Lawn, R.J., and Likoswe, A.A. (2008) Genotypic differences in leaf area maintenance contribute to differences in recovery from water stress in soybean. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 59 (12). pp. 1075-1085.

PDF (Published Version) Restricted to Repository staff only

 

9

1

Abstract

Genotypic effects on leaf survival during water deficit stress and subsequent recovery were evaluated using soybean plants grown in tall cylinders in the glasshouse. An initial experiment sought to verify reported genotypic differences in leaf area maintenance under severe water deficit stress. A second experiment sought to test the hypothesis that these putative differences might affect recovery after stress was relieved. Two shoot genotypes, G2120 and cv. Valder, reported to have high and low leaf area retention, respectively, were used in both experiments. In order to preclude the possibility that the reported differences between G2120 and Valder were related to root rather than shoot traits, each shoot was grafted at the cotyledonary stage onto 2 non-self root genotypes, cv. Leichhardt and PI416937. Leichhardt has an apparently normal root, while PI416937 has been reported to be ‘extensively fibrous-rooted’. In the first experiment, water was withheld at the first trifoliolate leaf stage and the plants subjected to terminal water deficit stress. Consistent with the previous report, leaf area was maintained for longer into the stress by the G2120 shoots, with rapid loss of lower leaves not starting until c. 90% of plant-available water (PAW) had been depleted, compared with c. 80% for Valder. The Valder leaves also showed more ‘firing’ damage, with large patches of dead leaf tissue on the retained leaves. Also consistent with the previous report, leaf epidermal conductance to water vapour was lower in G2120 than in Valder. There were no apparent root effects. In the second experiment, water was again withheld at the first trifoliolate leaf stage, and treatments were re-watered when 80%, 85%, 90%, and 95% of the estimated PAW was extracted. Again, G2120 shoots showed better leaf area maintenance during the drying cycle, and less firing damage. When the plants were re-watered, the re-growth of G2120 generally exceeded that of Valder at all levels of PAW depletion. The differences in recovery between G2120 and Valder shoots were sufficient to have agronomic relevance, and confirmed the hypothesis that leaf area retention can affect recovery after severe water deficit stress. Root effects were relatively small. During the drying cycle, leaflet growth was marginally enhanced by Leichhardt relative to PI416937 roots. After re-watering, there was stronger recovery of plants with PI416937 roots, especially those with G2120 shoots. The basis of the differences between the root genotypes is not known but the stronger recovery of PI416937 may reflect its putative ‘extensively fibrous’ nature.

Actions (Repository Staff Only)

Item Control Page