Welcome to Acta Prataculturae Sinica ! Today is Share:

Acta Prataculturae Sinica ›› 2014, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (1): 167-176.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb20140120

• Orignal Article • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of drought stress and re-watering on growth and photosynthesis of Hosta

ZHANG Jin-zheng1,2,ZHANG Qi-yuan2,SUN Guo-feng1,HE Qing3,LI Xiao-dong1,LIU Hong-zhang2   

  1. 1.Institute of Botany,the Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beijing 100093,China;
    2.College of Science and Life,Jilin Agricultural University,Changchun 130118,China;
    3.Patent Examination Cooperation Center of The Patent Office,State Intellectual Property Office,Beijing 100190,China
  • Received:2012-07-24 Online:2014-02-20 Published:2014-02-20

Abstract: The effects of drought stress and re-watering on dry weights,some morphological indicators,chlorophyll content,gas exchange and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters of Hosta were studied using H. clausa var. ensata and H. ventricosa as examples. With time and an increase of drought stress,the effect of drought stress on dry weights,some morphological indicators and chlorophyll content of the two Hostas gradually increased. In addition,the net photosynthetic rate (Pn),stomatal conductance (Gs),and transpiration rate (Tr) decreased or significantly decreased,internal CO2 concentration (Ci) decreased or increased,and the maximum quantum yield of PSII photochemistry (Fv/Fm),the PSII maximum efficiency within light-adapted material(Fv'/Fm'),actual efficiency of photochemical energy conversion in PSII under light (ΦPSII),photochemical quenching coefficient (qP) all decreased or significantly decreased,but the nonphotochemical Chl fluorescence quenching (NPQ) of the two Hosta species significantly increased. After drought stress for 15 days or 30 days and re-watering for 15 days,the indicators recovered to differing extents. There was no irreversible damage to the photosynthetic apparatus after drought stress for 30 d. The comparative analysis of related physiological indexes showed that the drought resistance of H. clausa var. ensata was stronger than that of H. ventricosa.

CLC Number: