水分胁迫3

240 0
N. Katerji et al. /Agricultural
Water Management 30 (1996) 237-249
a.
maize
\
-0.2
(‘ \, i '1
\
i i i
‘ \.
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
-0.6 ----fresh 15meqll
-0.8
50
60
70
80
90
100
Days after sowing Fig. 1. Predawn leaf-water potential of maize and sunflower vs. days after sowing on loam.
The decrease of the predawn leaf-water potential of sunflower was rather slow between 47 and 56 days after sowing, when the average daily temperature was about 18OC,3°C lower than during the earlier and later days.
* Corresponding author, retired. 037%3774/96/$15.00 SSDI 0378-3774(95)0 0 1996 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved 1228- 1
238
N. Kuterji et ul./ Agricdturul
Station de Biociimatologie. 788.50 T~~vera~-~rig~~, France ter Resources. Universi
sarac aize and sunflower were grown in tanks filled with loam and cla water of three different pstused as paramete than that of sunflowe potential was the same fo and more severely affec Although salinity had a d was the sam matter of sunflower, its effect on evapotranspiration and grain Soil texture had a stronger effect on the development of le ower, which also appeared in the evapotranspi is more sensitive to drought than maize.
2. 2.1. Set-up The set-up consisted of 30 tanks of reinforced fibre glass with a diameter of I..20 and a depth of 1.20 m. A layer of coarse sand and gravel, 0.10 m thick, was overlain a re-packed soil profile of 1 m. At the bottom of the tank, a pipe serving as a drainage outlet connected the tank to a drainage reservoir. The set-up was covered at a height of 4 m by a sheet of transparent plastic to protect the assembly against precipitation. One series of 15 tanks was filled with loam and a second series of 15 tanks with clay. The tanks were irrigated with water of three different qualities: the control treatment saline with fresh water containing 3.7 mEq. Cl 1- ’ and an EC of 0.9 dS m’ *, and t treatments containing 15 and 30 mEq. Cl 1-l and with EC of 2.3 and 3.6 m-l, obtained by adding equivalent amounts of NaCl and CaCl, to fresh water. For each water quality, five tanks were available. At each irrigation, surplus water was added to provide a leaching fraction of about 0.2. The evapotranspiration of the irrigation interval was calculated as the difference between the amounts of irrigation and drainage water. To determine soil salinity, the chloride concentration of soil water was calculated from the salt balance of irrigation and drainage water and converted into EC of soil water by the equation 1nEC = 0.8241nCl- 1.42, the value of which was divided by 2 for the conversion to EC,. Owing to differences in water application, evapotranspiration and drainage, differences in soil salinity may appear between both soils. 2.2. crop Maize (Zea mays, variety hybrid Asgrow 88) was sown at a density of 21 grains per tank. This was reduced to 12 plants at the six-leaf stage, and finally to five plants per tank at harvest time because of the successive samplings to determine the growth parameters. Fertilizing was done three times: at the start of vegetative growth, 3 weeks later, and at the start of flowering, a total equivalent to 120 kg N ha- ’ and 120 kg P205 ha-‘ When 50% of the plants had attained a phenological stage, this date was noted: .
2.3.
ter stress of
t
3.1. Water stress of the plant The predawn leaf-water potential of maize and sunflower on loam (Fig. 0, whk increased at each irrigation and decreased afterwards, qualities, systematically showing the greatest difference irrigation. The average level for maize was clearly higher then for s leaf-water potential of the control treatment attained a value of less irrigation for maize, as against a v differences have been observed unde
Keywords: Crop water stress; Crop water use efficiency; Leaf water potential; Stomatal conductance; tolerance; Maize; Sunflower Salt
A previous publication (Katerji et al., 1994) presented the results of using saline water during emergence and early seedling growth of maize
Table 1 Evapotranspiration of maize (mm day- ‘ from 24 July 1993 until 4 November 1993 ) Soil Water quality Dates 24.7-4.8 Loam Fresh 15 mEq. 1-r 30 mEq. I- ’ Clay Fresh 15 mEq. 1-r 30 mEq. 1’’ 3.5 3.1 3.0 3.6 2.9 2.8 4.8-12.8 5.0 4.9 4.8 5.9 5.2 4.9 12.8-21.8 6.0 6.0 5.3 7.1 6.6 6.1 21.8-12.9 9.9 9.3 7.6 11.3 9.6 8.2 12.9-30.9 7.9 7.5 6.5 8.0 6.8 6.4 30.9-4.11 3.2 3.0 2.5 2.8 2.4 2.3 Total mm (so) 607 578 494 644 552 505 100 95 81 100 86 78