Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea maintained higher water potential of −1.2 kJ kg −1 by stomatal closure.
- Taxon
- cowpea
Vigna unguiculatae0 - Outcome
- water potentiale0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- −1.2 kJ kg −1e0
- Qualifier
- stomatal closuree0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSetting
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the cowpea plants adjusted by half as much but maintained a higher water potential (−1.2 kJ kg −1 ) by stomatal closure”
Title
Stomatal Closure vs. Osmotic Adjustment: a Comparison of Stress Response1
Keith J. McCree; Steven G. Richardson Crop Science 1987. doi:10.2135/cropsci1987.0011183x002700030024xa
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Observation Under frequent irrigation, cowpea and sugarbeet had almost identical carbon gain and water-loss rates.
- Observation With irrigation withheld, sugarbeet adjusted osmotically by 0.8 kJ kg −1 and reached −2.6 kJ kg −1 minimum leaf water potential.
- Observation Sugarbeet reached a daytime minimum leaf water potential of −2.6 kJ kg −1.
- Observation Cowpea adjusted osmotically by half as much as sugarbeet.
- Association At a given water potential, cowpea water-loss rates were much smaller.
- Observation On a given day, cowpea and sugarbeet water-loss rates were very similar.
- Observation Sugarbeet water potential fell much more rapidly.
- Observation Carbon gain rates were similar in cowpea and sugarbeet.
- Observation Osmotic adjustment showed little or no carbon gain advantage over stomatal closure.