Survival adaptations of threeEuphorbia spp. in arid ecosystem

  • Sudeep Kumar
  • D. N. Sen


Three species ofEuphorbia (E. granulata, E. prostrata andE. hirta) exhibited both morphological and physiological adaptations in dry environmental conditions. High bound water, thick cuticle, dense hair covering and low stomatal index are some of the survival adaptations they developed under water stress conditions of the Indian arid zone.


Euphorbia granulata E. prostrata E. hirta Leaf area Number of hairs Thickness of cuticle Stomatal index Relative water content Water deficit Bound water Plant water content and Soil moisture content 

Literature Cited

  1. Bannister P. (1964a): The water relations of certain heath plants with reference to their ecological amplitude. II. Field studies.—J. Ecol., Oxford, 52: 481–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bannister P. (1964b): The water relations of certain heath plants with reference to their ecological amplitude. III. Experimental studies; General conclusion.—J. Ecol., Oxford, 52: 499–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hsiao T. C. (1973): Plant responses to water stress.—Ann. Rev. Pl. Physiol., Palo Alto (California), 24: 519–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Iljin W. S. (1957): Drought resistance in plants and physiological process.—Ann. Rev. Pl. Physiol., Palo Alto (California), 8: 257–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jha P. K. etSen D. N. (1980): Drought avoidance byCyperus rotundus.—Folia Geobot. Phytotax., Praha, 15: 387–394.Google Scholar
  6. Jha P. K. etSen D. N. (1982): Adaptation and survival strategies inCyperus rotundus L.— 69th Indian Sci. Cong., Mysore, p.—192.Google Scholar
  7. Lange O. L., Kappen L. etSchulze E. D. (eds.) (1976): Water and plant life—problems and modern approaches.—Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Levitt J. (1956) Significance of hydration to the state of protoplasm. In: Encyclopaedia of plant physiology III. (ed.)W. Ruhland, Berlin, pp. 650–651.Google Scholar
  9. Martin E. V. (1943): Studies of evaporation and transpiration under controlled conditions.— Carnegie Institution Publication, Washington, D. C., 550: 48.Google Scholar
  10. Maximov N. A. (1929): The plant in relation to water.—London.Google Scholar
  11. Mathur T. etSen D. N. (1972): Ecology of Indian desert VIII; on the water relations and assimilate balance of some dssert plants.—Ann. Arid Zone, Jodhpur (India), 2: 18–30.Google Scholar
  12. Migahid A. M. (1944): Binding of water in xerophytes and its relation to osmotic pressure.—Bull. Fac. Sci. Fouad I. Univ. Cairo, 25: 81–93.Google Scholar
  13. Schonbeck M. W. etNorton T. A. (1979): An investigation of drought avoidance in intertidal algae.—Bot. Marina, New York, 22: 133–144.Google Scholar
  14. Sen D. N. (1972): Water relations of a psammophyte—Convolvulus microphyllus Sieb. ex.Spreng. In: Ecophysiological Foundation of Ecosystems Productivity in Arid zone.—International Symposium USSR, Moscow, pp. 79–83.Google Scholar
  15. Sen D. N. (1973): Ecology of Indian desert III: Survival adaptations of vegetation in dry environment. —Vegetatio, Amsterdam, 27: 201–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sen D N. (1977): Ecophysiological studies on weeds of cultivated fields with special reference to bajra (Pennisetum typhoideum) (Rich.) and til (Sesamum indicum Linn.) crops. IIIrd Progress Report, US PL-480 Project, Univ. of Jodhpur, Jodhpur.Google Scholar
  17. Sen D. N. (1978): Concepts in Indian ecology.—Jullundur (India).Google Scholar
  18. Sen D. N. etBhandari M. C. (1975): On the ecology of a perennial cucurbit in the arid zone—Citrullus colocynthis (Linn.) Schard.—Inter. J. Biometeor., Lisse (Netherland), 18 (2): 113–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sen D. N. etBhandari M. C. (1978): Ecology and water relations of twoCitrullus spp. in Indian arid zone.—Environ. Physiol. Ecol. Plants, (eds.)D. N. Sen etR. P. Bansal, Bishen Singh M. Pal Singh, New Delhi (India), pp 203–208.Google Scholar
  20. Sen D. N., Bohra P. N. etBhati P. R. (1979): Water regimes and drought tolerence of three arid zone weeds.—J. Indian Bot. Soc., Lucknow, 58: 120–128.Google Scholar
  21. Sen D. N. etChawan D. D. (1972): LeaflessEuphorbia on Rajasthan (India) rocks. IV. Water relations of seedlings and adult plants.—Vegetatio, Amsterdam, 24: 193–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shreve F. (1934): The problems of the desert.—Sci. Mon. March, Tucson, pp 199–209.Google Scholar
  23. Slatyer R. O. (1965): Efficiency of water utilization by arid zone vegetation.—Ann. Arid Zone, Jodhpur (India), 3: 1–12.Google Scholar
  24. Stocker O. (1929): Das Wasserdefizit von Gefässpflanzen in verschiedenen Klimazonen.— Planta, Berlin, 7: 382–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vadia Y., Raney F. C. etHagen R. M. (1961): Plant water deficit and physiological processes. —Ann. Rev. Plant. Physiol., Palo Alto (California), 12: 265–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vogel S. (1968): “Sun leaves” and “Shade leaves” differences in convective heat dissipation.— Ecology, Durham, 49: 1203–1204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Weatherley P. E. (1950): Studies in the water relations of the cotton plant. I. The field measurements of water deficits in leaves.—New Phytol., London, 49: 81–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yapp R. H. (1909): On stratification in the vegetation of marsh and its relation to evaporation and temperature.—Ann. Bot., London, 23: 275–319.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sudeep Kumar
    • 1
  • D. N. Sen
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Plant Ecology, Department of BotanyUniversity of JodhpurJodhpurIndia

Personalised recommendations