Plant Physiol. email content delivery
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Plant Physiology 73:658-661 (1983)
© 1983 American Society of Plant Biologists

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hutmacher, R. B.
Right arrow Articles by Krieg, D. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hutmacher, R. B.
Right arrow Articles by Krieg, D. R.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Hutmacher, R. B.
Right arrow Articles by Krieg, D. R.
Articles

Photosynthetic Rate Control in Cotton 1

Stomatal and Nonstomatal Factors

Robert B. Hutmacher and Daniel R. Krieg

Plant and Soil Science Department, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 79409, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Lubbock, Texas 79409

The relationship between single leaf photosynthesis and conductance was examined in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) across a range of environmental conditions. The purpose of this research was to separate and define the degree of stomatal and nonstomatal limitations in the photosynthetic process of field-grown cotton.

Photosynthetic rates were related to leaf conductance of upper canopy leaves in a curvilinear manner. Increases in leaf conductance of CO2 in excess of 0.3 to 0.4 mole per square meter per second did not result in significant increases in gross or net photosynthetic rates. No tight coupling between environmental influences on photosynthetic rates and those affecting conductance levels was evident, since photosynthesis per unit leaf conductance did not remain constant. Slowly developing water stress caused greater reductions in photosynthesis than in leaf conductance, indicating nonstomatal limitations of photosynthesis.

Increases in external CO2 concentration to levels above ambient did not produce proportional increases in photosynthesis even though substomatal or intercellular CO2 concentration increased. The lack of a linear increase in photosynthetic rate in response to increases in leaf conductance and in response to increases in external CO2 concentration demonstrated that nonstomatal factors are major photosynthetic rate determinants of cotton under field conditions.

1 Supported by the Science and Education Administration of the United States Department of Agriculture under Grant 5901-0410-8-0095-0 from the Competitive Research Grants Office and the Water Resources Center, Texas Tech University.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ANN BOT (LOND)Home page
D. E. LYNN and S. WALDREN
Physiological Variation in Populations of Ranunculus repens L. (Creeping Buttercup) from the Temporary Limestone Lakes (Turloughs) in the West of Ireland
Ann. Bot., June 1, 2002; 89(6): 707 - 714.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Crop Sci.Home page
J. Guo, W. A. Jermyn, and M. H. Turnbull
Diurnal and Seasonal Photosynthesis in Two Asparagus Cultivars with Contrasting Yield
Crop Sci., March 1, 2002; 42(2): 399 - 405.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ASPB Publications PLANT PHYSIOLOGY THE PLANT CELL
Copyright © 1983 by the American Society of Plant Biologists