Ecological Adaptations of Kalancho

daigremontiana, Iris pseudacorus and Vicia

fabia to Drought

Introduction
Drought has adverse physiological effects for all plants. A combination of lack of
water and stress response result in reduced growth, increased oxidative damage,
and reduced metabolic efficiency (Farooq, 2009). It is therefore in a plants best
interests to be able to resist the effects of drought as effectively as possible,
especially those that inhabit areas likely to suffer from regular water shortage.

Xerophytes are plants that are specifically adapted to arid environments with
little rainfall. Common among them are the succulents; plants that have
developed thick stems and leaves in order to store water. Kalancho
daigremontiana is one such plant; also known as the Mexican hat plant, K.
daigremontiana is native to the arid regions in southwest Madagascar, sheltered
from the comparatively humid Indian Ocean.

Hydrophytes, on the other hand, are adapted to an abundance of water. Like
Xerophytes, Hydrophyte is a general term that covers plants ranging from almost
completely submerge water lilies to shore dwelling grasses. Iris pseudacorus is a
particularly successful variety of hydrophyte, adapted to river banks and present
across Europe, Eastern Asia and North Africa (Sutherland, 1990).

Existing as a middle ground between the two are the mesophytes. Neither
particularly adapted to wet nor dry conditions, mesophytes tend to struggle
under drought conditions, as their characteristic broad, flat leaves lose water
easily. Vicia fabia is a mesophyte native to North Africa and southern Asia, and is
grown as a crop across much of the world.

In this study, we aim to investigate the ability of the three plant species
mentioned above to withstand drought conditions, namely by examining their
ability to retain water over a period of time.

Materials and methods
Six plants each of Iris pseudacorus, Kalancho daigremontiana and Vicia faba
were grown to maturity under identical conditions, with each plant being
watered daily. Three plants of each species were then separated, and were not
given any further water for seven days, whilst the rest continued on daily
watering. All other variables (humidity, light exposure, etc.) were maintained.
At the end of the seven days, five 10mm discs were punched from the leaves of
each plant. Each set of five discs were weighed together and their weights
recorded as their fresh weight (Wf), and the mean calculated.
Each set of five discs was then laid on water in a closed petri dish for 45 minutes,
in order to saturate the tissues to their maximum possible water content. At the
end of the 45 minutes, the discs were removed, lightly padded dry to remove
surface water, and reweighed. This data was recorded as their turgid weight
(Wt), and also averaged.
Finally, the two data values for each sample were used to calculate the leafs
percentage relative water content (%RWC) using the formula below.
Wf
%RWC= ---- x 100
Wt
Results

Weights (g) of leaf disc samples
Daily watering Drought
Iris Vicia Kalancho Iris Vicia Kalancho
Wf Wt Wf Wt Wf Wt Wf Wt Wf Wt Wf Wt
0.12
3
0.14
2
0.08
2
0.11
9
0.52
4
0.52
6
0.08
8
0.12
3
0.08
2
0.12
5
0.39
6
0.47
4
0.11
9
0.15
6
0.09
3
0.13
2
0.54
6
0.55
1
0.08
4
0.11
1
0.08
1
0.15
1
0.41
4
0.52
5
0.12
9
0.15
5
0.10
3
0.12
2
0.52
1
0.54
3
0.14
8
0.21
6
0.07
3
0.11
3
0.30
7
0.41
2
Averag
e
weight
0.12
4
0.15
1
0.09
3
0.12
4
0.53
0
0.54
0
0.10
7
0.15
0
0.07
9
0.13
0
0.37
2
0.47
0
%
RWC
82.0 74.6 98.2 71.9 61.3 79.0
Figure 1: a table describing the weights of leaf disc samples, and the relative
water content percentages calculated from them.

Discussion
From the results, it appears that Kalancho had the greatest variation in water
content between the drought and watered conditions. This result is surprising, as
Kalancho is especially adapted to the dry climate of the Madagascan southwest
and so would be expected to be capable of greater water retention than the other
species. On the other hand, whilst Kalancho had the greatest difference in water
retention, it did have the highest percentage relative water content of all the
plants in both the drought and daily watering conditions. This suggests that the
plant relies mainly on large stored reserves of water to survive drought, rather
than reducing the rate of water loss. This makes sense in the context of the
Madagascan seasonal pattern, where there is an annual wet season. This
predictable pattern means the plant does not need to invest as much in efficient
usage of water, and instead focus on storing as much water as possible, as it can
rely on replenishing itself when the monsoons arrive. This strategy would be
largely facilitated by the thick, fleshy leaves the plant possesses, allowing for
large amounts of water to be stored in the tissue.

Iris pseudacorus also surprised with the lowest level of variation. As a
hydrophyte, it would be easy to expect Iris to survive poorly under drought
conditions due to its usual habitat being highly water saturated
1
. This hardiness
may be a survival strategy against unexpected drops in water levels, especially in
the dryer regions the plant inhabits. Unlike Kalancho, which has a reliable, if
intermittent water supply, the rivers and streams on which Iris grows can be
subject to less predictable changes, such as upstream blockages or changes in
course, so a survival strategy tailored toward long term water retention is a
more viable option. Observations of the plant suggest that the stiff, waxy leaves
may go some ways to preventing loss of water through evaporation.

Of the three plants, Vicia had the lowest relative water content under both
conditions. As the only plant grown for food of the three species, it is likely that
generations of selective breeding have focused mostly on generating specimens
that produce the largest yield of crops. Whilst this would normally have severe
adverse effects on the survivability of this species in the wild, the use of human
activities such as irrigation would be able to mitigate these issues, even in the
face of adverse climatic conditions.

Reviewing the methodology, greater precaution could have been taken to
quantify and standardise the amount of water given to each plant, in order to
ensure accurate representation of the plants ability to retain water.
Furthermore, since samples were only taken from one leaf per plant, it is
possible (although unlikely) that this leaf was unrepresentative of the plant as a
whole, and had anomalously high or low water retention. A possible way to
prevent this could be taking samples from every leaf, rather than just one.

References
M. Farooq, A. Wahid, N. Kobayashi, D. Fujita, S. M. A. Basra (2009): Plant
Drought Stress: Effects, Mechanisms and Management. Sustainable Agriculture,
pages 153-188
W.J. Sutherland (1990): Biological Flora of the British Isles. Journal of Ecology,
volume 78, pages 833-848
1 Royal Horticultural Society website, Available:
http://apps.rhs.org.uk/plantselector/plant?plantid=3237. Accessed 1st April
2014.