沙漠研究 19-1, 225- 228 (2009 )Journal of Arid Land Studies“Desert Technology IX ”
Refereed Paper

Effect of Soil Water Deficit on Growth and Water Use Efficiency for Three Tunisian
Pastorals Species (Lotus creticus, Plantago albicans and Rhanterium suaveolens)Sihem TALBI1, Elkadri LEFI2, Hanen ENNEB1, Ali FERCHICHI1
Abstract: Three pastorals species (Lotus creticus, Plantago albicans and Rhanterium
suaveolens) were subjected to two watering regimes (50 % and 100 % of field capacity (FC)).
The aim of the current work is to study the effect of water deficit on growth parameters (leafarea, leaf elongation and biomass production) and water use efficiency of the studied species
during two growth stages: seedling or establishment stage and full vegetative stage. We notedthat water stress induced a reduction of all studied parameters mainly in the second stage. The
highest decreases in leaf area (50.00%) and in leaf elongation were shown in Plantago albicans.
However, we noted an increase of water use efficiency on all studied species; Rhanterium
suaveolens used more efficiently water (52.37%) in stress conditions than Lotus creticus(11.77%) and Plantago albicans (3.62%).
Keywords: Arid land, Pastoral plants, Water stress, Water use efficiency

1. Introduction
Several environmental factors adversely affect plant growth, development and final yield performanceof crop. Drought, salinity, and extremes of temperature are among major environmental constraints
known to limit plant productivity in many regions of the world. Recent studies have shown that growth
rates of several plants are directly proportional to the water availability in the soil (Kameli and Loser,1995). It is estimated that less than 10.00% of the world’s arable lands may be free of major
environmental stresses (Dudal, 1976). Pastorals plants are known in arid land to support dryness. When
exposed to water stress they develop some mechanism of tolerance and/or resistance.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Plants material
The studied species are Lotus creticus, Plantago albicans and Rhanterium suaveolens which werecollected from several places of Tunisian arid lands. Seeds were sown into pots. Experiments werecarried out under glasshouse-controlled conditions (T: 26 ˚C and ordinary light).
2.2. Water regimes
Water supply was varied in two levels, according to 100% (control) and 50% of water field capacity(WFC). Water content at maximum water holding capacity was determined as the amount of waterretained by representative samples of the substrate. Water regimes were implemented 8 weeks aftersowing. Adjustment of the intended water contents was accomplished on a weight basis every second day.
Plants were sampled after one month of stress (establishment stage) and then after two months of stress(full vegetative stage).
2.3. Growth parameters
The growth parameters measured are leaf area (cm2.plant-1), leaf elongation (mm2), dry weight shoot(DWS), dry weight root (DWR) (g) and the allocation of resources (DWR / DWS). The leaf area (LA)was calculated using mesurim pro 6 software.
2.4. Water use efficiency (WUE)
Water use efficiency was calculated by integrating over the vegetation period dividing accumulated
dry matter (shoot and root) by cumulative water use (WUE).
12

Dryland and oasis cropping Laboratory, Institute of Arid Area of Medenine, 4119, Tunisia.
Gafsa Faculty of sciences, Sidi Ahmed Zarrouk, Gafsa 2112, Tunisia.
E-mail, sihem_talbi@yahoo.fr, Tel: (+216) 95 28 76 29; Fax:(+216) 75 63 30 06

226

2.5. Statistical analysis
All analyses were done on a completely randomized design. All data obtained were subjected to
one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the mean differences were compared by Duncan test. Eachdata point was the mean of six replicates (n = 6). Comparison with P values < 0. 05 were consideredsignificantly different.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Morphological parameters
The effect of water stress on growth parameters for all species was illustrated in Table 1. For theleaf area, the comparison between the three species showed that on establishment stage, stressed plants of L.
creticus and R. suaveolens formed a homogeneous group. In this stage, it was R. suaveolens which wasmore affected by water stress (57.00%). While, at the full vegetative stage, it was rather P. albicans
which was more sensitive to water stress (53.00%). The differences between all species was statisticallysignificant (p<0.05). The highest leaf elongation has been recorded on P. albicans. On establishment
stage, the drought stressed plant, decreased their leaf elongation from 100 to 68 mm (32.00 %). On thefull vegetative stage, the leaf elongation decreased by about 50.00%. However, on R. suaveolens, drought
stress decreased the leaf elongation (p<0. 01) by 30.00%.
Water stress caused a significant reduction of leaf area and leaf elongation. Similar results wereobtained by Hall (1993) in Medicago sativa subjected to water deficit. Harrouni et al. (1995) concluded
that drought stress reduced vegetative growth and particularly leaf expansion. According to Thakur andRai (1982), drought stress induced a slowing in plant growth. It results in reduction of elongation of allinternodes. Harrouni et al. (1995) suggested that the effect of drought was expressed by a progressive
slowing of the primary growth since the water deficit reduced the turgescence and consequently theexpansion capacity of leaves.
For dry weight shoot, growth of pastorals plant was affected by water stress. On establishment stage,
there was no large difference between the three species. But on the second stage of development, theTable 1. Effect of drought stress during experiment period on growth parameters; leaf area (LA), leaf elongation(LE), dry weight roots (DWR) and dry weight shoot (DWS).
ControlLA(cm2)LE(mm)

DWS(g)DWR(g)

F calculated
andsignification
L. creticus
P. albicans
R.suaveolens
F calculated
andsignification
L. creticus
P. albicans
R.suaveolens
F calculated
andsignification
L. creticus
P. albicans
R.suaveolens
F calculated
andsignification
L. creticus
P. albicans
R.suaveolens

Establishment stageStressReduction(%)

55.29**

19.53**

0.46±0.08b
5.20± 1.50a
1.20±0.21b

0.25±0.08b
2.77±1.43a
0.52±0.09b

237.30**191.35**9.71±1.30c
100.40±14.2a
22.86±2.79b

6.14±1.95c
68.40±10.9a
15.80±0.37b

9.41*

2.18ns

0.71± 0.17a
0.90± 0.48a
0.21±0.11b

0.18± 0.11a
0.25± 0.12a
0.13 ± 0.08 a

5.30**

8.01**

0.20±0.05b
0.46± 0.42a
0.03±0.007b

0.08 ±0.03b
0.18± 0.12a
0.02± 0.01b

44.78
46.56
56.73

36.76
32
29.97

74.14
71.92
36.01

57.15
60.5
32.41

Control

Full vegetative stage
Stress

256,59**67,40**

0.84± 0.37c
10.41±1.29a
3.42± 0.43b

0.45± 0.12c
4.67±1.11a
2.19± 0.21b

743,646**

89,18*

11.10± 6.90c
174.4±14.9a
30.20± 0.75b6.57 ± 1.71b
90.71±21.8a
20 ± 0.00 b

1.94ns

5.19*

1.23 ±0.24a
2.68 ± 0.42a
1.91 ± 2.30a

0.63± 0.29b
1.24± 0.69ab
1.66± 0.72a

18.59**

5.87**

0.88 ± 0.72b
1.93 ± 0.52a
0.24 ±0.16c

0.62 ±0.41ab
1.25 ± 0.91a
0.18 ± 0.16b

Reduction(%)

46.0152.3433.86

40.81
47.87
28.39

48.70
53.62
12.99

29.35
35.27
23.69

Means ± S.D. based on 6 replicates (n = 6). Significant differences are indicated with *, ** for α < 0.05, 0.01, n.s =non significant. Same letters indicate homogeneous groups.

227

Table 2. Effect of drought stress during experiment period on the ratio: dry weight root (DWR) / dry weightshoot (DWS) on Lotus creticus, Plantago albicans and Rhanterium suaveolens.
Establishment stage
Full vegetative stage
Increase
Increase Decrease
ControlStressedControlStressed
(%)
(%)
(%)
L.creticus
0.20±0.03ab 0.51± 0.13a
84.17
0.69±0.4a
0.88±0.27a
27.35
P.albicans
0.42±0.25a
0.66 ±0.22a
55.89
0.74±0.28a
1.08±0.88 a
45.43
bbb
0.22±0.10
6.66
0.17±0.08
0.12±0.10b
27.32
R.suaveolens
0.21±0.11
F calculated
2.87*
13.02**
6.77**
6.21**and signification

behaviour of each species became different and R. suaveolens presented the lowest reduction of dry weight(12. 99 %).
In addition to the reduction of dry weight shoot, dry weight root was also affected by water stress.
Duncan test classified the studied species on different groups. On establishment stage, water stressed
plant of L. creticus and R. suaveolens formed a homogeneous group but with different percentage ofreduction. Yet, on full vegetative stage, R. suaveolens was distinguished by less developed roots. P.
albicans was the specie which presented the highest reduction of DWR on establishment stage by 60.50%
and by 35.27% on full vegetative stage. All the studied species increased their ratio DWR/DWS in waterstress conditions on establishment stage. L. creticus and P. albicans presented the highest level ofincrease, although, on full vegetative stage, only R. suaveolens decreased its ratio by 27.35% (Table 2).
Shoot and root dry weight decreased significantly in case of water shortage. Similar results wereshown by Bloch et al., (2006) in sugar beet plant. In Medicago sativa, dry matter production is the mostsensitive parameter to water rationing, a reduction of water supply from flowering phase leads to a declineof dry matter of 50.00% (Vidal and Pagnonec, 1985).
On three pastoral species the resources allocation between aerial and taproots parts was dependent onspecies and water regime. The ratio DWR/DWS was higher on drought condition than on well wateredconditions for Lotus creticus and Plantago albicans. This is due to the reduction of DWS and of DWR(Jaballah, 2007; Knight et al., 2006; Malik et al., 2002). However, for R. suaveolens there was no
significant difference between stressed and well watered plants. This indicates that there was an equal
distribution of resources between aerial and roots parts.
3.2. Water use efficiency
On well watered conditions, WUE amounted to 11.04; 14.91 and 15.14 g kg-1 for L. creticus, P.
albicans and R. suaveolens respectively (Table 3). Difference between groups for this treatment wasnon-significant. Drought stress increased significantly WUE by 11.77 % for L. creticus; 3.62 % for P.
albicans and by 52.37 % for R. suaveolens.
Generally, dry matter production and water use of crop stands are closely related and the relationshipbetween cumulative water use and yield, characterized by the water-use efficiency (WUE), is to a large
extent independent of the level of water supply and water use (Ehlers and Goss, 2003). However, in theTable 3. Effect of drought stress during experiment period on the water use efficiency (WUE) on Lotus creticus,
Plantago albicans and Rhanterium suaveolens.
WUE (g. kg-1)
F calculated
and signification
L. creticus
P. albicans

controlstress

1,634 ns3.601 *

11.04 ± 2.92 a

12.34 ± 3.50 b

11.77

aab

3.62

14.91 ± 4.85

15.45 ± 9.90

Increase (%)

15.14 ± 5.99a
23.07 ± 8.20 a
52.37
R. suaveolens
Means ± S.D. based on 6 replicates (n = 6). Significant differences are indicated with *, for
α < 0.05, n.s = non significant. Same letters indicate homogeneous groups.

228

present study the relationship between water use and yield was modified by water supply. WUE
increased for all studied species. Similar results were found for sugar beet by Bloch et al. (2006) which
reported that WUE amounted to 7.4 g and 6 g total dry matter per litre H2O for drought and control,respectively. The higher efficiency of water use under stress is due to the fact that drought-stressed plants
wilt far more than unstressed plants and wilting invariably occurs in times when the saturation deficit of theatmosphere is large. Therefore, the plant assimilates only in times when the saturation deficit is small andhence loses less water for every carbon molecule fixed (Clover et al., 2001).
Araus et al. (2002) and Bacelar et al. (2007) suggested that the increase in water use efficiency underdrought stress was as a strategy to improve crop performance underwater-limited conditions anddifferences in WUE may therefore need to be combined with other crop traits to be of practical value forcrop improvement in dry environments.
4. Conclusion
Different behavior of the three species was recorded under water stress conditions. All studied
parameters were affected and especially on full vegetative stage. It’s recommended to study the survival
mechanism of plants under long periods of dryness such as physiological mechanism which give more
precision about the adaptation of plants to stress and ameliorate mechanism of adaptation to stress insensitive plants.
References
Araus J.L., Slafer G.A., Reynolds M.P., Royo C. (2002): Plant breeding and drought in C3 cereals: what should we breed for?
Ann. Bot., 89: 925–940.
Bacelar E.A., Moutinho-Pereira J.M., Goncalves B.C., Ferreira H.F., Correia C.M. (2007): Changes in growth, gas exchange, xylem
hydraulic properties and water use efficiency of three olive cultivars under contrasting water availability regimes. Environmentaland Experimental Botany, 60: 183–192.
Bloch D., Hoffmann C.M., Marlander B. (2006): Impact of water supply on photosynthesis, water use and carbon isotope
discrimination of sugar beet genotypes. Europ. J. Agronomy, 24: 218–225.
Clover G.R.G., Jaggard K.W., Smith H.G., Azam-Ali S.N. (2001): The use of radiation interception and transpiration to predict theyield of healthy, droughted and virus-infected sugar beet. J. Agric. Sci. Camb., 136: 169–178.
Dudal R. (1976): Inventory of Major Soils of the World with Special Reference to Mineral Stress. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp.Stn, Ithaca,
3pp.
Ehlers W., Goss M. (2003): Water Dynamics in Plant Production. CABI Publishing, Oxon/Cambridge.
Hall M.H. (1993): Alfalfa growth flowering release from drought stress. Agro. J., 85(5): 991-994.
Harrouni M.C., Zahri S., El Hemaîd A. (1995): Transplantation des jeunes plantules d’arganier: effet combiné de techniques culturales
et du stress hydrique. Actes du colloque international La forêt face à la désertification « cas des Arganeraies », faculté dessciences, Agadir, 26, 27 et 28 octobre 1995 : 115-133.
Jaballah S. (2007): Effet du stress hydrique sur la croissance et le comportement de certaines espèces pastorales. Mastère enphysiologie cellulaire et moléculaire des plantes. Faculté des sciences de Tunis. 134p.
Kameli A, Lösel DM. (1995). Contribution of carbohydrates and other solutes to osmotic adjustment in wheat leaves under waterstress. J. Plant Physiol., 145: 363-6.
Knight C.A., Vogel H., Kroymann J., Shumates A.,Witsenboer H., Mitchell-Olds T. (2006): Expression profiling and local adaptationof Boechera halboellii populations for water use efficiency across a naturally occurring water stress gradient. Molecular Ecology,
15: 1229-1237.
Malik A.I., Colmer T.D., Lambers H., Setter T.L, Short-emeyer M. (2002): Short-term water logging has long-term effects on thegrowth and physiology of wheat. New Phytol., 153: 225-236.
Thakur P.S., Rai V.K. (1982): Effect of water stress on protein content in two maize cultivars differing in drought resistance. BiologiaPlant (Praha), 24: 96-100
Vidal A., Pagnonec J.C. (1985) : Effet de l’alimentation en eau sur quelques caractères morphologiques et anatomiques des feuilles desoja (Glycine max L. Miller). Les Colloques, 37: 199-223.