4.6 Article

Comparative ecophysiological measurements on the light responses, water relations and desiccation tolerance of the filmy ferns Hymenophyllum wilsonii Hook. and H-tunbrigense (L.) Smith

Journal

ANNALS OF BOTANY
Volume 91, Issue 6, Pages 717-727

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcg077

Keywords

chlorophyll fluorescence; desiccation tolerance; filmy ferns; Hymenophyllaceae; Hymenophyllum; light responses; osmotic potential; P-V curves; pressure-volume curves

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chlorophyll-fluorescence and infrared gas analyser measurements show saturation of photosynthetic electron flow and CO2 uptake at generally lower irradiances in Hymenophyllum tunbrigense than in H. wilsonii, but with wide variation in both species (63-189 mumol m(-2) s(-1) PPFD in H. tunbrigense, 129-552 mumol m(-2) s(-1) PPFD in H. wilsonii), probably related to both site and season. Non-photochemical quenching (at 400 gmol m(-2) s(-1) PPFD) ranged from 2.1 to 8.1, with no significant difference between the species. Pressure-volume curves from thermocouple-psychrometer measurements give full-turgor osmotic potentials of approx. -1.4 MPa in both species, and indicate low apoplast fractions and high cell-wall elastic moduli. Leaves of H. tunbrigense recovered within 24 h from up to 7 d desiccation at water potentials ranging from -40 MPa (74 % relative humidity, RH) to -220 MPa (20 % RH); after 15 or 30 d, desiccation recovery was slower and less complete, and leaves were severely damaged at the highest and lowest humidities. Hymenophyllum wilsonii recovered well from up to 30 d desiccation at -114 and -220 MPa, but at -40 MPa it showed signs of damage after 15 d, and was severely damaged or killed after 30 d. Results are discussed in relation to the ecological and geographical distributions of the two species, and to the adaptive strategies of filmy ferns in general. (C) 2003 Annals of Botany Company.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available