Low air humidity increases leaf-specific hydraulic conductance of Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh (Brassicaceae)

Journal of Experimental Botany

Volumn 58, Issue 13, 2007, Pages 3711-3718

  Levin, Michal ^a   Lemcoff, Jorge Hugo ^a   Cohen, Shabtai ^a   Kapulnik, Yoram ^a  

^a VOLCANI CENTER   (Israel)

Author keywords

Aquaporin; Isohydric; Leaf conductance; Osmotic; Water potential; Water relations

Indexed keywords

ATMOSPHERIC HUMIDITY; NUTRIENTS; OSMOSIS; TRANSPIRATION;

AQUAPORIN; ISOHYDRIC; LEAF CONDUCTANCE; WATER POTENTIAL;

PLANTS (BOTANY);

AQUAPORIN; MERCURIC CHLORIDE; WATER;

ARABIDOPSIS; ARTICLE; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFECT; EVAPOTRANSPIRATION; GENETICS; HUMIDITY; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT; PLANT LEAF; TIME;

AQUAPORINS; ARABIDOPSIS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMIDITY; MERCURIC CHLORIDE; PLANT LEAVES; PLANT SHOOTS; PLANT TRANSPIRATION; TIME FACTORS; WATER;

ARABIDOPSIS; ARABIDOPSIS THALIANA; BRASSICACEAE;

EID: 36849046288     PISSN: 00220957     EISSN: 14602431     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erm220     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Addington RN, Donovan LA, Mitchell RJ, Vose JM, Pecot SD, Jack SB, Hacke UG, Sperry JS, Oren R. 2006. Adjustments in hydraulic architecture of Pinus palustris maintain similar stomatal conductance in xeric and mesic habitats. Plant, Cell and Environment 29, 535-545.
2. Aphalo PJ, Jarvis PG. 1991. Do stomata respond to relative-humidity? Plant, Cell and Environment 14, 127-132.
3. Aroca R, Ferrante A, Vernieri P, Chrispeels MJ. 2006. Drought, abscisic acid and transpiration rate effects on the regulation of PIP aquaporin gene expression and abundance in Phaseolus vulgaris plants. Annals of Botany 98, 1301-1310.
4. Assmann SM, Snyder JA, Lee Y-RJ. 2000. ABA-deficient (aba1) and ABA-insensitive (abi1-1, abi2-1) mutants of Arabidopsis have a wild-type stomatal response to humidity. Plant, Cell and Environment 23, 387-395.
5. Barrowclough DE, Peterson CA, Steudle E. 2000. Radial hydraulic conductivity along developing onion roots. Journal of Experimental Botany 51, 547-557.
6. Boyes DC, Zayed AM, Ascenzi R, McCaskill AJ, Hoffman NE, Davis KR, Gorlach J. 2001. Growth stage-based phenotypic analysis of Arabidopsis: a model for high throughput functional genomics in plants. The Plant Cell 13, 1499-1510.
7. Buckley TN. 2005. The control of stomata by water balance. New Phytologist 168, 275-292.
8. Bunce JA. 1996. Growth at elevated carbon dioxide concentration reduces hydraulic conductance in alfalfa and soybean. Global Change Biology 25, 155-158.
9. Bunce JA. 1997. Does transpiration control stomatal responses to water vapour pressure deficit? Plant, Cell and Environment 20, 131-135.
10. Bunce JA. 2006. How do leaf hydraulics limit stomatal conductance at high water vapour pressure deficits? Plant, Cell and Environment 29, 1644-1650.
11. Carvajal M, Cooke DT, Clarkson DT. 1996. Responses of wheat plants to nutrient deprivation may involve the regulation of water-channel function. Planta 199, 372-381.
12. Carvajal M, Martinez V, Alcaraz CF. 1999. Physiological function of water channels as affected by salinity in roots of paprika pepper. Physiologia Plantarum 105, 95-101.
13. Clarkson DT, Carvajal M, Henzler T, Waterhouse RN, Smyth AJ, Cooke DT, Steudle E. 2000. Root hydraulic conductance: diurnal aquaporin expression and the effects of nutrient stress. Journal of Experimental Botany 51, 61-70.
14. David TS, Ferreira MI, Cohen S, Pereira JS, David JS. 2004. Constraints on transpiration from an evergreen oak tree in southern Portugal. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 122, 193-205.
15. Dewar RC. 2002. The Ball-Berry-Leuning and Tardieu-Davies stomatal models: synthesis and extension within a spatially aggregated picture of guard cell function. Plant, Cell and Environment 25, 1383-1398.
16. Franks PJ, Drake PL, Froend RH. 2007. Anisohydric but isohydrodynamic: seasonally constant plant water potential gradient explained by a stomatal control mechanism incorporating variable plant hydraulic conductance. Plant, Cell and Environment 30, 19-30.
17. Garnier E, Laurent G, Bellmann A, Debain S, Berthelier P, Ducout B, Roumet C, Navas ML. 2001. Consistency of species ranking based on functional leaf traits. New Phytologist 152, 69-83.
18. Gibeaut DM, Hulett J, Cramer GR, Seemann JR. 1997. Maximal biomass of Arabidopsis thaliana using a simple, low-maintenance hydroponic method and favorable environmental conditions. Plant Physiology 115, 317-319.
19. Hacke G, Sperry JS, Ewers BE, Ellsworth DS, Schäfer KVR, Oren R. 2000. Influence of soil porosity on water use in Pinus taeda. Oecologia 124, 495-505.
20. Henzler T, Waterhouse RN, Smyth AJ, Carvajal M, Cooke DT, Schäffner AR, Steudle E, Clarkson DT. 1999. Diurnal variations in hydraulic conductivity and root pressure can be correlated with the expression of putative aquaporins in the roots of Lotus japonicus. Planta 210, 50-60.
21. Hubbard RM, Ryan MG, Stiller V, Sperry JS. 2001. Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis vary linearly with plant hydraulic conductance in ponderosa pine. Plant, Cell and Environment 24, 113-121.
22. Javot H, Lauvergeat V, Santoni V, et al. 2003. Role of a single aquaporin isoform in root water uptake. The Plant Cell 15, 509-522.
23. Javot H, Maurel C. 2002. The role of aquaporins in root water uptake. Annals of Botany 90, 301-313.
24. Kawasaki S, Borchert C, Deyholos M, Wang H, Brazille S, Kawai K, Galbraith D, Bohnert HJ. 2001. Gene expression profiles during the initial phase of salt stress in rice. The Plant Cell 13, 889-905.
25. Li YAN, Xu HAO, Cohen S. 2005. Long-term hydraulic acclimation to soil texture and radiation load in cotton. Plant, Cell and Environment 28, 492-499.
26. Liu Q, Umeda M, Uchimiya H. 1994. Isolation and expression analysis of 2 rice genes encoding the Major Intrinsic Protein. Plant Molecular Biology 26, 2003-2007.
27. Lovisolo C, Schubert A. 2006. Mercury hinders recovery of shoot hydraulic conductivity during grapevine rehydration: evidence from a whole-plant approach. New Phytologist 172, 469-478.
28. Lu ZJ, Neumann PM. 1999. Water stress inhibits hydraulic conductance and leaf growth in rice seedlings but not the transport of water via mercury-sensitive water channels in the root. Plant Physiology 120, 143-151.
29. Luu D-T, Maurel C. 2005. Aquaporins in a challenging environment: molecular gears for adjusting plant water status. Plant, Cell and Environment 28, 85-96.
30. Maherali H, DeLucia EH, Sipe TW. 1997. Hydraulic adjustment of maple saplings to canopy gap formation. Oecologia 112, 472-480.
31. Mariaux JB, Bockel C, Salamini F, Bartels D. 1998. Desiccation-and abscisic acid-responsive genes encoding major intrinsic proteins (MIPs) from the resurrection plant Craterostigma plantagineum. Plant Molecular Biology 38, 1089-1099.
32. Martre P, Morillon R, Barrieu F, North GB, Nobel PS, Chrispeels MJ. 2002. Plasma membrane aquaporins play a significant role during recovery from water deficit. Plant Physiology 130, 2101-2110.
33. Martre P, North GB, Nobel PS. 2001. Hydraulic conductance and mercury-sensitive water transport for roots of Opuntia acanthocarpa in relation to soil drying and rewetting. Plant Physiology 126, 352-362.
34. McClenahan K, Macinnis-Ng C, Eamus D. 2004. Convergence in hydraulic architecture, water relations and primary productivity amongst habitats and across seasons in Sydney. Functional Plant Biology 31, 429-439.
35. Meites L, ed. 1963. Handbook of analytical chemistry. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
36. Monteith JL. 1995. A reinterpretation of stomatal responses to humidity. Plant, Cell and Environment 18, 357-364.
37. Nardini A, Salleo S, Andri S. 2005. Circadian regulation of leaf hydraulic conductance in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L. cv. Margot). Plant, Cell and Environment 28, 750-759.
38. Rieger M. 1995. Offsetting effects of reduced root hydraulic conductivity and osmotic adjustment following drought. Tree Physiology 15, 379-385.
39. Saliendra NZ, Sperry JS, Comstock JP. 1995. Influence of leaf water status on stomatal response to humidity, hydraulic conductance and soil drought in Betula occidentalis. Planta 196, 357-366.
40. Sarda X, Tousch D, Ferrare K, Cellier F, Alcon C, Dupuis JM, Casse F, Lamaze T. 1999. Characterization of closely related delta-TIP genes encoding aquaporins which are differentially expressed in sunflower roots upon water deprivation through exposure to air. Plant Molecular Biology 40, 179-191.
41. Schultz HR. 2003. Differences in hydraulic architecture account for near-isohydric and anisohydric behaviour of two field-grown Vitis vinifera L. cultivars during drought. Plant, Cell and Environment 26, 1393-1405.
42. 2-assimilation rates of plants in contrasting environments. In: Lange OL, Nobel PS, Osmond CB, Ziegler H, eds. Encyclopedia of plant physiology, Vol. 12B. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 181-230.
43. Sobrado MA. 2003. Hydraulic characteristics and leaf water use efficiency in trees from tropical montane habitats. Trees - Structure and Function 17, 400-406.
44. Sperry JS. 2004. Coordinating stomatal and xylem functioning - an evolutionary perspective. New Phytologist 162, 568-570.
45. Sperry JS, Adler FR, Campbell GS, Comstock JP. 1998. Limitation of plant water use by rhizosphere and xylem conductance: results from a model. Plant, Cell and Environment 21, 347-359.
46. Sperry JS, Hacke UG, Oren R, Comstock JP. 2002. Water deficits and hydraulic limits to leaf water supply. Plant, Cell and Environment 25, 251-263.
47. Tardieu F. 2003. Virtual plants: modelling as a tool for the genomics of tolerance to water deficit. Trends in Plant Science 8, 9-14.
48. Tardieu F, Davies WJ. 1993. Integration of hydraulic and chemical signalling in the control of stomatal conductance and water status of droughted plants. Plant, Cell and Environment 16, 341-349.
49. Tardieu F, Simonneau T. 1998. Variability among species of stomatal control under fluctuating soil water status and evaporative demand: modelling isohydric and anisohydric behaviours. Journal of Experimental Botany 49, 419-432.
50. Tardieu F, Zhang J, Katerji N, Bethenod O, Palmer S, Davies WJ. 1992. Xylem ABA controls the stomatal conductance of field-grown maize subjected to soil compaction or soil drying. Plant, Cell and Environment 15, 193-197.
51. Tsuda M, Tyree MT. 2000. Plant hydraulic conductance measured by the high pressure flow meter in crop plants. Journal of Experimental Botany 51, 823-828.
52. Turner NC, Schulze ED, Gollan T. 1984. The responses of stomata and leaf gas-exchange to vapor-pressure deficits and soil-water content. Oecologia 63, 338-342.
53. Tyree MT, Nardini A, Salleo S, Sack L, El Omari B. 2005. The dependence of leaf hydraulic conductance on irradiance during HPFM measurements: any role for stomatal response? Journal of Experimental Botany 56, 737-744.
54. Wan X, Zwiazek JJ. 1999. Mercuric chloride effects on root water transport in aspen seedlings. Plant Physiology 121, 939-946.
55. Weatherley PE. 1950. Studies in the water relations of the cotton plant. I. The field measurement of water deficits in leaves. New Phytologist 49, 81-97.
56. Weig A, Deswarte C, Chrispeels MJ. 1997. The major intrinsic protein family of Arabidopsis has 23 members that form three distinct groups with functional aquaporins in each group. Plant Physiology 114, 1347-1357.
57. Xu L-K, Hsiao TC. 2004. Predicted versus measured photosynthetic water-use efficiency of crop stands under dynamically changing field environments. Journal of Experimental Botany 55, 2395-2411.
58. Yamada S, Katsuhara M, Kelly WB, Michalowski CB, Bohnert HJ. 1995. A family of transcripts encoding water channel proteins - tissue-specific expression in the common ice plant. The Plant Cell 7, 1129-1142.