4.7 Article

Height-related trends in stomatal sensitivity to leaf-to-air vapour pressure deficit in a tall conifer

Journal

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
Volume 61, Issue 1, Pages 203-210

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erp291

Keywords

Cuticular conductance; foliar turgor; Pseudotsuga menziesii; stomatal conductance; tree height

Categories

Funding

  1. USDA Forest Service

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Stomatal responses to leaf-to-air vapour pressure deficit (LVPD), leaf water potential components, and cuticular properties were characterized for Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) foliage collected from tree tops along a height gradient from 5 m to 58 m in order to explore height-related trends in stomatal sensitivity to LVPD and to investigate the role of bulk leaf turgor and leaf cuticle thickness in determining stomatal behaviour. There were three distinct phases in the response of stomatal conductance (g(s)) to changes in LVPD. At low LVPD, g(s) increased with increasing LVPD (phase one). During the second phase, g(s) was maximal at low to intermediate LVPD and during the third phase g(s) declined steadily as LVPD increased. The responsiveness of g(s) to LVPD exhibited a height-related pattern such that maximum g(s) (g(s-max)) occurred at progressively greater LVPD with increasing height (r(2)=0.55, P=0.006). Bulk leaf osmotic potential at full turgor decreased with height (r(2)=0.77, P=0.00016), and LVPD at g(s-max) and at maximum crown conductance (g(c-max)) in the field were significantly correlated with leaf turgor (r(2)=0.92, P=0.0093). Cuticle thickness increased by 0.044 mu m for every metre increase in height (r(2)=0.78, P=0.00015). The observed trends in the response of g(s) to LVPD along a height gradient, and their consistency with height-related trends in foliar osmotic potential suggest that osmotic adjustment at the tops of tall trees influences the relationship between g(s) and LVPD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available