Wind and Windblown Sand Damage to Pearl Millet

Abstract

Pearl millet [Pennisetum gluucum (L.) R. Br.] is grown worldwide in areas affected by wind erosion, but no data on associated damage to millet are available. Laboratory wind tunnel experiments were conducted to determine the kind and extent of damage to millet caused by wind, sandblasting, and burial. In Exp. 1, millet was exposed for 15 min to wind (8, 11, or 14 m s-') or wind + sand (8.3, 25.0, or 41.7 g ,-I-I sand abrader flux) at 8 and/or 16 d after emergence (DAE). Viable leaf area, leaf net photosynthesis, and NO3 content were measured through 21 DAE and dry matter production through 57 DAE. In Exp. 2, millet was seeded as three single seeds or in tufts, exposed to 25 g m-I s-' sand flux for 15 min at the 1-, 2-, or 3-leaf stage, and then manually covered by 15 mm sand. Survival was monitored weekly; dry matter was determined 70 DAE. In Exp. 1, survival was uniformly 100%. Wind alone or low sand flux had no effect on viable leaf area. High sand flux decreased viable leaf area by 74% at 2 d after the 8-DAE exposure and 42% at 5 d after the 16-DAE exposure. Photosynthesis of the remaining leaf area was reduced up to 88% immediately after exposure compared with the control, and NO3 content of sandblasted millet was increased up to six times. Dry weight was reduced 40% at 21 DAE by the highest sand flux, but 9.7% at 57 DAE. In Exp. 2, burial decreased millet survival and dry weight. Buried tufts had a higher survival rate and 35% more dry weight than buried single plants. Millet buried at the 1-leaf stage had 28% higher survival than plants treated later. Sandblasting reduced dry matter of buried millet only. Regression analyses between calculated total kinetic effects and growth parameters showed low ? values. Millet can survive short-term sandblasting at any growth stage, but growth is reduced by strong sand flux, a sequence of wind erosion events during early growth, or by combinations of abrasion with burial by blown sand. s IND EROSION affects 430 million hectares worldwide, w o r 897 o of the susceptible dryland areas (UNEP, 1992).

Wind erosion: the perspective of grass‐roots communities in the Sahel

“…The greater importance of seedling burial is also supported by its higher score (Table III). The present results are consistent with the ®ndings of Sterk and Haigis (1998) and with past experimental results which have shown that millet, which is the crop most likely to be affected by wind erosion, is rather resistant to sandblasting but is sensitive to burial at the seedling stage as a result of it being sown in small planting holes (Michels et al, 1995a).…”

The record of Australian Jurassic plant–arthropod interactions

“…As arthropod damage expressed in plant fossils can be difficult to differentiate from abiotic trauma, we used the criteria outlined by Labandeira (2006, and the references therein) to identify arthropod-generated damage and also to distinguish herbivory from saprotrophy. Most importantly, herbivory damage is typically expressed by stereotypical feeding patterns consistent with modern analogues, the development of reaction tissue around the wound, development of necrotic flaps or veinal stringers around damaged tissue, and distinctive and consistent phytotissue-herbivore linkages that are incompatible with other forms of biological or physical trauma, such as that caused by fungi (Parbery, 1996;Taylor and Osborn, 1996) or abiotic processes (Wilson, 1984;Michels et al, 1995;Wright and Vincent, 1996;Racskó et al, 2010). We sought to assign examples of plant damage to the principal functional feeding groups outlined by Labandeira et al (2007a): viz., external foliage feeding (here subdivided into the categories of leaf-margin feeding, apical feeding, surface feeding and hole feeding), piercing-and-sucking, boring, leaf mining, galling, seed feeding, palynophagy, nectarivory and oviposition.…”

Unusual Sydney dust storm and its mineralogical and organic characteristics

“…[4][5][6][7] Dust storms carry tonnes of top soil from agricultural land and affects the soil resource base and crop productivity on a long-term basis by damaging plant tissue, causing delay in plant development [8][9][10] and accelerates land degradation. [11,12] Moreover, the deposition of dust on irrigation canals and rivers affects the water quality of streams, lakes and oceans. [13][14][15][16][17] A study by Lim et al [18] highlighted the contribution of dust events to the distribution of microbes in the environment from two dust storms in Australia.…”