1996
DOI: 10.1016/s0168-9452(96)04494-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Water relations of Fino lemon plants on two rootstocks under flooded conditions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

1
27
1
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
27
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…1). A similar slow recovery period was found in citrus plants flooded for 8 days (Ruiz-Sánchez et al 1996).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1). A similar slow recovery period was found in citrus plants flooded for 8 days (Ruiz-Sánchez et al 1996).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Plants grafted onto Real Fino apricot and Pollizo prune rootstocks developed similar mechanisms to confront short term soil flooding conditions The early leaf conductance and net photosynthesis response seems to suggest that porometric and/or photosynthetic changes are reliable bioindicators of the altered behaviour caused by flooding in apricot plants, as has been proposed in lemon (Ruiz-Sánchez et al 1996) and kiwi fruit (Savé and Serrano 1986).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…Progressive decreases in soil oxygen concentration and redox potential are major physiological consequences of soil flooding (Ruizsanchez et al, 1996;Syvertsen et al, 1983). Like other crops, citrus trees respond to flooding by reducing leaf water potential, stomatal conductance, gas exchange and plant growth Vu and Yelenosky, 1991).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Physiological changes associated with flooding include a reduction in leaf conductance (g s ) and photosynthetic rate, P N (Pezeshki 1993, Batzli and Dawson 1997, Fernández et al 1999, the development of water deficit in the leaves (Crawford 1982, Ruiz-Sánchez et al 1996, different response to following drought (Elcan and Pezeshki 2002), and a decreased xylem water potential (ψ) and leaf sap osmotic potential (ψ s ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%