The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Influence of Soil Water Supply on the Plant Water Balance of Four Tropical Grain Legumes
Abstract
The water balance of soybean (Glycine max), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), black gram (Vigna mungo), and pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) grown in pots was studied during a soil drying cycle. The response of the plants was analysed for three distinct stages of dehydration. In stage I, the rate of transpiration remained constant and equal to that of well watered plants even though soil water status fell by more than 50%. Stage II began when the rate of soil water supply to the plant was less than potential transpiration and stomates closed resultingjn the maintenance of plant water balance. When soil water content was expressed as a fraction of transpirable soil water, all species showed a transition from stage I to stage II at a fraction of transpirable soil water of about 0.3 to 0.2. As the soil water declined further, all species had a similar decrease in relative transpiration rate. Consequently, the responses of the four species in stages I and II were essentially identical, except that pigeonpea extracted a slightly greater amount of soil water. Stage III occurred once stomates had reached minimum conductance and water loss was then a function of the epidermal conductance and the environment around the leaf. Substantial differences were found among the four grain legumes in epidermal conductance. Soybean had the highest conductance, followed by black gram, cowpea and pigeonpea. Substantial variation in dehydration tolerance among the four grain legumes was also found: the ranking of dehydration tolerance based on the relative water content was pigeonpea > cowpea > mungbean > soybean. Differences among the four grain legume species in the duration of stage III which finished when plants died, were consistent with differences in epidermal conductance and in dehydration tolerance of leaves.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Crop responses to drought and the interpretation of adaptation
Blum, A. (1996) · Drought Tolerance in Higher Plants: Genetical, Physiological and Molecular Biological Analysis · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-1299-6_8 · Cited by 494
Integrated genomics, physiology and breeding approaches for improving drought tolerance in crops
Mir, R. R., Zaman-Allah, M., Sreenivasulu, N., Trethowan, R., & Varshney, R. K. (2012) · Theoretical and Applied Genetics · doi:10.1007/s00122-012-1904-9 · Cited by 477
Sarker, U., & Oba, S. (2020) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2020.559876 · Cited by 336
Sinclair, T. R., Soltani, A., Marrou, H., Ghanem, M., & Vadez, V. (2020) · Crop Science · doi:10.1002/csc2.20106 · Cited by 24
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Sinclair, T., & Ludlow, M.
- Venue
- Australian Journal of Plant Physiology
- Publisher
- CSIRO Publishing
- Published
- 1986-06-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 329-341
- ISSN
- 0310-7841 (ISSN-L)
- 1446-5655
- OpenAlex
- W2314597653
- Cited by
- 540
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Influence of Soil Water Supply on the Plant Water Balance of Four Tropical Grain Legumes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1071/pp9860329
- The paper
- Sinclair, T., & Ludlow, M. (1986). Influence of Soil Water Supply on the Plant Water Balance of Four Tropical Grain Legumes. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1071/pp9860329
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.