Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T21:45:31.057Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leaf area and transpiration efficiency during different growth stages in oats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

W. Ehlers
W. Ehlers
Affiliation:
Institute of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Georg-August-University of Göttingen, von Siebold-Str. 8, D-3400 Gottingen, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Dry matter production, transpiration and transpiration efficiency (DM production: transpiration) were studied during vegetative growth of oats over 4 years (1976–77 and 1982–83) in field experiments on loess-derived soils near Gottingen, Germany, under different weather conditions. Shoot and root dry matter and leaf area were measured or estimated regularly during the season. The rate of evapotranspiration including intercepted rain water by leaves (ET) was determined during five consecutive growth stages from the water balance in the 2 m soil profile. The rate of soil evaporation (E) and the rate at which rain water was intercepted by leaves (I) were estimated separately in order to attain T, the transpiration rate (T = ET–E–I), or IT, the rate of interception of rain water by leaves plus transpiration (IT = ET–E). The potential evapotranspiration rate (ETp) was derived from meteorological parameters.

During the early stages of oat development (seedling growth and tillering), T and IT, related to ETp, were higher than expected from crop growth rate (CGR), calculated for shoot and total dry matter including roots, respectively. It was concluded that, at a leaf area index (LAI) of < 3·4, part of the solar radiation was converted to sensible heat between plant rows, increasing ETp near the ground and hence T, but not CGR. Because of this, LAI influenced IT efficiency and the crop-specific constant m of de Wit's formula. IT efficiency was not only dependent on LAI but also on ETp. Grain yield was related to both cumulative IT (ITC), normalized by ET, and leaf area duration during the period from anthesis to harvest. Increased leaf area duration after anthesis may partly explain the higher yields obtained with modern high-yielding varieties of small-grained cereals.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 116 , Issue 2 , April 1991 , pp. 183 - 190
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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

Aggarwal, P. K. & Sinha, S. K. (1983). Water stress and water-use efficiency in field grown wheat: a comparison of its efficiency with that of C4-plants. Agricultural Meteorology 29, 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aggarwal, P. K., Singh, A. K., Chaturvedi, G. S. & Sinha, S. K. (1986). Performance of wheat and triticale cultivars in a variable soil-water environment. II. Evapotranspiration, water use efficiency, harvest index and grain yield. Field Crops Research 13, 301–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Khafaf, S., Wierenga, P. J. & Williams, B. C. (1978). Evaporative flux from irrigated cotton as related to leaf area index, soil water, and evaporative demand. Agronomy Journal 70, 912–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asrar, G., Hipps, L. E. & Kanemasu, E. T. (1984). Assessing solar energy and water use efficiencies in winter wheat: a case study. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 31, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bierhuizen, J. F. & Slatyer, R. O. (1965). Effect of atmospheric concentration of water vapour and CO2 in determining transpiration-photosynthesis relationships of cotton leaves. Agricultural Meteorology 2, 259–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bois, J. F., Orstrom, A., Couchat, P. & Lasceve, G. (1985). Relationships between transpiration and photosynthesis during a water stress. Ada Horticulturae 171, 297–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clawson, K. L., Specht, J. E., Blad, B. L. & Garay, A. F. (1986). Water use efficiency in soybean pubescence density isolines – a calculation procedure for estimating daily values. Agronomy Journal 78, 483–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, P. J. M., Keatinge, J. D. H. & Hughes, G. (1983). Crop evapotranspiration - a technique for calculation of its components by field measurements. Field Crops Research 7, 299–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wit, C. T. (1958). Transpiration and crop yields. Verslagen van Landbouwkundige Onderzoekingen. No. 64.6. Wageningen, Netherlands: Instituut voor Biologisch en Scheikundig Onderzoek van Landbouwgewassen.Google Scholar
Ehlers, W. (1989). Transpiration efficiency of oat. Agronomy Journal 81, 810–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehlers, W., Grimme, K., Baeumer, K., Stülpnagel, R., Köpke, U. & Böhm, W. (1981). Flow resistance in soil and plant during field growth of oats. Geoderma 25, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehlers, W., Khosla, B. K., Köpke, U., Stülpnagel, R., Böhm, W. & Baeumer, K. (1980). Tillage effects on root development, water uptake and growth of oats. Soil and Tillage Research 1, 19–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehlers, W., Müller, U. & Grimme, K. (1986). Untersuchungen zum Wasserhaushalt der Ackerbohne. II. Wasserpotential, stomatäre Leitfähigkeit und Ertragsbildung. Kali-Briefe (Bünlehoj) 18, 189–210.Google Scholar
Evans, L. T., Wardlaw, I. F. & Fischer, R. A. (1975). Wheat. In Crop Physiology. Some Case Histories (Ed. Evans, L. T.), pp. 101–149. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, R. A. (1981). Optimizing the use of water and nitrogen through breeding of crops. Plant and Soil 58, 249–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larcher, W. (1973). Ökologie der Pftanzen. Stuttgart: Ulmer.Google Scholar
Müller, U., Grimme, K., Meyer, C. & Ehlers, W. (1986). Leaf water potential and stomatal conductance of fieldgrown faba beans (Vicia faba L.) and oats (Avena saliva L.). Plant and Soil 93, 17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, J. T. (1983). Efficient water use in crop production: discussion on the generality of relations between biomass production and evapotranspiration. In Limitations to Efficient Water Use in Crop Production (Eds Taylor, H. M., Jordan, W. R. & Sinclair, T. R.), pp. 29–44. Madison: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Sandhu, B. S. & Horton, M. L. (1977). Response of oats to water deficit. II. Growth and yield characteristics. Agronomy Journal 69, 361–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, H. D., Ferguson, J. A. & Wood, L. S. (1987). Water use, yield, and dry matter accumulation by determinate soybean grown in a humid region. Agronomy Journal 79, 870–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, R. H. & Laing, D. R. (1966). Moisture stress and plant response. In Plant Environment and Efficient Water Use (Ed. Pierre, W. H.), pp. 73–94. Madison: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Shibles, R. M. & Weber, C. R. (1965). Leaf area, solar radiation interception and dry matter production by soybeans. Crop Science 5, 575–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanhill, G. (1986). Water use efficiency. Advances in Agronomy 39, 53–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, C. B. & Sinclair, T. R. (1983). Efficient water use in crop production: research or re-search? In Limitations to Efficient Water Use in Crop Production (Eds Taylor, H. M., Jordan, W. R. & Sinclair, T. R.), pp. 1–27. Madison: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Van Bavel, C. H. M. (1966). Potential evaporation: the combination concept and its experimental verification. Water Resources Research 2, 455–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, G. K. (1986). Transpiration efficiency of fieldgrown maize. Field Crops Research 14, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D. J. (1947). Comparative physiological studies on the growth of field crops. I. Variation in net assimilation rate and leaf area between species and varieties, and within and between years. Annals of Botany NS 11, 41–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar