Influence of Irrigation Regime on Growth of Select Field-grown Tree Species in a Semi-arid Climate

Abstract

Over three growing seasons (2003 through 2005) we investigated stem area increase and shoot growth of field-grown (FG) trident maple (Acer buergeranum), hedge maple (A. campestre), autumn blaze maple (A. × freemanii ‘Autumn Blaze’), shantung maple (A. truncatum), Mexican redbud (Cercis canadensis mexicana), Texas redbud (C. canadensis texensis), white Texas redbud (C. canadensis texensis ‘Alba’), Oklahoma redbud (C. canadensis texensis ‘Oklahoma’), Washington hawthorn (Crataegus phaenopyrum), Arizona ash (Fraxinus velutina coriacea ‘Bonita’), Mexican plum (Prunus mexicana), chinquapin oak (Quercus muehlenbergii), English oak (Q. robur) trees subjected to three reference evapotranspiration (ETo) based irrigation regimes (100, 60, and 30% ETo). For maple trees, stem area increase did not differ between irrigation treatments. However, except for trident maple shoot elongation varied with irrigation level and species. Stem area did not differ between irrigation regimes for redbud trees, and shoot elongation was generally greatest for trees that received lower irrigation treatments. Depending upon species, oak stem area increase did not differ, or was greatest for trees that received greater irrigation. For each oak species, shoot elongation was influenced by irrigation level. For two of the three remaining species, stem area increase and shoot elongation differed according to irrigation volume. Despite three differing irrigation volumes, greatest growth was not always associated with increased irrigation volume. In addition, each species appears to be suited for regions with low precipitation and high pH soils.

Response of Two Field-grown Maple (Acer) Species to Reduced Irrigation in a High Vapor Pressure, Semi-arid Climate

“…More negative predawn ψ l reflects limited soil moisture available to the roots, or an inefficient water conducting system (Nash and Graves 1993;Zwack et al 1998). Water deficit stress (more negative ψ l ) in response to reduced irrigation has been reported for numerous woody landscape plants (Stabler and Martin 2000;Niu et al 2008;Montague and Fox 2009), and several maple species in particular (Pair 1994;Zwack et al 1998;Zwack et al 1999;Barton and Walsh 2000;St. Hilaire and Graves 2001;Bush et al 2008).…”

“…Although few studies have investigated gas exchange of field-grown (or urban-grown) trees in high-VPD, urban-like climates (Cregg and Dix 2001;Bush et al 2008), previous reports on apical growth of field-grown trees subjected to reduced irrigation in semi-arid, high-VPD climates is sparse. In a study closely associated with this research project, in a high-VPD, semi-arid climate, Fox and Montague (2009) subjected numerous tree species (Acer, Cercis, Fraxinus, Prunus, and Quercus) to variable, ETo-based irrigation rates (33%, 66%, and 100% ETo). They determined total tree leaf area and shoot elongation for field-grown trees were not always cor-related with trees receiving the greatest amount of irrigation volume.…”

“…Shantung maple is native to semi-arid regions of northern China (Pair 1987), and is thought to be well adapted to heat, cold, drought, and variable soil types (Liu 1989;Pair 1994;Wang et al 2006;Fox and Montague 2009). Freeman maples are the result of controlled pollination, or natural crosses between red and silver maples (Bachtell 1989;Santamour 1993) and considerable genetic variation in relation to drought tolerance exists within parent populations (Bachtell 1989;Abrams and Kubiske 1990;Santamour 1993;Zwack et al 1998;Bauerle et al 2003).…”

“…Therefore, PF values have been developed for many turf species (Carrow 1995;Ervin and Koski 1998). However, due to the difficulty of quantifying values , the great diversity of species (Sun et al 2012), and the reality that PF values determined in one climate may not translate to another climate (Kjelgren et al 2005), there are a limited number of PF values reported for landscape tree species (Levitt et al 1995;Niu et al 2006;Fox and Montague 2009;Costello 2013).…”

Manejo De Irrigação Em Viveiros Florestais: Uso Racional Da Água E Análise Da Qualidade Das Mudas

“…Maiores volumes de irrigação aplicados às mudas lixiviam os nutrientes (Figura 4) porque os substratos utilizados, mesmo com excelente capacidade de retenção, tem pouca capacidade de proteção contra o excesso hídrico devido aos pequenos volumes dos recipientes (ARREOLA et al, 2006;BEESON Jr., 2006). Dessa forma, as irrigações excessivas podem favorecer o surgimento de doenças fúngicas, bem como, por meio da lixiviação, degradar as águas superficiais e subterrâneas, reduzir o crescimento das mudas e aumentar os custos de produção (LAMHAMEDI et al, 2001;JUNTUNEN et al, 2002JUNTUNEN et al, , 2003FOX;MONTAGUE, 2009). Fonte: De autoria própria.…”