ISHS


Acta
Horticulturae
Home


Login
Logout
Status


Help

ISHS Home

ISHS Contact

Consultation
statistics
index


Search
 
ISHS Acta Horticulturae 1130: XXIX International Horticultural Congress on Horticulture: Sustaining Lives, Livelihoods and Landscapes (IHC2014): International Symposia on the Physiology of Perennial Fruit Crops and Production Systems and Mechanisation, Precision Horticulture and Robotics

Responses of young apple trees to soil water restriction: combining shoot morphology and leaf functioning over a range of genotypes

Authors:   P.É. Lauri, P. Losciale, M. Zibordi, L. Manfrini, L. Corelli-Grappadelli, J.L. Regnard, E. Costes
Keywords:   apple, Malus × domestica, leaf functioning, shoot morphology, water restriction
DOI:   10.17660/ActaHortic.2016.1130.71
Abstract:
Adapting temperate fruit-tree cultivation to stressful environments is a considerable challenge for the breeder. This is especially true for water restriction (WR) which is likely to occur more frequently in the near future, not only in Mediterranean climates but also in several parts of the middle and high latitudes. Apple was chosen as an example of fruit tree distributed worldwide and also cultivated in semi-arid regions where irrigation is crucial for regular cropping. A range of apple genotypes sourced from a single-cross-population and trained as grafted one-year-old single shoots, grown in 4-L pots in controlled conditions were used. We investigated genotype variations in some morphological and leaf ecophysiological traits of shoots maintained in a severe WR in comparison to well-watered (WW) shoots. A Principal Component Analysis performed on all variables showed that the effects of WR on the two components of vegetative growth (i.e., stem and leaf) and on leaf ecophysiology strongly varied depending on the water regime, and within each water regime on the genotype. From an ecophysiological point of view, well-watered genotypes were better discriminated by leaf “efficacy” (i.e., net photosynthesis, electron transport rate and growth) than by “efficiency” (i.e., water use efficiency), whereas the reverse was true under WR.

Download Adobe Acrobat Reader (free software to read PDF files)

1130_70     1130     1130_72

URL www.actahort.org      Hosted by KU Leuven      © ISHS