查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 黃金金露華作物水分逆境指數(CWSI)與葉片水勢、土壤水勢相關性之探討
- 以葉溫及作物水分逆境指數(CWSI)偵測黃金金露華、彩葉草之水分狀況
- 茶樹葉片水勢與葉綠素a慢相螢光釋放反應之關係
- Effect of Soil Moisture, Soil Temperature and Seed-Borne Alternaria Carthami, on Emergence of Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.)
- 缺水對茶樹葉片光合組織光反應能力之影響
- 天然闊葉林冠層孔隙內微環境的變化與苗木之生長
- 貯運溫度與時期對擎天鳳梨'Cherry'儲後品質、葉片解剖與水勢之影響
- 木賊葉木麻黃苗木對水分逆境之反應
- 木本盆栽植物水分監測技術及灌溉策略
- 熱影像檢測技術應用於番茄水分逆境檢測之研究
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 黃金金露華作物水分逆境指數(CWSI)與葉片水勢、土壤水勢相關性之探討=Relationships of Crop Water Stress Index (CWSI) with Leaf Water Potential and Soil Water Potential of Duranta Repens L.cv. Golden Leaves |
---|---|
作 者 | 張育森; 蔣雨芳; | 書刊名 | 中華農學會報 |
卷 期 | 184 1998.12[民87.12] |
頁 次 | 頁83-97 |
分類號 | 435.13 |
關鍵詞 | 作物水分逆境指數; 葉片水勢; 土壤水勢; 黃金金露華; Crop water stress index; CWSI; Leaf water potential; Soil watere potential; Dranta repens l.cv. golden leaves; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 為評估以CWSI (crop water stress index)取代傳統測知植物水分狀況之 可行性,本試驗以黃金金露華 (Dranta repens L.cv. Golden Leaves) 盆栽於玻璃 溫室中所測得之CWSI與其葉片水勢、土壞水勢相比較,探討其相關性。試驗 期間(1995.10.30~11.9)植株每日測得的CWSI與其葉片水勢、土壞水勢比較,相 關度均不高(r分別為-0.06,-0.45),由於CWSI的上下限係於強光下求得,故CWSI 應僅連用在晴朗強光下進行測定,經去除陰雨天弱光數據後,則CWSI與葉片 水勢達極顯著負相關(r=-0.91 )。上述CWSI係採用試驗期間(10月份)所測上下 限估算之,若採用其他月份(5月、6月、7月)所得之上下限,估算新的CWSI, 則重新運算的CWSI與試驗期間之葉片水勢相關性以7月份較高(r=-0.90 ), 與試驗期間(10月份)最接近,5月份和6月份略低(r分別為-0.81 和-0.84 ), 但仍達顯著負相關。至於CWSI與土壞水勢的相關性,亦以試驗期間(10月份) 和7月份之上下限估算的CWSI與土壞水勢相關係數較高(r分別為-0.69和- 0.63),而以5月份和6月份之上下限估算的CWSI與土壞水勢通關係數略低(r 均為-0.54),但以上各相關係數均未達顯著相關。無論CWSI與葉片水勢或CWSI 與土壞水勢之相關係數,均以7月份之CWSI者大於5、6月份之CWSI者。其 原因可能係7月份測定時之氣候環境(尤其光強度和蒸散壓差(VPD))與試驗期間 (10月份)最相似所致。試驗結果顯示:CWSI與葉片水勢的相關性大於CWSI 與土壞水勢的關係。為使CWSI有效地偵測植物水分狀況,建議受測植株,最 好能在環境因子保持一致時測定,並採用氣候因子相近的上下限估算CWSI。 |
英文摘要 | This study used the crop water stress index (CWSI) to measure plant water stress and relate these measurements to leaf water potential (LWP) and soil water potential (SWP) values of gold dewdrop (Duranta repens L. cv. Golden Leaves). In the experimental period (1995.10.30-1995.11.9), The related values of potted gold dewdrops grown in greenhouse were measured every days whatever the light condition. There were no significant linear correlation of CWSI with LWP and SWP. After removing the values measures in cloudy or rainy days, the CWSI was linearly correlated to LWP(r=-0.91 ), but not to SWP(r=-0.69). The lower and upper baselines measured in May, June and July 1995, instead of that measured in experimental period (October 1995), were used to compute new CWSI. The linear correlation of new CWSI, based on the baselines of May, June and July, with LWP were r=-0.81 , -0.84 and 0.90 , respectively; and with SWP were r=-0.54, -0.55 and -0.63, respectively. The data of July, which supposed to have similar environmental factors (especially light intensity and vapor pressure deficit) to experimental period (October), had higher absolute correlation coefficient than those of May and June. The result also showed that CWSI correlated better to LWP than to SWP. When using CWSI as a plant water status indicator, it is suggested that the plant should be measured in the constant environment and use the lower and upper baseline from similar climate to compute CWSI. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。