000872881 001__ 872881
000872881 005__ 20210130004321.0
000872881 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.3390/agronomy10010134
000872881 0247_ $$2Handle$$a2128/23963
000872881 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:74221054
000872881 0247_ $$2WOS$$aWOS:000513232600134
000872881 037__ $$aFZJ-2020-00346
000872881 041__ $$aEnglish
000872881 082__ $$a640
000872881 1001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aBoudiar, Ridha$$b0
000872881 245__ $$aEffects of Low Water Availability on Root Placement and Shoot Development in Landraces and Modern Barley Cultivars
000872881 260__ $$aBasel$$bMDPI$$c2020
000872881 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000872881 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000872881 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1579675157_11356
000872881 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000872881 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000872881 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000872881 520__ $$aEarly vigor has been proposed as a favorable trait for cereals grown in drought-prone environments. This research aimed at characterizing early stage shoot and root growth of three Spanish barley landraces compared with three modern cultivars. Genotypes were grown in an automated phenotyping platform, GrowScreen-Rhizo, under well-watered and drought conditions. Seminal and lateral root length, root system width and depth were recorded automatically during the experiment. Drought induced greater growth reduction in shoots (43% dry weight reduction) than in roots (23% dry weight). Genotypic differences were larger under no stress, partly due to a more profuse growth of landraces in this treatment. Accession SBCC146 was the most vigorous for shoot growth, whereas SBCC073 diverted more assimilates to root growth. Among cultivars, Cierzo was the most vigorous one and Scarlett had the least root dry weight of all genotypes, under both conditions. Root growth was redirected to lateral roots when seminal roots could not progress further in dry soil. This study reveals the presence of genetic diversity in dynamics of early growth of barley. The different patterns of growth observed for SBCC073 and SBCC146 should be explored further, to test if they affect field performance of barley in drought-prone environments
000872881 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-582$$a582 - Plant Science (POF3-582)$$cPOF3-582$$fPOF III$$x0
000872881 536__ $$0G:(EU-Grant)284443$$aEPPN - European Plant Phenotyping Network (284443)$$c284443$$fFP7-INFRASTRUCTURES-2011-1$$x1
000872881 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef
000872881 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aCasas, Ana M.$$b1
000872881 7001_ $$00000-0001-8980-3034$$aGioia, Tania$$b2
000872881 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)143649$$aFiorani, Fabio$$b3
000872881 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)129373$$aNagel, Kerstin A.$$b4
000872881 7001_ $$00000-0003-2938-1719$$aIgartua, Ernesto$$b5$$eCorresponding author
000872881 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2607043-1$$a10.3390/agronomy10010134$$gVol. 10, no. 1, p. 134 -$$n1$$p134 -$$tAgronomy$$v10$$x2073-4395$$y2020
000872881 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/872881/files/agronomy-10-00134.pdf$$yOpenAccess
000872881 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/872881/files/agronomy-10-00134.pdf?subformat=pdfa$$xpdfa$$yOpenAccess
000872881 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:872881$$pdnbdelivery$$pec_fundedresources$$pVDB$$pdriver$$popen_access$$popenaire
000872881 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)143649$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b3$$kFZJ
000872881 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)129373$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b4$$kFZJ
000872881 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-582$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-580$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-500$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bKey Technologies$$lKey Technologies for the Bioeconomy$$vPlant Science$$x0
000872881 9141_ $$y2020
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS
000872881 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBY4$$2HGFVOC$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bAGRONOMY-BASEL : 2017
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0111$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0510$$2StatID$$aOpenAccess
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Blind peer review
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1060$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0310$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bNCBI Molecular Biology Database
000872881 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List
000872881 920__ $$lyes
000872881 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-2-20101118$$kIBG-2$$lPflanzenwissenschaften$$x0
000872881 980__ $$ajournal
000872881 980__ $$aVDB
000872881 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000872881 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)IBG-2-20101118
000872881 9801_ $$aFullTexts