4.5 Article

Impact of simulated herbivory on water relations of aspen (Populus tremuloides) seedlings: the role of new tissue in the hydraulic conductivity recovery cycle

期刊

OECOLOGIA
卷 161, 期 4, 页码 665-671

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00442-009-1416-8

关键词

Defoliation; Gradual physiological changes; Percent loss of conductivity; Plant responses; Refoliation process

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Physiological mechanisms behind plant-herbivore interactions are commonly approached as input-output systems where the role of plant physiology is viewed as a black box. Studies evaluating impacts of defoliation on plant physiology have mostly focused on changes in photosynthesis while the overall impact on plant water relations is largely unknown. Stem hydraulic conductivity (k (h)), stem specific conductivity (k (s)), percent loss of hydraulic conductivity (PLC), CO2 assimilation (A) and stomatal conductance (g (s)) were measured on well-irrigated 1-month-old Populus tremuloides (Michx.) defoliated and control seedlings until complete refoliation. PLC values of defoliated seedlings gradually increased during the refoliation process despite them being kept well irrigated. k (s) of defoliated seedlings gradually decreased during refoliation. PLC and k (s) values of control seedlings remained constant during refoliation. k (s) of new stems, leaf specific conductivity and A of leaves grown from new stems in defoliated and control seedlings were not significantly different, but g (s) was higher in defoliated than in control seedlings. The gradual increase of PLC and decrease of k (s) values in old stems after defoliation was unexpected under well-irrigated conditions, but appeared to have little impact on new stems formed after defoliation. The gradual loss of conductivity measured during the refoliation process under well-irrigated conditions suggests that young seedlings of P. tremuloides may be more susceptible to cavitation after herbivore damage under drought conditions.

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

4.5
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