Morphological and physiological responses of Calobota sericea plants subjected to water limitation and subsequent rewatering

References

• Abu-Zanat MW, Ruyle GB, Abdel-Hamid NF. 2004. Increasing range production from fodder shrubs in low rainfall areas. Journal of Arid Environments 59: 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2003.12.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anjum SA, Xie XY, Wang LC, Saleem MF, Man C, Lei W. 2011. Morphological, physiological and biochemical responses of plants to drought stress. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6: 2026–2032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold PA, Kruuk LEB, Nicrota AB. 2019. How to analyse plant phenotypic plasticity in response to a changing climate. The New Phytologist 222: 1235–1241. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15656.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basal O, Szabó A, Veres S. 2020. Physiology of soybean as affected by PEG-induced drought stress. Current Plant Biology 22: 100135. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpb.2020.100135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basu S, Ramegowda V, Kumar A, Pereira A. 2016. Plant adaptation to drought stress [version 1; peer review: 3 approved]. F1000 Research 5 (F1000 Faculty Rev): 1554 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7678.1
   Google Scholar
• Batra NG, Sharma V, Kumari N. 2014. Drought-induced changes in chlorophyll fluorescence, photosynthetic pigments, and thylakoid membrane proteins of Vigna radiata. Journal of Plant Interactions 9: 712–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/17429145.2014.905801.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beebe SE, Rao IM, Blair MW, Acosta-Gallegos JA. 2013. Phenotyping common beans for adaptation to drought. Frontiers in Physiology 4: 35. http://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2013.00035.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belkheiri O, Mulas M. 2013. Effect of water stress on growth, water use efficiency and gas exchange as related to osmotic adjustment of two halophytes Atriplex spp. Functional Plant Biology 40: 466–474. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP12245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benhin JKA. 2008. South African crop farming and climate change: An economic assessment of impacts. Global Environmental Change 18: 666–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bijanzadeh E, Emam Y. 2010. Effect of defoliation and drought stress on yield components and chlorophyll content of wheat. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 13: 699–705. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2010.699.705.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bloom AJ, Chapin FS, Mooney HA. 1985. Resource limitation in plants–an economic analogy. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 16: 363–392. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.16.110185.002051.
   Google Scholar
• Blum A. 2005. Drought resistance, water-use efficiency, and yield potential—are they compatible, dissonant, or mutually exclusive? Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 56: 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1071/AR05069.
   Google Scholar
• Boatwright JS, Tilney PM, van Wyk B-E. 2018. A taxonomic revision of Calobota (Fabaceae, Crotalarieae). Strelitzia 39: 1–94.
   Google Scholar
• Borba MEA, Maciel GM, Fraga Júnior EF, Machado Júnior CS, Marquez GR, Silva IG, Almeida RS. 2017. Gas exchanges and water use efficiency in the selection of tomato genotypes tolerant to water stress. Genetics and Molecular Research 16: gmr16029685. https://doi.org/10.4238/gmr16029685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradshaw AD. 1965. Evolutionary significance of phenotypic plasticity in plants. Advances in Genetics 13: 115–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2660(08)60048-6.
   Google Scholar
• Bradshaw AD. 2006. Unravelling phenotypic plasticity–why should we bother? The New Phytologist 170: 644–648. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01761.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodribb TJ, Cochard H. 2009. Hydraulic failure defines the recovery and point of death in water-stressed conifers. Plant Physiology 149: 575–584. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.108.129783.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodribb TJ, Feild TS, Sack L. 2010. Viewing leaf structure and evolution from a hydraulic perspective. Functional Plant Biology 37: 488–498. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP10010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodribb TJ, Holbrook NM. 2003. Stomatal closure during leaf dehydration, correlation with other leaf physiological traits. Plant Physiology 132: 2166–2173. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.103.023879.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casson SA, Hetherington AM. 2010. Environmental regulation of stomatal development. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 13: 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2009.08.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaves MM, Maroco JP, Pereira JS. 2003. Understanding plant responses to drought — from genes to the whole plant. Functional Plant Biology 30: 239–264. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP02076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chimphango SBM, Gallant LH, Poulsen ZC, Samuels MI, Hattas D, Curtis OE, Muasya AM, Cupido C, Boatwright JS, Howieson J. 2020. Native legume species as potential fodder crops in the Mediterranean Renosterveld shrubland, South Africa. Journal of Arid Environments 173: 104015. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2019.104015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clauw P, Coppens F, De Beuf K, Dhondt S, Van Daele T, Maleux K, Inze D. 2015. Leaf responses to mild drought stress in natural variants of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Physiology 167: 800–816. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.114.254284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comas LH, Becker SR, Cruz VV, Byrne PF, Dierig DA. 2013. Root traits contributing to plant productivity under drought. Frontiers in Plant Science 4: 442. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00442.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DEA (Department of Environmental Affairs). 2013. Long-term adaptation scenarios flagship research program (LTAS) for South Africa. Climate change implications for the agriculture and forestry sectors in South Africa. Pretoria: Department of Environmental Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Dickinson EB, Hyam GFS, Breytenbach WAS, Metcalf HD, Williams FR, Scheepers LJ, Plint AP, Smith HRH, van Vuuren PJ, et al. 2010. Pasture Handbook (2nd edn.). Singapore: Craft Print International Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Din J, Khan SU, Ali I, Gurmani AR. 2011. Physiological and agronomic response of canola varieties to drought stress. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 21: 78–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong S, Jang Y, Dong Y, Wang L, Wang W, Ma Z, Yan C, Ma C, Liu L. 2019. A study on soybean responses to drought stress and rehydration. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences 26: 2006–2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2019.08.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Efeoğlu B, Ekmekçi Y, Çiçek N. 2009. Physiological responses of three maize cultivars to drought stress and recovery. South African Journal of Botany 75: 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2008.06.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eziz A, Yan Z, Tian D, Han W, Tang Z, Fang J. 2017. Drought effect on plant biomass allocation: A meta-analysis. Ecology and Evolution 7: 11002–11010. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fenta BA, Beebe SE, Kunert KJ, Burridge JD, Barlow KM, Lynch JP, Foyer CH. 2014. Field phenotyping of soybean roots for drought stress tolerance. Agronomy (Basel) 4: 418–435. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy4030418.
   Google Scholar
• Flexas J, Barón M, Bota J, Ducruet J-M, Gallé A, Galmés J, Jiménez M, Pou A, Ribas-Carbó M, Sajnani C, et al. 2009. Photosynthesis limitations during water stress acclimation and recovery in the drought-adapted Vitis hybrid Richter-110 (V. berlandieri × V. rupestris). Journal of Experimental Botany 60: 2361–2377. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erp069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foster K, Lambers H, Real D, Ramankutty P, Cawthray GR, Ryan MH. 2015. Drought resistance and recovery in mature Bituminaria bituminosa var. albomarginata. Annals of Applied Biology 166: 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/aab.12171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foster K, Ryan MH, Real D, Ramankutty P, Lambers H. 2012. Drought resistance at the seedling stage in the promising fodder plant tedera (Bituminaria bituminosa var. albomarginata). Crop & Pasture Science 63: 1034–1042. https://doi.org/10.1071/CP12216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frosi G, Harand W, de Oliveira MT, Pereira S, Cabral SP, de Assuncao Montenegro AA, Santos MG. 2017. Different physiological responses under drought stress result in different recovery abilities of two tropical woody evergreen species. Acta Botanica Brasílica 31: 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-33062016abb0375.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gargallo-Garriga A, Sardans J, Perez-Trujillo M, Rivas-Ubach A, Oravec M, Vecerova K, Urban O, Jentsch A, Kreyling J, Beierkhunlein C, et al. 2014. Opposite metabolic responses of shoots and roots to drought. Scientific Reports 4: 6829. http://doi.org/10.1038/srep06829.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray SB, Brady SM. 2016. Plant developmental responses to climate change. Developmental Biology 419: 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2016.07.023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Héroult A, Lin YS, Bourne A, Medlyn BE, Ellsworth DS. 2013. Optimal stomatal conductance in relation to photosynthesis in climatically contrasting Eucalyptus species under drought. Plant, Cell & Environment 36: 262–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2012.02570.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holbrook NM, Ahrens ET, Burns MJ, Zwieniecki MA. 2001. In vivo observation of cavitation and embolism repair using magnetic resonance imaging. Plant Physiology 126: 27–31. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.126.1.27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hörtensteiner S. 2009. Stay-green regulates chlorophyll and chlorophyll binding protein degradation during senescence. Trends in Plant Science 14: 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2009.01.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Summary for Policy Makers. http://www.ipcc.cg/SPM13apr07.pdf. [Accessed 1 August 2021].
   Google Scholar
• Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Escuredo PR, Arrese-Igor C, Becana M. 2009. Oxidative damage in pea plants exposed to water deficit or paraquat. Plant Physiology 116: 173–181. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.116.1.173.
   Google Scholar
• Jordaan AJ, Sakulski D, Jordaan AD. 2013. Interdisciplinary drought risk assessment for agriculture: The case of communal farmers in the Northern Cape Province, South Africa. South African Journal of Agricultural Extension 44–58.
   Google Scholar
• Katul G, Leuning R, Oren R. 2003. Relationship between plant hydraulic and biochemical properties derived from a steady-state coupled water and carbon transport model. Plant, Cell & Environment 26: 339–350. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.2003.00965.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kobata T, Okuno T, Yamamoto T. 1996. Contributions of capacity for soil water extraction and water use efficiency to maintenance of dry matter production in rice subjected to drought. Japanese Journal of Crop Science 65: 652–662. https://doi.org/10.1626/jcs.65.652.
   Google Scholar
• Kong B, He B, Yu H, Liu Y. 2017. An Integrated Field and Hyperspectral Remote Sensing Method for the Estimation of Pigments Content of Stipa Purpurea in Shenzha, Tibet. Mathematical Problems in Engineering Article 4787054. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4787054.
   Google Scholar
• Kruger AC, Shongwe S. 2004. Temperature trends in South Africa: 1960–2003. International Journal of Climatology 24: 1929–1945. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1096.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lambers H, Chapin FS, Pons TL. 2008. Plant Physiological Ecology. (2nd edn.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-78341-3.
   Google Scholar
• Lotter D, Valentine AJ, van Garderen EA, Tadross M. 2014. Physiological responses of a fynbos legume, Aspalathus linearis to drought stress. South African Journal of Botany 94: 218–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2014.07.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mafakheri A, Siosemardeh A, Bahramnejad B, Struik PC, Sohrabi Y. 2010. Effect of drought stress on yield: proline and chlorophyll contents in three chickpea cultivars. Australian Journal of Crop Science 4: 580–585.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makbul S, Güller NS, Druma N, Güven S. 2011. Changes in anatomical and physiological parameters of soybean under drought stress. Turkish Journal of Botany 35: 369–377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makonya GM, Ogola JBO, Muasya AM, Crespo O, Maseko S, Valentine AJ, Ottosen C-O, Rosenqvist E, Chimphango SBM. 2020. Intermittent moisture supply induces drought priming responses in some heat-tolerant chickpea genotypes. Crop Science 60: 2527–2542. https://doi.org/10.1002/csc2.20228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mao W, Allington G, Li Y, Zang T, Wang S. 2012. Life history strategy influences biomass allocation in response to limiting nutrients and water in an arid system. Polish Journal of Ecology 60: 545–557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meissner HH, Scholtz MM, Engelbrecht FA. 2013. Sustainability of the South African livestock sector towards 2050. Part 2: Challenges, changes and required implementations. South African Journal of Animal Science 43: 289. Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v43i3.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller FL, Raitt LM, Chimphango SBM, Samuels MI, Cupido CF, Boatwright JS, Knight R, Trytsman M. 2017a. Prioritisation of native legume species for further evaluation as potential forage crops in water-limited agricultural systems in South Africa. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 189: 512. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-6230-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller FL, Raitt LM, Cupido CF, Chimphango SBM, Samuels MI, Boatwright JS. 2017b. Dormancy-breaking treatments in two potential forage crop legumes from the semi-arid rangelands of South Africa. South African Journal of Botany 113: 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2017.08.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller FL, Raitt LM, Cyster LF, Cupido CF, Samuels MI, Chimphango SBM, Boatwright JS. 2019b. The effects of temperature, water availability and seed burial depth on seed germination and seedling establishment of Calobota sericea (Fabaceae). South African Journal of Botany 121: 224–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2018.11.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller FL, Samuels MI, Cupido CF, Swarts MBV, Amary NM, Hattas D, Morris C, Cyster LF, Boatwright JS. 2019a. The impacts of season and livestock management strategy on the quality of diets selected by goats and sheep in the semi-arid rangelands of Namaqualand. South Africa. African Journal of Range & Forage Science 36: 105–114. https://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2018.1552622.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mutava RN, Prince SJK, Syed NH, Song L, Valliyodan B, Chen W, Nguyen H. 2015. Understanding abiotic stress tolerance mechanisms in soybean: A comparative evaluation of soybean response to drought and flooding stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 86: 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2014.11.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nemeskéri E, Molnar K, Vigh R, Nagy J, Dobos A. 2015. Relationships between stomatal behaviour, spectral traits and water use and productivity of green peas (Pisum sativum L.) in dry seasons. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 37: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-015-1776-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen A, Lamant A. 1989. Variation in growth and osmotic regulation of roots of water-stressed maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.) provenances. Tree Physiology 5: 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/5.1.123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicotra AB, Atkin OK, Bonser SP, Davidson AM, Finnegan EJ, Mathesius U, Poot P, Purugganan MD, Richards CL, Valladares F, et al. 2010 Plant phenotypic plasticity in a changing climate. Trends in Plant Science 15: 684–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2010.09.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Obidiegwu JE, Bryan GJ, Jones HG, Prashar A. 2015. Coping with drought: stress and adaptive responses in potato and perspectives for improvement. Frontiers in Plant Science 6: 542. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00542.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osakabe Y, Osakabe K, Shinozaki K, Tran LSP. 2014. Response of plants to water stress. Frontiers in Plant Science 5: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00086.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer A, Ainslie A. 2006. Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profiles: South Africa. FAO. https://ees.kuleuven.be/klimos/toolkit/documents/658_SouthAfrica_English.pdf. [Accessed 1 August 2021].
   Google Scholar
• Pang J, Yang J, Ward P, Siddique KHM, Lambers H, Tibbett M, Ryan M. 2011. Contrasting responses to drought stress in herbaceous perennial legumes. Plant and Soil 348: 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-011-0904-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pirasteh-Anosheh H, Saed-Moucheshi A, Pakniyat H, Pessarakli M. 2016. Stomatal responses to drought stress. In: Parvaiz A (Ed.). Water Stress and Crop Plants: A Sustainable Approach (Vol.1), (1st edn.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119054450.ch3.
   Google Scholar
• Polania J, Poschenrieder C, Rao I, Beebe S. 2017. Root traits and their potential links to plant ideotypes to improve drought resistance in common bean. Theoretical and Experimental Plant Physiology 29: 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40626-017-0090-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polle A, Chen SL, Eckert C, Harfouche A. 2019. Engineering Drought Resistance in Forest Trees. Frontiers in Plant Science 9: 1875. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01875
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pompelli MF, Franca SC, Tigre RC, de Oliveira MT, Sacilot M, Pereira EC. 2013. Spectrophotometric determinations of chloroplastidic pigments in acetone, ethanol and dimethylsulphoxide. Brazilian Journal of Biological Sciences 11: 52–58.
   Google Scholar
• Poorter H, Niklas KJ, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Poot P, Mommer L. 2012. Biomass allocation to leaves, stems and roots: Meta-analyses of interspecific variation and environmental control. The New Phytologist 193: 30–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03952.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Praba ML, Cairns JE, Babu RC, Lafitte HR. 2009. Identification of physiological traits underlying cultivar differences in drought tolerance in rice and wheat. Journal of Agronomy & Crop Science 195: 30–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.2008.00341.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuels I, Cupido C, Swarts MB, Palmer AR, Paulse JW. 2016. Feeding ecology of four livestock species under different management in a semi-arid pastoral system in South Africa. African Journal of Range & Forage Science 33: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2015.1029972.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperry JS, Hacke UG, Oren R, Comstock JP. 2002. Water deficits and hydraulic limits to leaf water supply. Plant, Cell & Environment 25: 251–263. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0016-8025.2001.00799.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tolk JA, Howell TA. 2003. Water use efficiencies of grain sorghum grown in three USA southern Great Plains soils. Agricultural Water Management 59: 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(02)00157-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torres-Ruiz JM, Diaz-Espejo A, Morales-Sillero A, Martín-Palomo MJ, Mayr S, Beikircher B, Fernandez JE. 2013. Shoot hydraulic characteristics, plant water status and stomatal response in olive trees under different soil water conditions. Plant and Soil 373: 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1774-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truter WF, Botha PR, Dannhauser CS, Maasdorp BV, Miles N, Smith A, Snyman HA, Tainton NM. 2015. South African pasture and forage science entering the 21st century: past to present. African Journal of Range & Forage Science 32: 73–89. https://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2015.1054429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trytsman M, Masemola EL, Müller FL, Calitz FJ, van Wyk AE. 2019. Assessing legumes indigenous to South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland for their pasture potential. African Journal of Range & Forage Science 36: 27–40. https://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2018.1522515.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner NC. 1981. Techniques and experimental approaches for the measurement of plant water status. Plant and Soil 58: 339–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02180062.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter J, Nagy L, Hein R, Rascher U, Beierkuhnlein C, Willner E, Jentsch A. 2011. Do plants remember drought? Hints towards a drought-memory in grasses. Environmental and Experimental Botany 71: 34–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2010.10.020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang N, Gao J, Zhang S. 2017. Overcompensation or limitation to photosynthesis and root hydraulic conductance altered by rehydration in seedlings of sorghum and maize. The Crop Journal 5: 337–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2017.01.005.
   Google Scholar
• Yan W, Zheng S, Zhong Y, Shangguan Z. 2017. Contrasting dynamics of leaf potential and gas exchange during progressive drought cycles and recovery in Amorpha fruticosa and Robinia pseudoacacia. Scientific Reports 7: 4470. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-04760-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar