li F-M (2017) Genotypic variation in yield, yield components, root morphology and architecture, in soybean in relation to water and phosphorus supply. Front Plant Sci 8:1499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Honsdorf N, March TJ, Berger B, Tester M, Pillen K (2014) High-throughput phenotyping to detect drought tolerance QTL in wild barley introgression lines. PLoS One 9(5):e97047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hsiao TC (1973) Plant responses to water stress. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 24:893–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hurley MB, Rowarth JS (1999) Resistance to root growth and changes in the concentrations of ABA within the root and xylem sap during root-restriction stress. J Exp Bot 50:799–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ismail AM, Hall AE, Bray EA (1994) Drought and pot size effects on transpiration efficiency and carbon isotope discrimination of cowpea accessions and hybrids. Aust J Plant Physiol 21:23–35Google Scholar
  15. Kong H, Palta JA, Siddique KHM, Stefanova K, Xiong Y-C, Turner NC (2015) Photosynthesis is reduced, and seeds fail to set and fill at similar soil water contents in grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) subjected to terminal drought. J Agron Crop Sci 201:241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kramer PJ (1969) Plant and soil water relationships: a modern synthesis. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Lawlor DW (2013) Genetic engineering to improve performance under drought: physiological evaluation of achievements, limitations, and possibilities. J Exp Bot 64:83–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu Q, Yasufuku N, Miao J, Ren J (2014) An approach for quick estimation of maximum height of capillary rise. Soils Found 54:1241–1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pang J, Turner NC, Du Y-L, Colmer TD, Siddique KHM (2017a) Pattern of water use and seed yield under terminal drought in chickpea genotypes. Front Plant Sci 8:1375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pang J, Turner NC, Khan T, Du Y-L, Xiong J-L, Colmer TD, Devilla R, Stefanova K, Siddique KHM (2017b) Response of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to terminal drought: leaf stomatal conductance, pod abscisic acid concentration, and seed set. J Exp Bot 68:1973–1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Parent B, Shahinnia F, Maphosa L, Berger B, Rabie H, Chalmers K, Kovalchuk A, Langridge P, Fleury D (2015) Combining field performance with controlled environment plant imaging to identify the genetic control of growth and transpiration underlying yield response to water-deficit stress in wheat. J Exp Bot 66:5481–5492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Passioura JB (2006) The perils of pot experiments. Funct Plant Biol 33:1075–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Poorter H, Bȕhler J, van Dusscholten D, Climent J, Postma JA (2012) Pot size matters: a meta-analysis of the effects of rooting volume on plant growth. Funct Plant Biol 39:839–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Puértolas J, Larsen EK, Davies WJ, Dodd IC (2017) Applying ‘drought’ to potted plants by maintaining suboptimal soil moisture improves plant water relations. J Exp Bot 68:2413–2424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ratliff LF, Ritchie JT, Cassel DK (1983) Field-measured limits of soil water availability as related to laboratory-measured properties. Soil Sci Soc Am J 47:770–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sinclair TR, Manandhar A, Shekoofa A, Rosas-Anderson P, Bagherzadi L, Schoppach R, Sadok W, Rufty TW (2017) Pot binding as a variable confounding plant phenotype: theoretical derivation and experimental observations. Planta 245:729–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Slatyer RO (1967) Plant-water relationships. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Teare ID, Peet MM (eds) (1983) Crop-water relations. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Turner NC, Jones MM (1980) Turgor maintenance by osmotic adjustment: a review and evaluation. In: Turner NC, Kramer PJ (eds) Adaptation of plants to water and high temperature stress. Wiley, New York, pp 87–103Google Scholar
  30. Turner NC, Wright GC, Siddique KHM (2001) Adaptation of grain legumes (pulses) to water-limited environments. Adv Agron 71:193–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vadez V, Kholova J, Choudhary S, Zindy P, Terrier M, Krishnamurthy L, Kumar PR, Turner NC (2011) Responses to increased moisture stress and extremes: whole plant response to drought under climate change. In: Yadav SS, Redden RK, Hatfield JL, Lotze-Campen H, Hall AE (eds) Crop adaptation to climate change. Wiley/Blackwell, Chichester, pp 186–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vadez V, Kholová J, Hummel G, Zhokhavets U, Gupta SK, Hash CT (2015) LeasyScan: a novel concept combining 3D imaging and lysimetry for high-throughput phenotyping of traits controlling plant water budget. J Exp Bot 66:5581–5593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang T, Du Y-L, He J, Turner NC, Wang B-R, Zhang C, Cui T, Li F-M (2017) Recently-released genotypes of naked oat (Avena nuda L.) out-yield early releases under water-limited conditions by greater reproductive allocation and desiccation tolerance. Field Crops Res 204:169–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. White RG, Kirkegaard JA (2010) The distribution and abundance of wheat roots in a dense, structured subsoil – implications for water uptake. Plant Cell Environ 33:139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wright GC (1997) Management of drought in peanuts – can crop modelling assist in long-term planning decisions? In: Cruickshank A, Cruickshank S, Fleming B (eds) Proceedings of the 2nd Australian Peanut Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, July 1997. Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane, pp 26-29Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UWA Institute of Agriculture and UWA School of Agriculture and Environment, M082The University of Western AustraliaPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations