Abstract
Field studies were conducted to examine the relative effects of net irradiance (Rn), air vapor pressure deficit (VPD) and leaf water potential (Ψ1), on leaf conductance, (C1) of well-watered potatoes. Conductances of sunlit, surface-layer leaves for the cultivars Russet Burbank, Kennebec and Lemhi Russet were positively correlated with Rn (r2=0.79, 0.83 and 0.62, respectively) for Rn between 100 and 650 Wm-2. Leaf conductance (cm s-1) for all three cultivars was described by the linear relation: C1=0.871 +0.0028 Rn (r2=0.73). Mean C1 for a full Russet Burbank canopy, comprised of measurements from both sunlit and shaded leaves, was also linearly related to Rn. Although VPD and Ψ1 were significantly correlated with C1 (r2=0.44 and 0.46, respectively), the results of multiple regression analysis showed that they had no additional effect on C1 beyond that attributed to Rn. These results indicate that potato leaf conductance is primarily related to irradiance under nonlimiting soil water conditions.
Resumen
Se condujeron estudios de campo para determinar los efectos relativos de la irradiación (Rn), del déficit de presión de vapor del aire (VPD) y del potencial de agua en la hoja (I1), sobre la conductancia foliar (C1) de papas debidamente irrigadas. Las conductancias de las capas superficiales de las hojas iluminadas por el sol, para los cultivares Russet Burbank, Kennebec y Lemhi Russet, estuvieron positivamente correlacionadas con Rn (r2=0,79, 0,83 y 0,62 respectivamente) para Rn entre 100 y 650 Wm-2. La conductancia de la hoja (cm s-1) para los tres cultivares estuvo representada por la relación lineal: C1=0,871 + 0,0028 Rn (r2=0,73). La C1 media para el follaje completa de Russet Burbank, comprendió mediciones tanto de hojas iluminadas por sel sol como de hojas en la sombra y estuvo también correlacionada linealmente con Rn. No obstante que el VPD y el I1 estuvieron significativamente correlacionados con C1 (r2=0,44 y 0,46 respectivamente), los resultados del análisis de regresión múltiple mostraron que ellos no tuvieron efecto adicional sobre C1 más allá del atribuído a Rn. Estos resultados indican que, bajo condiciones de humedad ilimitada del suelo, la conductancia de las hojas de papa está principalmente correlacionada con la irradiación.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Literature Cited
Ackerson, R.C., D.R. Krieg, T.D. Miller and R.G. Stevens. 1977. Water relations and physiological activity of potatoes. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 102:572–575.
Aston, M.J. 1976. Variations of stomatal diffusion resistance with ambient humidity in sunflower (Helianthus annuus). Aust J Plant Physiol 3:489–502.
Carlson, R.E., N.N. Momen, O. Arjmand and R.H. Shaw. 1979. Leaf conductance and leaf water potential relationships for two soybean cultivars grown under controlled irrigation. Agron J 71:321–325.
Choudhury, B.J. and S.B. Idso. 1985. An empirical model for stomatal resistance of field-grown wheat. Agric For Meteorol 36:65–82.
Denmead, O.T. and B.D. Millar. 1976. Field studies of the conductance of wheat leaves and transpiration. Agron J 68:307–311.
Dwelle, R.B., P.J. Hurley and J.J. Pavek. 1983. Photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of potato clones. Plant Physiol 72:172–176.
Dwelle, R.B., G.E. Kleinkopf and J.J. Pavek. 1981. Stomatal conductance and gross photosynthesis of potato (Solatium tuberosum L.) as influenced by irradiance, temperature, and growth stage. Potato Res 24:49–59.
Gandar, P.W. and C.B. Tanner. 1976. Leaf growth, tuber growth and water potential in potatoes. Crop Sci 16:534–538.
Hall, A.E. and G.J. Hoffman. 1976. Leaf conductance response to humidity and water transport in plants. Agron J 68:876–881.
Hall, A.E. and M.R. Kaufmann. 1975. Stomatal response to environment withSesamum indicum L. Plant Physiol 55:455–459.
Idso, S.B. 1983. Stomatal regulation for evaporation from well-watered plant canopies: a new synthesis. Agric Meteorol 29:213–217.
Johnson, J.D. and W.K. Ferrell. 1983. Stomatal response to vapour pressure deficit and effect on plant water stress. Plant, Cell and Environment 6:451–456.
Jones, H.G. 1983. Plants and microclimate. Cambridge University Press, The Pitt building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1RP.
Kaufmann, M.R. 1982. Leaf conductance as a function of photosynthetic photon flux density and absolute humidity difference from leaf to air. Plant Physiol 69:1018–1022.
Little, T.M. and F.J. Hills. 1978. Agricultural experimentation. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Morison, J.I.L. and R.M. Gifford. 1983. Stomatal sensitivity to carbon dioxide and humidity. Plant Physiol 71:789–796.
Sheriff, D.W. 1977. The effect of humidity on water uptake by, and viscous-flow resistance of, excised leaves of a number of species. Physiological and anatomical observations. J Exp Bot 28:1399–1407.
Shimshi, D., J. Shalhevet and T. Meir. 1983. Irrigation regime effects on some physiological responses of potato. Agron J 75:262–267.
Stark, J.C. and J.L. Wright. 1985. Relationship between foliage temperature and water stress in potatoes. Am Potato J 62:57–68.
Thomas, J.C., K.W. Brown and W.R. Jordan. 1976. Stomatal response to leaf water potential as affected by preconditioning water stress in the field. Agron J 68:706–708.
van Loon, C.D. 1981. The effect of water stress on potato growth, development and yield. Am Potato J 58:51–69.
Wolfe, D.W., E. Fereres and R.E. Voss. 1983. Growth and yield responses of two potato cultivars at various levels of applied water. Irrig Sci 3:211–222.
Young, E., J.M. Hand and S.C. Wiest. 1981. Diurnal variation in water potential components and stomatal resistance of irrigated peach seedlings. J Am Hortic Sci 106:337–340.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Approved for publication by the Director of the Idaho Agric. Expt. Station as research paper No. 86741.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stark, J.C. Stomatal behavior of potatoes under nonlimiting soil water conditions. American Potato Journal 64, 301–309 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02853522
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02853522