4.7 Article

Alternate wetting and drying irrigation-mediated changes in the growth, photosynthesis and yield of the medicinal plant Tulipa edulis

期刊

INDUSTRIAL CROPS AND PRODUCTS
卷 66, 期 -, 页码 81-88

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.12.002

关键词

Tulipa edulis; Persistent drought; Alternate wetting and drying; Photosynthesis; Chlorophyll fluorescence

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [501100001809, 81202867]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tulipa edulis is an important medicinal plant with a variety of anti-cancer properties. There is an urgent need to reduce water consumption in T. edulis under greenhouse cultivation. A greenhouse experiment was performed to study the effect of well-watered (80% of field capacity, Control), persistent drought (50% of field capacity, D) and alternate wetting and drying (50% and 80% of field capacity, AWD) regimes on the growth traits, photosynthetic pigment contents, chlorophyll fluorescence parameters, photosynthetic characteristics and yield of T. edulis. The results showed that compared with the well-watered control, persistent drought inhibited plant growth and yields dramatically, presumably due to the significantly lower photosynthetic rate caused by a decrease in photosynthetic pigments and a reduced chlorophyll fluorescence efficiency (Fv/Fm, Fv/F0). In contrast, the AWD plants showed a capacity for photosynthesis comparable to the well-watered control, which could be associated with similar photosynthetic pigment levels and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters (Fv/Fm, Fv/F0). AWD reduced the irrigation water input by 25.09% while leading to comparable yields and increased water productivity by 21.21% compared with the well-watered control. The results suggested that an alternate wetting and drying (50% and 80% of field capacity) regime can be an effective means of saving water, promoting bulb production, and improving water production for T. edulis. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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