JXB Advance Access originally published online on November 22, 2006
Journal of Experimental Botany 2007 58(2):113-117; doi:10.1093/jxb/erl212
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RESEARCH PAPER |
The drought environment: physical, biological and agricultural perspectives
CSIRO Plant Industry, GPO Box 1600, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
* E-mail: john.passioura{at}csiro.au
‘Drought’ has many meanings in relation to crop production. These range from: statistical (say, the lowest decile of annual rainfall) to a meteorologist; through yield being limited by too little water to an agronomist; to sudden severe water deficits to many molecular biologists. To a farmer, the corresponding management issues, respectively, are risk management (how best to manage a meteorologically drought-prone farm over several years), how best to match cultivar and agronomic operations to the developing growing season, and how best to minimize possible major damage to (say) floral fertility induced by severe water deficits during flowering. All these definitions and the issues they imply are relevant to improving crop production when water is limiting. How can scientists best help? The answers depend on the scales (temporal and spatial) being addressed. Agronomists and breeders, interacting, can help improve components of seasonal water balance in the field, for example, minimizing evaporative losses from the soil surface by better matching the development of a crop to its environment. Physiologists, biochemists, and molecular biologists can help by identifying ways of improving the competence of particular organs. A promising target is floral infertility resulting from water deficits, which results from lesions in tissue, and cellular and molecular processes. Choosing problems whose solutions will have implications in the field and be attractive to farmers requires knowledge of what is important in the field.
Key words: Agriculture, biological environment, crop production, drought, interdisciplinary co-operation, physical environment
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. F. Reynolds, W. L. Bauerle, and Y. Wang Simulating carbon dioxide exchange rates of deciduous tree species: evidence for a general pattern in biochemical changes and water stress response Ann. Bot., September 1, 2009; 104(4): 775 - 784. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. E. Boccalandro, M. L. Rugnone, J. E. Moreno, E. L. Ploschuk, L. Serna, M. J. Yanovsky, and J. J. Casal Phytochrome B Enhances Photosynthesis at the Expense of Water-Use Efficiency in Arabidopsis Plant Physiology, June 1, 2009; 150(2): 1083 - 1092. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. M. Chaves, J. Flexas, and C. Pinheiro Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell Ann. Bot., February 1, 2009; 103(4): 551 - 560. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Izanloo, A. G. Condon, P. Langridge, M. Tester, and T. Schnurbusch Different mechanisms of adaptation to cyclic water stress in two South Australian bread wheat cultivars J. Exp. Bot., September 1, 2008; 59(12): 3327 - 3346. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. C. Collins, F. Tardieu, and R. Tuberosa Quantitative Trait Loci and Crop Performance under Abiotic Stress: Where Do We Stand? Plant Physiology, June 1, 2008; 147(2): 469 - 486. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. E. Nickson Planning Environmental Risk Assessment for Genetically Modified Crops: Problem Formulation for Stress-Tolerant Crops Plant Physiology, June 1, 2008; 147(2): 494 - 502. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|