Abstract
AbstractStem water potential (Ψstem) is a key indicator for assessing plant water status, which is crucial in understanding plant health and productivity. However, existing measurement methods for Ψstem, characterized by destructiveness and intermittency, limit its applicability. Microtensiometers, an emerging plant-based sensor, offer continuous monitoring capabilities and have shown success in certain vine and tree species. In this study, we investigate the efficacy of microtensiometers ability to monitor the Ψstem of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) under three distinct irrigation treatments in Maricopa, Arizona, an extremely hot, arid environment. We analyze the diurnal dynamics of Ψstem across the irrigation regimes and compare these measurements with midday leaf water potentials (Ψleaf) obtained using a dewpoint potentiometer. Our results demonstrate that the microtensiometer-derived Ψstem closely follows known diurnal patterns of Ψleaf, tracking with vapor pressure deficit (VPD) and responding to variations in irrigation levels and soil moisture content. Time cross-correlation analysis reveals an 80-minute lag in Ψstem response to changing VPD under non-water limiting conditions, which shortens under water-limiting conditions. Additionally, we establish a robust linear relationship (R2adj = 0.82) between Ψstem and Ψleaf, with this relationship strengthening as water availability decreases. Notably, we observe mean gradients of 1.2 and 0.06 MPa between soil vs. stem and stem vs. leaf water potentials, respectively. Moreover, Ψstem data proves to be more sensitive in distinguishing between irrigation treatments earlier in the growing season compared to Ψleaf, leaf temperature and leaf gas exchange parameters. These findings highlight the utility of microtensiometers as valuable tools for monitoring water status in smaller-stemmed row crops such as cotton.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference81 articles.
1. Ahmed MA, Passioura J, Carminati A (2018) Hydraulic processes in roots and the rhizosphere pertinent to increasing yield of water-limited grain crops: a critical review. J Experimental Bot (Vol 69. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ery183
2. Allen RG, Pereira L, Raes S, Smith M (1987) Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines for computing crop water requirement. FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation ISBN 978-92-5-104219-9. In Irrigation and Drainage FAO, Rome
3. Améglio T, Archer P, Cohen M, Valancogne C, Daudet FA, Dayau S, Cruiziat P (1999) Significance and limits in the use of predawn leaf water potential for tree irrigation. Plant Soil 207(2). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026415302759
4. Beaudette D, Skovlin J, Roecker S, Brown A (2023) soilDB: Soil Database Interface. R package version 2.7.8. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=soilDB
5. Black WL, Santiago M, Zhu S, Stroock AD (2020) Ex situ and in situ measurement of Water Activity with a MEMS tensiometer. Anal Chem 92(1). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.9b02647