Abstract
Water loss from roots back into drying soil is a problem of practical importance in plants growing under conditions of very low substrate water potential, such as dry or saline areas. Root exodermis is relatively impermeable and has been suggested to play a protective role against water loss. The relative water retention ability was compared in root segments from exodermal (maize, onion, sunflower, Rhodes grass and sorghum) and non-exodermal species (Pisum sati um, Vicia faba and wheat). Apical and basal segments from exodermal roots, with different degrees of exodermis development, were also compared, as were segments from sorghum roots in which the exodermis thickness had been modified by subjecting the plants to a 30 d water stress treatment. Water retention was significantly higher in segments from exodermal roots. In each root, water loss was higher in apical than in basal segments, regardless of the presence of exodermis. In sorghum, prolonged drought treatment increased exodermis thickening in nodal roots, however, no differences in rates of water loss were observed in segments obtained from control and droughted plants. Soil sheaths formed around roots of Rhodes grass growing in very dry soil with the epidermis adhering tightly to the sheath. In plants growing in the field, soil sheaths may be more effective than the exodermis in preventing root water loss.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Root segments from exodermal species retained significantly more water than those from non-exodermal species.
Verbatim
e0“exodermal (maize, onion, sunflower, Rhodes grass and sorghum) and non-exodermal species (Pisum sati um, Vicia faba and wheat)”
e1“Water retention was significantly higher in segments from exodermal roots.”
Claim · model-written summary
Apical segments lost more water than basal segments regardless of exodermis.
Verbatim
e0“In each root, water loss was higher in apical than in basal segments, regardless of the presence of exodermis.”
e1“exodermal (maize, onion, sunflower, Rhodes grass and sorghum) and non-exodermal species (Pisum sati um, Vicia faba and wheat)”
Claim · model-written summary
Prolonged drought increased nodal root exodermis thickening in sorghum.
- Organ / stage
- nodal rootse0
- Treatment
- prolonged drought treatmente0
- Outcome
- exodermis thickeninge0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- controle1
SorghumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In sorghum, prolonged drought treatment increased exodermis thickening in nodal roots”
e1“segments obtained from control and droughted plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Water loss rates did not differ between root segments from control and droughted sorghum.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In sorghum, prolonged drought treatment increased exodermis thickening in nodal roots, however, no differences in rates of water loss were observed in segments obtained from control and droughted plants.”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil sheaths formed around Rhodes grass roots in very dry soil and the epidermis adhered tightly to them.
Verbatim
e0“Soil sheaths formed around roots of Rhodes grass growing in very dry soil with the epidermis adhering tightly to the sheath.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest soil sheaths may prevent root water loss more effectively than the exodermis in field plants.
Verbatim
e0“In plants growing in the field, soil sheaths may be more effective than the exodermis in preventing root water loss.”
e1“roots of Rhodes grass”
The same questions in other papers
drought · physiology: water · SorghumResults differ
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 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.