4.6 Article

An integrated model of stomatal development and leaf physiology

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 201, 期 4, 页码 1218-1226

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.12608

关键词

Arabidopsis thaliana; stomatal development; stomatal conductance; g(smax); Ball-Woodrow-Berry; model; CO2 responses; climate change

资金

  1. Stanford University Bio-X Interdisciplinary Fellowship
  2. Carnegie Institution for Science
  3. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences
  5. Div Of Biological Infrastructure [1040106] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stomatal conductance (g(s)) is constrained by the size and number of stomata on the plant epidermis, and the potential maximum rate of g(s) can be calculated based on these stomatal traits (Anatomical g(smax)). However, the relationship between Anatomical g(smax) and operational g(s) under atmospheric conditions remains undefined. Leaf-level gas-exchange measurements were performed for six Arabidopsis thaliana genotypes that have different Anatomical g(smax) profiles resulting from mutations or transgene activity in stomatal development. We found that Anatomical g(smax) was an accurate prediction of g(s) under gas-exchange conditions that maximized stomatal opening, namely high-intensity light, low [CO2], and high relative humidity. Plants with different Anatomical g(smax) had quantitatively similar responses to increasing [CO2] when g(s) was scaled to Anatomical g(smax). This latter relationship allowed us to produce and test an empirical model derived from the Ball-Woodrow-Berry equation that estimates g(s) as a function of Anatomical g(smax), relative humidity, and [CO2] at the leaf. The capacity to predict operational g(s) via Anatomical g(smax) and the pore-specific short-term response to [CO2] demonstrates a precise link between stomatal development and leaf physiology. This connection should be useful to quantify the gas flux of plants in past, present, and future CO2 regimes based upon the anatomical features of stomata.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据