Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Heuvelink, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Heuvelink, E.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Heuvelink, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1995 Oxford University Press

RESEARCH-ARTICLE

Dry matter partitioning in a tomato plant: one common assimilate pool?

E. Heuvelink1

Wageningen Agricultural University, Department of Horticulture Haagsteeg 3, 6708 PM Wageningen, The Netherlands

1Fax: +31 317484709. E-mail: ep.heuvelink{at}users.tbpt.wau.nl

The influence of the distance (transport resistance) between source and sink on dry matter distribution between fruits and vegetative parts in tomato was studied. In two glasshouse experiments, a control treatment (single-shoot plants, no truss removal) was conducted, together with two double-shoot treatments: double-shoot plants with no trusses removed from one shoot and all trusses removed at anthesis from the other shoot (100–0) and double-shoot plants with every second truss removed from both shoots (50–50). Plant growth and dry matter distribution was recorded by periodical destructive harvests, during a period of about 100 d after anthesis of the first truss. In experiment 2, plants were probably sink-limited. At the end of both experiments, 58–60% of dry matter was in the fruits for control plants, whereas for both double-shoot treatments this was 43% (Experiment 1) or 38% (Experiment 2). Until 60–65 d after first flowering, vegetative growth of the individual shoots in both double-shoot treatments was the same. Results supported the assumption of one common assimilate pool and showed no significant influence of distance (transport resistance) between source and sink on dry matter partitioning.

Key words: Allocation, distance, dry matter distribution, one assimilate pool, partitioning, transport resistance, tomato


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ANN BOT (LOND)Home page
A. Mathieu, P. H. Cournede, V. Letort, D. Barthelemy, and P. de Reffye
A dynamic model of plant growth with interactions between development and functional mechanisms to study plant structural plasticity related to trophic competition
Ann. Bot., June 1, 2009; 103(8): 1173 - 1186.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN BOT (LOND)Home page
M. Kang, J. B. Evers, J. Vos, and P. de Reffye
The Derivation of Sink Functions of Wheat Organs using the GREENLAB Model
Ann. Bot., May 1, 2008; 101(8): 1099 - 1108.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.