The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Wheat Yield Progress Associated with Higher Stomatal Conductance and Photosynthetic Rate, and Cooler Canopies
Abstract
Grain yields of eight representative semidwarf spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars released in northwest Mexico between 1962 and 1988 have increased linearly across years as measured in this region during 6 yr under favorable management and irrigation. To understand the physiological basis of this progress and possibly assist future selection for grain yield, leaf traits were determined during 3 yr in the same study. Stomatal conductance (gs), maximum photosynthetic rate (A max, and canopy temperature depression (CTD), averaged over the 3 yr, were closely and positively correlated with progress in the 6‐yr mean yield. The correlation was greatest with gs (r = 0.94, P < 0.01). Compared with the overall yield increase of 27%, gs increased 63%, A max increased 23%, and canopies were 0.6°C cooler. Carbon‐13 isotope discrimination was also positively associated with yield progress (r = 0.71, P < 0.05), but other leaf traits such as flag leaf area, specific leaf weight, percentage N and greeness were not, nor was crop growth rate around anthesis. The causal basis of the leaf activity interrelationships is reasonably clear, with both increased intercellular CO 2 concentration and increased mesophyll activity contributing to the increase in A max. However, causal links to the yield progress, and the accompanying increase in kernels per square meter, are not clear. It is concluded that g s and CTD should be further investigated as potential indirect selection criteria for yield.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“For example, a positive association of P N with drought tolerance has been reported in different crops, e.g., semi-dwarf spring wheat (Fischer et al. 1998), maize (Ashraf et al. 2007), transgenic lines of rice (Garg et al. 2002), and transgenic cotton lines (Yan et al. 2004).”
From Photosynthesis under stressful environments: An overview (2013) · cites this paper as Fischer et al. 1998
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 701–754 of 754
Davoudi, Y., Tabari, M., Sadati, S., & Bader, M. K. ‐. (2026) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2025.1715389 · Cited by 1
Dominguez, D. L., Arancibia, C., Cavagnaro, J., & Cavagnaro, P. (2026) · BMC Plant Biology · doi:10.1186/s12870-026-08220-7 · Cited by 1
“Similar relationships have been reported in major crops, where enhancing g s has been associated with improved photosynthesis and yield [34–36].”
Rukhsar, A., Kanbar, O., Mahmoudi, H., Yousfi, S., Serret, M., & Araus, J. (2026) · Agronomy · doi:10.3390/agronomy16020270 · Cited by 1
“This positive genotypic relationship between δ 13 C and yield contrasts with most field studies of bread and durum wheat under mild to moderate water stress, where δ 13 C is typically negatively correlated with yield, or ∆ 13 C is positively correlated with yield [19,63,64].”
Bendou, O., Gutiérrez-Fernández, I., Marcos-Barbero, E. L., Bueno-Ramos, N., González-Hernández, A. I., Morcuende, R., & Arellano, J. B. (2026) · Plant Stress · doi:10.1016/j.stress.2026.101247 · Cited by 1
Yi, Y., Xiong, X., Gong, T., Xiang, Y., Du, H.-M., Wei, C.-H., Lyu, T., Zhang, Y., Yang, T., Deng, H.-L., et al. (2025) · Potato Research · doi:10.1007/s11540-025-09931-4 · Cited by 1
“Stomata are typically located in the epidermis of plant leaves and serve as channels for the exchange of CO 2 and H 2 O between plants and the atmosphere, thereby influencing plant productivity and water use (Fischer et al. 1998; Stewart et al. 2011; Liao et al. 2022).”
Rezzouk, F. Z., Serret, M., Araus, J., & Bragado, R. (2025) · Crop Journal · doi:10.1016/j.cj.2025.04.013 · Cited by 1
Maity, S., Srinivasan, V., Dutta, P., Roy, S. K., & Das, S. (2024) · International Journal of Bio-resource and Stress Management · doi:10.23910/1.2024.5379 · Cited by 1
“Most of the earlier workers have demonstrated a positive relationship between photosynthesis and crop yield when photosynthesis rates were performed on flag leaves at grain filling stage under open field conditions (Blum, 1990; Fischer et al., 1998; Reynolds et al., 2000; Furbank et al., 2013).”
BackgroundAsadi-Rad, H., Heydari, M., Hosseinzadeh, J., Hajinia, S., Miralles, I., & Prévosto, B. (2022) · Trees · doi:10.1007/s00468-022-02292-2 · Cited by 1
Baktash, A. (2021) · Muthanna Journal for Agricultural Sciences · doi:10.52113/mjas04/8.3/37g · Cited by 1
Biotechnological Approaches to Improve Carbon Fixation in Agricultural Crops
del Moral, L. D. (2020) · Modern Concepts & Developments in Agronomy · doi:10.31031/mcda.2020.07.000661 · Cited by 1
“Consequently, increased stomatal conductance would be detrimental to productivity in dry environments, although it has been found to correlate with higher yields under good irrigation conditions [32].”
BackgroundButler, E., Mueller, N., & Huybers, P. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · doi:10.1073/pnas.1905004116 · Cited by 1
Character association and path co-efficient analysis in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)
Amin, M., Hasan, M., Barma, N., Rahman, M., & Rahman, M. M. (2017) · doi:10.3329/bjar.v42i3.34516 · Cited by 1
“CIMMYT began CTD measurements on different irrigated experiments in Northwest Mexico and it was found that phenotypic correlations of CTD with grain yield were occasionally positive (Reynolds et al., 1994; Fischer et al., 1998).”
BackgroundEpure, D., Becheritu, M., & Cioineag, C. (2017) · AgroLife Scientific Journal · doi:10.17930/agl2017114 · Cited by 1
Screening genetic variation for photosynthetic capacity and efficiency in wheat
Pérez, V. (2016) · doi:10.25911/5d78d63c7dce5 · Cited by 1
“…with improvements in RUE, CO2 assimilation rate and stomatal conductance in the flag leaf (Shimshi and Ephrat, 1975; Reynolds et al., 1994; Watanabe et al., 1994; Fischer et al., 1998b; Gutierrez-Rodriguez et al., 2000; Reynolds et al., 2000; Shearman et al., 2005; Sadras and Lawson, 2011).”
BackgroundNandanwar, H. R., Manivel, P., Saravanan, R., Shah, S. A., & Ravi, V. (2015) · doi:10.5376/mpb.2015.06.0006 · Cited by 1
Korori, S., Matinizadeh, M., Shirvany, A., Mashaei, E. M., Khorabadi, T. T., Monemian, S., & Abdi, E. (2014) · doi:10.22059/ijer.2014.804 · Cited by 1
New sources of salt tolerance in durum wheat
James, R. A. (2007) · doi:10.25911/5d63c2768bf5e · Cited by 1
“Genotypic variation in intrinsic stomatal conductance without stress has been reported for irrigated or well watered wheat (Condon et al., 1990; Morgan and LeCain, 1991; Fischer et al., 1998) and barley (e.”
BackgroundMaity, S., Dutta, P., & Das, S. (2019) · Vegetos- An International Journal of Plant Research · doi:10.1007/s42535-019-00088-3
Scafaro, A. P., Coast, O., Salter, W. T., Taylor, N. L., Thistlethwaite, R. J., Cowan‐Turner, D., & Atkin, O. K. (2026) · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY · doi:10.1093/plphys/kiag548 · Cited by 1
“Single measurements are generally uncorrelated because they capture only an instant in time for a process that is constantly changing throughout the day, across seasons, and in relation to developmental stage (Zelitch 1982; Fischer et al. 1998; Reynolds et al. 2000; Driever et al. 2014).”
Sangha, J., Knox, R. E., Duarte, A. G., Ruan, Y., Cuthbert, R., Lokuruge, P., Kumar, S., & Soolanayakanahally, R. (2026) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2026.1840301
Koehler, T., Ding, Q., Ossola, E., Anderson, J. A., Carminati, A., & Sadok, W. (2026) · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY · doi:10.1093/plphys/kiag500
“This method, pioneered by Fischer et al. (1998), offers the unique advantage of detecting signatures of “cryptic” or indirect selection of breeders of physiological traits that likely contributed to yield increase (Baca Cabrera et al. 2025; Ding et al. 2025).”
Nabati, J., Ahmadi-Lahijani, M. J., Mirzaeian, A., Jangjoo, F., Rouhani, M. S., Goldani, M., & Parsa, M. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-31349-8
“Mesophyll conductance was determined by dividing A N /C i 44,45 .”
Bapela, T., Tesfamariam, S. A., Tsilo, T., & Shimelis, H. (2025) · Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science · doi:10.1111/jac.70139
Atmaca, E., Koyunlu, M. E., Özkan, B., Önler, E., Yağcılar, Ç., Deveci, M., & Çelen, İ. (2025) · Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture · doi:10.3897/ejfa.2025.154685
“Stomatal conductance was measured on four randomly selected leaves per plot using a Decagon SC-1 portable porometer at 10:00–11:00 AM (Fischer et al. 1998).”
Yield from the shadows: beyond top layer photosynthesis to enhance crop productivity
Robles-Zazueta, C. A., Molero, G., Reynolds, M. P., & Murchie, E. (2025) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.08.04.668377
“For most of field trials that previously reported relationships between yield and photosynthesis, the strongest relationships were found at grain filling (Gent, 1995; Fischer et al., 1998; Reynolds et al., 2000; Zheng et al., 2011; Gaju et al., 2016), similarly to our results.”
Pourkhaloee, A., Haghnegahdar, S., Karimi, H. R., & Azimi, M. H. (2024) · Flower and Ornamental Plants · doi:10.61882/flowerjournal.9.2.221
Tahmasebpoor, H., Kaviani, B., Pirkhezri, M., & Hashemabadi, D. (2024) · Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences · doi:10.56093/ijas.v94i9.142564
“Water use efficiency (dividing photosynthesis by transpiration) and mesophyll conductive (dividing the amount of photosynthesis by the amount of substomatal CO 2 ) were obtained by methods presented by Fischer et al .”
MethodIdentification of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes tolerant to heat and low N stress
El-Karamity, A. E., Salem, M. A., Naguib, S., Ibrahim, S. M., & Fouad, H. (2024) · SVU-International Journal of Agricultural Sciences · doi:10.21608/svuijas.2024.305437.1380
Razzaghi, S. (2024) · Plant Science Today · doi:10.14719/pst.3266
“Protein content was analysed using a Kjeldahl machine (model V40) (28).”
MethodPhysiological traits associated with terminal heat stress in wheat: A review update
Singh, A., Dash, L., & Chatterjee, A. (2024) · International Journal of Agriculture Extension and Social Development · doi:10.33545/26180723.2024.v7.i4a.514
“When wheat was under thermal stress, the CTD, flag leaf stomatal conductance, and photosynthetic rate were all positively correlated with yield (Fischer et al. 1998) [115] .”
BackgroundYaaran, A., Erez, E., Procko, C., & Moshelion, M. (2023) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2022.10.03.510099
“…the leaf and the loss of water from the leaf both occur through the stomata, creating a strong relationship between transpiration and productivity (de Wit, 1958; Fischer et al., 1998; Richards, 2000; Kemanian et al., 2005; Blum, 2009; Sperry et al., 2017; Sinclair, 2018; Xiong and Nadal, 2020).”
BackgroundAMELIN, A. V., CHEKALIN, E. I., ZAIKIN, V. V., Мазалов, В. И., & Ikusov, R. (2021) · IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · doi:10.1088/1755-1315/848/1/012096 · Cited by 2
“As it is known, photosynthesis is the basic source of transformed natural power of sun and main factor of production process of plants [21], while the transpiration protects plants from overheat and dehydration in dry and hot weather by ensuring transportation of mineral substances absorbed from the soil up the plant…”
BackgroundFetati, A., Mediouni, R., Benseddik, B., Abbache, A., & Zaagane, M. (2021) · GABJ · doi:10.46325/gabj.v0i0.946
“This deficit must be compensated by irrigation which constitutes a possibility of reducing this stomatal regulation (Fischer et al., 1998).”
BackgroundThe water use efficiency by plants in different breeding periods buckwheat varieties
Amelin, A., Fesenko, A., Zaikin, V., Chekalin, E., & Mazalov, V. (2021) · doi:10.1088/1755-1315/677/4/042053
“Among endogenous factors, photosynthesis and leaf transpiration have a significant impact on this indicator, due to their significant physiological role in the production process and the plant's protective complex [1, 2, 3].”
BackgroundYABANİ NOHUT GENOTİPLERİNİN YÜKSEK BUHAR BASINCI FARKINDA STOMA İLETKENLİK İNDEKSİ DEĞİŞİMLERİ
Başdemi̇r, F., & Yıldırım, M. (2020) · Toprak Bilimi ve Bitki Besleme Dergisi · doi:10.33409/tbbbd.789236
Eyland, D., van Wesemael, J., Lawson, T., & Carpentier, S. (2020) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.09.03.281873
“A high gs under steady-state conditions is associated with high 59 A and consequently improved growth (Fischer et al., 1998; Franks, 2006).”
BackgroundYang, K. F., Gergel, S., Duriaux‐Chavarría, J., & Baudron, F. (2020) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2020.604887
Poudel, P., Kakani, V. G., Alderman, P. D., & Carver, B. F. (2020) · American Journal of Plant Sciences · doi:10.4236/ajps.2020.118091
“Higher stomatal conductance is associated with an increase in grain yield in wheat [26].”
BackgroundKhan, H. A., Nakamura, Y., Furbank, R., & Evans, J. (2020) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.05.21.109652
“However, there are a few examples that have compared historical sequences of cultivars and observed correlations between leaf photosynthetic rate and wheat yield (Beche et al., 2014; Fischer et al., 1998; Gaju et al., 2016; Yao et al., 2019).”
BackgroundQuantifying Intra-canopy Hyperspectral Heterogeneity with respect to Soybean Anatomy
Neeno, S. (2020) · doi:10.25394/pgs.12249842.v1
“The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) is a ubiquitous example, which is frequently used to represent general vegetative health (Fischer et al., 1998).”
BackgroundZhang, H., Chen, Y., Niu, Y., Zhang, X., Sun, L., Wang, H.-Y., Xiao, J., & Wang, X. (2020) · doi:10.21203/rs.2.24038/v1
“The relative growth rate of plant was positively correlated with daily integrals of photosynthesis expressed in different species and environments, and 93% of the variation in relative growth rate can be explained by photosynthesis [4], when yield increased by 27%, maximum photosynthetic rate increased by 23% in wheat…”
BackgroundCHATTERJEE, A., CHATTOPADHYAY, T., Maji, A., Sen, P., & Ali, M. (2020) · Journal of Crop and Weed · doi:10.22271/09746315.2020.v16.i2.1311 · Cited by 1
Adaptation of Cropping Systems to Drought under Climate Change (Examples from Australia and Spain)
O’Leary, G. J., Nuttall, J. G., Redden, R. J., Cantero‐Martínez, C., & Mínguez, M. I. (2018) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119180661.ch4 · Cited by 1
Scope, Options and Approaches to Climate Change
Seneweera, S., Arun-Chinnappa, K., & Hirotsu, N. (2018) · Food Security and Climate Change · doi:10.1002/9781119180661.ch6
Effect of hot water treatment in controlling fusarium wilt of gladiolus
Yasmin, L., Ali, M., & Dey, T. (2017) · doi:10.3329/bjar.v42i3.34498
Srivastava, A., Srivastava, P., Sharma, A., Sarlach, R. S., & Bains, N. (2016) · doi:10.5958/2229-4473.2016.00072.0
“[7] recommended relative drought index (RDI) as a positive indicator for stress tolerance.”
BackgroundKalidasu, G., Sarada, C., Kumari, S., & Naidu, L. N. (2016) · doi:10.23910/ijbsm/2016.7.2.1547
“Golabadi et al. (2006) used MP, GMP, TOL, SSI and ST for discriminating F3 and F4 wheat lines.”
MethodWater stress response of Tricepiro and its progenitors Triticale and Trigopiro
Ruíz, M., Golberg, A., & Molas, M. (2014) · Phyton · doi:10.32604/phyton.2014.83.263
Visual Discovery and Reconstruction of the Climatic Conditions of the Past
Therón, R. (2006) · International Conference on Conceptual Structures · doi:10.1007/11758532_6
Features of adaptation of photosynthesis of winter wheat plant leaves to growing conditions
Amelin, A., Chekalin, E., Zaikin, V., & Ikusov, R. (2021) · doi:10.1051/e3sconf/202125402013
Amelin, A., Chekalin, E., Zaikin, V., Mazalov, V., & Ikusov, R. (2021) · IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environment · doi:10.1088/1755-1315/839/4/042026
“for assimilates but also on the leaves stomatal conductance [15] and the key enzyme RuBisc [16], which requires this issue additional study in the culture.”
BackgroundPlant Phenomics: Bridging the gap between Plant Physiology and Genetics
Maniya, R., Darshan, M., Shukla, P., & Krishna, S. (2014) · doi:10.21090/ijaerd.010338
Metadata
- Authors
- Fischer, R. A., Rees, D., Sayre, K. D., Lu, Z. ‐., Condon, A. G., & Saavedra, A. L.
- Affiliations
- Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (AU)
- Natural Resources Institute (GB)
- Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz Y Trigo (MX)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
- Cologeio de Postgraduados, Centro de Botanica Montecillo Texcoco Edo de Mexico Mexico
- Corresponding author
- Fischer, R. A.
- Venue
- Crop Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-11
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1467-1475
- ISSN
- 0011-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1435-0653
- OpenAlex
- W2058467808
- Cited by
- 887
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 53 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 42 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 45 · 2012: 39
- FWCI
- 33.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Crop Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Crop Yield and Soil Fertility
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetics and Plant Breeding
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Wheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
- Keywords
- stomatal conductance, photosynthetic rate, canopy temperature depression, carbon isotope discrimination, leaf traits, intercellular CO2 concentration, northwestern Mexico
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