1966
DOI: 10.2134/agronj1966.00021962005800060009x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influences of Plant Moisture Stress, Solar Radiation, and Air Temperature on Cotton Leaf Temperature1

Abstract: The influences of cotton plant relative turgidity (RT), solar radiation (RS), and air temperature at plant height (TA) on leaf temperature (TL,) and leaf minus air temperature (TL — TA) were studied during two crop seasons. The daily data show that (a) a decrease in relative turgidity from 83 to 59% resulted in a 3.6C increase in leaf temperature, and (b) a unit increase in solar radiation (from about 0.5 to 1.5 ly min‐1) resulted in a 9 to 10C increase in leaf temperature. These same changes in relative turgi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
47
0

Year Published

1971
1971
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 109 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
3
47
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The large diameter changes and temperature differences on the nonirrigated treatment suggest the temperature difference may be an indirect measure of plan t-water status. This is in general agreement with the earlier work of Wiegand and Namken (1966), who showed similar results for cottonleaf temperatures under field conditions.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…The large diameter changes and temperature differences on the nonirrigated treatment suggest the temperature difference may be an indirect measure of plan t-water status. This is in general agreement with the earlier work of Wiegand and Namken (1966), who showed similar results for cottonleaf temperatures under field conditions.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Not imposing feasible bounds would have posed a risk for the minimization to wander into physically unrealistic but mathematically sound parameter space (i.e., a set of parameters achieving a very small ε by combining, for example, nonrealistic growth temperatures). The optimal temperature chosen by the optimization algorithm for microbial growth, for example, is 21.6 • C. Considering that during summer days with higher vapor pressure deficit the leaf surface temperature can reach even a 5 • C difference from air temperature (Jackson et al, 1981;Wiegand and Namken, 1966), this would mean that the modeled optimal temperature is quite close to the incubation temperature used in the laboratory (25 • C). It is worth noting that, while a reasonable choice of growth temperature range was made for the overall microbial population, specific microorganisms may have different temperature optima.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is, however, not captured using 30 min-averaged surface temperatures (raw data obtained at a resolution of 5 min). The timing of thermal image capture affects the suitability of derived T rad values to predict the measured flux data, which highlights the need for longer continuous observations to capture near-steady-state canopy temperatures and resulting temperature gradients [77][78][79]. Consequently, especially the relation between T aero,inv and T rad,WE is nonlinear during intermittent clouds (Figure 4).…”
Section: Radiometric Surface Temperatures Versus the Inverted Aerodynmentioning
confidence: 99%