Linking stem rehydration kinetics to hydraulic traits using a novel method and mechanistic model.
Stem capacitance
centrifuge method
gravity feed apparatus
hydraulic modelling
rehydration kinetics
rehydration time constant
Journal
Annals of botany
ISSN: 1095-8290
Titre abrégé: Ann Bot
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0372347
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 08 2023
25 08 2023
Historique:
received:
24
02
2023
accepted:
22
05
2023
pmc-release:
26
05
2024
medline:
28
8
2023
pubmed:
26
5
2023
entrez:
26
5
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Despite the recognized importance of hydraulic capacitance as a mechanism used by plants to maintain hydraulic functioning during high transpiration, characterizing the dynamics of capacitance remains a challenge. We used a novel 'two-balance method' to investigate relationships between stem rehydration kinetics and other hydraulic traits in multiple tree species, and we developed a model to explore stem rehydration kinetics further. We found that: (1) rehydration time constants and the amount of water uptake occurring during rehydration differed significantly across species; (2) time constants did not change with declining water potential (Ψ), while water uptake increased at lower Ψ in some species; (3) longer time constants were associated with lower wood density, higher capacitance and less negative stem pressures causing 50 % loss of hydraulic conductivity (P50); (4) greater water uptake occurred in stems with lower wood density and less negative P50 values; and (5) the model could estimate the total hydraulic resistance of the rehydration path, which cannot be measured directly. Overall, the two-balance method can be used to examine rehydration dynamics quickly and thoroughly in detached woody stems. This method has the potential to improve our understanding of how capacitance functions across tree species, which is an often-overlooked component of whole-plant hydraulics.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Despite the recognized importance of hydraulic capacitance as a mechanism used by plants to maintain hydraulic functioning during high transpiration, characterizing the dynamics of capacitance remains a challenge.
METHODS
We used a novel 'two-balance method' to investigate relationships between stem rehydration kinetics and other hydraulic traits in multiple tree species, and we developed a model to explore stem rehydration kinetics further.
KEY RESULTS
We found that: (1) rehydration time constants and the amount of water uptake occurring during rehydration differed significantly across species; (2) time constants did not change with declining water potential (Ψ), while water uptake increased at lower Ψ in some species; (3) longer time constants were associated with lower wood density, higher capacitance and less negative stem pressures causing 50 % loss of hydraulic conductivity (P50); (4) greater water uptake occurred in stems with lower wood density and less negative P50 values; and (5) the model could estimate the total hydraulic resistance of the rehydration path, which cannot be measured directly.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the two-balance method can be used to examine rehydration dynamics quickly and thoroughly in detached woody stems. This method has the potential to improve our understanding of how capacitance functions across tree species, which is an often-overlooked component of whole-plant hydraulics.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37232478
pii: 7180190
doi: 10.1093/aob/mcad066
pmc: PMC10457032
doi:
Substances chimiques
Water
059QF0KO0R
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1121-1131Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Annals of Botany Company. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
Tree Physiol. 2008 Mar;28(3):469-80
pubmed: 18171669
Funct Plant Biol. 2011 Feb;38(2):118-126
pubmed: 32480868
Tree Physiol. 2015 Apr;35(4):400-9
pubmed: 25030935
Plant Cell Environ. 2018 Oct;41(10):2250-2262
pubmed: 29603273
New Phytol. 2010 Jan;185(2):493-501
pubmed: 19925557
Plant Cell Environ. 2011 Apr;34(4):690-703
pubmed: 21241327
Plant Cell Environ. 2017 Feb;40(2):290-303
pubmed: 27861997
Oecologia. 2008 May;156(1):31-41
pubmed: 18253753
Plant Physiol. 2019 Apr;179(4):1658-1668
pubmed: 30718351
Tree Physiol. 2007 Feb;27(2):181-98
pubmed: 17241961
New Phytol. 2015 Feb;205(3):1008-14
pubmed: 25729797
Science. 1969 Mar 14;163(3872):1219-20
pubmed: 17847548
Plant Cell Environ. 2007 Aug;30(8):910-21
pubmed: 17617819
Planta. 1990 Oct;182(3):420-6
pubmed: 24197194
Tree Physiol. 2010 Aug;30(8):1001-15
pubmed: 20566583
Plant Physiol. 2015 Mar;167(3):963-71
pubmed: 25588734
Oecologia. 2001 Feb;126(4):457-461
pubmed: 28547229
Plant Cell Environ. 2009 Jan;32(1):10-21
pubmed: 19076529
Plant Physiol. 2017 Dec;175(4):1649-1660
pubmed: 29042460
Physiol Plant. 2012 Oct;146(2):129-35
pubmed: 22443461
Plant Cell Environ. 2014 May;37(5):1171-83
pubmed: 24289816
Plant Cell Environ. 2019 Oct;42(10):2789-2807
pubmed: 31273812
Tree Physiol. 2013 Feb;33(2):123-34
pubmed: 23192973
Am J Bot. 2012 Oct;99(10):1583-91
pubmed: 22965850
Tree Physiol. 2015 Jul;35(7):706-22
pubmed: 26163488
New Phytol. 2007;174(4):787-798
pubmed: 17504462
Oecologia. 2013 Jun;172(2):317-26
pubmed: 23070142
Tree Physiol. 2004 Aug;24(8):901-9
pubmed: 15172840
Tree Physiol. 2016 Jun;36(6):756-69
pubmed: 27083523
Plant Physiol. 1961 Sep;36(5):633-8
pubmed: 16655566
Plant Sci. 2011 Apr;180(4):604-11
pubmed: 21421408
Tree Physiol. 2008 Sep;28(9):1341-8
pubmed: 18595846
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2006;57:361-81
pubmed: 16669766
Plant Cell Environ. 2020 Dec;43(12):3048-3067
pubmed: 32935340
Plant Cell Environ. 2009 Nov;32(11):1500-12
pubmed: 19558405
Tree Physiol. 2001 Jun;21(9):561-9
pubmed: 11390300
Nature. 2012 Nov 29;491(7426):752-5
pubmed: 23172141