Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct 26;10:18221. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-75212-4

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Physiological evaluation of E. grandis seedlings subjected to a rapid drought in a growth chamber. (a) Watering regime for the water deficit experiment. During normal watering and recovery plants were watered to field capacity; during drought, the watering was suspended for 10 days (DAT, days after transplantation). (b) Relative water content (RWC) of individual leaves before and during the drought stress, and 14 days into the recovery period (DAT 45, 55, and 69, respectively). (c and d) Growth parameters, computed upon harvesting the plants at the end of the experiment, for well-watered plants and plants subjected to drought and recovery. (c) Total leaf area. (d) Growth index calculated by subtracting the initial volume index (the product of stem height, h and the square of the collar diameter, d2) from the final volume index for each plant. Dotted lines indicate differences in mean growth index increment between inoculated plants and the non-inoculated controls for the same water condition. Data shown are the means, n = 8, error bars indicate SEM. Different letters indicate statistically significant differences in a two-way ANOVA (P-value < 0.05). Uppercase letters indicate the irrigation factor (well watered or drought + recovery). Lowercase letters indicate the interaction between inoculation (non-inoculated, N33 or M25) and irrigation factors. The inoculation factor was not significant in all cases.