Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:07:42.900Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hydraulic Press Measurements of Leaf Water Potential in Groundnuts†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

G. Rajendrudu ,
M. Singh  and
J. H. Williams
G. Rajendrudu
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh 502 324, India
M. Singh
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh 502 324, India
J. H. Williams
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh 502 324, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The hydraulic press was compared with the dew point psychrometer and the pressure chamber methods for measuring leaf water potential (Ψ) in groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea L.). For measurements on the same leaf, regression analysis revealed that the slopes did not differ significantly from unity. An analysis of functional relations between measurements made by the press and the dew point psychrometer or the press and the pressure chamber showed that the error variance of the press was similar to those of the two other methods. Therefore, we conclude that for groundnuts the performance of the press, the dew point psychrometer and the pressure chamber are similar.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , October 1983 , pp. 287 - 291
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCE

Bell, C. J. & Squire, G. R. (1981). Comparative measurements with two water vapour diffusion porometers (dynamic and steady-state). Journal of Experimental Botany 32:1143–1156.Google Scholar
Campbell, G. S. & Brewster, S. F. (1975). Leaf water potential and soil water content measured with a simple hydraulic press. Paper presented at the USDA Western Regional Research Project W-67. Honolulu: Hawaii.Google Scholar
Jones, C. A. & Carabaly, A. (1980). Estimation of leaf water potential in tropical grasses with the Campbell–Brewster hydraulic press. Tropical Agriculture, Trinidad 57:305–307.Google Scholar
Kendall, M. G. & Stuart, A. (1973). In The Advanced Theory of Statistics. Vol. 2, 399–443. London: Charles Griffin.Google Scholar
Klepper, B. & Barrs, H. D. (1968). Effects of salt secretion on psychrometric determinations of water potentials of cotton leaves. Plant Physiology 43:1138–1140.Google Scholar
Radulovich, R. A., Phene, C. J., Davis, K. R. & Brownell, J. R. (1982). Comparison of water stress of cotton from measurements with the hydraulic press and the pressure chamber. Agronomy Journal 74:383–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, G. A. & Hinckley, H. D. (1975). The pressure chamber as an instrument for ecological research. Advances in Ecological Research 9:166–243.Google Scholar
Scholander, P. F., Hammed, H. T., Hemmingsen, E. A. & Broadstreet, E. D. (1964). Hydrostatic pressure and osmotic potential in leaves of mangroves and some other plants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 52:119–125.Google Scholar
Turner, N. C. (1981). Techniques and experimental approaches for the measurement of plant water status. Plant and Soil 58:339–366.Google Scholar
Yegappan, T. M. & Mainstone, B.J. (1981). Comparisons between press and pressure chamber techniques for measuring leaf water potential. Experimental Agriculture 17:75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar