4.5 Article

A global analysis of plant recovery performance from water stress

期刊

OIKOS
卷 126, 期 10, 页码 1377-1388

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/oik.04534

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plant post-drought recovery performance is essential to predict shifts in ecosystem dynamics and production during frequent climate change-driven drought events. Yet, it is not clear how post-drought recovery is related to evolutionary and geographic variations in plants. In this study, we generated a global data set of post-drought recovery performance in 140 plant species from published studies. We quantified the plant post-drought recovery performance by calculating a recovery index for multiple plant physiological and hydraulic parameters, including leaf water potential, net photosynthetic rate, leaf hydraulic conductance and shoot biomass. The magnitude of recovery among four plant functional types (deciduous angiosperms, evergreen angiosperms, gymnosperms, and crops), two plant growth forms (shrubs and trees), two water management strategies (isohydric and anisohydric), four xylem porosity types (diffuse, ring, semi-ring and tracheid), and four major biomes (dry sclerophyll forest, boreal forest, temperate forest and tropical/subtropical forest) were compared. We found the inability to completely recover immediately after severe water stress is ubiquitous across all plant functional types and growth forms, while the rate and magnitude of post-drought recovery varied greatly across different plant taxonomic categories and geographic ranges. In general, plant hydraulic architecture, leaf anatomy and physiology affect plants' propensity towards recovery, and reflect evolutionary consequences of plant adaptation to their habitat. Due to the essential role of plant functional traits in regulating carbon storage in each biome, a better understanding plant post-drought recovery performance could improve our predictions on ecosystem productivity in a rapidly changing climate.

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