4.6 Article

Kaolin and seaweed-based extracts can be used as middle and long-term strategy to mitigate negative effects of climate change in physiological performance of hazelnut tree

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY AND CROP SCIENCE
卷 206, 期 1, 页码 28-42

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jac.12369

关键词

Corylus avellana; gas exchange; mitigation strategies; natural substances; summer stress; water status

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spraying plants with exogenous substances have gained more attention due to its potential to reduce the negative impacts of heat and water stress in a climate-changing environment. Therefore, the effects of spraying kaolin and Ascophyllum nodosum with and without irrigation on leaf gas exchange parameters, plant water status, electrolyte leakage, cuticular waxes, plant hormones and antioxidant enzymes, proline, malondialdehyde (MDA) content and lipid peroxidation of membranes of hazelnut trees were studied. Six different treatments with kaolin (K), A. nodosum (An), irrigation (I), kaolin with irrigation (Ki), A. nodosum with irrigation (Ani) and no irrigation (control) during two consecutive years (2016-2017) were applied in a hazelnut orchard of 'Grada de Viseu' cultivar located in Moimenta da Beira region, Northern Portugal. Results showed that K and An were effective for reducing hazelnut heat and drought stress by increasing the water relative content (RWC), net CO2 assimilation (A), water use efficiency (A/g(s)) and reducing the leaf mass per area (LMA), electrolyte leakage (EL). Moreover, concentration of ABA, MDA, proline and lipid peroxidation of membranes, as well the average content of antioxidant enzymes, was lower, suggesting that under K and An, plants have a better physiological performance than without these two exogenous substances. Nonetheless, these benefits only appear to be significant in the second year of the experiment showing that the use of both substances to mitigate climate change adverse effects should be considered as a long-term strategy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据