Physiologia Plantarum · 1998 · 78 citations · 0 references
AgricultureAgronomyPlant SciencesGrapevine PhysiologyPhotosynthesisPlant PhysiologyLeaf PhysiologyPhotosynthesis In CropsPhotosynthetic Energy ConversionCrop Photosynthetic ResponseLeaf Hydraulic ConductancePhotosynthetic Capacity AdjustmentPhotosynthetic ProductivityPhotosynthetic RatePhotosynthetic Response To EnvironmentPhotosynthetic TraitsWater Stress Effects On Photosynthesis
Leaf net CO 2 uptake and leaf photosynthetic capacity were investigated in micropropagated 41B grapevine rootstock ( Vitis vinifera ‘Chasselas’× Vitis berlandieri , Mill. De Gr.) plants grown in the presence of four sucrose concentrations (6.25, 12.5, 25.0 or 37.5 g l −1 ). Sucrose concentration in the medium during growth in vitro did not affect the leaf photosynthetic performance of plants neither before nor after transplantation. The maximum photosynthetic rate, measured as CO 2 ‐dependent O 2 evolution, was 7.3 µmol m −2 s −1 before transplanting and 15.4 µmol m −2 s −1 one month after transplantation. The maximum quantum yield of O 2 evolution (on the basis of incident light) was about 0.07 for all sucrose treatments both before and after transplantation. Dry biomass before transplanting was highest in plants grown with 25.0 or 37.5 g l −1 sucrose in the medium. One month after transplantation the highest dry biomass was also observed for the same treatments. Survival of plants was 100% for all treatments. Leaf conductance to water vapour was always higher in plants before than after transplantation. Both before and after transplanting it increased with increasing light intensity and decreased slightly with increasing CO 2 molar ratio in in vitro plants. Stomata of plants before transplantation were unresponsive to vapour pressure deficit. In vitro plants experience an acute water stress when they are maintained with the whole root system in water and exposed to ambient controlled conditions in a growth chamber. However, there was no wilting of the leaves when similar plants with roots cut off were left in the same conditions. Hydraulic conductivity was low at both root and shoot‐root connection levels. It is likely that water supply could be limiting during transplantation because of the low root and root‐stem connection conductivity. Water uptake by roots rather than water loss from the shoots would be of primary importance for the maintenance of water balance during acclimatisation.