Abstract
Spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) was treated with 2 atmospheric CO2 concentrations (350 and 700 mumol.mol-1), 2 levels of soil moisture (wet and drought), and 5 levels of nitrogen fertilizer (0, 50, 100, 150, 200 mg.kg-1 soil). The results showed that elevated atmospheric CO2 increased photosynthetic rate more in drought than in wet treatment. Photosynthetic rate increased with the increase of nitrogen fertilizer. Stomatal conductance decreased with CO2 enrichment, which was more in drought than in wet treatment. CO2 enrichment decreased more evapotranspiration in drought than in wet treatment. The decrease was more apparent with no fertilization. CO2 enrichment increased more leaf water use efficiency in drought than in wet treatment. Canopy WUE increased with CO2 enrichment and N fertilization. Thus, the increase in photosynthesis and the reduction in evapotranspiration due to elevated CO2 can ameliorate the negative effects of drought, and increase wheat resistance to water 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
Claim · model-written summary
Elevated CO2 increased photosynthetic rate more under drought than wet conditions.
- Taxon
- Spring wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- elevated atmospheric CO2e0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic ratee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- droughte0
- Comparator
- wet treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“elevated atmospheric CO2 increased photosynthetic rate more in drought than in wet treatment.”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Photosynthetic rate rose with increasing nitrogen fertilizer.
- Taxon
- Spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- nitrogen fertilizere0
- Outcome
- Photosynthetic ratee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Photosynthetic rate increased with the increase of nitrogen fertilizer.”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment decreased stomatal conductance more under drought than wet conditions.
- Taxon
- Spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- CO2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- Stomatal conductancee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- droughte0
- Comparator
- wet treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Stomatal conductance decreased with CO2 enrichment, which was more in drought than in wet treatment.”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment decreased evapotranspiration more under drought than wet conditions.
- Taxon
- Spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- CO2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- evapotranspiratione0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- droughte0
- Comparator
- wet treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CO2 enrichment decreased more evapotranspiration in drought than in wet treatment.”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The evapotranspiration decrease with CO2 enrichment was more apparent without fertilization.
- Taxon
- Spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- no fertilizatione0
- Outcome
- decreasee0
- Direction
- decreasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The decrease was more apparent with no fertilization.”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment increased leaf water use efficiency more under drought than wet conditions.
- Taxon
- Spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- CO2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- leaf water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- droughte0
- Comparator
- wet treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CO2 enrichment increased more leaf water use efficiency in drought than in wet treatment.”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 enrichment increased canopy water use efficiency.
- Taxon
- Spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- CO2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- Canopy WUEe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Canopy WUE increased with CO2 enrichment and N fertilization.”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
N fertilization increased canopy water use efficiency.
- Taxon
- Spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- N fertilizatione0
- Outcome
- Canopy WUEe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Canopy WUE increased with CO2 enrichment and N fertilization.”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors infer that elevated CO2 can alleviate drought effects and increase wheat water-stress resistance.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- elevated CO2e0
- Outcome
- wheat resistance to water stresse0
- Qualifier
- increase in photosynthesis and the reduction in evapotranspiratione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the increase in photosynthesis and the reduction in evapotranspiration due to elevated CO2 can ameliorate the negative effects of drought, and increase wheat resistance to water stress.”
The same questions in other papers
co2 · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
38 papers more in this group
See all 42 papers →co2 · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
68 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
93 papers more in this group
See all 97 papers →fertilization · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
98 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →fertilization · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
125 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
129 papers more in this group
See all 133 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.