Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …


2 Issues per year

CiteScore 2017: 0.59

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.427
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.658

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 39, Issue 64


Comparison of Desert-Adapted Helianthus niveus (Benth.) Brandegee ssp. tephrodes (A. Gray) Heiser to Cultivated H. annuus L. for Putative Drought Avoidance Traits at Two Ontogenetic Stages

Alan W. Bowsher / Ethan F. Milton / Lisa A. Donovan
Published Online: 2016-02-26 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/helia-2016-0003


Water availability is a major factor limiting plant productivity in both natural and agronomic systems. Identifying putative drought resistance traits in crops and their wild relatives may be useful for improving crops grown under water-limiting conditions. Here, we tested the expectation that a desert-dwelling sunflower species, Helianthus niveus ssp. tephrodes (TEPH) would exhibit root and leaf traits consistent with greater ability to avoid drought than cultivated sunflower H. annuus (ANN) in a common garden environment. We compared TEPH and ANN at both the seedling and mature stages under well-watered greenhouse conditions. For traits assessed at the seedling stage, TEPH required a longer time to reach a rooting depth of 30 cm than ANN, and the two species did not differ in root:total biomass ratio at 30 cm rooting depth, contrary to expectations. For traits assessed at the mature stage, TEPH had a higher instantaneous water use efficiency and photosynthetic rate on a leaf area basis, but a lower photosynthetic rate on a mass basis than ANN, likely due to TEPH having thicker, denser leaves. Contrary to expectations, ANN and TEPH did not differ in leaf instantaneous stomatal conductance, integrated water-use efficiency estimated from carbon isotope ratio, or nitrogen concentration. However, at both the seedling and mature stages, TEPH exhibited a lower normalized difference vegetative index than ANN, likely due to the presence of dense leaf pubescence that could reduce heat load and transpirational water loss under drought conditions. Thus, although TEPH root growth and biomass allocation traits under well-watered conditions do not appear to be promising for improvement of cultivated sunflower, TEPH leaf pubescence may be promising for breeding for drought-prone, high radiation environments.

Keywords: abiotic stress; crop improvement; leaf pubescence; NDVI; rooting depth rate; water use efficiency


  • Alahdadi, I., Oraki, H., Khajani, F.P., 2011. Effect of water stress on yield and yield components of sunflower hybrids. African Journal of Biotechnology 10: 6504–6509.Google Scholar

  • Barbour, M.G., Billings, W.D., 1988. North American Terrestrial Vegetation, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 1–448.Google Scholar

  • Bartelme, E.M., 2014. Investigation of drought resistance in the granite outcrop sunflower, Helianthus porteri, compared to three non-outcrop congeners. MS Thesis, University of Georgia.

  • Blum, A., 1996. Crop responses to drought and the interpretation of adaptation. Plant Growth Regulation 20: 135–148.Google Scholar

  • Boyer, J.S., 1982. Plant productivity and environment. Science 218: 443–448.Google Scholar

  • Chapin, F.S. III., Autumn, K., Pugnaire, F., 1993. Evolution of suites of traits in response to environmental stress. The American Naturalist 142: S78–S92.Google Scholar

  • Comas, L.H., Becker, S.R., Cruz, V.M.V., Byrne, P.F., Dierig, D.A., 2013. Root traits contributing to plant productivity under drought. Frontiers in Plant Science 4: 1–16.Google Scholar

  • Craufurd, P.Q., Wheeler, T.R., Ellis, R.H., Summerfield, R.J., Williams, J.H., 1999. Effect of temperature and water deficit on water-use efficiency, carbon isotope discrimination, and specific leaf area in peanut. Crop Science 39: 136–142.Google Scholar

  • deVicente, M.C., Tanksley, S.D., 1993. QTL analysis of transgressive segregation in an interspecific tomato cross. Genetics 134: 585–596.Google Scholar

  • Donovan, L.A., Ehleringer, J.R., 1994. Potential for selection on plants for water-use efficiency as estimated by carbon isotope discrimination. American Journal of Botany 81: 927–935.Google Scholar

  • Ehleringer, J., 1984. Ecology and ecophysiology of leaf pubescence in North American desert plants. In: Rodriguez, P.L.H.E., Mehta, I. (eds.) Biology and Chemistry of Plant Trichomes, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 113–132.Google Scholar

  • Ehleringer, J., Björkman, O., 1978. Pubescence and leaf spectral characteristics in a desert shrub, Encelia farinosa. Oecologia 36: 151–162.Google Scholar

  • Ehleringer, J., Björkman, O., Mooney, H.A., 1976. Leaf pubescence: Effects on absorptance and photosynthesis in a desert shrub. Science 192: 376–377.Google Scholar

  • Ehleringer, J.R., Mooney, H.A., 1978. Leaf hairs: Effects on physiological activity and adaptive value to a desert shrub. Oecologia 37: 183–200.Google Scholar

  • El Midaoui, M., Serieys, H., Griveau, Y., Benbella, M., Talouizte, A., Bervillé, A., Kaan, F., 2003. Effects of osmotic and water stresses on root and shoot morphology and seed yield in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) genotypes bred for morocco or issued from introgression with H. argophyllus T. & G. and H. debilis Nutt. Helia 26: 1–16.Google Scholar

  • Farquhar, G.D., Ehleringer, J.R., Hubrick, K.T., 1989. Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology 40: 503–537.Google Scholar

  • Farquhar, G.D., Sharkey, T.D., 1982. Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology 33: 317–345.Google Scholar

  • Fereres, E., Gimenez, C., Fernandez, J.M., 1986. Genetic variability in sunflower cultivars under drought. I. Yield relationships. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 37: 573–582.Google Scholar

  • Gates, D.M., 1968. Transpiration and leaf temperature. Annual Reviews of Plant Physiology 19: 211–238.Google Scholar

  • Grant, L., 1987. Diffuse and specular characteristics of leaf reflectance. Remote Sensing of Environment 22: 309–322.Google Scholar

  • Hajjar, R., Hodgkin, T., 2007. The use of wild relatives in crop improvement: a survey of developments over the last 20 years. Euphytica 156: 1–13.Google Scholar

  • Heiser, C.B.J., Smith, D.M., Clevenger, S.B., Martin, W.C.J., 1969. The North American sunflowers: Helianthus. Memoirs of the Torrey Botanical Club 22:1–218.Google Scholar

  • Henry, A., Gowda, R.P.V., Tores, R.O., McNally, K.L., Serraj, R., 2011. Variation in root system architecture and drought response in rice (Oryza sativa): Phenotyping of the OryzaSNP panel in rainfed lowland fields. Field Crops Research 120: 205–214.Google Scholar

  • Héroult, A., Lin, Y.-S., Bourne, A., Medlyn, B.E., Ellsworth, D.S., 2013. Optimal stomatal conductance in relation to photosynthesis in climatically contrasting Eucalyptus species under drought. Plant, Cell & Environment 36: 262–274.Google Scholar

  • Hickman, J.C. (Ed.), 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California, University of California Press, Oakland, CA, pp. 1–1400.Google Scholar

  • IPCC, 2007. Climate change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller, pp. 996.

  • Jackson, L.E., Koch, G.W., 1997. The ecophysiology of crops and their wild relatives. In: Jackson, L.E. (ed.) Ecology in Agriculture, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 3–37.Google Scholar

  • Jones, O.R., 1984. Yield, water use efficiency and oil concentration and quality of dryland sunflower grown in the southern high plains. Agronomy Journal 76: 229–235.Google Scholar

  • Karaata, H., 1991. Water-production functions of sunflower under Kırklareli conditions. Village Affair Research Institute, Kırklareli Turkey, Report No 24. PhD Thesis (In Turkish).

  • Kramer, P.J., Boyer, J.S., 1995. Water Relations of Plants and Soils, Academic Press, London, San Diego, pp. 1–495.Google Scholar

  • Mason, C.M., McGaughey, S.E., Donovan, L.A., 2013. Ontogeny strongly and differentially alters leaf economic and other key traits in three diverse Helianthus species. Journal of Experimental Botany 64: 4089–4099.Google Scholar

  • McDonald, P.G., Fonseca, C.R., Overton, J.M., Westoby, M., 2003. Leaf-size divergence along rainfall and soil-nutrient gradients: Is the method of size reduction common among clades? Functional Ecology 17: 50–57.Google Scholar

  • Milton, E.F., Goolsby, E.W., Donovan, L.A., 2013. Cultivated Helianthus annuus differs from two wild relatives in germination response to simulated drought stress. Helia 36: 35–46.Google Scholar

  • Nicotra, A., Babicka, N., Westoby, M., 2002. Seedling root anatomy and morphology: An examination of ecological differentiation with rainfall using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Oecologia 130: 136–145.Google Scholar

  • Onemli, F., Gucer, T., 2010. Response to drought of some wild species of Helianthus at seedling growth stage. Helia 33: 45–54.Google Scholar

  • Passioura, J., 2006. Increasing crop productivity when water is scarce – from breeding to field management. Agricultural Water Management 80: 176–196.Google Scholar

  • Poorter, H., Niklas, K.J., Reich, P.B., Oleksyn, J., Poot, P., Mommer, L., 2012. Biomass allocation to leaves, stems and roots: Meta-analyses of interspecific variation and environmental control. New Phytologist 193: 30–50.Google Scholar

  • Poorter, H., Evans, J.R., 1998. Photosynthetic nitrogen-use efficiency of species that differ inherently in specific leaf area. Oecologia 116: 26–37.Google Scholar

  • Rauf, S., 2008. Breeding sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) for drought tolerance. Communications in Biometry and Crop Science 3: 29–44.Google Scholar

  • Rauf, S., Sadaqat, H.A., 2007. Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) germplasm evaluation for drought tolerance. Communications in Biometry and Crop Science 2: 8–16.Google Scholar

  • Reddy, G.K.M., Dangi, K.S., Kumar, S.S., Reddy, A.V., 2003. Effect of moisture stress on seed yield and quality in sunflower, Helianthus annuus L. Journal of Oilseeds Research 20: 282–283.Google Scholar

  • Reynolds, M., Dreccer, F., Trethowan, R., 2007. Drought adaptive traits derived from wheat wild relatives and landraces. Journal of Experimental Botany 58:177–186.Google Scholar

  • Richards, R.A., 1996. Defining selection criteria to improve yield under drought. Plant Growth Regulation 20: 157–166.Google Scholar

  • Richards, R.A., 2006. Physiological traits used in the breeding of new cultivars for water-scarce environments. Agricultural Water Management 80: 197–211.Google Scholar

  • Richards, R.A., Rebetzke, G.J., Watt, M., Condon, A.G., Spielmeyer, W., Dolferus, R., 2010. Breeding for improved water productivity in temperate cereals: Phenotyping, quantitative trait loci, markers, and the selection environment. Functional Plant Biology 37: 85–97.Google Scholar

  • Sadras, V.O., Hall, A.J., Trapani, N., Vilella, F., 1989. Dynamics of rooting and rooting-length: Leaf-area relationships as affected by plant population in sunflower crops. Field Crops Research 22: 45–57.Google Scholar

  • Sandquist, D.R., Ehleringer, J.R., 1997. Intraspecific variation of leaf pubescence and drought response in Encelia farinosa associated with contrasting desert environments. New Phytologist 135: 635–644.Google Scholar

  • Schneider, C.A., Rasband, W.S., Eliceiri, K.W., 2012. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nature Methods 9: 671–675.Google Scholar

  • Seiler, G.J., 1992. Utilization of wild sunflower species for the improvement of cultivated sunflower. Field Crops Research 30: 195–230.Google Scholar

  • Seiler, G.J., 1994. Primary and lateral root elongation of sunflower seedlings. Environmental and Experimental Botany 34: 409–418.Google Scholar

  • Seiler, G.J., 1998. Influence of temperature on primary and lateral root growth of sunflower seedlings. Environmental and Experimental Botany 40: 135–146.Google Scholar

  • Seiler, G.J., 2008. Root growth of interspecific sunflower seedlings derived from wild perennial sunflower species. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 88: 705–712.Google Scholar

  • Seiler, G., Gulya, T.J., Marek, L.F., 2006a. Exploration for wild Helianthus species from the desert Southwestern USA for potential drought tolerance. Helia 29: 1–10.Google Scholar

  • Seiler, G.J., Gulya, T.J., Marek, L.F., Knauf, C., 2006b. Plant exploration to collect wild Helianthus niveus subspecies for sunflower improvement. In: Proceedings Sunflower Research Workshop, Fargo NC.

  • Seiler, G.J., Rieseberg, L.H., 1997. Systematics, origin, and germplasm resources of the wild and domesticated sunflower. In: Schneiter, A.A. (ed.) Sunflower Technology and Production, American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, pp. 21–65.Google Scholar

  • Sheffield, J., Wood, E.F., 2008. Global trends and variability in soil moisture and drought characteristics, 1950–2000, from observation-driven simulations of the terrestrial hydrologic cycle. Journal of Climate 21: 432–458.Google Scholar

  • Shimshi, D., Mayoral, M.L., Atsmon, D., 1982. Responses to water stress in wheat and related wild species. Crop Science 22: 123–128.Google Scholar

  • Sims, D., Gamon, J.A., 2002. Relationships between leaf pigment content and spectral reflectance across a wide range of species, leaf structures, and developmental stages. Remote Sensing of Environment 81: 337–354.Google Scholar

  • Singh, K.B., Ocampo, B., 1997. Exploitation of wild Cicer species for yield improvement in chickpea. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 95: 418–423.Google Scholar

  • Škorić, D., 2009. Sunflower breeding for resistance to abiotic stresses. Helia 32: 1–16.Google Scholar

  • Slaton, M.R., Hunt, E.R., Smith, W.K., 2001. Estimating near-infrared leaf reflectance from structural characteristics. American Journal of Botany 88: 278–284.Google Scholar

  • Smith, W.K., 1978. Temperatures of desert plants: Another perspective on the adaptability of leaf size. Science 201: 614–616.Google Scholar

  • Sobrado, M.A., Rawson, H.M., 1984. Leaf expansion as related to plant water availability in wild and cultivated sunflower. Physiologia Plantarum 60: 561–566.Google Scholar

  • Sobrado, M.A., Turner, N.C., 1983a. A comparison of the water relations characteristics of Helianthus annuus and Helianthus petiolaris when subjected to water deficits. Oecologia 58: 309–313.Google Scholar

  • Sobrado, M.A., Turner, N.C., 1983b. Influence of water deficits on the water relations characteristics and productivity of wild and cultivated sunflowers. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 10: 195–203.Google Scholar

  • Sobrado, M.A., Turner, N.C., 1986. Dry matter accumulation and distribution in the wild sunflower Helianthus petiolaris and the cultivated sunflower Helianthus annuus as influenced by water deficits. Oecologia 59: 181–187.Google Scholar

  • Tahir, M.H.N., Mehdi, S.S., 2001. Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) populations under water stress and normal conditions. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 3: 236–238.Google Scholar

  • Tardieu, F., 2012. Any trait or trait-related allele can confer drought tolerance: Just design the right drought scenario. Journal of Experimental Botany 63: 25–31.Google Scholar

  • Thompson, T.E., Zimmerman, D.C., Rogers, C.E., 1981. Wild Helianthus as a genetic resource. Field Crops Research 4: 333–343.Google Scholar

  • Tucker, C.J., 1979. Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring vegetation. Remote Sensing of Environment 8: 127–150.Google Scholar

  • Turner, N., Begg, J., 1981. Plant-water relations and adaptation to stress. Plant and Soil 58: 97–131.Google Scholar

  • Uga, Y., Sugimoto, K., Ogawa, S., Rane, J., Ishitani, M., Hara, N., Kitomi, Y., Inukai, Y., Ono, K., Kanno, N., Inoue, H., Takehisa, H., Motoyama, R., Nagamura, Y., Wu, J., Matsumoto, T., Takai, T., Okuno, K., Yano, M., 2013. Control of root system architecture by DEEPER ROOTING 1 increases rice yield under drought conditions. Nature Genetics 45: 1097–1102.Google Scholar

  • Verslues, P.E., Agarwal, M., Katiyar-Agarwal, S., Zhu, J., Zhu, J.K., 2006. Methods and concepts in quantifying resistance to drought, salt and freezing, abiotic stresses that affect plant water status. The Plant Journal 45: 523–539.Google Scholar

  • Wishart, J., George, T.S., Brown, L.K., White, P.J., Ramsay, G., Jones, H., Gregory, P.J., 2014. Field phenotyping of potato to assess root and shoot characteristics associated with drought tolerance. Plant and Soil 378: 351–363.Google Scholar

  • Wright, I.J., Reich, P.B., Westoby, M., Ackerly, D.D., Baruch, Z., Bongers, F., Cavender-Bares, J., Chapin, T., Cornelissen, J.H.C., Diemer, D., Flexas, J., Garnier, E., Groom, P.K., Gulias, J., Hikosaka, K., Lamont, B.B., Lee, T., Lee, W., Lusk, C., Midgley, J.J., Navas, M.-L., Niinemets, U., Oleksyn, J., Osada, N., Poorter, H., Poot, P., Prior, L., Pyankov, V.I., Roumet, C., Thomas, S.C., Tjoelker, M.G., Veneklaas, E.J., Villar, R., 2004. The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature 428: 821–827.Google Scholar

  • Xie, X., Jin, F., Song, M.-H., Suh, J.-P., Hwang, H.-G., Kim, Y.-G., 2008. Fine mapping of a yield-enhancing QTL cluster associated with transgressive variation in an Oryza sativa x O. rufipogon cross. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 116: 613–622.Google Scholar

  • Zhang, H., Hinze, L.L., Lan, Y., Westbrook, J.K., Hoffmann, W.C., 2012. Discriminating among cotton cultivars with varying leaf characteristics using hyperspectral radiometry. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers 55: 275–280.Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2016-01-07

Accepted: 2016-02-12

Published Online: 2016-02-26

Published in Print: 2016-07-01

Citation Information: Helia, Volume 39, Issue 64, Pages 1–19, ISSN (Online) 2197-0483, ISSN (Print) 1018-1806, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/helia-2016-0003.

Export Citation

©2016 by De Gruyter.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in