Usefulness of trunk diameter variations as continuous water stress indicators of pomegranate (Punica granatum) trees

Intrigliolo, Diego S.; Puerto, H.; Bonet, Luís; Alarcón, J.J.; Nicolás, Emilio Nicolás; Bartual, J.

doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2011.05.001

Cited by 46 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The irrigation treatments affected TGR, although no differences were observed for MDS (Figure 4). These results differed from the results for adult plants, where MDS was the most sensitive variable and the most useful for irrigation programming (Intrigliolo et al, 2011a;Galindo et al, 2013). However, in other studies conducted using young almond, lemon, olive and cherry trees, TGR was also sensitive to water availability (Moriana and Fereres, 2002;Nortes et al, 2005;Livellara et al, 2011).…”

Section: Soil Moisture Content (V/v) and Reference Evapotranspirationcontrasting

confidence: 55%

“…A defi cient water regime during the fi rst stages of growth could completely inhibit vegetative development, depending on the age of the plant (Martín-Vertedor et al, 2011). This effect is attributed to a reduction in stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis, and the subsequent decreased growth of young plants (Intrigliolo et al, 2011a). Canopy growth is fundamental during the fi rst years of development, as it greatly infl uences the amount of foliage available, the photosynthetic capacity and the fi nal size of the plant (Intrigliolo and Castel, 2005).…”

Section: Soil Moisture Content (V/v) and Reference Evapotranspirationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The trunk cumulative growth (TCG), trunk growth rate (TGR) and maximum daily shrinkage (MDS) were estimated using linear variable differential transducers (LVDT) (Intrigliolo et al, 2011a;Fernández and Cuevas, 2010), model DD-S, Ecomatik, with a precision of ± 2 µm. Sensors were placed on the trunks of 12 plants at 20 cm above the ground (Fernández and Cuevas (2010 Trunk cumulative growth (μm) DOY:…”

Section: Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

RESPONSES OF YOUNG Punica granatum PLANTS UNDER FOUR DIFFERENT WATER REGIMES

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. We evaluated the effect of the four treatments on canopy volume (CV) during two growing seasons. For 28 days during the second growing season, we evaluated soil moisture content (θ), the soil-moisture depletion factor (p), trunk cumulative growth (TCG), trunk growth rate (TGR) and maximum daily trunk shrinkage (MDS). We found relationships between CV and TCG and between CV and TGR. There were no differences in MDS among the irrigation treatments. We observed significant water stress in plants in the 0.3 ETc treatment (p = 0.47). The highest growth was observed in plants in the 1.3 ETc treatment, which suggests that the crop coefficient (Kc) was underestimated.

show abstract

Section: Soil Moisture Content (V/v) and Reference Evapotranspirationcontrasting

confidence: 55%

Section: Soil Moisture Content (V/v) and Reference Evapotranspirationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

RESPONSES OF YOUNG Punica granatum PLANTS UNDER FOUR DIFFERENT WATER REGIMES

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By contrast, tests performed on isohydric species showed a lack of use of this type of indicator. Intrigliolo et al [68] showed how the use of TGR was unsuitable as a measure to determine plant water status in pomegranate [67]. The same conclusion was reached for peach [83].…”

Section: Use Of Water Stress Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…Intrigliolo et al [68] showed that the MDS difference between treatments, with pomegranate, increased with stress and then tended to stabilize or even decrease. This was also observed by other research [13,61].…”

Section: Use Of Water Stress Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Water Status Indicators for Irrigation Scheduling Associated with Iso- and Anisohydric Behavior: Vine and Plum Trees

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant water status indicators have been increasingly used for scheduling irrigation. Different variables may be used to do this, depending on personal preferences and the resources available. Many studies have suggested that selection of an indicator should take into account plant behavior in relation to isohydricity. In two Iberian studies, deficit irrigation (DI) was applied in a vineyard and in a plum orchard while plant water status and fluxes were monitored. These case-studies are discussed with special focus on the use of predawn leaf water potential (Ψ pd ) versus stem water potential (Ψ st ) to determine whether Ψ st performed better and would therefore be the preferred stress indicator for plants exhibiting anisohydric behavior. In contrast, in plants with isohydric behavior, Ψ pd would be generally preferred. This hypothesis seems to be supported by the present results obtained and by prior studies. The cultivars used and the intensity of stress applied have an important influence on the results. This suggests that, if no specific information is available from the existing literature, daily preliminary studies would be recommended prior to application in order to select the most appropriate plant water stress indicators.

show abstract