4.7 Article

Modeling tree water deficit from microclimate: an approach to quantifying drought stress

Journal

TREE PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages 147-156

Publisher

HERON PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/25.2.147

Keywords

Picea abies; Pinus sylvestris; Quercus pubescens; soil water potential; vapor pressure deficit; stem radius changes; tree water relations

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tree water deficit estimated by measuring water-related changes in stem radius (DeltaW) was compared with tree water deficit estimated from the output of a simple, physiologically reasonable model (DeltaW(E)), with soil water potential (Psi(soil)) and atmospheric vapor pressure deficit (VPD) as inputs. Values of DeltaW were determined by monitoring stem radius changes with dendrometers and detrending the results for growth, We followed changes in DeltaW and DeltaW(E) in Pinus sylvestris L. and Quercus pubescens Willd. over 2 years at a dry site (2001-2002; Salgesch, Wallis) and in Picea abies (L.) Karst. for 1 year at a wet site (1998; Davos, Graubuenden) in the Swiss Alps. The seasonal courses of DeltaW in deciduous species and in conifers at the same site were similar and could be largely explained by variation in DeltaW(E). This finding strongly suggests that DeltaW, despite the known species-specific differences in stomatal response to microclimate, is mainly explained by a combination of atmospheric and soil conditions. Consequently, we concluded that trees are unable to maintain any particular DeltaW. Either Psi(soil) or VPD alone provided poorer estimates of AWthan a model incorporating both factors. As a first approximation of DeltaW(E), Psi(soil) can be weighted so that the negative mean Psi(soil) reaches 65 to 75% of the positive mean daytime VPD over a season (Q. pubescens: similar to65%, P abies: similar to70%, P sylvestris: similar to75%). The differences in DeltaW among species can be partially explained by a different weighting of Psi(soil) against VPD. The DeltaW of P. sylvestris was more dependent on Psi(soil) than that of Q. pubescens, but less than that of P. abies, and was less dependent on VPD than that of P. abies and Q. pubescens. The model worked well for P. abies at the wet site and for Q. pubescens and P. sylvestris at the dry site, and may be useful for estimating water deficit in other tree species.

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