Paper · 1999 · New Phytologist

Diurnal variations of photosynthesis and dew absorption by leaves in two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions

SERGI MUNNÉ‐BOSCH; SALVADOR NOGUÉS; LEONOR ALEGRE

13
claims
40
verbatim quotes
153
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The effects of summer drought, dew deposition on leaves and autumn rainfall on plant water relations and diurnal variations of photosynthesis were measured in two evergreen shrubs, rosemary ( Rosmarinus officinalis ) and lavender ( Lavandula stoechas ), grown in Mediterranean field conditions. Withholding water for 40 d caused a similar decrease in predawn shoot water potential (ψ pd ) from c. −0.4 to c. −1.3 MPa in both species, but a 50% decrease in the relative leaf water content in L. stoechas compared with 22% in R. officinalis . A similar decrease in CO 2 assimilation rates by c. 75% was observed in water‐stressed plants of both species, although L. stoechas showed smaller photosynthesis: stomatal conductance ratio than R. officinalis (35 vs 45 μmol CO 2 :mol H 2 O). The relative quantum efficiency of photosystem II photochemistry also decreased by c. 45% at midday in water‐ stressed plants of both species. Nevertheless, neither L. stoechas nor R. officinalis suffered drought‐induced damage to photosystem II, as indicated by the maintenance of the ratio F v : F m throughout the experiment, associated with an increase in the carotenoid content per unit of chlorophyll by c. 62% and c. 30%, respectively, in water‐stressed plants. Only L. stoechas absorbed dew by leaves. In this species the occurrence of 6 d of dew over a 15‐d period improved relative leaf water content by c. 72% and shoot water potential by c. 0.5 MPa throughout the day in water‐stressed plants, although the photosynthetic capacity was not recovered until the occurrence of autumn rainfall. The ability of leaves to absorb dew allowed L. stoechas to restore plant water status, which is especially relevant in plants exposed to prolonged drought.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Withheld water decreased predawn shoot water potential similarly in both shrubs.

Taxon
rosemarySalvia rosmarinust1
Treatment
Withholding water for 40 de0
Outcome
predawn shoot water potentiale0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
from c. −0.4 to c. −1.3 MPae0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Salvia rosmarinus
Salvia rosmarinus · TaxonMargalob · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Withholding water for 40 d caused a similar decrease in predawn shoot water potential (ψ pd ) from c. −0.4 to c. −1.3 MPa in both species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 295–432 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“rosemary ( Rosmarinus officinalis )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–216 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lavender relative leaf water content fell 50% under drought.

Outcome
relative leaf water contente0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
50%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lavandula angustifolia
Lavandula angustifolia · TaxonAndrey Zharkikh · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a 50% decrease in the relative leaf water content in L. stoechas”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 438–502 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“lavender ( Lavandula stoechas )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rosemary relative leaf water content fell 22% under drought.

Taxon
rosemarySalvia rosmarinust1
Outcome
relative leaf water contente1
Value
22%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Salvia rosmarinus
Salvia rosmarinus · TaxonMargalob · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“compared with 22% in R. officinalis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 503–538 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
e1

“a 50% decrease in the relative leaf water content in L. stoechas”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 438–502 · show in text ↑
t1

“rosemary ( Rosmarinus officinalis )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–216 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

CO2 assimilation fell about 75% in both drought-stressed shrubs.

Taxon
rosemarySalvia rosmarinust1
Treatment
water‐stressede0
Outcome
CO 2 assimilation ratese0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
c. 75%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Salvia rosmarinus
Salvia rosmarinus · TaxonMargalob · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A similar decrease in CO 2 assimilation rates by c. 75% was observed in water‐stressed plants of both species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 541–650 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“rosemary ( Rosmarinus officinalis )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–216 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lavender photosynthesis to stomatal conductance ratio was lower than rosemary, 35 versus 45.

Outcome
photosynthesis: stomatal conductance ratioe0
Direction
smallere0
Value
35 vs 45 μmol CO 2 :mol H 2 Oe0
Comparator
R. officinalise0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lavandula angustifolia
Lavandula angustifolia · TaxonAndrey Zharkikh · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“L. stoechas showed smaller photosynthesis: stomatal conductance ratio than R. officinalis (35 vs 45 μmol CO 2 :mol H 2 O)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 661–782 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“lavender ( Lavandula stoechas )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Photosystem II quantum efficiency fell about 45% at midday in drought-stressed shrubs.

Taxon
rosemarySalvia rosmarinust1
Treatment
water‐ stressede0
Outcome
relative quantum efficiency of photosystem II photochemistrye0
Direction
decreasede0
Value
c. 45%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Salvia rosmarinus
Salvia rosmarinus · TaxonMargalob · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The relative quantum efficiency of photosystem II photochemistry also decreased by c. 45% at midday in water‐ stressed plants of both species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 784–925 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“rosemary ( Rosmarinus officinalis )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–216 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Neither shrub suffered detectable drought damage to photosystem II.

Outcome
drought‐induced damage to photosystem IIe0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lavandula angustifolia
Lavandula angustifolia · TaxonAndrey Zharkikh · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“neither L. stoechas nor R. officinalis suffered drought‐induced damage to photosystem II”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 941–1029 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“lavender ( Lavandula stoechas )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lavender carotenoid content per chlorophyll rose about 62% during water stress.

Treatment
water‐stressede0
Outcome
carotenoid content per unit of chlorophylle0
Direction
increasee0
Value
c. 62%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lavandula angustifolia
Lavandula angustifolia · TaxonAndrey Zharkikh · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“an increase in the carotenoid content per unit of chlorophyll by c. 62% and c. 30%, respectively, in water‐stressed plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1129–1251 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“lavender ( Lavandula stoechas )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rosemary carotenoid content per chlorophyll rose about 30% during water stress.

Taxon
rosemarySalvia rosmarinust1
Treatment
water‐stressede0
Outcome
carotenoid content per unit of chlorophylle0
Direction
increasee0
Value
c. 30%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Salvia rosmarinus
Salvia rosmarinus · TaxonMargalob · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“an increase in the carotenoid content per unit of chlorophyll by c. 62% and c. 30%, respectively, in water‐stressed plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1129–1251 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“rosemary ( Rosmarinus officinalis )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 181–216 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Only lavender absorbed dew through leaves.

Outcome
absorbed dew by leavese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lavandula angustifolia
Lavandula angustifolia · TaxonAndrey Zharkikh · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Only L. stoechas absorbed dew by leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1253–1292 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“lavender ( Lavandula stoechas )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Six days of dew improved lavender relative leaf water content about 72%.

Treatment
6 d of dew over a 15‐d periode0
Outcome
relative leaf water contente0
Direction
improvede0
Value
c. 72%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lavandula angustifolia
Lavandula angustifolia · TaxonAndrey Zharkikh · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the occurrence of 6 d of dew over a 15‐d period improved relative leaf water content by c. 72%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1310–1404 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“lavender ( Lavandula stoechas )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Six days of dew improved lavender shoot water potential by about 0.5 MPa.

Treatment
water‐stressede0
Outcome
shoot water potentiale0
Value
c. 0.5 MPae0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lavandula angustifolia
Lavandula angustifolia · TaxonAndrey Zharkikh · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“shoot water potential by c. 0.5 MPa throughout the day in water‐stressed plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1409–1488 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“lavender ( Lavandula stoechas )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–252 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lavender photosynthetic capacity did not recover until autumn rainfall.

Outcome
photosynthetic capacitye0
Direction
not recoverede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lavandula angustifolia
Lavandula angustifolia · TaxonAndrey Zharkikh · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the photosynthetic capacity was not recovered until the occurrence of autumn rainfall”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1499–1584 · show in text ↑
t0

“two evergreen shrubs growing in Mediterranean field conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–131 · show in text ↑
t1

“lavender ( Lavandula stoechas )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 221–252 · show in text ↑

drought · physiology: pigments · Lavandula angustifolia (lavender)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

drought · physiology: water · Lavandula angustifolia (lavender)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

drought · physiology: pigments · Salvia rosmarinus (rosemary)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

drought · physiology: photosynthesis · Salvia rosmarinus (rosemary)Results agree

3 papers: 0 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

drought · physiology: water · Salvia rosmarinus (rosemary)Results agree

3 papers: 0 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.