Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T14:57:35.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of soil water potential on growth and yield of sunflower (Helianthus annuus)*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

N. Sionit
Affiliation:
Departments of Irrigation and Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Pahlavi University, Shiraz, Iran
S. R. Ghorashy
Affiliation:
Departments of Irrigation and Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Pahlavi University, Shiraz, Iran
M. Kheradnam
Affiliation:
Departments of Irrigation and Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Pahlavi University, Shiraz, Iran

Summary

The effect of soil water potential of the root media on the vegetative growth, seed and oil yield of sunflower (var. Record) grown in containers under field conditions was investigated.

The weight of shoots and the total leaf area of plants before flowering significantly decreased with decrease in the water potential of the root media. There was a sharp reduction of shoot weight as the potential decreased from —0–32 to — 1–25 bars and then a further slow decline as soil water potential dropped to — 8'6 bars. There were no significant differences in the 100-seed weights and percentage. of oil among the treatments, but the total number of seeds was significantly different.

The data did not indicate the existence of a threshold water potential above which yield was independent of soil water potential, but rather that yield was a continuously decreasing function of soil water potential.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

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

Association of Official Agricuxttjbail Chemists (1965). Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. Washington: A.O.A.C. 957 pages.Google Scholar
Bielorai, H. & Rubin, J. (1957). A study of the irrigation requirements and consumptive water use of late hybrid corn in the Northern Negev. In: Final Report of the Ford Foundation Israel Project A-5. Special Bull. Israel Agric. Res. Stn, Rehovot, Israel, no. 6.Google Scholar
Black, A. L. (1970). Soil water and soil temperature influences on dryland winter wheat. Agron. J. 62, 797801.Google Scholar
Brix, H. (1962). The effects of water stress on the rates of photosynthesis and respiration in tomato plants and loblolly pine seedlings. PI. physiol., Lancaster 15, 1020.Google Scholar
Denmead, O. T. & Shaw, R. H. (1962). Availability of soil water to plants as affected by soil moisture content and meteorological conditions. Agron. J. 54, 385–90.Google Scholar
Gardner, W. R. & Nieman, R. H. (1964). Lower limit of water availability to plants. Science, N.Y. 143, 1460–62.Google Scholar
Pependick, R. I., Cochran, V. L. & Woody, W. M. (1971). Soil water potential and water content profiles with wheat under low spring and summer rainfall. Agron. J. 63, 731–4.Google Scholar
Perrier, E. R., McKell, C. M. & Davidson, J. M. (1961). Plant—soil—water relations of two subspecies of orchard grass. Soil Sci. 92, 413–20.Google Scholar
Rawitz, E. & Hillel, D. I. (1969). Comparison of indexes relating plant response to soil moisture status. Agron. J. 61, 231–5.Google Scholar
Salter, P. J. (1958). The effects of different waterregimes on the vegetative growth and fruit development in the tomato. J. hort. Sci. 33, 112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar