4.7 Article

Diurnal changes in embolism rate in nine dry forest trees: relationships with species-specific xylem vulnerability, hydraulic strategy and wood traits

Journal

TREE PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 35, Issue 7, Pages 694-705

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/tpv049

Keywords

anisohydric; drought stress; embolism repair; isohydric; P-50; P-88; safety margin; wood capacitance; wood density

Categories

Funding

  1. University of Messina
  2. University of Trieste

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent studies have reported correlations between stem sapwood capacitance (C-wood) and xylem vulnerability to embolism, but it is unclear how C-wood relates to the eventual ability of plants to reverse embolism. We investigated possible functional links between embolism reversal efficiency, C-wood, wood density (WD), vulnerability to xylem embolism and hydraulic safety margins in nine woody species native to dry sclerophyllous forests with different degrees of iso versus anisohydry. Substantial inter-specific differences in terms of seasonal/diurnal changes of xylem and leaf water potential, maximum diurnal values of transpiration rate and xylem vulnerability to embolism formation were recorded. Significant diurnal changes in percentage loss of hydraulic conductivity (PLC) were recorded for five species. Significant correlations were recorded between diurnal PLC changes and P-50 and P-88 values (i.e., xylem pressure inducing 50 and 88% PLC, respectively) as well as between diurnal PLC changes and safety margins referenced to P-50 and P-88. WD was linearly correlated with minimum diurnal leaf water potential, diurnal PLC changes and wood capacitance across all species. In contrast, significant relationships between P-50, safety margin values referenced to P-50 and WD were recorded only for the isohydric species. Functional links between diurnal changes in PLC, hydraulic strategies and WD and C-wood are discussed.

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