Drought responses in Coffea arabica as affected by genotype and phenophase. I – leaf distribution and branching

In Coffea arabica, there is a small genetic distance between wild and bred genotypes. However, coffee genotypes express differential acclimation to multiple drought cycles, allowing them to successfully deal with water-limiting conditions. We hypothesized that bred coffee cultivars have a plant structure less sensitive to drought than wild genotypes. Plant and leaf architecture were analyzed over the coffee strata of two cultivars (Iapar 59 and Catuaí 99) and two wild Ethiopia accessions (‘E083’ and ‘E027’) grown under rainfed conditions and irrigation. During two consecutive productive years, evaluations were taken at leaf and berry expansion (BE1 and BE2) and harvest (BH1 and BH2) phenophases. The plant canopy was divided into up to four strata of 40 cm of thickness. Topological and geometric coding of coffee trees was performed in three botanical scales – metamers, branches, and plants in multiscale tree graphs (MTGs), following the VPlants modeling platform. Leaf and branch area per plant increased with tree structure development, being always significantly higher in irrigated than in rainfed plants over all phenophases. The individual leaf area was the least sensitive to water regime in Catuaí 99, while the 2nd order axis elevation – angle in relation to horizontal plane, ranging from 0° to 90° – of bred cultivars was less sensitive to drought than in ‘E083’. This finding partially corroborated our hypothesis that orchestrated reprograming of leaf/branch responses over the vertical plant profile were less sensitive to water availability in cultivars than in wild accessions. Leaves of 2nd to 4th-order branching were roughly plagiophile, while the 1st-order leaves were classified as extremophiles. When the coffee leaves were planophile, irrespective of genotype, this pattern was found at the lowest, 1st plant stratum, and the newest developed 4th stratum. Such responses were not obligatorily related to water regime, similar to branch elevation – with exception of ‘E083’, very sensitive to drought. Taken together, our data suggest that the leaf and branch elevations in C. arabica were more influenced by light distribution through the canopy profile – i.e., self-shading – than by water availability.