Abstract
To investigate the effects of water-saving supplemental irrigation on photosynthesis, senescence, and grain filling characteristics of flag leaves in tillers of wheat varieties with different spike types, and to elucidate the physiological mechanisms underlying yield formation under supplemental irrigation, an experiment was conducted using two wheat varieties: the medium-spike Jimai 22 (J22) and the large-spike Shannong 23 (S23). Three irrigation regimes were applied: no irrigation throughout the growing season (W0); water-saving supplemental irrigation (W70), which maintained 70% relative soil moisture in the 0-40 cm layer at both the jointing and flowering stages; and full supplemental irrigation (W90), which maintained 90% relative soil moisture at the same stages and depth. A total of six treatment combinations were evaluated to compare photosynthetic performance senescence characteristics of flag leaves on tillers, and grain filling parameters between the two spike-type varieties. Results showed that under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher relative chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, sucrose content, superoxide dismutase activity, and soluble protein content in the flag leaves of tillers after flowering, along with lower malondialdehyde content, compared with other treatments. Additionally, the average grain filling rate, maximum grain filling rate, and duration of the active grain filling period were significantly higher, contributing to a significantly greater grain weight. Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, the single-plant grain yield of S23 increased by 8.39% to 45.16%, and the grain yield per hectare increased by 5.76% to 44.32%, compared with other treatments. Although no significant yield difference was observed between the water-saving and fully irrigated S23 treatments, the total irrigation volume under water-saving irrigation was 14.82% to 52.61% lower, while irrigation water use efficiency was 22.33% to 122.74% higher, In conclusion, the water-saving supplemental irrigation treatment for S23 achieved higher grain yield and the highest irrigation efficiency by enhancing the accumulation of photosynthetic products in tillers and their branches, making it the most effective treatment under the experimental conditions.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 had higher relative chlorophyll content in tiller flag leaves after flowering than under other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Material
- S23e0
- Organ / stage
- flag leaves of tillers after floweringe0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione0
- Outcome
- relative chlorophyll contente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher relative chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, sucrose content, superoxide dismutase activity, and soluble protein content in the flag leaves of tillers after flowering, along with lower malondialdehyde content, compared with other treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 had higher net photosynthetic rate in tiller flag leaves after flowering than under other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Organ / stage
- flag leaves of tillers after floweringe0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione0
- Outcome
- net photosynthetic ratee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher relative chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, sucrose content, superoxide dismutase activity, and soluble protein content in the flag leaves of tillers after flowering, along with lower malondialdehyde content, compared with other treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 had higher sucrose content in tiller flag leaves after flowering than under other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Organ / stage
- flag leaves of tillers after floweringe0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione0
- Outcome
- sucrose contente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher relative chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, sucrose content, superoxide dismutase activity, and soluble protein content in the flag leaves of tillers after flowering, along with lower malondialdehyde content, compared with other treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 had higher superoxide dismutase activity in tiller flag leaves after flowering than under other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Organ / stage
- flag leaves of tillers after floweringe0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione0
- Outcome
- superoxide dismutase activitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher relative chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, sucrose content, superoxide dismutase activity, and soluble protein content in the flag leaves of tillers after flowering, along with lower malondialdehyde content, compared with other treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 had higher soluble protein content in tiller flag leaves after flowering than under other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Organ / stage
- flag leaves of tillers after floweringe0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione0
- Outcome
- soluble protein contente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher relative chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, sucrose content, superoxide dismutase activity, and soluble protein content in the flag leaves of tillers after flowering, along with lower malondialdehyde content, compared with other treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
S23 had lower malondialdehyde content in tiller flag leaves after flowering under water-saving supplemental irrigation.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Organ / stage
- flag leaves of tillers after floweringe0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione0
- Outcome
- malondialdehyde contente0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher relative chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, sucrose content, superoxide dismutase activity, and soluble protein content in the flag leaves of tillers after flowering, along with lower malondialdehyde content, compared with other treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 had significantly higher average grain filling rate.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e1
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione1
- Outcome
- average grain filling ratee0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the average grain filling rate, maximum grain filling rate, and duration of the active grain filling period were significantly higher, contributing to a significantly greater grain weight”
e1“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 had significantly higher maximum grain filling rate.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e1
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione1
- Outcome
- maximum grain filling ratee0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the average grain filling rate, maximum grain filling rate, and duration of the active grain filling period were significantly higher, contributing to a significantly greater grain weight”
e1“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 had significantly higher duration of the active grain filling period.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e1
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione1
- Outcome
- duration of the active grain filling periode0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the average grain filling rate, maximum grain filling rate, and duration of the active grain filling period were significantly higher, contributing to a significantly greater grain weight”
e1“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Water-saving supplemental irrigation produced significantly greater S23 grain weight.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e1
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione1
- Outcome
- grain weighte0
- Direction
- greatere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the average grain filling rate, maximum grain filling rate, and duration of the active grain filling period were significantly higher, contributing to a significantly greater grain weight”
e1“under water-saving supplemental irrigation, S23 exhibited higher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
S23 single-plant grain yield increased by 8.39% to 45.16% under water-saving supplemental irrigation versus other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione0
- Outcome
- single-plant grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 8.39% to 45.16%e0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, the single-plant grain yield of S23 increased by 8.39% to 45.16%, and the grain yield per hectare increased by 5.76% to 44.32%, compared with other treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
S23 grain yield per hectare increased by 5.76% to 44.32% under water-saving supplemental irrigation versus other treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigatione0
- Outcome
- grain yield per hectaree0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 5.76% to 44.32%e0
- Comparator
- other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under water-saving supplemental irrigation, the single-plant grain yield of S23 increased by 8.39% to 45.16%, and the grain yield per hectare increased by 5.76% to 44.32%, compared with other treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
S23 yield did not differ significantly between water-saving and fully irrigated treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Treatment
- water-savinge0
- Outcome
- yield differencee0
- Direction
- no significante0
- Comparator
- fully irrigated S23 treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Although no significant yield difference was observed between the water-saving and fully irrigated S23 treatments, the total irrigation volume under water-saving irrigation was 14.82% to 52.61% lower, while irrigation water use efficiency was 22.33% to 122.74% higher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Water-saving irrigation used 14.82% to 52.61% less irrigation water than full irrigation.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- water-saving irrigatione0
- Outcome
- total irrigation volumee0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 14.82% to 52.61%e0
- Comparator
- fully irrigated S23 treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Although no significant yield difference was observed between the water-saving and fully irrigated S23 treatments, the total irrigation volume under water-saving irrigation was 14.82% to 52.61% lower, while irrigation water use efficiency was 22.33% to 122.74% higher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Water-saving irrigation raised irrigation water use efficiency by 22.33% to 122.74%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- water-saving irrigatione0
- Outcome
- irrigation water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 22.33% to 122.74%e0
- Comparator
- fully irrigated S23 treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Although no significant yield difference was observed between the water-saving and fully irrigated S23 treatments, the total irrigation volume under water-saving irrigation was 14.82% to 52.61% lower, while irrigation water use efficiency was 22.33% to 122.74% higher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors attribute higher S23 grain yield under water-saving irrigation to enhanced photosynthetic product accumulation in tillers and branches.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- S23e0
- Treatment
- water-saving supplemental irrigation treatmente0
- Outcome
- higher grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- enhancing the accumulation of photosynthetic products in tillers and their branchese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the water-saving supplemental irrigation treatment for S23 achieved higher grain yield and the highest irrigation efficiency by enhancing the accumulation of photosynthetic products in tillers and their branches”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors identify water-saving supplemental irrigation for S23 as the most effective treatment under the experimental conditions.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- most effective treatmente0
- Qualifier
- under the experimental conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“making it the most effective treatment under the experimental conditions”
t0“wheat”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · physiology: antioxidant enzymes · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →irrigation · physiology: oxidative · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →irrigation · quality: sugar starch · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →irrigation · physiology: osmolytes · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →irrigation · physiology: pigments · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →irrigation · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
31 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
46 papers more in this group
See all 50 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
252 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
299 papers more in this group
See all 303 papers →irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
797 papers in the same direction as this paper · 184 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
985 papers more in this group
See all 989 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.