| Literature DB >> 29474679 |
Ya Zhang1, Laurent J Lamarque2,3, José M Torres-Ruiz2, Bernhard Schuldt4, Zohreh Karimi5, Shan Li1,6, De-Wen Qin7, Paulo Bittencourt8, Régis Burlett2, Kun-Fang Cao7, Sylvain Delzon2, Rafael Oliveira8, Luciano Pereira8, Steven Jansen1.
Abstract
Methods to estimate xylem embolism resistance generally rely on hydraulic measurements, which can be far from straightforward. Recently, a pneumatic method based on air flow measurements of terminal branch ends was proposed to construct vulnerability curves by linking the amount of air extracted from a branch with the degree of embolism. We applied this novel technique for 10 temperate tree species, including six diffuse, two ring-porous and two gymnosperm species, and compared the pneumatic curves with hydraulic ones obtained from either the flow-centrifuge or the hydraulic-bench dehydration method. We found that the pneumatic method provides a good estimate of the degree of xylem embolism for all angiosperm species. The xylem pressure at 50% and 88% loss of hydraulic conductivity (i.e., Ψ50 and Ψ88) based on the methods applied showed a strongly significant correlation for all eight angiosperms. However, the pneumatic method showed significantly reduced Ψ50 values for the two conifers. Our findings suggest that the pneumatic method could provide a fast and accurate approach for angiosperms due to its convenience and feasibility, at least within the range of embolism resistances covered by our samples.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29474679 PMCID: PMC6025199 DOI: 10.1093/treephys/tpy015
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tree Physiol ISSN: 0829-318X Impact factor: 4.196
List of the 10 species studied with reference to their family classification, the technique applied, xylem pressure at 50% and 88% of the maximum air discharged (Ψ50P and Ψ88P) or at 50% and 88% loss of hydraulic conductivity (Ψ50H and Ψ88H) with standard deviation, vessel porosity and collecting site.
| Species | Family | Technique | Ψ50 (MPa) | Ψ88 (MPa) | Vessel porosity | Collecting site |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Betulaceae | Pneumatic | −1.6 ± 0.2 | −2.3 ± 0.3* | Diffuse-porous | Söflingen, Ulm | |
| Flow-centrifuge | −1.5 ± 0.1 | −1.6 ± 0.1 | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |||
| Betulaceae | Pneumatic | −1.8 ± 0.1 | −2.2 ± 0.2 | Diffuse-porous | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |
| Flow-centrifuge | −2.0 ± 0.1 | −2.3 ± 0.1 | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |||
| Betulaceae | Pneumatic | −3.8 ± 0.5 | −5.6 ± 0.6* | Diffuse-porous | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |
| Flow-centrifuge | −3.7 ± 0.2 | −4.5 ± 0.1 | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |||
| Betulaceae | Pneumatic | −2.1 ± 0.3 | −3.6 ± 0.8 | Diffuse-porous | Ulm University campus | |
| Flow-centrifuge | −2.0 ± 0.2 | −2.8 ± 0.8 | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |||
| Fagaceae | Pneumatic | −2.8 ± 0.4* | −5.1 ± 0.6* | Diffuse-porous | Ulm University campus | |
| Flow-centrifuge | −3.2 ± 0.2 | −3.9 ± 0.3 | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |||
| Oleaceae | Pneumatic | −2.4 ± 0.4 | −3.8 ± 0.6 | Ring-porous | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |
| Hydraulic | −2.7 | −3.8 | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |||
| Magnoliaceae | Pneumatic | −1.4 ± 0.2 | −1.9 ± 0.3 | Diffuse-porous | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |
| Flow-centrifuge | −1.5 ± 0.1 | −1.8 ± 0.1 | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |||
| Pinaceae | Pneumatic | −2.8 ± 0.2* | −3.8 ± 0.6* | Tracheids only | University of Bordeaux | |
| Flow-centrifuge | −3.7 ± 0.2 | −4.3 ± 0.3 | University of Bordeaux | |||
| Pinaceae | Pneumatic | −2.0 ± 0.4* | −4.0 ± 0.8 | Tracheids only | Botanical Garden, Ulm University | |
| Flow-centrifuge | −3.2 ± 0.2 | −3.7 ± 0.3 | University of Bordeaux | |||
| Fagaceae | Pneumatic | −3.2 ± 0.3* | −4.4 ± 0.5* | Ring-porous | Ulm University campus | |
| Hydraulic | −2.8 | −3.2 | Botanical Garden, Ulm University |
Hydraulic = hydraulic-bench dehydration. Standard deviation values in the hydraulic-bench dehydration technique were not available for F. excelsior and Q. robur. Data with * showed a significant difference (P < 0.05) between the techniques applied (for details see Table 2).
List of the t-statistics (t), the degrees of freedom (df) and the significance values (P) of t-tests on Ψ50 and Ψ88 values in the 10 species studied. Xylem embolism resistance was measured using the pneumatic method (Ψ50P, Ψ88P) and flow-centrifuge/hydraulic-bench dehydration (Ψ50H, Ψ88H) methods.
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| df |
|
| df |
| |
|
| 1.156 | 7 | 0.286 | 4.899 | 7 | 0.002 |
|
| −1.360 | 9 | 0.207 | −0.529 | 9 | 0.610 |
|
| 0.169 | 4.855* | 0.872 | 3.774 | 4.164* | 0.018 |
|
| 0.425 | 9 | 0.681 | 1.769 | 9 | 0.111 |
|
| −2.311 | 10 | 0.043 | 4.373 | 10 | 0.001 |
|
| 1.709 | 5 | 0.148 | 0.055 | 5 | 0.959 |
|
| −0.942 | 8 | 0.374 | 1.115 | 8 | 0.297 |
|
| −10.811 | 14 | 0.000 | −2.618 | 14 | 0.020 |
|
| −6.628 | 8 | 0.000 | 0.672 | 3.757* | 0.540 |
|
| −2.826 | 6 | 0.030 | −4.299 | 6 | 0.005 |
Values of df with * suggested that the assumption of homogeneity of variance was broken and thus the degree of freedom was reduced. P < 0.05 indicated a significant difference.
Figure 1.Stem vulnerability curves of six diffuse-porous species. Circles and blue solid lines represent data and regression fits based on the hydraulic method. Triangles and red solid lines represent data and regression lines obtained with the pneumatic method. The short dash lines represent 95% confidence bands.
Figure 2.Stem vulnerability curves of two ring-porous species (a, b) and two conifer species (c, d). Circles and blue solid lines represent data and regression fits from the hydraulic-bench dehydration (a, b) or flow-centrifuge method (c, d). Triangles and red solid lines represent data and regression lines from the pneumatic method. The short dash lines represent 95% confidence bands. Bench dehydration data of F. excelsior were reproduced from Li et al. (2015). Pneumatic data for Q. robur required gluing off xylem from the previous growth rings.
Figure 3.Relationships between Ψ50 (a), Ψ88 (b) and slope (c) values obtained from the pneumatic curves and the hydraulic curves. (a) Ψ50 values of the pneumatic method (Ψ50P) and Ψ50 values of the hydraulic method (Ψ50H) were strongly correlated (R2 = 0.670, P < 0.01). The solid line showed the fitting: Ψ50H = 0.945Ψ50P – 0.383. (b) Ψ88 values of the pneumatic method (Ψ88P) and Ψ88 values of the hydraulic method (Ψ88H) were strongly correlated (R2 = 0.752, P < 0.01). The solid line showed the fitting: Ψ88H = 0.733Ψ88P – 0.492. (c) The slope of the percentage of air discharge (SP) and the slope of the percentage loss of hydraulic conductivity (SH) were strongly correlated (R2 = 0.566, P = 0.02) when excluding A. glutinosa as an outlier. The solid line showed the fitting: SH = 0.822SP + 64.792. Data from different species were presented with different symbols. Dash-dotted lines represented the 95% confidence band. The dash line was the 1:1 line.