Search Results

2 assimilation rates than W13 ( Fig. 3A) . Fig. 3. Seasonal evolution of the shade acclimation coefficient for: ( A ) leaf net CO 2 assimilation ( A n ), σ A , ( B ) leaf transpiration rate ( E ), σ E , ( C ) leaf stomatal conductance ( g S ), σ g

photosynthetic rate ( Mena-Petite et al., 2003 ). Fig. 4. Comparisons of net photosynthetic rate ( A ) and stomatal conductance ( g S ) ( B ) of non-grafted watermelon ( Citrullus lanatus ‘Zaojia 84-24’) seedlings and grafted watermelon seedlings with pumpkin

experiment. Stomatal conductance and photosynthetic rates were measured at ambient light intensities and a CO 2 reference concentration of 380 μmol∙mol −1 using a portable photosynthesis system (LI-6400XT; LI-COR Biosciences, Lincoln, NE). Growth chamber

significant in both 2013 and 2014. Stomatal conductance in Zn2 treatment trees was significantly higher than that of the trees in the Control on all early through midseason measurement occasions [May through August ( Fig. 6 )]. Average g s of trees in the Zn

varieties. K0: 0 mmol·L −1 K + ; K1: 5 mmol·L −1 K + ; and K2: 20 mmol·L −1 K + (control). Data are means ± sd ( n = 3). Treatments with different letters (a, b, and c) are significantly different at P < 0.05 level. Stomatal conductance. The changes

during drought stress. Fig. 3. ( A ) Changes in net photosynthetic rate (P n ), ( B ) transpiration rate (T r ), and ( C ) stomatal conductance ( g S ) in zoysiagrass and kentucky bluegrass exposed to 20-d drought stress and 6-d rewatering. Vertical bars

pods began to yellow. Pods were harvested when they were brown or yellow; then, they were dried at 66 °C to a constant weight. Pods with at least one fully developed seed were included in yield measurements. Stomatal conductance . The g S was measured

irrigation rate ( Fig. 3A ). Stomatal conductance increased with increasing irrigation rate ( Fig. 3B ). Photosynthetic WUE was highest at the lowest irrigation rate and decreased with increasing irrigation rate up to 100% ETc and remained about constant with

recovered to C levels. Fig. 3. Variation in mean (and standard error, n = 6) ( A ) net photosynthetic rate ( P n ), ( B ) stomatal conductance ( g S ), ( C ) transpiration rate ( T r ), and ( D ) intercellular CO 2 concentration ( C i ) in T .118 of C

values were observed with the 1.8 and 3.6 dS·m −1 treatments, respectively ( Table 4 ). Table 4. Effect of irrigation with saline water on net CO 2 assimilation rate (A), stomatal conductance to water vapour ( g s ), transpiration rate (E