Conclusion
The greater tolerance of Dayton to A1 can be explained by a longer resistance of the plasmalemma towards A1 stress. Whether a stronger mucigel production could be resonsible for increased A1 tolerance has to be examined in more detail.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baier, R., Münnich, H., Heinke, F. und Göring, H. 1976 Zytologische Untersuchungen zur Wirkung von Aluminium auf Maiswurzeln. Wiss. Z. d. Humboldt-Univ. zu Berlin, Math. Nat. R XXV, 840–844.
Foy, C. D., Armiger, W. H., Briggle, L. W. and Reid, D. A. 1965 Different aluminium tolerance of wheat and barley varieties in acid soils. Agron. J.57, 413–417.
Hecht-Buchholz, Ch. 1979 Calcium deficiency and plant ultrastructure. Commun. in Soil Science and Plant Analysis10, 67–81.
Hecht-Buchholz, Ch. 1978 Aluminium toxicity in barley—a light and electronmicroscopic study. Proc. of the 8th Intern. Colloquium on Plant Analysis and Fertilizer Problems Auckland, New Zealand, N.Z. DSIR Inform. 134, 179.
Henning, S. J. 1975 Aluminium toxicity in the primary meristem of wheat roots. Ph. D. Thesis, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis Oregon.
McLean, F. T. and Gilbert, B. E. 1927 The relative aluminium tolerance of crop plants. Soil Sci.24, 163–175.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hecht-Buchholz, C., Foy, C.D. Effect of aluminium toxicity on root morphology of barley. Plant Soil 63, 93–95 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02374262
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02374262