MAGNETISNI AND PLANT GROWTII

II. EFFECT O,N ROOT GROWfiI OF CEREALS

U. J. PrrruaN
Research Statiotz, Canada Department of Agri'culture, Lethbridge, Albetta
Received FebruarY 28, 1964
ABSTRACT
Most roots of Kharkov 22 M.C., Vakka, Jones Fife-, Norin 62, Werla, .and
Capelle winter wheats (Triticum iestiaum L.l and of Chinook spring wheat
(Triticum destililm L,) orientated themseives in a pJane approximately p.arallel
to tne tt"iirontal component of the geomagneric field when grorvn in stadonary
pots at Lethbridge, Alta. Similarly, the. ioots of Kharkov 22 M'C' grown at
St. John's, Nfld.i orientated themsLlves in approximqrely this same .plane. ln
.."ir*t,in" i""ir "t..--on fall rye (Secal'e'cereale
-;n" tbot. of winter
L.,1'were omni-directional.
and spring wheats, o''ts (Attena,sativa L,), and fall.rye
erown in a magneio-klinostar at"Lethbridge orientated themselves in^a..plane
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from pubs.aic.ca by 189.228.31.153 on 04/19/15

ippi."i-"*tv plialleLto the lines of force'of an introduced magnetic.field that

iitersected the'horizontal component of the geomagnetic field- at right angles.
A critical level of masnctic intensiry may be necessary before the troplsm
occurs. This level probibly differs beiween species and varieties'
INTRODUCTION
In a concise literature review Larsen ( 3 ) indicates that troPisms in plant
roots have been studied since 1703, when Dodart investigated tlie direction of
root and shoot growth on beans. F{oweveL, it was not until 1960 that a plant-
growth respon;e in cress roots (Lepiditnn sati.l'wm L.) was lecognized and
Ealled magnetotropism by Audus (f). Schreiber (7) reported.that the two
cleases an? associated fe'eder loots of sugal beets grown in Manitoba were
For personal use only.

orientated in an east-west direction, but-he failed to name the stimulus re-

soonsible for the tropism. Pittman (4) concluded that the lateral roots of
fiharkov 22 M.C. winter wheat tend to orientate themselves in a general north-
south direction and that the lesponse is magnetotropic or even geomagneto-
rropic. With radioacrive traceri _Woolley and Pittman (8) -found .that. phos-
ph6rus uDtake was sleater from soil on the nofth and south sides of Kharkov 22
M.C. otrir,t than fiom soil on the east or west sides. Pittman (5, 6) showed
that s'peed of germination and growth of some cereals is affected by seed
orientition relaiive to the lines ofTorce in a magnetic field. His results suPPort
similar evidence given by Krylov and Tarakanova (2).
The experiments reported herein wele ca1.1.ied out (d) to determine if the
maqnetotroprsm notcd i'4) occurs in cereals other than Kharkov 22 \l'C' and
ui fi"r.iorrr'other rhan Lethbridge, Alta., and (b) to investigate the effects of
an introduced magnetic stimulus on root growth'
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The efiect of geomagnetic and introduced magnetic stim_uli on loot glowth
of cereals was stuiied atiethbridge, Alta., and Stl John's, Nfld.
G eo tn a gn' e ti c S ti.nru.Xu s

At Lethbridge, where compass_ declination was 20"32'E., the direction of

root growth of "cereals that rdmained stationary or were rotated daily 90"
horiz|ntally clockwise was studied by the merhod of Pittman (4) except as
nored.l The followins cereals \Mere used: Triticurn aestil"wm L., winter var.
Kharkov 22 M.C1 Va[ka, Jones Fife, Norin 62, Werla, and Capelle; summer
S".a orientation was random except that the embryo end was placed dorvnward.
Can. I, Plmt Sci. Vol. 44 (1964)
283
 284 O{NADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE lVol. 44

ACRYLIC PLASIIC
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from pubs.aic.ca by 189.228.31.153 on 04/19/15

Frc. 1. Diagram of the magneto-klinostat.

For personal use only.

var. Chinook; and Secale cerecle I-., var. common fall. At St. John's, rvhere
compass declination was 28"30'1v., only Kharkov zz M.c. was used. All tests
were replicated four to six times and r.vere conducted in s'reenhouses rvhere
randoini.l-occurring introduced magnetic fields r,vere undeteZtable with a com-
pass'
.,The temperiture trrs rpproiin-rately 65oF, and natural light condirions
Prevxllecl.
Direction of roor growth on each plant was described by the formula:
D:toO-5((dn+ds)/9)
where D :
growth direction,
d,n and ds : deviation in degrees from true north and true south,
respectively
where ,oot, -.r. omni-directional or where no Dredominant direction
of,gro'uvth could be_detecred because of a single root oimultiple roots, rhe D
value became 50. where the roots all greu,' n"orth and sourh D : 10o and east
andwestD=0.
Introduced Ma:gnetic Stindus
A non-ferrous klinostat (Fig. t) at Lethbridge lvas used to rotate planrs
in a. vertical plane at right anglel to antl r5 in. frJm the mid-point of a 47-in.
horizontal electromagnit that"developed approximately 300 garlss. The magnet
was orientated wirh its, long axis eOd to th6 horizontal com[onent of the
[eo-
"the
llagnetic field, which has a.strength oJ about.16 gauss at Lethbridge.
klinostat was driven at a uniform-speed of 20 revolirions per hour b! a small
electric motor placed l5 ft arvay tb nrinimize interference with the hagnetic
fields around the klinostat. Rahdomly-occulring introduced magnetic"fields
w-ere undetectable with a compass and #ere, thereiore, assumed to b"e negligible.
 Mey 19641 PITTMAN-MAGNETISM AND PLANT GROIVTH. II 285

After the pots were seeded as previously described, !h"y.were phced in the
activated magneto-klinosrat and'watered'and kept moist with taP water. The
Ioots were e"xamined after 10 days and their D values calculatbd. Roots on
the following cereals were examined: Kharkov 22 M.C. winter wheat, Chinook
spring wheai, common faTl rye, Eagle oats (Aaena satitsa L.), and Compana
barley (Hordeunt vwlgare L.).
Kharkov 22 M.C. was also used to test the effect of vertical rotation only
(without the magnet activated) and of reversing the polarity of the elecffo-
magnet on the horizontal direction of root growth.
RESULTS
Geomagtetic Stitmtlus
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from pubs.aic.ca by 189.228.31.153 on 04/19/15

All wheat plants (Triti.cum spp.) that remained stationary after planting
had relatively high D values. This-indicates a stfong tendency for their roots
to be orient'ated"in a seneral north-south direction-(Table t)' With minor
exceptions. where roof"growth was orientated in a general north-south direc-
tionf deviation \vas to t[e east of true north at Lethbridge and to the r'vest at
St. John's. The direction of root growth at the two locations vas aPPlox-f
mately the same relative to the horizbntal component of the geomagnetic field.
Planti that we-re rotated 90" daily had D values that showei theiiroots rvere
omni-directional (Table 1). The roots on many of these rotated plants
orientated themselves in a spiral direction opposite to the direction of rotation.
For personal use only.

. Root growth of common fall rye failed to exhibit any discernible direc-
tronalrsm.
Intro duc e d Magnetic Stinntlus
I(harkov 22 M.C. grown on the klinostat without the magnet activated
had relatively highD vilues. This indicates a strong tendency for their roots
to be orientated"in a general north-south direction*(Table 2) similar to'that
normally obtained on-stationary plants grown in the greenhouse (Table 1)-
ConverJely, all plants grown oir tn. kfiriostat with thJmagnet activated had
relativelv io- d valuei This indicates that their roots oriintated themselves
approximately parallel to the long axis of the magnet and hence parallel to its
mdgnetic fieid'at the mid-point-between the p6les. The roots of Chinook

fu"
Av. Df valyes of
'oots grown ln pots
t
Site Cereal Stationary Rotated ,st value

Lethbridge Kharkov 22 M.C. winter wheat / J.{t 49.6 4.0 6.4*

Vakka winter wheat 77.r 3.8 7.9*
,a*
Tones Fife winter wheat 72.1 49.6 J.l LL
-Norin
62 winter wheat 78.3 50.0 3.8 7.4*
Werla winter wheat 77.r +J. I 4.7 7.0*
Capelle winter wheat 82.r 50.4 4.2 7.6"
Chinook spring wheat 50.0 3.1 7.8*
Common fall rye 54.4 49.1 1.5 3.6

St. Tohn's Kharkov 22 M.C. winter wheat 77.2 40.0 0.9 39.9t+
x' ** indicate significance at the 0.05 and O.0l levels, respectively.
to - rco:i(Ei+aiyq) *h..e dn aid ds - deviaiion in degrees from true north and true south, respectivelv.
 286 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE lVol. 44

Teslp 2, Root cnorvtn pATTERNS oF cEREArs cRowN rN A MAGNETo-KLrNosrAT

er LBrtsnrocB. Ar,re.

Electromagnet
Av. Dt value
Cereal Active Inactive of roots
Kharkov 22 M.C. winter wheat 88.2
Kharkov 22 M.C. winter wheat X 5.3
Kharkov 22 M.C. winter wheat t.u
Chinook sprine wheat 10.7
Easle oats 10.0
Coirmon fall rve X 18.2
Compana barlev 18.2
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from pubs.aic.ca by 189.228.31.153 on 04/19/15

tD - .100-5((dz*ds)/9) where d.n and ds - deviation in degrees from true north and true south, respectively.
{rolarlty ot electromagnet
reversed after 48 hours,

wheat usually orienfated themselves more closelv Darallel to the introduced

magnetic field than did those of the other cereali. '(R D value of 12 would
indicate pe-rfect alignment with the introduced magnetic field.) Reversing the
polarity bf the eleitromagnet during the experim"ent had no visible effeJt on
root orienration or directibn of srowth.
Although the roots of co-Lon fall rye and Compan a barley orientated
themselves i'pproximately parallel to the inlroduced magnetic fielh, there was
more. variation and greatei digression from the parallel- plane than for roots
For personal use only.

of winter and spring*wheats.

These resurrs .""o,"f[1u;filiX?'f;iJ:o:.tltJi"" (4) that mosr winrer

wheat roots orientate themselves in a general north-south direction
if the plants
are not moved. The fact that the roits of winter wheat grown at Leth6ridse
(declination 2A"32'E.) and that grorvn at St. John's (de-Iination 28.30, W:)
all orientated themselves approximlately parallel to the horizontal component of
-rfiose
the geomagnetic field at locatiirni supports the hypothesis thit the re-
sPonse is magnetotropic. Perfect alignmenr with the horizontal component
oT the geoma'gnetic 6eld would be ifrdicated by D : 88 at Lethbridge and
D:85-at St. iohn's.
The factihat the roots of all rvinter wheat varieties exhibit directionalism
about equally suggests an inherent factor for directionalism common to rhose
varieties. Similaiiy, since the roots of chinook spring wheat also grew norrh
and south, it appeirs that spring varieties may bihav"e as do wintir varieties,
but more experiments are needed to confirm this.
Why root growth appears to respond to the horizontal and not (or to a
.t5 the veriical .ornpo.t'.ttt of the geomagnetic field ar rhe resr
Iesser. defuree)
locations remains unanswered,
Evidence that the stimulus associated with the observed directionalism in
cereal roots is magnetic was supplied from plants gro\4/n on the klinostat.
vertical rotation only, on the klinostat. did not visiblv alter the normal
growth. pafgln of- wintei whear roots, but subjecting them to an introduced
magnetic-field did alter this patr€rn. Similariy, th6 roots of other cereals
orientated themselves approximately parallel to ihe introduced magnetic field,
whereas they grew in a north-soirtli direction or showed no diiectionalism
 May 19641 PITTIMAN-MAGNETISM AND PLANT GROIVTH. II 287

when grown away from the introduced fiel_d, It is pertinent that these re-
,pottt.ioc"urred in an introduced magnetic field that was much stronger than'
#d op.rrr"d horizontally at right u.r[l.r to, the horizontal componeit of the
geomagnetic field.
The fact that the roots of rye showed directionalism when subfected to
the introduced magnetic field arid not otherwise suggests a critical level of
-below r.vhich no response or tropism occufs. This level
magnetic intensity
probably differs between species and varieties.
It was noted that the primary lateral roots of winter wheats often grow
in a spiral pattem if the piants ire turned clockwise horizontally 90' .daily.
This irggests the existenc^e of a 'north-seeking factor' in one primary latelal
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from pubs.aic.ca by 189.228.31.153 on 04/19/15

root tip;d a 'south-seeking factor' in the opp-osite one. Failure of the visible
roorc to alter their directiois of growth whbn the polarity of the magnet \{'as
reversed fails to verify such a hlpothesis. Further research is required.
REFERENCES
l. Auous, L. 1960. Magnetotropism: A new -plant-growth response. Nature,.lB5, 132.
J.
z. Klyrov, A. V., and G. Al TenexeNove. 1960. Magiretotropism of plants and its nature.
Plant Physiol. 7, 156-760. (Translation
.An from Fiziologiya Rastenii.)
3, Lensex, P. tb6z. deotropism. introduction. Encyilbpedia of Plant Physiol. l7
(2), 3+7r.
4. Prrrnrex, U, J. 1962. Growth reaction and magnetotropism in roots of winter wheat
(Kharkov 22 M.C.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 42, +30436.
5. Pnrntex, U. J. 1963. Effects oi magnetism on'seedling growth of cereal plants. Bio-
For personal use only.

medical Sci. Inst. Vol. 1. Plenum Press, New York.

6. PrrruaN, U. J. 1963. Magnetism and plant grorvth. I. Effect on germination and early
growth of cereal seeds. Can. J. Plant Sci. 43, 513-518.
7. SorneJeER, K. 1958. An unusual tiopism of feeder roots in sugar beets and its possible
effecc on fertilizer response. Can, J. Planc Sci. 38, 124.
8. Woor,r-Bv. D. G.. and U. T. Prrruew. 1963, Unpublished data.