Paper · 1996 · Experimental Agriculture

Responses of Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones to Drought and Temperature. II. Dry Matter Production and Partitioning

P. J. Burgess; M. K. V. Carr

12
claims
24
verbatim quotes
18
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

SUMMARY The physiological basis for differences in yields from well-watered and draughted plants of four contrasting clones of tea was studied in terms of light interception, dry matter production and partitioning at a high altitude site in Southern Tanzania where there are marked seasonal variations in rainfall and temperature. The plant dry weights, including roots, were measured eight months after field planting and subsequently at intervals of three to four months, corresponding to the different seasons, during the following two years. Fully irrigated plants of one clone (S15/10) were also harvested after four years in the field. Clones differed in the rates of canopy spread and hence in their capacity to intercept solar radiation. The ‘radiation use efficiency’ (the net total dry matter production per unit of intercepted short-wave radiation) was similar for the four well-watered clones and ranged from 0.40 to 0.66 g MJ −1 , which corresponds closely to values reported for other woody tropical plants. A 16-week drought treatment imposed two years after planting reduced the mean light interception of the four clones by about 25% and the mean radiation use efficiency by 78% to 0.09 g MJ −1 . Clone S15/10, a cultivar from Kenya which produces large yields, partitioned a greater proportion of dry matter to leaves and harvested shoots than the other clones, and correspondingly less to large structural roots. This resulted in a maximum harvest index of 24%, substantially greater than other values reported in the literature. There were seasonal differences in partitioning, with more dry matter being diverted to roots and less to shoots during the cool season. Although the drought treatments had no significant effect on root growth, the amount of dry matter partitioned to leaves, stems and harvested shoots declined by 80–95%. The roots of all four clones extended in depth at similar rates (about 2 mm d −1 ), those of Clone S15/10 reaching 2.8m after four years. The results are discussed in terms of appropriate field cultural practices and possible selection criteria for high yielding clones.

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 12

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Tea clones differed in their rates of canopy spread and so in capacity to intercept solar radiation.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Outcome
rates of canopy spreade1

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e1

“Clones differed in the rates of canopy spread and hence in their capacity to intercept solar radiation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 642–744 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Radiation use efficiency was similar across the four well-watered tea clones, at 0.40 to 0.66 g MJ -1.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Outcome
radiation use efficiencye2
Direction
no_changeinferrede2
Value
0.40 to 0.66 g MJ −1e2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e2

“The ‘radiation use efficiency’ (the net total dry matter production per unit of intercepted short-wave radiation) was similar for the four well-watered clones and ranged from 0.40 to 0.66 g MJ −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 746–941 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A 16-week drought reduced mean light interception of the four clones by about 25%.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Treatment
16-week drought treatmente3
Outcome
mean light interceptione3
Direction
reducede3
Value
about 25%e3

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e3

“A 16-week drought treatment imposed two years after planting reduced the mean light interception of the four clones by about 25% and the mean radiation use efficiency by 78% to 0.09 g MJ −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1211 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A 16-week drought reduced mean radiation use efficiency by 78%, to 0.09 g MJ -1.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Treatment
16-week drought treatmente3
Outcome
mean radiation use efficiencye3
Direction
reducede3
Value
78%e3

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e3

“A 16-week drought treatment imposed two years after planting reduced the mean light interception of the four clones by about 25% and the mean radiation use efficiency by 78% to 0.09 g MJ −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1211 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clone S15/10 partitioned a greater proportion of dry matter to leaves and harvested shoots than the other clones.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Material
Clone S15/10e5
Outcome
proportion of dry mattere5
Direction
greatere5
Comparator
the other clonese5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e5

“Clone S15/10, a cultivar from Kenya which produces large yields, partitioned a greater proportion of dry matter to leaves and harvested shoots than the other clones, and correspondingly less to large structural roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1214–1430 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clone S15/10 partitioned less dry matter to large structural roots than the other clones.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Material
Clone S15/10e5
Outcome
large structural rootse5
Direction
lesse5
Comparator
the other clonese5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e5

“Clone S15/10, a cultivar from Kenya which produces large yields, partitioned a greater proportion of dry matter to leaves and harvested shoots than the other clones, and correspondingly less to large structural roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1214–1430 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clone S15/10 reached a maximum harvest index of 24%, substantially greater than values reported in the literature.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Outcome
harvest indexe7
Direction
greatere7
Value
24%e7
Comparator
other values reported in the literaturee7

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e7

“This resulted in a maximum harvest index of 24%, substantially greater than other values reported in the literature”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1432–1547 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Dry matter was diverted more to roots and less to shoots during the cool season.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Organ / stage
rootse1
Outcome
dry matter being diverted to rootse1
Direction
moree1
Qualifier
less to shootse1
Setting
cool seasone1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e1

“There were seasonal differences in partitioning, with more dry matter being diverted to roots and less to shoots during the cool season”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1549–1684 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The drought treatments had no significant effect on root growth.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Treatment
drought treatmentse2
Outcome
root growthe2
Direction
no_changeinferrede2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e2

“Although the drought treatments had no significant effect on root growth, the amount of dry matter partitioned to leaves, stems and harvested shoots declined by 80–95%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1686–1853 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought declined the amount of dry matter partitioned to leaves, stems and harvested shoots by 80–95%.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Treatment
drought treatmentse2
Outcome
the amount of dry matter partitioned to leaves, stems and harvested shootse2
Direction
declinede2
Value
80–95%e2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e2

“Although the drought treatments had no significant effect on root growth, the amount of dry matter partitioned to leaves, stems and harvested shoots declined by 80–95%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1686–1853 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Roots of all four tea clones extended in depth at similar rates, about 2 mm d -1.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Organ / stage
rootse4
Outcome
extended in depthe4
Direction
no_changeinferrede4
Value
about 2 mm d −1e4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e4

“The roots of all four clones extended in depth at similar rates (about 2 mm d −1), those of Clone S15/10 reaching 2.8m after four years”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 1855–1991 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Roots of Clone S15/10 reached 2.8 m depth after four years.

Taxon
Camellia sinensisCamellia sinensist0
Material
Clone S15/10e4
Organ / stage
rootse4
Outcome
extended in depthe4
Value
2.8me4

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Camellia sinensis
Camellia sinensis · TaxonAxelBoldt at en.wikipedia · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Young Tea (Camellia sinensis) Clones”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–49 · show in text ↑
e4

“The roots of all four clones extended in depth at similar rates (about 2 mm d −1), those of Clone S15/10 reaching 2.8m after four years”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 1855–1991 · show in text ↑

drought · growth · Camellia sinensis (black tea)Results agree

7 papers: 0 positive, 7 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 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.