Abstract
Our objectives were to determine (a) if mycorrhizal (VAM) fungi can alter drought-induced, nonhydraulic regulation of shoot growth, and (b) how much of a root system can be dried or severed before hydraulic effects on shoot responses become evident. Sorghum was grown with roots equally divided among four pots. The 2×2×4 factorial design had two levels of mycorrhizae (± Glomus intraradix ), two levels of root treatment (dried or severed) and four levels of amount of roots treated (0, 1, 2 or 3 pots dried or severed). Neither leaf water potential (Ψ) nor Cs were affected by drying 1 or 2 pots, and reductions in leaf area in these plants were therefore attributed to nonhydraulic signalling. When 2 pots were dried, leaf growth was reduced less in VAM than in nonVAM plants, despite lower P in VAM leaves and despite quicker soil drying by VAM roots. Drying or severing roots of 3 pots did result in drops in leaf Ψ and Cs, indicating a likely hydraulic effect on leaf water status in those plants. Leaf P declined progressively as more roots were dried or severed, possibly also affecting growth in plants with roots in 3 pots dried or severed. Leaf extension rates (LER) declined with only slight drops in soil Ψ, and LER declines were related to volume of soil drying. In VAM plants, leaf area reductions were correlated with length of time roots were exposed to soil Ψ between -0.02 and -0.50 MPa.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Drying one or two pots did not alter leaf water potential or Cs.
SorghumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“Neither leaf water potential (Ψ) nor Cs were affected by drying 1 or 2 pots”
Claim · model-written summary
Drying one or two pots reduced leaf area through nonhydraulic signalling.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“reductions in leaf area in these plants were therefore attributed to nonhydraulic signalling”
Claim · model-written summary
With two pots dried, VAM plants lost less leaf growth than nonVAM plants.
- Treatment
- VAMe0
- Interactor
- VAMe0symbiont
- Outcome
- leaf growthe0
- Direction
- reduced lesse0
- Comparator
- nonVAM plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“When 2 pots were dried, leaf growth was reduced less in VAM than in nonVAM plants”
Claim · model-written summary
VAM leaves had lower P than nonVAM leaves.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“despite lower P in VAM leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil dried more quickly around VAM roots.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“despite quicker soil drying by VAM roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Drying or severing roots in three pots lowered leaf water potential and Cs.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“Drying or severing roots of 3 pots did result in drops in leaf Ψ and Cs”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf P declined as more roots were dried or severed.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“Leaf P declined progressively as more roots were dried or severed”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf extension rates declined with slight soil water-potential drops.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“Leaf extension rates (LER) declined with only slight drops in soil Ψ”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf extension rate declines were related to the volume of drying soil.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“LER declines were related to volume of soil drying”
Claim · model-written summary
In VAM plants, leaf-area reductions correlated with exposure time at soil water potential of -0.02 to -0.50 MPa.
- Treatment
- length of time roots were exposed to soil Ψe0
- Interactor
- VAMe0symbiont
- Outcome
- leaf area reductionse0
- Qualifier
- between -0.02 and -0.50 MPae0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“SORGHUM”
e0“In VAM plants, leaf area reductions were correlated with length of time roots were exposed to soil Ψ between -0.02 and -0.50 MPa”
The same questions in other papers
mycorrhiza · growth · SorghumResults differ
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →processing · physiology: water · SorghumResults agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- no effect
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.