2005
DOI: 10.1080/14620316.2005.11511964
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Photosynthesis in response to sink-source manipulations during different phenological stages of fruit development in peach trees: regulation by stomatal aperture and leaf temperature

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

4
15
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
4
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1G,H). These results are in agreement with our previous studies on peach trees (Li et al 2001(Li et al , 2005(Li et al , 2007, indicating that reducing sink demand, here by girdling the branch between the source leaves and the root system including tubers, could inhibit P N of source leaves in a manner similar to that after removing fruits in peach trees. The lower g s and increased T l occurred around noon when PAR was high (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…1G,H). These results are in agreement with our previous studies on peach trees (Li et al 2001(Li et al , 2005(Li et al , 2007, indicating that reducing sink demand, here by girdling the branch between the source leaves and the root system including tubers, could inhibit P N of source leaves in a manner similar to that after removing fruits in peach trees. The lower g s and increased T l occurred around noon when PAR was high (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…It was the first theory explaining the decline of photosynthetic capacity after weakened sink demand (Herold 1980, Layne and Flore 1995, Quereix et al 2001). However, this hypothesis still remains to be conclusively proven (Nautiyal et al 1999, Li et al 2001, Li et al 2005. For example, low sink demand after fruit removal decreased P N without influencing accumulation of sugars in leaves Ferree 1986, Marcelis 1991), and accumulation of sugars in leaves did not result in decreasing P N under low sink demand (Roper ⎯⎯⎯⎯ Received 24 March 2008, accepted 15 October 2009.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A specific g s corresponded with lower CWSI values at pre-harvest than post-harvest stage. It has been reported that fruit removal significantly decreases the net photosynthesis rate, stomatal conductance and transpiration rate, and increased leaf temperature around midday [39]. Therefore, the higher CWSI values of post-harvest can be explained because of the reduction on the transpiration rate and thereby leaf evaporative cooling.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Leaves exposed directly to the sun may not be fully adapted to high light in June, and therefore more prone to closed stomata. The stomatal conductance could also have been affected by the sprays of sulphur and/or potassium bicarbonate in the unshielded control, as shown earlier by McAfee and Rom (2003), or simply due to differences in source-sink relationships as related to light intensity and discussed by Li et al (2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 77%