Abstract
Almond plants (Amygdalus communis L.) of the Garrigues variety were grown in the field drip irrigated and rainfed. Leaf water potential (Ψ) and leaf conductance (g1) were determined throughout one growing season. Pre-dawn measurement for Ψ in the irrigated treatment was consistent through the growing season, whereas in the rainfed treatment it decreased gradually. Ψ values at midday (Ψ minimum) was closely dependent on atmospheric evaporative demand, and their recovery was quicker in the wet treatment than in the dry. The g1 values were higher in the wet than dry treatments, decreasing in both cases by leaf ageing. Maximum values for g1 were reached when evaporative demand was highest in the day. The relationship between Ψ and g1 revealed a decrease in the hysteresis throughout the growing season, being most marked in the dry treatment. The results highlight the close dependence of Ψ and g1 on evaporative demand, leaf ageing and irrigtion treatment during the growing season.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abd El-Rahman A A, Shalaby A F and Balegh M S 1966 Water relations of almond under desert conditions. Bull. Fac. Sci. Cairo Univers. 40, 13–28.
Aussenac G and Valette J C 1982 Comportement hydrique estival deCedrus atlántica Manetti,Quercus ilex L. etQuercus pubescens Willd. et de divers pins dans le Mont Ventoux. Ann. Sci. forest. 39, 41–62.
Carter P R and Sheaffer C C 1983 Alfalfa response to soil water deficits. II. Plant water potential, leaf conductance, and canopy temperature relationships. Crop Sci. 23, 676–680.
Castel J R and Fereres E 1982 Responses of young almond trees to two drought periods in the field. J. Hortic. Sci. 57, 175–187.
De Michele D W and Sharpe J H 1973 An analysis of the mechanics of guard cell motion. J. Theor. Biol. 41, 77–96.
Elfving D C, Kaufmann M R and Hall A E 1972 Interpreting leaf water potential measurements with a model of the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum. Physiol. Plant. 27, 161–168.
El-Sharkawi H M and El-Monayeri M 1976 Response of olive and almond orchard to partial irrigation under dry-farming practices in semi-arid regions. III. Plant-soil water relations in almond during the growing season. Plant and Soil 44, 113–128.
Fereres, E, Aldrich T M, Schulbach H and Martinich D A 1981 Responses of young almond trees to late-season drought. Cal. Agri. 35, 11–12.
Goode J E 1968 The measurement of sap tension in the petioles of apple raspberry and black currant leaves. J. Hortic. Sci. 43, 231–233.
Henson I E, Alagarswamy G, Bidinger F R and Mahalakshmi V 1982 Stomatal responses of pearl millet (Pennisetum americanum L. Leeke) to leaf water status and environmental factors in the field. Plant, Cell Envir. 5, 64–74.
Jarvis P G 1976 The interpretation of the variation in leaf water potential and stomatal conductance found in canopies in the field. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 273, 593–610.
Klepper B 1968 Diurnal pattern of water potential in woody plants. Plant Physiol. 43, 1931–1934.
León A, Del Amor, F, Torrecillas A and Ruiz-Sanchez M C 1985 L'irrigation goutte á goutte de jeunes plantations d'amandiers. Fruits 40, 659–663.
Meidner H 1970 Effects of photoperiodic induction and debudding inXanthium pennsylvanicum and of partial defoliation inPhaseolus vulgaris on rates of net photosynthesis and stomatal conductances. J. Exp. Bot. 21, 164–169.
Morgan J M 1984 Osmoregulation and water stress in higher plants. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 35, 299–319.
Müller U, Grimme K, Meyer C and Ehlers W 1986 Leaf water potential and stomatal conductance of field-grown faba beans (Vicia faba L.) and oats (Avena sativa L.). Plant and Soil 93, 17–33.
Roberts, S W, Miller P C and Valamanesh A 1981 Comparative field water relations of four co-occurring chaparral shrub species. Oecologia 48, 360–363.
Rudich J, Rendon-Poblete E, Stevens M A and Ambri A I 1981 Use of leaf water potential to determine water stress in field-grown tomato plants. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 106, 732–736.
Scholander P F, Hammel H T, Bradstreet E D and Hemmingsen E A 1965 Sap pressure in vascular plants. Science 148, 339–346.
Schulze E D and Hall A E 1982 Stomatal responses, water loss and CO2 assimilation rates of plants in contrasting environments.In Physiological plant ecology, II. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology Eds O L Lange, P S Nobel, C B Osmond and H Ziegler. pp 181–230, 12B. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Sharratt B S, Reicosky D C, Idso S B and Bakedr D G 1983 Relationships between leaf water potential, canopy temperature, and evapo-transpiration in irrigated and nonirrigated alfalfa. Agron. J. 75, 891–894.
Solárová J and Pospišilová J 1983 Photosynthetic characteristics during ontogenesis of leaves 8. Stomatal diffusive conductance and stomatal reactivity. Photosynthetica 17, 101–151.
Taerum R 1965 Effects of moisture stress and climatic conditions on stomatal behavior and growth in Rome Beauty apple trees. Proc. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 85, 20–32.
Tenhunen J D, Lange O L and Jahner D 1982 The control by atmospheric factors and water stress of midday stomatal closure inArbutus unedo growing in a natural macchia. Oecologia 55, 165–169.
Turner N C and Begg J E 1973 Stomatal behavior and water status of maize, sorghum, and tobacco under field conditions. I. At high soil water potential. Plant Physiol. 51, 31–36.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Torrecillas, A., Ruiz-Sanchez, M.C., Del Amor, F. et al. Seasonal variations on water relations ofAmygdalus communis L. under drip irrigated and non irrigated conditions. Plant Soil 106, 215–220 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02371216
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02371216