4.6 Article

Intra-annual Pattern of Photosynthesis, Growth and Stable Isotope Partitioning in a Poplar Clone Subjected to Ozone and Water Stress

期刊

WATER AIR AND SOIL POLLUTION
卷 224, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
DOI: 10.1007/s11270-013-1761-4

关键词

Biomass; Carbon allocation; Leaf demography; Root/shoot ratio; delta C-13; delta O-18

资金

  1. General Directorate for Environmental Quality of the Lombardy Region
  2. Regional Agency for Services to Agriculture and Forests (E.R.S.A.F.)
  3. Lombardy Foundation for the Environment (F.L.A.)
  4. Regional Agency for Environmental Protection (A.R.P.A.)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An experiment in open-top chambers was carried out in summer 2008 in Curno (northern Italy) in order to study the effects of ozone and drought stress on net photosynthesis, growth and stable isotope partitioning on cuttings of an ozone-sensitive poplar clone (Oxford). The biomass (as dry weight) of stems, leaves and roots was assessed five times during the growing season on a set of plants intended for destructive measurements (set 1). Another set of plants (set 2) was used for repeated measurements (net photosynthesis) and then destroyed at the end of the experiment. The dry weight of the stems in set 1 plants was calculated using allometric relations. The results showed that drought stress had a strong effect on all the parameters assessed. Ozone did not have any effect on biomass allocation in woody stems and stable isotope composition but reduced root/shoot ratios and caused loss of leaves during the growing season. The loss of leaves in the lower part of the crown was partly recovered with the emission of new young leaves in the upper part, thus restoring the overall photosynthetic apparatus. We conclude that the metabolic costs suffered to repair damage and support growth, and the reduction in starch reserves in the roots can compromise growth and the capacity to cope with stress factors in subsequent years.

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