In general, rates of leaf photosynthesis (A|eaf) were alike in both banana and
rubber (Table 4). Whilst some statistical differences in Aieaf among treatments were
observed due to the large number of measurements made, the magnitude of the effect
was physiologically negligible. No clear differences in treatment effect on dark
respiration were observed (Table 4). Full details of the light use study appears in
(Rodrigo et aL, 2001b).
Transpiration rate (Tr) and cumulative water use (IWU) increased
dramatically with an increase in banana density (Table 5), with greater values in the B
and BBBR treatments. However, no significant treatment effect on water use
efficiency (WUE) or soil water status was observed (data not shown here, see
Rodrigo 1997).
In general, rates of leaf photosynthesis (A|eaf) were alike in both banana andrubber (Table 4). Whilst some statistical differences in Aieaf among treatments wereobserved due to the large number of measurements made, the magnitude of the effectwas physiologically negligible. No clear differences in treatment effect on darkrespiration were observed (Table 4). Full details of the light use study appears in(Rodrigo et aL, 2001b).Transpiration rate (Tr) and cumulative water use (IWU) increaseddramatically with an increase in banana density (Table 5), with greater values in the Band BBBR treatments. However, no significant treatment effect on water useefficiency (WUE) or soil water status was observed (data not shown here, seeRodrigo 1997).
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98aba/98abadb1435b0cfbe63f2dabdddc22693678da81" alt=""