Literature DB >> 27329266

Pragmatic hydraulic theory predicts stomatal responses to climatic water deficits.

John S Sperry1, Yujie Wang2, Brett T Wolfe3, D Scott Mackay4, William R L Anderegg2, Nate G McDowell5, William T Pockman6.   

Abstract

Ecosystem models have difficulty predicting plant drought responses, partially from uncertainty in the stomatal response to water deficits in soil and atmosphere. We evaluate a 'supply-demand' theory for water-limited stomatal behavior that avoids the typical scaffold of empirical response functions. The premise is that canopy water demand is regulated in proportion to threat to supply posed by xylem cavitation and soil drying. The theory was implemented in a trait-based soil-plant-atmosphere model. The model predicted canopy transpiration (E), canopy diffusive conductance (G), and canopy xylem pressure (Pcanopy ) from soil water potential (Psoil ) and vapor pressure deficit (D). Modeled responses to D and Psoil were consistent with empirical response functions, but controlling parameters were hydraulic traits rather than coefficients. Maximum hydraulic and diffusive conductances and vulnerability to loss in hydraulic conductance dictated stomatal sensitivity and hence the iso- to anisohydric spectrum of regulation. The model matched wide fluctuations in G and Pcanopy across nine data sets from seasonally dry tropical forest and piñon-juniper woodland with < 26% mean error. Promising initial performance suggests the theory could be useful in improving ecosystem models. Better understanding of the variation in hydraulic properties along the root-stem-leaf continuum will simplify parameterization.
© 2016 The Authors. New Phytologist © 2016 New Phytologist Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  climate change drought; hydraulic limitation; modeling climate change impacts; plant drought responses; plant water transport; stomatal regulation; xylem cavitation; xylem transport

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27329266     DOI: 10.1111/nph.14059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  New Phytol        ISSN: 0028-646X            Impact factor:   10.151


  13 in total

1.  Hydraulic diversity of forests regulates ecosystem resilience during drought.

Authors:  William R L Anderegg; Alexandra G Konings; Anna T Trugman; Kailiang Yu; David R Bowling; Robert Gabbitas; Daniel S Karp; Stephen Pacala; John S Sperry; Benjamin N Sulman; Nicole Zenes
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Non-stomatal processes reduce gross primary productivity in temperate forest ecosystems during severe edaphic drought.

Authors:  Louis Gourlez de la Motte; Quentin Beauclaire; Bernard Heinesch; Mathias Cuntz; Lenka Foltýnová; Ladislav Šigut; Natalia Kowalska; Giovanni Manca; Ignacio Goded Ballarin; Caroline Vincke; Marilyn Roland; Andreas Ibrom; Denis Lousteau; Lukas Siebicke; Johan Neiryink; Bernard Longdoz
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2020-09-07       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Why are leaves hydraulically vulnerable?

Authors:  Lawren Sack; Thomas N Buckley; Christine Scoffoni
Journal:  J Exp Bot       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 6.992

4.  Field-based high throughput phenotyping rapidly identifies genomic regions controlling yield components in rice.

Authors:  Paul Tanger; Stephen Klassen; Julius P Mojica; John T Lovell; Brook T Moyers; Marietta Baraoidan; Maria Elizabeth B Naredo; Kenneth L McNally; Jesse Poland; Daniel R Bush; Hei Leung; Jan E Leach; John K McKay
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Bridging Drought Experiment and Modeling: Representing the Differential Sensitivities of Leaf Gas Exchange to Drought.

Authors:  Shuang-Xi Zhou; I Colin Prentice; Belinda E Medlyn
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2019-01-15       Impact factor: 5.753

6.  Plant identity and shallow soil moisture are primary drivers of stomatal conductance in the savannas of Kruger National Park.

Authors:  Rebecca L Tobin; Andrew Kulmatiski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Plant water potential improves prediction of empirical stomatal models.

Authors:  William R L Anderegg; Adam Wolf; Adriana Arango-Velez; Brendan Choat; Daniel J Chmura; Steven Jansen; Thomas Kolb; Shan Li; Frederick Meinzer; Pilar Pita; Víctor Resco de Dios; John S Sperry; Brett T Wolfe; Stephen Pacala
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-12       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Virtual Plants Need Water Too: Functional-Structural Root System Models in the Context of Drought Tolerance Breeding.

Authors:  Adama Ndour; Vincent Vadez; Christophe Pradal; Mikaël Lucas
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2017-09-26       Impact factor: 5.753

Review 9.  Short-term effects of drought on tropical forest do not fully predict impacts of repeated or long-term drought: gas exchange versus growth.

Authors:  Patrick Meir; Maurizio Mencuccini; Oliver Binks; Antonio Lola da Costa; Leandro Ferreira; Lucy Rowland
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-10-08       Impact factor: 6.237

10.  A Dynamic Model for Strategies and Dynamics of Plant Water-Potential Regulation Under Drought Conditions.

Authors:  Phillip Papastefanou; Christian S Zang; Thomas A M Pugh; Daijun Liu; Thorsten E E Grams; Thomas Hickler; Anja Rammig
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 5.753

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.