Relative water content may be accurately estimated using the ratio of tissue fresh weight to tissue turgid weight, termed here relative tissue weight. That relative water content and relative tissue weight are linearly related is demonstrated algebraically. The mean value of r2 for grapevine (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Shiraz) leaf tissue over eight separate sampling occasions was 0.993. Similarly high values were obtained for maize (Zea mays cv. Cornell M-3) (0.998) and apple (Malus sylvestris cv. Northern Spy) (0.997) using a range of leaf ages. The proposal by Downey and Miller (1971. Rapid measurements of relative turgidity in maize (Zea mays L.). New Phytol. 70: 555-560) that relative water content in maize may be estimated from water uptake was also investigated for grapevine leaves; this was found to be a less reliable estimate than that obtained with relative tissue weight. With either method, there is a need for calibration, although this could be achieved for relative tissue weight at least with only a few subsamples.The relative water content technique, formerly known as relative turgidity, was originally described by Weatherley (9, 10) and has been widely accepted as a reproducible and meaningful index of plant water status (see literature cited by Barrs [1] monly expressed in decimal form (5, 11), and this convention is followed here.A major disadvantage of the RWC technique is the considerable time lag between sampling and obtaining the result. Further, the four weighing operations required (one for tare weight) are time-consuming and monotonous. These objections could be partly overcome if the oven-drying operation and subsequent weighing operation could be eliminated. However, this would require that RWC could be reliably estimated from the prior weights: sampling weight, turgid weight, or the difference, water uptake. Downey and Miller (3) have determined an empirical relationship between RWC and water uptake for maize, using small discs of constant area.A second indirect estimate of RWC is introduced here. This index, termed relative tissue weight, is calculated as the ratio tissue fresh weight to turgid weight. The same ratio has been used before (4,7,8), but in all three instances it has been termed erroneously relative turgidity.
MATERIALS AND METHODSGrapevines (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Shiraz) growing in an irrigation trial at the Griffith Viticultural Research Station, N.S.W. provided a range of leaf material of varying water status. Two replicates of eight treatments were sampled on each of 2 consecutive days on eight occasions throughout the growing season of 1968-69. The youngest fully expanded leaf was used. Four leaf samples were taken from each plot of four adjacent vines between 6 AM and 6:30 AM EST, sealed in plastic bags, and taken to the laboratory. There an entire disc of 8.4 cm diameter was cut from each leaf. Discs of this size were found to give considerably less variable RWC values than samples of 20 discs of diameter 0.8 cm, as recommended by Barrs (1); RWC values for th...