Paper · 2004 · Agronomie

Comparison of flag leaf and ear photosynthesis with biomass and grain yield of durum wheat under various water conditions and genotypes

Hanane Abbad; Samir El Jaafari; Jordi Bort; et al.

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
106
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Photosynthetic activity of cereals has traditionally been studied using leaves, thus neglecting the role of other organs such as ears. Here, we studied the effects of water status and genotypes on the photosynthetic activity of the flag leaf blade and the ear of durum wheat. The various parameters related to the photosynthetic activity were analysed in relation to the total above-ground plant biomass and grain yield at maturity. Four local varieties plus two cultivars adapted to the semiarid areas of South Morocco were grown in pots in a greenhouse. Five different water treatments were maintained from the beginning of stem elongation to maturity, when shoot biomass and grain yield were recorded. The net photosynthesis (A), stomatal conductance (g s ) and transpiration (T) of the ear and the flag leaf were measured at anthesis. In both organs these factors decreased significantly with water deficit, whereas the A/T and A/g s ratios increased. The genotype effect was also significant for all traits studied. Whole-organ photosynthesis was much higher in the ear than in the flag leaf in well-watered conditions. As water stress developed, photosynthesis decreased less in the ear than in the flag leaf. Whole-ear photosynthesis correlated better than flag leaf photosynthesis with biomass and yield. Nevertheless, the relationships of the whole flag leaf with biomass and yield improved as the water stress became more severe, suggesting a progressive shift of yield from sink to source limitation. For all water regimes the ratios A/g s and A/T of the ear also showed a higher (negative) correlation with both biomass and yield than those of the flag leaf. The results indicate that the ear has a greater photosynthetic role than the flag leaf in determining grain yield, not only in drought but also in the absence of stress.

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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficit significantly decreased photosynthesis, stomatal conductance and transpiration in both ears and flag leaves.

Organ / stage
ear and the flag leafe0
Treatment
water deficite0
Outcome
net photosynthesis (A), stomatal conductance (g s ) and transpiration (T)e0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The net photosynthesis (A), stomatal conductance (g s ) and transpiration (T) of the ear and the flag leaf were measured at anthesis. In both organs these factors decreased significantly with water deficit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 705–910 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficit increased A/T and A/g s ratios in both organs.

Treatment
water deficite0
Outcome
A/T and A/g s ratiose0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In both organs these factors decreased significantly with water deficit, whereas the A/T and A/g s ratios increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 839–954 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Genotype significantly affected all studied photosynthetic traits.

Material
genotypee0
Outcome
all traits studiede0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The genotype effect was also significant for all traits studied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 956–1019 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Whole-organ photosynthesis was higher in the ear than the flag leaf under well-watered conditions.

Organ / stage
eare0
Outcome
Whole-organ photosynthesise0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
flag leafe0

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Whole-organ photosynthesis was much higher in the ear than in the flag leaf in well-watered conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1021–1123 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

As water stress developed, photosynthesis decreased less in the ear than in the flag leaf.

Organ / stage
eare0
Treatment
water stresse0
Outcome
photosynthesise0
Direction
decreased lesse0
Comparator
flag leafe0

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“As water stress developed, photosynthesis decreased less in the ear than in the flag leaf”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1125–1214 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Whole-ear photosynthesis correlated better with biomass and yield than flag leaf photosynthesis.

Organ / stage
Whole-eare0
Outcome
biomass and yielde0
Direction
correlated bettere0
Comparator
flag leaf photosynthesise0

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Whole-ear photosynthesis correlated better than flag leaf photosynthesis with biomass and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1216–1311 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flag leaf relationships with biomass and yield improved as water stress intensified.

Treatment
water stresse0
Outcome
relationships of the whole flag leaf with biomass and yielde0
Direction
improvede0

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the relationships of the whole flag leaf with biomass and yield improved as the water stress became more severe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1327–1438 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ear A/g s and A/T ratios had higher negative correlations with biomass and yield than flag leaf ratios at all water regimes.

Organ / stage
eare0
Outcome
correlation with both biomass and yielde0
Direction
higher (negative)e0
Comparator
flag leafe0

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“For all water regimes the ratios A/g s and A/T of the ear also showed a higher (negative) correlation with both biomass and yield than those of the flag leaf”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1512–1669 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors infer a greater role for the ear than flag leaf photosynthesis in determining grain yield with and without drought.

Organ / stage
eare0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Qualifier
not only in drought but also in the absence of stresse0

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

Triticum turgidum subsp. durum
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the ear has a greater photosynthetic role than the flag leaf in determining grain yield, not only in drought but also in the absence of stress”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1697–1839 · show in text ↑
t0

“durum wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–90 · show in text ↑

drought · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum turgidum (rivet wheat)Positive and negative results

16 papers: 5 positive, 11 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 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.