Limits...
Growth and physiological responses of isohydric and anisohydric poplars to drought.

Attia Z, Domec JC, Oren R, Way DA, Moshelion M - J. Exp. Bot. (2015)

Bottom Line: Low gs of the isohydric BS under drought reduced CO2 assimilation rates and biomass potential under moderate water stress.Overall, the results indicate three strategies for how closely related biomass species deal with water stress: survival-isohydric (BS), sensitive-anisohydric (BSxSI), and resilience-anisohydric (SI).Implications for woody biomass growth, water-use efficiency, and survival under variable environmental conditions are discussed.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Plant Sciences and Genetics in Agriculture, The Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 76100, Israel.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Mean differences in (A) Ψleaf, (B) Kleaf, (C) Kplant, (D) E, (E) gs, and (F) AN in three poplar genotypes under three SWCg treatments grown in a semi-controlled greenhouse. Data are shown as means ± SE (BS; n = 42), (SI; n = 210), and BSxSI (n = 311). Different letters above the columns indicate significant differences between the three poplar genotypes within an SWCg bin according to Tukey’s HSD test, P < 0.05. Asterisks indicate significant differences in comparisons within a genotype to well-irrigated controls using Dunnett’s method, P < 0.05.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4493787&req=5

Figure 1: Mean differences in (A) Ψleaf, (B) Kleaf, (C) Kplant, (D) E, (E) gs, and (F) AN in three poplar genotypes under three SWCg treatments grown in a semi-controlled greenhouse. Data are shown as means ± SE (BS; n = 42), (SI; n = 210), and BSxSI (n = 311). Different letters above the columns indicate significant differences between the three poplar genotypes within an SWCg bin according to Tukey’s HSD test, P < 0.05. Asterisks indicate significant differences in comparisons within a genotype to well-irrigated controls using Dunnett’s method, P < 0.05.

Mentions: Under well-watered conditions (70–100% SWCg), Ψleaf of the SI was significantly less negative than the BS and BSxSI, but Ψleaf differences between the three genotypes disappeared at 30–49% SWCg (Fig. 1A). Thus, only the BS presented isohydric behaviour, maintaining constant Ψleaf with declining SWCg (Fig. 2A), and the stem water potential (Ψstem) showed the same tendency (Supplementary Fig. 1A). As a consequence, the water potential difference between the stem and the leaf (∆Ψleaf) did not vary between the three genotypes: ∆Ψleaf remained constant as SWCg decreased, generating a constant driving force (of around 0.3MPa) for water flow from the stem to the leaf (Supplementary Fig. 1B). This behaviour was made ​​possible by the fact that the BS sharply reduced E and gs in response to the declining SWCg, while BSxSI and SI kept higher E and gs as water depletion progressed, and were thus insensitive to the declining Ψleaf (Figs 1D,E and 2A,B).


Growth and physiological responses of isohydric and anisohydric poplars to drought.

Attia Z, Domec JC, Oren R, Way DA, Moshelion M - J. Exp. Bot. (2015)

Mean differences in (A) Ψleaf, (B) Kleaf, (C) Kplant, (D) E, (E) gs, and (F) AN in three poplar genotypes under three SWCg treatments grown in a semi-controlled greenhouse. Data are shown as means ± SE (BS; n = 42), (SI; n = 210), and BSxSI (n = 311). Different letters above the columns indicate significant differences between the three poplar genotypes within an SWCg bin according to Tukey’s HSD test, P < 0.05. Asterisks indicate significant differences in comparisons within a genotype to well-irrigated controls using Dunnett’s method, P < 0.05.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4493787&req=5

Figure 1: Mean differences in (A) Ψleaf, (B) Kleaf, (C) Kplant, (D) E, (E) gs, and (F) AN in three poplar genotypes under three SWCg treatments grown in a semi-controlled greenhouse. Data are shown as means ± SE (BS; n = 42), (SI; n = 210), and BSxSI (n = 311). Different letters above the columns indicate significant differences between the three poplar genotypes within an SWCg bin according to Tukey’s HSD test, P < 0.05. Asterisks indicate significant differences in comparisons within a genotype to well-irrigated controls using Dunnett’s method, P < 0.05.
Mentions: Under well-watered conditions (70–100% SWCg), Ψleaf of the SI was significantly less negative than the BS and BSxSI, but Ψleaf differences between the three genotypes disappeared at 30–49% SWCg (Fig. 1A). Thus, only the BS presented isohydric behaviour, maintaining constant Ψleaf with declining SWCg (Fig. 2A), and the stem water potential (Ψstem) showed the same tendency (Supplementary Fig. 1A). As a consequence, the water potential difference between the stem and the leaf (∆Ψleaf) did not vary between the three genotypes: ∆Ψleaf remained constant as SWCg decreased, generating a constant driving force (of around 0.3MPa) for water flow from the stem to the leaf (Supplementary Fig. 1B). This behaviour was made ​​possible by the fact that the BS sharply reduced E and gs in response to the declining SWCg, while BSxSI and SI kept higher E and gs as water depletion progressed, and were thus insensitive to the declining Ψleaf (Figs 1D,E and 2A,B).

Bottom Line: Low gs of the isohydric BS under drought reduced CO2 assimilation rates and biomass potential under moderate water stress.Overall, the results indicate three strategies for how closely related biomass species deal with water stress: survival-isohydric (BS), sensitive-anisohydric (BSxSI), and resilience-anisohydric (SI).Implications for woody biomass growth, water-use efficiency, and survival under variable environmental conditions are discussed.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute of Plant Sciences and Genetics in Agriculture, The Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 76100, Israel.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus