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


     


Plant Physiology 92:733-739 (1990)
© 1990 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 Web of Science
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 CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (13)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Santakumari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Berkowitz, G. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Santakumari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Berkowitz, G. A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Santakumari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Berkowitz, G. A.
Environmental and Stress Physiology

Correlation between the Maintenance of Photosynthesis and in Situ Protoplast Volume at Low Water Potentials in Droughted Wheat 1

Mane Santakumari and Gerald A. Berkowitz

Department of Horticulture, Cook College, Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903

Studies were undertaken to examine the relationship between water deficit effects on photosynthesis and the extent of protoplast volume reduction which occurs in leaves at low water potential ({Psi}w). This relationship was monitored in two cultivars (`Condor' and `Capelle Desprez') of cultivated wheat (Triticum aestivum) that differed in sensitivity to drought, and in a wild relative of cultivated wheat (Triticum kotschyi) that has been previously found to be `drought resistant.' When subjected to periods of water stress, Condor and T. kotschyi plants underwent osmotic adjustment; Capelle plants did not. Photosynthetic capacity was maintained to different extents in the three genotypes as leaf {Psi}w declined during stress; Capelle plants were most severely affected. Calculations of internal leaf [CO2] and stomatal conductance from gas exchange measurements indicated that differences in photosynthetic inhibition at low {Psi}w among the genotypes were primarily due to nonstomatal effects. The extent of protoplast volume reduction that occurred in leaves at low {Psi}w was also found to be different in the three genotypes; maintenance of protoplast volume and photosynthetic capacity in stressed plants of the genotypes appeared to be correlated. When the extent of water stress-induced inhibition of photosynthesis was plotted as a function of declining protoplast volume, this relationship appeared identical for the three genotypes. It was concluded that there is a correlative association between protoplast volume and photosynthetic capacity in leaves of wheat plants subjected to periods of water stress.


1 New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Publication No. 12149-8-89, supported by State and Hatch funds. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant DMB 8706240.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ASPB Publications PLANT PHYSIOLOGY® THE PLANT CELL
Copyright © 1990 by the American Society of Plant Biologists