Further Effects of Light Intensity, Carbon Dioxide Concentration, and Day Temperature on the Growth of Chrysanthemum morifolium cv. Bright Golden Anne in Controlled Environments

In earlier work the effects of light intensity over the range31 to 250 J cm^–2 day^–1 and carbon dioxide concentrationfrom 325 to 900 ppm with 8-h days at 18.3 °C and 16-h nightsat 15.6 °C were described. The present paper is concernedwith three further experiments with light levels up to 375 Jcm^–2 day^–1 (which corresponds to the daily totalin a glasshouse in southern England in early May or August andthe intensity is approximately that of mid-winter sunshine),carbon dioxide concentration up to 1500 ppm, and day temperaturesof 18.3 to 29.4 °C. Final plant weight was increased by light over the range 125–375J cm^–2 day^–1 and by carbon dioxide over the range325–900 ppm, with positive interaction between them; thisinteraction was increased by raising the temperature to 23.9°C and somewhat more at 29.4 °C day temperature. Leaf-arearatio and specific leaf area were reduced by increasing eitherlight or carbon dioxide but there was little effect of temperature.Leaf-weight ratios were uniform within experiments but therewere small consistent differences between one experiment andthe other two which also affected leaf-area ratios. Mean unit leaf rate was scarcely affected by day temperatureover the range investigated. There were the usual increasesdue to increased light and carbon dioxide concentration anda consistent difference in absolute value between one experimentand the other two. These differences in mean unit leaf rateare illustrated in detail in the ontogenetic trend of unit leafrate and plant size. Lower unit leaf rates were to a considerableextent compensated for by increased leaf-area ratios in theusual way. Despite the substantial differences in day temperature the specificwater contents (g water g dry weight^–1) differed little,showing in the majority of cases higher values in the highertemperature for otherwise similar treatment combinations. Flower development was somewhat delayed at 23.9 °C day temperature,and substantially so at 29.4 °C. Lateral branch length wasincreased at 23.9 °C and excessively so at 29.4 °C.This reveals quite clearly that a temperature optimum for vegetativegrowth may not be the optimum for flowering performance norproduce a desirable plant shape. Despite the marked effects of temperature on rate of flowerdevelopment, the relationship between flower development andthe ratio of flower to total weight was the same for all treatmentcombinations in all three experiments and coincident with thatreported earlier. Gasometric determinations indicated that respiratory loss bythe whole plant was a smaller proportion of net photosyntheticgain at a temperature of 29.4 °C than at 18.3 °C andwas likewise a smaller proportion at 1500 ppm carbon dioxidethan at 325 ppm. If photorespiration of leaves is assumed tobe as great as their dark respiration, the respiratory lossesare in the range of 31–50 per cent of the gross gain.Greater rates of photorespiration would increase the proportionaterespiratory loss.