4.7 Article

The relationship between maximal stomatal conductance and leaf traits in eight Southeast Asian early successional tree species

期刊

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
卷 202, 期 1-3, 页码 245-256

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.07.021

关键词

leaf size; maximum stomatal conductance; leaf nutrient content; pioneer trees; SLA

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The large-scale conversion of tropical old-growth forests to other land use types may subsequently increase the area covered by secondary forests. These tropical secondary forests are dominated by early successional tree species that may have elevated stomatal conductances and transpirational water loss. We studied eight abundant tree species of the tropical moist secondary forest in Sulawesi, Indonesia, for sun leaf stomatal conductance of water vapour (g(smax)) in 4-7 m tall trees and related conductance to various leaf morphological (size, specific leaf area) and chemical parameters (nutrient contents, delta(13)C). g(smax) showed a considerable variability among the eight coexisting early successional trees (393-734 mmol m(-2) s(-1)). With a mean of 590 mmol m(-2) s(-1) it was more than twice as high as the maximal conductance reported for mature late-successional trees in tropical moist forests. Among the tested leaf traits, g(smax) showed the closest relation to leaf nitrogen per area and leaf size; g(smax) was only weakly correlated to leaf nitrogen per unit dry mass; Do correlation existed with leaf delta(13)C values and specific leaf area. A significant negative relationship existed between g(smax) and leaf size, which could point at a reduction in leaf-specific hydraulic conductance of the leaf petiole in large leaves of tropical pioneer trees. Thus, our data indicate that the early successional tree species studied in Sulawesi are characterized by a high but relatively heterogeneous water turn-over, and that leaf size might be a good predictor for maximal stornatal conductance. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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