2002
DOI: 10.1078/0176-1617-00530
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dehydration-avoidance responses of tepary bean lines differing in drought resistance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
28
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
1
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Physiological investigations of tepary reaction to drought were conducted on the whole plant level in the field (Miklas et al 1994;Mohamed 1996;Mohamed et al 2002) or in pot experiments (Markhart 1985;Mohamed et al 2002). Teparies have been considered dehydrationpostponing species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Physiological investigations of tepary reaction to drought were conducted on the whole plant level in the field (Miklas et al 1994;Mohamed 1996;Mohamed et al 2002) or in pot experiments (Markhart 1985;Mohamed et al 2002). Teparies have been considered dehydrationpostponing species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The root system of crop plants play a critical role while water deficit situation, the plants have unique feature of vigorous root growth at initial stage of drought condition facilitating better absorption of water from deep soil (Hu and Xiong, 2014). The drought resistance of plants is also associated with the increased growth, length, weight, volume and density of plant roots of crops (Hammer et al, 2009), extensive root system and rooting depth (Dixon et al, 1980), the root/shoot ratio (Tavakol and Pakniyat, 2007;Ali et al, 2009), penetration ability of roots in soil (Mohamed et al, 2002).…”
Section: Phenotypic Flexibilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been shown that the two high yielding Phaseolus acutifolius lines may rely on two different strategies. The first is characterized by a thin, deeply penetrating root with large mass and increasing stomatal conductance for one of the lines, while the other line developed a great mass of deeply penetrating roots and reduced the leaf expansion remarkably and stomata conductance (Mohamed et al, 2002). The bean variety that is more sensitive to drought has more intensive and earlier paraheliotropic leaf movement and the reduction in the water content of the leaves is faster under water deficiency than drought tolerant variety (Lizana et al, 2006).…”
Section: Defence Strategies In Beansmentioning
confidence: 99%