4.8 Review

Will a 385 million year-struggle for light become a struggle for water and for carbon? - How trees may cope with more frequent climate change-type drought events

期刊

GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY
卷 17, 期 1, 页码 642-655

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02248.x

关键词

carbon starvation; climate change; drought; impeded carbon translocation; tree mortality; xylem dysfunction

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trees are exceptional organisms that have evolved over some 385 million years and have overtaken other plants in order to harvest light first. However, this advantage comes with a cost: trees must transport water all the way up to their crowns and inherent physical limitations make them vulnerable to water deficits. Because climate change scenarios predict more frequent extreme drought events, trees will increasingly need to cope with water stress. Recent occurrences of climate change-type droughts have had severe impacts on several forest ecosystems. Initial experimental studies have been undertaken and show that stomatal control of water loss hinders carbon assimilation and could lead to starvation during droughts. Other mechanisms of drought-induced mortality are catastrophic xylem dysfunction, impeded long-distance transport of carbohydrates (translocation) and also symplastic failure (cellular breakdown). However, direct empirical support is absent for either hypothesis. More experimental studies are necessary to increase our understanding of these processes and to resolve the mystery of drought-related tree mortality. Instead of testing the validity of particular hypothesis as mechanisms of drought-induced tree mortality, future research should aim at revealing the temporal dynamics of these mechanisms in different species and over a gradient of environmental conditions. Only such studies will reveal whether the struggle for light will become a struggle for water and/or for carbon in drought-affected areas.

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

4.8
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