4.7 Article

Long-term acclimatization of hydraulic properties, xylem conduit size, wall strength and cavitation resistance in Phaseolus vulgaris in response to different environmental effects

Journal

PLANT CELL AND ENVIRONMENT
Volume 29, Issue 5, Pages 836-843

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2005.01454.x

Keywords

hydraulic conductivity; embolism; soil texture; moisture; shade; phosphorus; wood density

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Phaseolus vulgaris grown under various environmental conditions was used to assess long-term acclimatization of xylem structural characteristics and hydraulic properties. Conduit diameter tended to be reduced and 'wood' density (of 'woody' stems) increased under low moisture ('dry'), increased soil porosity ('porous soil') and low phosphorus ('low PI) treatments. Dry and low P had the largest percentage of small vessels. Dry, low light ('shade') and porous soil treatments decreased P(50) (50% loss in conductivity) by 0.15-0.25 MPa (greater cavitation resistance) compared with 'controls'. By contrast, low P increased P(50) by 0.30 MPa (less cavitation resistance) compared with porous soil (the control for low P). Changes in cavitation resistance were independent of conduit diameter. By contrast, changes in cavitation resistance were correlated with wood density for the control, dry and porous soil treatments, but did not appear to be a function of wood density for the shade and low P treatments. In a separate experiment comparing control and porous soil plants, stem hydraulic conductivity (k(h)), specific conductivity (k(s)), leaf specific conductivity (LSC), total pot water loss, plant biomass and leaf area were all greater for control plants compared to porous soil plants. Porous soil plants, however, demonstrated higher midday stomatal conductance to water vapour (g(s)), apparently because they experienced proportionally less midday xylem cavitation.

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