Claim · model-written summary
Water deficit did not decrease chlorophyll content in either cotton species.
- Taxon
- cotton species
Gossypium hirsutume3 - Treatment
- Water deficite2
- Outcome
- chlorophyll contente3
- Direction
- did not decreasee3
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Water deficit decreased photosynthesis in both cotton species, but did not decrease chlorophyll content or induce any sustained photoinhibition in either cotton species”
e3“did not decrease chlorophyll content or induce any sustained photoinhibition in either cotton species”
Title
Xiao-Ping Yi; Ya-Li Zhang; He-Sheng Yao; et al. Functional Plant Biology 2016. doi:10.1071/fp15247
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Intervention effect Water deficit decreased photosynthesis in both cotton species.
- Intervention effect Water deficit increased ETR/4-AG in cotton.
- Association The increase in ETR/4-AG was particularly pronounced in Xinluzao 45.
- Intervention effect Water deficit increased the activities of antioxidative enzymes in Xinluzao 45.
- Intervention effect Water deficit increased the contents of reactive oxygen species in Xinluzao 45.
- Intervention effect Moderate water deficit particularly increased non-photochemical quenching in Xinhai 21.
- Mechanism Xinluzao 45 relied on enhanced photorespiration and the Mehler reaction to dissipate excess light energy under mild and moderate water deficit.
- Mechanism Xinhai 21 used enhanced photorespiration for light energy utilisation under mild water deficit.
- Mechanism Xinhai 21 had a high capacity for dissipating excess light energy via heat dissipation under moderate water deficit.