Literature DB >> 22491524

Co-optimal distribution of leaf nitrogen and hydraulic conductance in plant canopies.

Mikko S Peltoniemi1, Remko A Duursma, Belinda E Medlyn.   

Abstract

Leaf properties vary significantly within plant canopies, due to the strong gradient in light availability through the canopy, and the need for plants to use resources efficiently. At high light, photosynthesis is maximized when leaves have a high nitrogen content and water supply, whereas at low light leaves have a lower requirement for both nitrogen and water. Studies of the distribution of leaf nitrogen (N) within canopies have shown that, if water supply is ignored, the optimal distribution is that where N is proportional to light, but that the gradient of N in real canopies is shallower than the optimal distribution. We extend this work by considering the optimal co-allocation of nitrogen and water supply within plant canopies. We developed a simple 'toy' two-leaf canopy model and optimized the distribution of N and hydraulic conductance (K) between the two leaves. We asked whether hydraulic constraints to water supply can explain shallow N gradients in canopies. We found that the optimal N distribution within plant canopies is proportional to the light distribution only if hydraulic conductance, K, is also optimally distributed. The optimal distribution of K is that where K and N are both proportional to incident light, such that optimal K is highest to the upper canopy. If the plant is constrained in its ability to construct higher K to sun-exposed leaves, the optimal N distribution does not follow the gradient in light within canopies, but instead follows a shallower gradient. We therefore hypothesize that measured deviations from the predicted optimal distribution of N could be explained by constraints on the distribution of K within canopies. Further empirical research is required on the extent to which plants can construct optimal K distributions, and whether shallow within-canopy N distributions can be explained by sub-optimal K distributions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22491524     DOI: 10.1093/treephys/tps023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tree Physiol        ISSN: 0829-318X            Impact factor:   4.196


  19 in total

1.  The role of mesophyll conductance in the economics of nitrogen and water use in photosynthesis.

Authors:  Thomas N Buckley; Charles R Warren
Journal:  Photosynth Res       Date:  2013-04-23       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Leaf nitrogen distribution in relation to crown architecture in the tall canopy species, Fagus crenata.

Authors:  Noriyuki Osada; Yuko Yasumura; Atsushi Ishida
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Changes in light- and nitrogen-use and in aboveground biomass allocation patterns along productivity gradients in grasslands.

Authors:  Anne Aan; Krista Lõhmus; Arne Sellin; Olevi Kull
Journal:  J Plant Res       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 2.629

Review 4.  Optimality of nitrogen distribution among leaves in plant canopies.

Authors:  Kouki Hikosaka
Journal:  J Plant Res       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 2.629

5.  A meta-analysis of leaf nitrogen distribution within plant canopies.

Authors:  Kouki Hikosaka; Niels P R Anten; Almaz Borjigidai; Chiho Kamiyama; Hidemitsu Sakai; Toshihiro Hasegawa; Shimpei Oikawa; Atsuhiro Iio; Makoto Watanabe; Takayoshi Koike; Kazuya Nishina; Akihiko Ito
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 4.357

6.  Variation in Xylem Resistance to Cavitation Explains Why Some Leaves Within a Canopy Are More Likely to Die under Water Stress.

Authors:  Meisha Holloway-Phillips
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 8.340

7.  On the complementary relationship between marginal nitrogen and water-use efficiencies among Pinus taeda leaves grown under ambient and CO2-enriched environments.

Authors:  Sari Palmroth; Gabriel G Katul; Chris A Maier; Eric Ward; Stefano Manzoni; Giulia Vico
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 4.357

8.  What is the most prominent factor limiting photosynthesis in different layers of a greenhouse cucumber canopy?

Authors:  Tsu-Wei Chen; Michael Henke; Pieter H B de Visser; Gerhard Buck-Sorlin; Dirk Wiechers; Katrin Kahlen; Hartmut Stützel
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.357

9.  Weak vertical canopy gradients of photosynthetic capacities and stomatal responses in a fertile Norway spruce stand.

Authors:  Lasse Tarvainen; Göran Wallin; Johan Uddling
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.225

10.  Hydraulic constraints modify optimal photosynthetic profiles in giant sequoia trees.

Authors:  Anthony R Ambrose; Wendy L Baxter; Christopher S Wong; Stephen S O Burgess; Cameron B Williams; Rikke R Næsborg; George W Koch; Todd E Dawson
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 3.225

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.