Paper · 2023 · Agronomy

Effect of Short-Term Water Deficit on Some Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) with Different Spike Morphotypes

Frantisek Hnilicka; Semen Lysytskyi; Tomas Rygl; et al.

16
claims
35
verbatim quotes
4
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Water deficit is one of the most important stress factors affecting yield and production quality. Breeders are focusing on breeding wheat cultivars and crop lines that are more resistant to water deficit, so there is a possibility that plants with changes in their ear morphologies, such as long chaff and multi-rowed varieties, will be more resistant to water deficit. Therefore, our research focused on the study of changes in the physiological parameters of wheat cultivar ‘Bohemia’ (normal cob) with an altered morphotype (genotypes ‘284-17’ (long chaff) and genotype ‘29-17’ (multirow cob)), in relation to the duration of the water deficit. The experiment was set up as a container experiment under partially controlled greenhouse conditions. The experimental design included four treatments. The control (C) variant was irrigated regularly. The other treatments were stressed by water deficit, which was induced through the method of gradually drying the substrate: treatment D1 involved 10 days without irrigation, 4 days of watering, 10 days with a re-induced water deficit and 4 days of watering; treatment D2 involved 10 days of watering, and then stress was induced via water deficit until the end of the experiment; treatment D3 involved 10 days of stress and then irrigation until the end of the experiment. The pigment content, gas exchange rate, chlorophyll fluorescence and water potential were monitored in the juvenile wheat plants. The obtained results showed that the contents of photosynthetically active pigments (chlorophyll a and b and carotenoids) were influenced by the gene type. The chlorophyll and carotenoid content were higher in genotype ‘29-17’ (0.080 and 1.925 nM cm−2, respectively) and lowest in cultivar ‘Bohemia’ (0.080 and 0.080 nM cm−2, respectively). The chlorophyll content decreased due to water deficit most significantly in the D2 variant (0.071 nM cm−2), compared to the control (0.138 nM cm−2). The carotenoid content significantly decreased due to water deficiency in the cultivar ‘Bohemia’, D2 (0.061 nM cm−2) and the genotype ‘284-17’ (0.075 nM cm−2) and non-significantly decreased in ‘29-17’ (1.785 nM cm−2). In the control plants, the carotenoid content decreased in the following order: genotype ‘29-17’ (1.853 nM cm−2) > genotype ‘284-17’ (0.088 nM cm−2) > cv. ‘Bohemia’ (0.087 nM cm−2). Wheat plants had a decreased photosynthetic rate due to the closure of stomata and reduction in substomatal CO2 levels, which were caused by water deficit. The above effect was observed in genotype ‘29-17’ and cultivar ‘Bohemia’. The transpiration rate increased by 0.099 mM m−2 s−1 (5.69%) in the variety ‘Bohemia’, due to water deficit. On the other hand, the transpiration rate of genotype ‘29-17’ and genotype ‘284-17’ decreased by 0.261 mM m−2 s−1 (88.19%) and 0.325 mM m−2 s−1 (81.67%), respectively, compared to the control. Among the genotypes studied, genotype ‘29-17’ showed higher photosynthesis and transpiration rates, compared to genotype ‘284-17’ and the variety ‘Bohemia’. The effect of genotype and water deficit on chlorophyll fluorescence parameters was also shown. In all genotypes studied, there was a significant decrease in water potential due to water deficit, most significantly in the Bohemia variety, then in the genotype ‘284-17’, and the least significant decrease in water potential was seen in the genotype ‘29-17’. Genotype ‘29-17’ appears promising with respect to drought tolerance and photosynthetic rate, despite increased transpiration and reduced water potential; it also appears promising for better water management, with respect to reduced water potential in aboveground organs. On the other hand, the variety Bohemia appears to be less suitable for dry areas, since, despite its relative plasticity, it shows not only high water potential values in the water deficit region but also the most significant decrease in water potential.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 16

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pigment contents of wheat were influenced by genotype.

Material
gene typee1
Outcome
contents of photosynthetically active pigmentse1

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“the contents of photosynthetically active pigments (chlorophyll a and b and carotenoids) were influenced by the gene type”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1485–1606 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorophyll and carotenoid content were higher in genotype ‘29-17’.

Material
genotype ‘29-17’e1
Outcome
chlorophyll and carotenoid contente1
Direction
highere1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“The chlorophyll and carotenoid content were higher in genotype ‘29-17’ (0.080 and 1.925 nM cm−2, respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1608–1718 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorophyll and carotenoid content were lowest in cultivar ‘Bohemia’.

Material
cultivar ‘Bohemia’e2
Outcome
chlorophyll and carotenoid contente1
Direction
loweste2

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“The chlorophyll and carotenoid content were higher in genotype ‘29-17’ (0.080 and 1.925 nM cm−2, respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1608–1718 · show in text ↑
e2

“lowest in cultivar ‘Bohemia’ (0.080 and 0.080 nM cm−2, respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1723–1791 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficit significantly decreased chlorophyll content to 0.071 nM cm−2, compared with the control (0.138 nM cm−2).

Treatment
water deficite1
Outcome
chlorophyll contente1
Direction
decreasede1
Value
0.071 nM cm−2e1
Comparator
controle1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“The chlorophyll content decreased due to water deficit most significantly in the D2 variant (0.071 nM cm−2), compared to the control (0.138 nM cm−2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1793–1941 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficiency significantly decreased carotenoid content in cultivar ‘Bohemia’ (0.061 nM cm−2).

Material
cultivar ‘Bohemia’e1
Treatment
water deficiencye1
Outcome
carotenoid contente1
Direction
significantly decreasede1
Value
0.061 nM cm−2e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“The carotenoid content significantly decreased due to water deficiency in the cultivar ‘Bohemia’, D2 (0.061 nM cm−2) and the genotype ‘284-17’ (0.075 nM cm−2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1943–2101 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficiency significantly decreased carotenoid content in genotype ‘284-17’ (0.075 nM cm−2).

Material
genotype ‘284-17’e1
Treatment
water deficiencye1
Outcome
carotenoid contente1
Direction
significantly decreasede1
Value
0.075 nM cm−2e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“The carotenoid content significantly decreased due to water deficiency in the cultivar ‘Bohemia’, D2 (0.061 nM cm−2) and the genotype ‘284-17’ (0.075 nM cm−2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1943–2101 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficiency non-significantly decreased carotenoid content in genotype ‘29-17’ (1.785 nM cm−2).

Material
‘29-17’e2
Treatment
water deficiencye1
Outcome
carotenoid contente1
Direction
non-significantly decreasede2
Value
1.785 nM cm−2e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“The carotenoid content significantly decreased due to water deficiency in the cultivar ‘Bohemia’, D2 (0.061 nM cm−2) and the genotype ‘284-17’ (0.075 nM cm−2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1943–2101 · show in text ↑
e2

“non-significantly decreased in ‘29-17’ (1.785 nM cm−2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2106–2160 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficit decreased the photosynthetic rate of wheat through stomatal closure and lower substomatal CO2 in genotype ‘29-17’ and cultivar ‘Bohemia’.

Material
genotype ‘29-17’e2
Treatment
water deficite1
Outcome
photosynthetic ratee1
Direction
decreasede1
Qualifier
closure of stomatae1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“Wheat plants had a decreased photosynthetic rate due to the closure of stomata and reduction in substomatal CO2 levels, which were caused by water deficit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2344–2498 · show in text ↑
e2

“The above effect was observed in genotype ‘29-17’ and cultivar ‘Bohemia’”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2500–2572 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficit increased the transpiration rate of cultivar ‘Bohemia’ by 0.099 mM m−2 s−1 (5.69%).

Material
variety ‘Bohemia’e1
Treatment
water deficite1
Outcome
transpiration ratee1
Direction
increasede1
Value
0.099 mM m−2 s−1 (5.69%)e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“The transpiration rate increased by 0.099 mM m−2 s−1 (5.69%) in the variety ‘Bohemia’, due to water deficit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2574–2681 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transpiration rate of genotype ‘29-17’ decreased by 0.261 mM m−2 s−1 (88.19%) compared with the control.

Material
genotype ‘29-17’e1
Outcome
transpiration ratee1
Direction
decreasede1
Value
0.261 mM m−2 s−1 (88.19%)e1
Comparator
controle1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“the transpiration rate of genotype ‘29-17’ and genotype ‘284-17’ decreased by 0.261 mM m−2 s−1 (88.19%) and 0.325 mM m−2 s−1 (81.67%), respectively, compared to the control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2702–2874 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transpiration rate of genotype ‘284-17’ decreased by 0.325 mM m−2 s−1 (81.67%) compared with the control.

Material
genotype ‘284-17’e1
Outcome
transpiration ratee1
Direction
decreasede1
Value
0.325 mM m−2 s−1 (81.67%)e1
Comparator
controle1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“the transpiration rate of genotype ‘29-17’ and genotype ‘284-17’ decreased by 0.261 mM m−2 s−1 (88.19%) and 0.325 mM m−2 s−1 (81.67%), respectively, compared to the control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2702–2874 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Genotype ‘29-17’ showed higher photosynthesis and transpiration rates than genotype ‘284-17’ and cultivar ‘Bohemia’.

Material
genotype ‘29-17’e1
Outcome
photosynthesis and transpiration ratese1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
genotype ‘284-17’e1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“genotype ‘29-17’ showed higher photosynthesis and transpiration rates, compared to genotype ‘284-17’”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2905–3005 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water deficit significantly decreased water potential in all wheat genotypes, most strongly in the Bohemia variety.

Material
Bohemia varietye1
Treatment
water deficite1
Outcome
water potentiale1
Direction
significant decreasee1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“In all genotypes studied, there was a significant decrease in water potential due to water deficit, most significantly in the Bohemia variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 3129–3270 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Genotype ‘29-17’ showed the least significant decrease in water potential under water deficit.

Material
genotype ‘29-17’e1
Outcome
water potentiale1
Direction
least significant decreasee1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“the least significant decrease in water potential was seen in the genotype ‘29-17’”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 3307–3389 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Genotype ‘29-17’ appears promising for drought tolerance.

Material
Genotype ‘29-17’e1
Outcome
drought tolerancee1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“Genotype ‘29-17’ appears promising with respect to drought tolerance and photosynthetic rate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 3391–3483 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The Bohemia variety appears less suitable for dry areas.

Material
variety Bohemiae1
Outcome
suitable for dry arease1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Physiological Properties of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–99 · show in text ↑
e1

“the variety Bohemia appears to be less suitable for dry areas”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 3683–3744 · show in text ↑

drought · physiology: pigments · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

131 papers: 16 positive, 115 negative or no effect

114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

127 papers more in this group

See all 131 papers →

drought · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

206 papers: 60 positive, 146 negative or no effect

145 papers in the same direction as this paper · 60 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

202 papers more in this group

See all 206 papers →

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

246 papers: 41 positive, 205 negative or no effect

204 papers in the same direction as this paper · 41 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

242 papers more in this group

See all 246 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.