Skip Navigation


JXB Advance Access originally published online on January 16, 2006
Journal of Experimental Botany 2006 57(3):685-697; doi:10.1093/jxb/erj062
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrowOA All Versions of this Article:
57/3/685    most recent
erj062v1
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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lizana, C.
Right arrow Articles by Pinto, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lizana, C.
Right arrow Articles by Pinto, M.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Lizana, C.
Right arrow Articles by Pinto, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2006]. Published by Oxford University Press [on behalf of the Society for Experimental Biology]. All rights reserved. The online version of this article has been published under an Open Access model. Users are entitled to use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the Open Access version of this article for non-commercial purposes provided that: the original authorship is properly and fully attributed; the Journal and the Society for Experimental Biology are attributed as the original place of publication with the correct citation details given; if an article is subsequently reproduced or disseminated not in its entirety but only in part or as a derivative work this must be clearly indicated. For commercial re-use, please contact: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

RESEARCH PAPER

Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress

I. Effects of drought on yield and photosynthesis

Carolina Lizana1, Mark Wentworth2, Juan P. Martinez1, Daniel Villegas1, Rodrigo Meneses3, Erik H. Murchie2, Claudio Pastenes1, Bartolomeo Lercari4, Paulo Vernieri4, Peter Horton2,* and Manuel Pinto1

1Facultad de Ciencias Agronómicas, Universidad de Chile, Casilla 1004, Santiago, Chile
2Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK
3Facultad de Ciencias Agricolas y Pecuarias ‘Martín Cárdenas’, Universidad Mayor de San Simon, Casilla 5842, Cochabamba, Bolivia
4Università di Pisa, Dipartimento di biologia delle piante agrarie, Viale delle Piagge 23, I-56124 Pisa, Italy

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: p.horton{at}sheffield.ac.uk

The yield of 24 commercial varieties and accessions of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) has been determined at different sites in Chile and Bolivia. Statistical analysis was performed in order to characterize whether a particular variety was more or less stable in yield under different environmental conditions. Amongst these, two varieties have been identified for more detailed study: one variety has a higher than average yield under unstressed conditions but is strongly affected by stress, and another has a reduced yield under unstressed conditions but is less affected by stress. The contrasting rate of abscission of the reproductive organs under drought stress was clearly consistent with these differences. The more tolerant genotype shows a great deal of plasticity at the biochemical and cellular level when exposed to drought stress, in terms of stomatal conductance, photosynthetic rate, abscisic acid synthesis, and resistance to photoinhibition. By contrast, the former lacks such plasticity, but shows an enhanced tendency for a morphological response, the movement of leaves, which appears to be its principal response to drought stress.

Key words: Abscission, common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), drought stress, photoinhibition, stomatal conductance, yield stability


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
 J Exp BotHome page
Z. Xu and G. Zhou
Responses of leaf stomatal density to water status and its relationship with photosynthesis in a grass
J. Exp. Bot., September 1, 2008; 59(12): 3317 - 3325.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
S. P. Singh
Drought Resistance in the Race Durango Dry Bean Landraces and Cultivars
Agron. J., August 10, 2007; 99(5): 1219 - 1225.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Exp BotHome page
M. Wentworth, E. H. Murchie, J. E. Gray, D. Villegas, C. Pastenes, M. Pinto, and P. Horton
Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress: II. Acclimation of photosynthesis
J. Exp. Bot., February 1, 2006; 57(3): 699 - 709.
[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.