Literature DB >> 29532255

The functional dependence of canopy conductance on water vapor pressure deficit revisited.

Marcel Fuchs1, Cecilia Stanghellini2.   

Abstract

Current research seeking to relate between ambient water vapor deficit (D) and foliage conductance (gF) derives a canopy conductance (gW) from measured transpiration by inverting the coupled transpiration model to yield gW = m - n ln(D) where m and n are fitting parameters. In contrast, this paper demonstrates that the relation between coupled gW and D is gW = AP/D + B, where P is the barometric pressure, A is the radiative term, and B is the convective term coefficient of the Penman-Monteith equation. A and B are functions of gF and of meteorological parameters but are mathematically independent of D. Keeping A and B constant implies constancy of gF. With these premises, the derived gW is a hyperbolic function of D resembling the logarithmic expression, in contradiction with the pre-set constancy of gF. Calculations with random inputs that ensure independence between gF and D reproduce published experimental scatter plots that display a dependence between gW and D in contradiction with the premises. For this reason, the dependence of gW on D is a computational artifact unrelated to any real effect of ambient humidity on stomatal aperture and closure. Data collected in a maize field confirm the inadequacy of the logarithmic function to quantify the relation between canopy conductance and vapor pressure deficit.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Air humidity; Coupling; Stomata; Transpiration

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29532255     DOI: 10.1007/s00484-018-1524-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Biometeorol        ISSN: 0020-7128            Impact factor:   3.787


  10 in total

1.  A new, vapour-phase mechanism for stomatal responses to humidity and temperature.

Authors:  David Peak; Keith A Mott
Journal:  Plant Cell Environ       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 7.228

2.  Natural evaporation from open water, hare soil and grass.

Authors:  H L PENMAN
Journal:  Proc R Soc Lond A Math Phys Sci       Date:  1948-04-22

3.  Stomatal responses to changes in vapor pressure deficit reflect tissue-specific differences in hydraulic conductance.

Authors:  T W Ocheltree; J B Nippert; P V V Prasad
Journal:  Plant Cell Environ       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 7.228

4.  Stomatal responses to humidity and temperature in darkness.

Authors:  Keith A Mott; David Peak
Journal:  Plant Cell Environ       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 7.228

5.  Stomatal heterogeneity in responses to humidity and temperature: Testing a mechanistic model.

Authors:  Kathryn J Sweet; David Peak; Keith A Mott
Journal:  Plant Cell Environ       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 7.228

6.  The evolution of mechanisms driving the stomatal response to vapor pressure deficit.

Authors:  Scott A M McAdam; Timothy J Brodribb
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 8.340

7.  Responses of stomata to changes in humidity.

Authors:  O L Lange; R Lösch; E D Schulze; L Kappen
Journal:  Planta       Date:  1971-03       Impact factor: 4.116

8.  Low leaf hydraulic conductance associated with drought tolerance in soybean.

Authors:  Thomas R Sinclair; Maciej A Zwieniecki; Noel Michele Holbrook
Journal:  Physiol Plant       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 4.500

9.  Hexokinase mediates stomatal closure.

Authors:  Gilor Kelly; Menachem Moshelion; Rakefet David-Schwartz; Ofer Halperin; Rony Wallach; Ziv Attia; Eduard Belausov; David Granot
Journal:  Plant J       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 6.417

10.  Resource use and efficiency, and stomatal responses to environmental drivers of oak and pine species in an Atlantic Coastal Plain forest.

Authors:  Heidi J Renninger; Nicholas J Carlo; Kenneth L Clark; Karina V R Schäfer
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 5.753

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.