Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by GOODMAN, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by ENNOS, A. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by GOODMAN, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by ENNOS, A. R.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by GOODMAN, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by ENNOS, A. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Annals of Botany 79: 703-711, 1997
© 1997 Annals of Botany Company

The Responses of Field-grown Sunflower and Maize to Mechanical Support

A. M. GOODMAN and A. R. ENNOS

School of Biological Sciences, 3.614 Stopford Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PT, U.K.

Received October 8, 1996 ; Accepted February 3, 1997

The effects of mechanical support on two contrasting species of herbaceous annual, the dicot sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) and the monocot maize (Zea mays L.), were investigated by comparing the growth and mechanical properties of supported plants and those which were left to sway freely in the wind.

Providing support had its greatest effect on the more highly-stressed basal areas of the plants, such as the lower stem and the base of the lateral roots. The diameter of the stem bases of both species was approx. 10% lower in supported plants, but there was no difference between treatments in the diameter of the stem above 50 cm. Roots of both species also showed a reduction in rigidity and bending strength of 40–50% in the supported plants compared with freely swaying plants. There was a significant reduction in the partitioning of biomass to the root systems of supported plants of both species.

There were differences in the way in which sunflower and maize responded to the provision of support; in sunflower, the reduction in lateral diameter was about twice that in maize, whereas in maize the decrease in the number of first-order laterals was twice that of sunflower. This study suggests that thigmomorphogenesis may be a localized response, but that different species can respond in different ways to mechanical stimulation.

Wind; support; anchorage; thigmomorphogenesis; Helianthus annuus L.; sunflower; Zea mays L.; maize


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Exp BotHome page
C. Coutand, J.L. Julien, B. Moulia, J.C. Mauget, and D. Guitard
Biomechanical study of the effect of a controlled bending on tomato stem elongation: global mechanical analysis
J. Exp. Bot., November 1, 2000; 51(352): 1813 - 1824.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.