Premium
Retention of mobile water during dehydration in the desiccation‐tolerant grass Eragrostis nindensis
Author(s) -
Balsamo Ronald A.,
Vander Willigen Clare,
Boyko Walter,
Farrant Jill
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
physiologia plantarum
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.351
H-Index - 146
eISSN - 1399-3054
pISSN - 0031-9317
DOI - 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2005.00501.x
Subject(s) - desiccation , dehydration , water content , eragrostis , horticulture , desiccation tolerance , ultimate tensile strength , botany , biology , chemistry , materials science , composite material , biochemistry , geotechnical engineering , engineering
Leaf tensile strength was measured for the drought‐tolerant grass Eragrostis curvula and the desiccation‐tolerant grass E . nindensis when fully hydrated, partially dehydrated, naturally air‐dried, and flash‐dried. Leaf tensile strength increased in intact, air‐dried leaves of E . curvula but not for similarly treated leaves of E . nindensis . Examination of leaf cross‐sections by light microscopy and histochemical staining for lignins failed to show any significant structural differences between the two species in the hydrated state. When leaves were flash‐dried, the tensile strength of E . curvula remained unchanged from leaves dried naturally, while there was a marked increase in the tensile strength of flash‐dried leaves of E . nindensis . Proton NMR indicated that the desiccation‐tolerant E . nindensis retained mobile water when leaf relative water content was less than 20% if dried naturally but not if flash‐dried, whereas no mobile water was detected in leaves of E . curvula when dried either naturally or with flash‐drying to below 20% relative water content. This behaviour suggests a fundamental difference in strategy for surviving water loss in vegetative tissues between desiccation‐tolerant species and drought‐tolerant species.