Abstract
The work reported here was done as part of an effort to develop a physiological process level data base for the simulation of cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) growth and yield. The effects of water stress on vegetative growth and on carbon exchange rate (CER) in cotton canopies were investigated in naturally illuminated, controlled environment cabinets (SPAR units). The control treatment was irrigated daily. In the other treatments, irrigation was stopped just before the appearance of the first blooms. An extra low water treatment was allowed to dry much faster than the low water treatment. Water stress had a strong effect on vegetative growth. Rate of increase in plant height and leaf area declined when midday leaf water potential was lower than −1.4 MPa, and they were almost zero at −2.0 to −2.5 MPa. Water stress had a similar effect on the CER over a wide range of radiation intensities. CER started to decline < 2 weeks after irrigation was stopped, and it was about 50% of the control when midday leaf water potential reached −2.0 to −2.5 MPa. Two different mechanisms are suggested for the effect of water stress on canopy photosynthesis. A direct effect on single leaves may have closed stomata, increased mesophyll resistance, or decreased Hill reaction activity. Additionally, there was the long‐term effect of reduced leaf growth, which produced a canopy consisting mainly of old, less photosynthetically efficient leaves.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Plant height growth rate declined below a midday leaf water potential of −1.4 MPa.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- Water Stresst0
- Outcome
- Rate of increase in plant heighte0
- Direction
- declinede0
- Value
- −1.4 MPae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Water Stress on Canopy Senescence and Carbon Exchange Rates in Cotton”
e0“Rate of increase in plant height and leaf area declined when midday leaf water potential was lower than −1.4 MPa”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf area growth rate declined below a midday leaf water potential of −1.4 MPa.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Water Stresst0
- Outcome
- leaf areae0
- Direction
- declinede0
- Value
- −1.4 MPae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Water Stress on Canopy Senescence and Carbon Exchange Rates in Cotton”
e0“Rate of increase in plant height and leaf area declined when midday leaf water potential was lower than −1.4 MPa”
Claim · model-written summary
Height and leaf area growth rates were almost zero at −2.0 to −2.5 MPa.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- almost zeroe0
- Value
- −2.0 to −2.5 MPae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton”
e0“they were almost zero at −2.0 to −2.5 MPa”
Claim · model-written summary
Carbon exchange rate began declining less than two weeks after irrigation stopped.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation was stoppede0
- Outcome
- CERe0
- Direction
- declinee0
- Value
- < 2 weekse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton”
e0“CER started to decline < 2 weeks after irrigation was stopped”
Claim · model-written summary
Carbon exchange rate was about half the control at −2.0 to −2.5 MPa.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Water Stresst0
- Outcome
- Carbon Exchange Ratest0
- Value
- 50%e0
- Qualifier
- −2.0 to −2.5 MPae0
- Comparator
- the controle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Water Stress on Canopy Senescence and Carbon Exchange Rates in Cotton”
e0“it was about 50% of the control when midday leaf water potential reached −2.0 to −2.5 MPa”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct leaf changes may explain reduced canopy photosynthesis under water stress.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Organ / stage
- single leavese0
- Outcome
- closed stomata, increased mesophyll resistance, or decreased Hill reaction activitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton”
e0“A direct effect on single leaves may have closed stomata, increased mesophyll resistance, or decreased Hill reaction activity”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced leaf growth produced an older, less photosynthetically efficient canopy.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- a canopy consisting mainly of old, less photosynthetically efficient leavese0
- Qualifier
- reduced leaf growthe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton”
e0“reduced leaf growth, which produced a canopy consisting mainly of old, less photosynthetically efficient leaves”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →drought · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →drought · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
60 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
82 papers more in this group
See all 86 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.