Physiology of the Yield Under Drought: Lessons from Studies with Lupin

  • Jairo A. PaltaEmail author
  • Jens D. Berger
  • Helen Bramley


The ‘Old World’ lupin species are unique among grain legume crops in their strong specific adaption to acid sandy soils, and in their extremely recent domestication history. Our understanding of lupin responses to drought is limited; based on studies with elite cultivars, representing only a small fraction of the genetic diversity resident in the species, and subjected to strong selection for early phenology throughout their domesticated history, facilitating drought escape. Lupins appear to have a mix of competitive and conservative water use strategies, with profligate water use and high rates of photosynthesis when water is freely available; coupled with high sensitivity to water deficits, whereby stomatal conductance is reduced, phytohormone concentrations and metabolism modified, well before changes in leaf water potential occur. With high root-shoot ratios and high hydraulic conductance, lupin roots are highly efficient at taking up and transporting water. However, the predominantly apoplastic flow in lupins cannot be regulated as flexibly as the symplastic water transport that is so important in cereals. Low rates of remobilization of pre-anthesis stored C in lupin forces the crop to rely almost completely on current photosynthesis, which exacerbates the effects of terminal drought, given that the species respond by reducing leaf area through abscission. Because of the past narrow focus on domesticated material it is not currently possible to put these observations in an ecophysiological context, to answer which of these attributes are characteristic of lupins as a species, and which can be expected to vary in response to environmental selection pressure. To advance our understanding of the species we advocate the study of wild germplasm specifically-adapted to habitats that impose contrasting drought stress, to address both the narrowness and short evolutionary history of the domesticated material, by highlighting responses to millennia of natural selection. By identifying the pros and cons of adaptive traits in an ecophysiological context our capacity to improve elite material will be considerably advanced.


Soil Water Content Stomatal Conductance Leaf Water Potential White Lupin Soil Water Deficit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. ABARE (2010) Australian crop report. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  2. Acosta-Gallegos JA, Adams MW (1991) Plant traits and yield stability of dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars under drought stress. J Agric Sci Cambridge 117:213–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ali M, Jensen CR, Mogensen VO, Bahrun A (1999) Drought adaptation of field grown wheat in relation to soil physical conditions. Plant Soil 208:149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Atkins CA, Pigeaire A (1993) Application of cytokinins to flowers to increase pod set in Lupinus angustifolius L. Aust J Agric Res 44:1799–1819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berger JD, Adhikari KN, Wilkinson D, Buirchell BJ, Sweetingham MW (2008) Ecogeography of the old world lupins. 1 Ecotypic variation in yellow lupin (Lupinus luteus L.). Aust J Agric Res 59:691–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger JD, Buirchell B, Luckett DJ, Nelson MN (2012a) Domestication bottlenecks limit genetic diversity and constrain adaptation in narrow-leafed lupin (Lupinus angustifolius L.). Theor Appl Genet 124:637–652PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berger JD, Buirchell B, Luckett DJ, Palta JA, Ludwig C, Liu D (2012b) How has narrow-leafed lupin changed in its 1st 40 years as an industrial, broad-acre crop? A G × E-based characterization of yield-related traits in Australian cultivars. Field Crops Res 126:152–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berger JD, Milroy SP, Turner NC, Siddique KHM, Imtiaz M, Malhotra R (2011) Chickpea evolution has selected for contrasting phenological mechanisms among different habitats. Euphytica 180:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blum A (2005) Drought resistance, water-use efficiency, and yield potential—are they compatible, dissonant, or mutually exclusive? Aust J Agric Res 56:1159–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bramley H, Turner DW, Tyerman SD, Turner NC (2007a) Water flow in the roots of crop species: the influence of root structure, aquaporin activity, and waterlogging. In: Sparks DL (ed) Advances in agronomy, vol 96, pp 133–196Google Scholar
  11. Bramley H, Turner NC, Turner DW, Tyerman SD (2007b) Comparison between gradient-dependent hydraulic conductivities of roots using the root pressure probe: the role of pressure propagations and implications for the relative roles of parallel radial pathways. Plant Cell Environ 30:861–874PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bramley H, Turner NC, Turner DW, Tyerman SD (2009) Roles of morphology, anatomy, and aquaporins in determining contrasting hydraulic behavior of roots. Plant Physiol 150:348–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bramley H, Turner NC, Turner DW, Tyerman SD (2010) The contrasting influence of short-term hypoxia on the hydraulic properties of cells and roots of wheat and lupin. Funct Plant Biol 37:183–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carminati A, Moradi AB, Vetterlein D, Vontobel P, Lehmann E, Weller U, Vogel HJ, Oswald SE (2010) Dynamics of soil water content in the rhizosphere. Plant Soil 332:163–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carminati A, Vetterlein D, Weller U, Vogel HJ, Oswald SE (2009) When roots lose contact. Vadose Zone J 8:805–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carvajal M, Cooke D, Clarkson D (1996) Responses of wheat plants to nutrient deprivation may involve the regulation of water-channel function. Planta 199:372–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chen YL, Dunbabin VM, Postma JA, Diggle AJ, Palta JA, Lynch JP, Siddique KH, Rengel Z (2011) Phenotypic variability and modelling of root structure of wild Lupinus angustifolius genotypes. Plant Soil 348:345–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Christiansen JL, Raza S, Jørnsgård B, Mahmoud SA, Ortiz R (2000) Potential of landrace germplasm for genetic enhancement of white lupin in Egypt. Genet Resour Crop Evol 47:425–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Clements JC, White PF, Buirchell BJ (1993) The root morphology of Lupinus angustifolius in relation to other Lupinus species. Aust J Agric Res 44:1367–1375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Clements JC, Cowling WA (1994) Patterns of morphological diversity in relation to geographical origins of wild Lupinus angustifolius from the Aegean region. Genet Resour Crop Evol 41:109–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Correia MJ, Pereira JS (1994) Abscisic-acid in apoplastic sap can account for the restriction in leaf conductance of white lupins during moderate soil drying and after re-watering. Plant Cell Environ 17:845–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Correia MJ, Pereira JS (1995) The control of leaf conductance of white lupin by xylem ABA concentration decreases with the severity of water deficits. J Exp Bot 46:101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cowling WA, Buirchel B, Tapia ME (1998a) Lupin. Lupinus L. promoting the conservaiton and use of underutilized and neglected crops. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  24. Cowling WA, Huyghe C, Swiecicki W (1998b) Lupin breeding. In: Gladstones JS, Atkins CA, Hamblin J (eds) Lupins as crop plants: biology, production and utilization. CAB International, pp 93–120Google Scholar
  25. Doussan C, Pierret A, Garrigues E, Pages L (2006) Water uptake by plant roots: II Modelling of water transfer in the soil root-system with explicit account of flow within the root system—comparison with experiments. Plant Soil 283:99–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dracup M, Reader M, Palta JA (1998) Timing of terminal drought is an important cause of yield variability in lupin grown on duplex soils in southern Australia. Aust J Agric Res 49:799–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dencic S, Kastori R, Kobiljski B, Duggan B (2000) Evaluation of grain yield and its components in wheat cultivars and landraces under near optimal and drought condition. Euphytica 113:43–52Google Scholar
  28. Eastham J, Gregory PJ (2000) The influence of crop management on the water balance of lupin and wheat crops on a layered soil in a Mediterranean climate. Plant Soil 221:239–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Farre I, Robertson MJ, Walton GH, Asseng S (2001) Yield analysis of canola in a variable environment. In: 12th Biennial Australian Research Assembly on Brassicas Victoria, pp 130–134Google Scholar
  30. FAO (2010) FAOSTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsGoogle Scholar
  31. Farrington P, Pate JS (1981) Fruit Set in Lupinus angustifolius cv. unicrop. I Phenology and growth during flowering and early fruiting. Aust J Plant Physiol 8:293–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Farrington P, Salama RB, Watson GD, Bartle GA (1992) Water-use of agricultural and native plants in a Western Australia wheat-belt catchment. Agric Water Manag 22:357–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. French RJ, Turner NC (1991) Water deficits change dry matter partitioning and seed yield in narrow-leafed lupins (Lupinus angustifolius L.). Aust J Agric Res 42:471–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gallardo M, Eastham J, Gregory PJ, Turner NC (1996) A comparison of plant hydraulic conductances in wheat and lupins. J Exp Bot 47:233–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gallardo M, Turner NC, Ludwig C (1994) Water relations, gas-exchange and abscisic-acid content of Lupinus cosentinii leaves in response to drying different proportions of the root-system. J Exp Bot 45:909–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Garcıa del Moral LF, Rharrabti Y, Villegas D, Royo C (2003) Evaluation of grain yield and its components in durum wheat under Mediterranean conditions: an ontogenic approach. Agron J 95:266–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Garrigues E, Doussan C, Pierret A (2006) Water uptake by plant roots: I formation and propagation of a water extraction front in mature root systems as evidenced by 2D light transmission imaging. Plant Soil 283:83–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gladstones JS (1970) Lupins as crop plants. Field Crop Abstr 23:123–148Google Scholar
  39. Gladstones JS (1994) An historical review of lupins in Australia. In: Dracup M, Palta JA (eds) 1st Lupin technical symposium. Department of Agriculture, Perth, pp 1–38Google Scholar
  40. Gregory PJ, Eastham J (1996) Growth of shoots and roots, and interception of radiation by wheat and lupin crops on a shallow, duplex soil in response to time of sowing. Aust J Agric Res 47:427–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Grime JP (1979) Plant strategies and vegetation processes. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  42. Hamblin A, Tennant D (1987) Root length density and water uptake in cereals and grain legumes: how well are they correlated? Aust J Agric Res 38:513–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hamza MA, Anderson SH, Aylmore LAG (2007) Computed tomographic evaluation of osmotica on shrinkage and recovery of lupin (Lupinus angustifolius L.) and radish (Raphanus sativus L.) roots. Environ Exp Bot 59:334–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hamza MA, Aylmore LAG (1992a) Soil solute concentration and water-uptake by single lupin and radish plant-roots. 1 Water extraction and solute accumulation. Plant Soil 145:187–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hamza MA, Aylmore LAG (1992b) Soil solute concentration and water-uptake by single lupin and radish plant-roots. 2 Driving forces and resistances. Plant Soil 145:197–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hartung W, Leport L, Ratcliffe RG, Sauter A, Duda R, Turner NC (2002) Abscisic acid concentration, root pH and anatomy do not explain growth differences of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and lupin (Lupinus angustifolius L.) on acid and alkaline soils. Plant Soil 240:191–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Henson IE, Jensen CR, Turner NC (1989a) Leaf gas exchange and water relations of lupins and wheat. I Shoot responses to soil water deficits. Aust J Plant Physiol 16:401–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Henson IE, Jensen CR, Turner NC (1989b) Leaf gas exchange and water relations of lupins and wheat. III Abscisic acid and drought-induced stomatal closure. Funct Plant Biol 16:429–442Google Scholar
  49. Henson IE, Jensen CR, Turner NC (1990) Influence of leaf age and light environment on the gas exchange of lupins and wheat. Physiol Plant 79:15–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Henson IE, Turner NC (1991) Stomatal responses to abscisic-acid in 3 lupin species. New Phytol 117:529–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hondelmann W (1984) The Lupin-ancient and modern crop plant. Theor Appl Genet 68:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hose E, Clarkson D, Steudle E, Schreiber L, Hartung W (2001) The exodermis: a variable apoplastic barrier. J Exp Bot 52:2245–2264PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Huyghe C (1997) White lupin (Lupinus albus L.). Field Crops Res 53:147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Jensen CR, Henson IE (1990) Leaf water relations characteristics of Lupinus angustifolius and L. cosentinii. Oecologia 82:114–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Jensen CR, Henson IE, Turner NC (1989) Leaf gas exchange and water relations of lupins and wheat. II Root and shoot water relations of lupin during drought-induced stomatal closure. Aust J Plant Physiol 16:415–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Jensen CR, Mogensen VO, Poulsen HH, Henson IE, Aagot S, Hansen E, Ali M, Wollenweber B (1998) Soil water matric potential rather than water content determines drought responses in field-grown lupin (Lupinus angustifolius). Aust J Plant Physiol 25:353–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Kuang J-B, Turner NC, Henson IE (1990) Influence of xylem water potential on leaf elongation and osmotic adjustment of wheat and lupin. J Exp Bot 41:217–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Leport L, Turner NC, French RJ, Tennant D, Thomson BD, Siddique KHM (1998) Water relations, gas exchange and growth of cool-season grain legumes in a Mediterranean-type environment. Eur J Agron 9:295–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Leport L, Turner NC, French RJ, Barr MD, Duda R, Davies SL, Tennant D, Siddique KHM (1999) Physiological responses of chickpea genotypes to terminal drought in a Mediterranean-type environment. Eur J Agron 11:279–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Muchow RC, Sinclair TR (1986) Water and nitrogen. Field Crops Res 15:143–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Munier-Jolain NM, Ney B, Duthion C (1996) Analysis of branching in spring-sown white lupins (Lupinus albus L.): the significance of the number of axillary buds. Ann Bot 77:123–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Noffsinger SL, van Santen E (2005) Evaluation of Lupinus albus L. germplasm for the southeastern USA. Crop Sci 45:1941–1950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Oswald SE, Menon M, Carminati A, Vontobel P, Lehmann E, Schulin R (2008) Quantitative imaging of infiltration, root growth, and root water uptake via neutron radiography. Vadose Zone J 7:1035–1047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Palta JA, Kobata T, Fillery IR, Turner NC (1994) Remobilisation of carbon and nitrogen in wheat as influenced by postanthesis water deficits. Crop Sci 34:118–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Palta JA, Ludwig C (1996) Pod set and seed yield as affected by cytokinin application and terminal drought in narrow-leafed lupin. Aust J Agric Res 48:81–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Palta JA, Plaut Z (1999) Yield and components of seed yield of indeterminate narrow-leafed lupin (Lupinus angustifolius L.) subjected to transient water deficit. Aust J Agric Res 50:1225–1232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Palta JA, Ludwig C (2000) Elevated CO2 during pod-filling increased seed yield but not harvest index in indeterminate narrow-leaf lupin. Aust J Agric Res 51:279–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Palta JA, Turner NC, French RJ (2004) The yield performance of lupin genotypes under terminal drought in a Mediterranean-type environment. Aust J Agric Res 55:449–459Google Scholar
  69. Palta JA, Turner NC, French RJ, Buirchell BJ (2003) Towards improvement of drought resistance in lupin—a crop for acid sandy soils. J Exp Bot 54:19–19Google Scholar
  70. Palta JA, Turner NC, French RJ, Buirchell BJ (2007) Physiological responses of lupin genotypes to terminal drought in a Mediterranean-type environment. Ann Appl Biol 150:269–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Palta JA, Berger DJ, Ludwig C (2008) The growth and yield of narrow-leafed lupin: myths and realities. In: Palta JA, Berger JD (eds) Lupins for health and wealth. ILA Press, Canterbury, New Zealand, pp 20–25Google Scholar
  72. Pandey RK, Herrera WAT, Pendleton JW (1984) Drought response of grain legumes under irrigation gradient: I Yield and yield components. Agronomuy J 76:549–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Passioura J, Munns R (1984) Hydraulic resistance of plants. II Effects of rooting medium, and time of day, in barley and lupin. Aust J Plant Physiol 11:341–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pate JS, Atkins CA, Perry MW (1980) Significance of photosynthate produced at different stages of growth as carbon source for fruit filling and seed reserve accumulation in Lupinus angustifolius L. Aust J Plant Physiol 7:283–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Pate JS, Farrington P (1981) Fruit-set in Lupinus angustifolius cv unicrop. 2 Assimilate flow during flowering and early fruiting. Aust J Plant Physiol 8:307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Pinheiro C, Antonio C, Ortuno MF, Dobrev PI, Hartung W, Thomas-Oates J, Ricardo CP, Vankova R, Chaves MM, Wilson JC (2011) Initial water deficit effects on Lupinus albus photosynthetic performance, carbon metabolism, and hormonal balance: metabolic reorganization prior to early stress responses. J Exp Bot 62:4965–4974PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Perry MW (1975) Field environment studies on lupins. 2 The effects of time of planting on dry matter partition and yield components of Lupinus angustifolius L. Aust J Agric Res 26:809–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Purcell LC, King CA (1996) Drought and nitrogen source effects on nitrogen nutrition, seed growth, and yield in soybean. J Plant Nutr 19:969–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Raman R, Luckett DJ, Raman H (2008) Estimation of genetic diversity in Albus lupin (Lupinus albus L.) using DArT and genic markers. In: Palta JA, Berger JD (eds) Lupins for health and wealth. ILA Press, Canterbury, New Zealand, pp 263–241Google Scholar
  80. Reader MA, Dracup M, Kirby EJM (1995) Time to flowering in narrow-leafed lupin. Aust J Agric Res 46:1063–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Rebetzke G, Richards RA (1999) Genetic improvement of early vigour in wheat. Aust J Agric Res 50:291–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Richards RA, Lukacs Z (2002) Seedling vigour in wheat–sources of variation for genetic and agronomic improvement. Aust J Agric Res 53:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Rodrigues ML, Pacheco CMA, Chaves MM (1995) Soil-plant water relations, root distribution and biomass partitioning in Lupinus albus L under drought conditions. J Exp Bot 46:947–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Rose IA, McWhirter KS, Spurway RA (1992) Identification of drought tolerance in early-maturing indeterminate soybeam [Glycine Max (L.) Merr.]. Aust J Agric Res 43:645–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Saldaña PA, Harcha CI, Calderini DF (2009) Sensitivity of yield and grain nitrogen concentration of wheat, lupin and pea to source reduction during grain filling. A comparative survey under high yielding conditions. Field Crops Res 114:233–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Sengbusch R, Zimmermann K (1937) Die Auffindung der ersten gelben und blauen Lupine (Lupinus luteus und Lupinus angustifolius) mit nicht platzenden Hülsen und die damit zusammenhängenden Probleme der Süßlupinenzüchtung. Zuchter 9:57–65Google Scholar
  87. Serraj R, Sinclair T, Purcell L (1999) Symbiotic N2 fixation response to drought. J Exp Bot 50:143–155Google Scholar
  88. Shearer G, Kohl DH (1986) N2-fixation in field settings: estimations based on natural 15 N abundance. Aust J Plant Physiol 13:699–757Google Scholar
  89. Sinclair TR (1986) Water and nitrogen limitations in soybean grain production. I Model development. Field Crops Res 15:125–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Siddique KHM, Regan KL, Tennant D, Thomson BD (2001) Water use and water use efficiency of cool season grain legumes in low rainfall Mediterranean-type environments. Eur J Agron 15:267–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Simpson MJA (1986) Geographical variation in Lupinus albus L. I Iberia. Plant Breeding 96:232–240Google Scholar
  92. Steudle E, Peterson C (1998) How does water get through roots? J Exp Bot 49:775–788Google Scholar
  93. Troll HJ (1940) Saatzeitversuche mit Zucht- und Landsorten sowie Wildformen von L. luteus und L. angustifolius. Pflanzenbau 16:403–430Google Scholar
  94. Turner NC, Stern WR, Evans P (1987) Water relations and osmotic adjustment of leaves and roots of lupins in response to water deficits. Crop Sci 27:977–983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Turner NC, Henson IE (1989) Comparative water relations and gas-exchange of wheat and lupins in the field. In: Kreeb KH, Richter H, Hinckley TM (eds) Structural and functional responses to environmental stresses: water shortage. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, pp 293–304Google Scholar
  96. Turner NC, Hartung W (2012) Dehydration of isolated roots of seven Lupinus species induces synthesis of different amounts of free, but not conjugated, abscisic acid. Plant Growth Regul 66:265–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Tyerman SD, Niemietz CM, Bramley H (2002) Plant aquaporins: multifunctional water and solute channels with expanding roles. Plant Cell Environ 25:173–194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Tyree M, Sperry J (1989) Vulnerability of xylem to cavitation and embolism. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 40:19–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Unkovich MJ, Pate JS, Sanford P, Armstrong R (1994) Potential precision of the 15 N natural abundance method in field estimates of nitrogen fixation by crop and pasture legumes in south–west Australia. Aust J Agric Res 45:119–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Weisz PR, Denison RF, Sinclair TR (1985) Response to drought stress of nitrogen fixation (acetylene reduction) rates by field-grown soybeans. Plant Physiol 78:525–530PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Wolf O, Jeschke WD, Hartung W (1990) Long distance transport of abscisic acid in NaCI-treated intact plants of Lupinus albus. J Exp Bot 41:593–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Zohary D, Hopf M (2000) Lupins: Lupinus. Domestication of plants in the old world. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 122–124Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jairo A. Palta
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jens D. Berger
    • 1
    • 2
  • Helen Bramley
    • 3
  1. 1.CSIRO, Plant IndustryWembleyAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Natural and Agricultural SciencesSchool of Plant Biology, The University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia
  3. 3.The UWA Institute of Agriculture (M082)The University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations