Premium
Response of Plant Water Potential to the Irrigated Environment of Southern Idaho 1
Author(s) -
Cary J. W.,
Wright J. L.
Publication year - 1971
Publication title -
agronomy journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.752
H-Index - 131
eISSN - 1435-0645
pISSN - 0002-1962
DOI - 10.2134/agronj1971.00021962006300050010x
Subject(s) - agronomy , water content , evapotranspiration , environmental science , soil water , water potential , phaseolus , growing season , hordeum vulgare , sativum , crop , moisture , biology , poaceae , chemistry , soil science , ecology , geotechnical engineering , organic chemistry , engineering
Laboratory studies have shown that plant water potential affects a number of key processes involved in growth, but there has been almost no information on what levels of water potential occur under irrigated conditions in the field. Before assessing the practical implication of laboratory results on soil and crop management, this type of information must be available. Consequently, plant water potential in irrigated crops of Zea mays , Triticum aestivum , Hordeum vulgaris , Phaseolus vulgaris , Pisum sativum , Solanum tuberosum , Beta vulgaris , and Medicago sativa , L. was measured throughout the growing season in southern Idaho. Soil moisture conditions and potential evapotranspiration were monitored. Daily changes in plant water potential varied from less than 5 bars to more than 20 bars, while random sampling of supposedly homogeneous sets of plants showed an average variation of about 2 bars. Changes due to differences in soil moisture were also detected, even though the soil moisture potential was kept high enough for near‐optimum crop production. Though the crops differed widely in their response to changes in environment, the plant water potential was strongly affected by microclimatic conditions. Day‐to‐day changes in plant water potential generally correlated more closely with changes in potential evapotranspiration than with changes in soil moisture content. Many of the daily changes observed in the plants remain unexplained, however. In general, the average water potential levels of all the field‐grown plants were lower than levels reported from growth chamber studies. Potentials seldom rose above —8 bars and were never observed above —5 bars.