Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T21:33:14.444Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Photosynthesis in Coffea arabica. II. Effects of Water Stress

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

D. Kumar  and
Larry L. Tieszen
D. Kumar
Affiliation:
Coffee Research Station, Ruiru, Kenya
Larry L. Tieszen
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, University of Nairobi, Kenya
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Experiments were carried out to relate soil moisture to leaf water potential (Ψ1), and to determine the effects of varying Ψ1, on leaf conductances and photosynthesis in coffee. Stomatal conductance was maximum at 0900 h, but plants growing in drier soil showed marked mid-day stomatal closure. After 1500 h, stomata began closing although plant water status improved. Photosynthesis in relation to changing Ψ1 appeared to exhibit roughly three different rates. At the fixed experimental temperature (25°C) low Ψ1 reduced photosynthesis throughits influence on stomata, but under field conditions low Ψ1 and an accompanying rise in temperature could lower the rate by lowering both mesophyll and stomatal conductances.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , January 1980 , pp. 21 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bierhuizen, J. F., Nunes, M. A. & Ploegman, C. (1969). Acta Bot. Neerl. 18:369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyer, J. S. (1970). Plant Physiol. 46:223.Google Scholar
Boyer, J. S. & Bowen, B. L. (1970). Plant Physiol. 45:612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cannell, M. G. R. (1976). J. Coff. Res. 5:7.Google Scholar
Gates, J. H., Kohl, C. & Hagan, R. N. (1966). Israel J. Bot. 15:64.Google Scholar
Hsiao, T. C. (1973). A. Rev. Plant Physiol. 24:519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, H. G. & Mansfield, T. A. (1970). J. exp. Bot. 21:714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, D. & Tieszen, L. L. (1980). Expl Agric. 16:13–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nafziger, E. D. & Koller, H. R. (1976). Plant Physiol. 57:560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nutman, F. J. (1937). Ann. Bot. (N. S.) 1:353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Toole, J. C., Crookston, R. K., Treharne, K. J., Ozbun, J. L. (1976). Plant Physiol. 57:465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plaut, Z. & Bravdo, B. (1973). Plant Physiol. 52:28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tesha, A. J., & Kumar, D. (1977). Oecologia, Berlin 28:377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zelitch, I. (1969). A. Rev. Plant Physiol. 20:329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar