loading page

Diversity in stomatal and hydraulic responses to terminal drought in common bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris ) and tepary bean ( P. acutifolius )
  • +8
  • Thomas Buckley,
  • Troy Magney S,
  • Jorge Berny Mier y Teran C,
  • Colleen Mills,
  • Antonia Palkovic,
  • Travis Parker A,
  • Marshall Pierce A,
  • Yasmin Wadhwani,
  • Christopher Wong YS,
  • Paul Gepts,
  • Matthew Gilbert
Thomas Buckley
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Troy Magney S
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Jorge Berny Mier y Teran C
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Colleen Mills
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Antonia Palkovic
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Travis Parker A
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Marshall Pierce A
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Yasmin Wadhwani
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Christopher Wong YS
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Paul Gepts
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile
Matthew Gilbert
University of California Davis Department of Plant Sciences
Author Profile

Abstract

Plants differ widely in how soil drying affects stomatal conductance ( g s) and leaf water potential ( ψ leaf), and in the underlying physiological controls. Efforts to breed crops for drought resilience would benefit from a better understanding of these mechanisms and their diversity. We grew 12 diverse genotypes of common bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and four of tepary bean ( P. acutifolius; a highly drought resilient species) in the field under irrigation and terminal drought, and quantified responses of g s and ψ leaf, and their controls (soil water potential [ ψ soil], evaporative demand [Δ w] and plant hydraulic conductance [ K]). We hypothesized that (i) common beans would be more ”isohydric” (i.e., exhibit strong stomatal closure in drought, minimizing ψ leaf decline) than tepary beans, and that genotypes with larger ψ leaf decline (more ”anisohydric”) would exhibit (ii) smaller increases in Δ w, due to less suppression of evaporative cooling by stomatal closure and hence less canopy warming, but (iii) larger K declines due to ψ leaf decline. Contrary to our hypotheses, we found that half of the common bean genotypes were similarly anisohydric to most tepary beans; that isohydric genotypes experienced less canopy warming and hence smaller increases in Δ w in drought, and similar declines in K; and that stomatal closure was similar in isohydric and anisohydric genotypes. g s and ψ leaf were virtually insensitive to drought in one tepary genotype (G40068). Our results highlight the potential importance of non-stomatal mechanisms for leaf cooling, and the variability in drought resilience traits among closely related crop legumes.
Submitted to Plant, Cell & Environment
26 May 2024Reviewer(s) Assigned
09 Jul 2024Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
09 Jul 2024Editorial Decision: Revise Minor