Differential daytime and night-time stomatal behavior in plants from North American deserts

New Phytologist

Volumn 194, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 464-476

  Ogle, Kiona ^a   Lucas, Richard W ^b   Bentley, Lisa Patrick ^c   Cable, Jessica M ^d   Barron Gafford, Greg A ^c,e   Griffith, Alden ^f   Ignace, Danielle ^c   Jenerette, G Darrel ^g   Tyler, Anna ^c   Huxman, Travis E ^c,e   Loik, Michael E ^h   Smith, Stanley D ⁱ   Tissue, David T ^j,k  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^c The University of Arizona   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^f WELLESLEY COLLEGE   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

^j TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^k WESTERN SYDNEY UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

more..

Author keywords

Anisohydric; Deserts; Hierarchical Bayes; Isohydric; Mixture model; Nocturnal stomatal conductance; Stomatal sensitivity

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; DAY LENGTH; DESERT; GRASS; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; NOCTURNAL ACTIVITY; SHRUB; SOIL WATER; STOMATAL CONDUCTANCE; VAPOR PRESSURE;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; DARKNESS; DESERT CLIMATE; EVAPOTRANSPIRATION; NORTH AMERICA; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT STOMA; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

DARKNESS; DESERT CLIMATE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; NORTH AMERICA; PLANT PHYSIOLOGICAL PHENOMENA; PLANT STOMATA; PLANT TRANSPIRATION; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

CHIHUAHUAN DESERT; GREAT BASIN; MOJAVE DESERT; SONORAN DESERT; UNITED STATES;

POACEAE;

EID: 84862811667     PISSN: 0028646X     EISSN: 14698137     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04068.x     Document Type: Article

References (67)

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 & Environment 29: 535-545.
2. Barbour MM, Buckley TN. 2007. The stomatal response to evaporative demand persists at night in Ricinus communis plants with high nocturnal conductance. Plant, Cell & Environment 30: 711-721.
3. 2 in temperate tree species. Functional Plant Biology 32: 1107-1121.
4. Barker DH, Vanier C, Naumburg E, Charlet TN, Nielsen KM, Newingham BA, Smith SD. 2006. Enhanced monsoon precipitation and nitrogen deposition affect leaf traits and photosynthesis differently in spring and summer in the desert shrub Larrea tridentata. New Phytologist 169: 799-808.
5. Brodribb TJ, Jordan GJ. 2008. Internal coordination between hydraulics and stomatal control in leaves. Plant, Cell & Environment 31: 1557-1564.
6. Buckley TN. 2005. The control of stomata by water balance. New Phytologist 168: 275-291.
7. Buckley TN, Mott KA, Farquhar GD. 2003. A hydromechanical and biochemical model of stomatal conductance. Plant, Cell & Environment 26: 1767-1785.
8. 4 plants. Plant Physiology 143: 4-10.
9. Cavender-Bares J, Sack L, Savage J. 2007. Atmospheric and soil drought reduce nocturnal conductance in live oaks. Tree Physiology 27: 611-620.
10. Cernusak LA, Farquhar GD, Wong SC, Stuart-Williams H. 2004. Measurement and interpretation of the oxygen isotope composition of carbon dioxide respired by leaves in the dark. Plant Physiology 136: 3350-3363.
11. 4 grass Distichlis spicata. Functional Plant Biology 36: 50-55.
12. Christman MA, Richards JH, McKay JK, Stahl EA, Juenger TE, Donovan LA. 2008. Genetic variation in Arabidopsis thaliana for night-time leaf conductance. Plant, Cell & Environment 31: 1170-1178.
13. Clark JS. 2005. Why environmental scientists are becoming Bayesians. Ecology Letters 8: 2-14.
14. Collins MJ, Fuentes S, Barlow EWR. 2010. Partial rootzone drying and deficit irrigation increase stomatal sensitivity to vapour pressure deficit in anisohydric grapevines. Functional Plant Biology 37: 128-138.
15. Cowan IR, Farquhar GD. 1977. Stomatal function in relation to leaf metabolism and environment. In: Jennings DH, ed. Integration of activity in higher plants. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 471-505.
16. Daley MJ, Phillips NG. 2006. Interspecific variation in nighttime transpiration and stomatal conductance in a mixed New England deciduous forest. Tree Physiology 26: 411-419.
17. Dawson TE, Burgess SSO, Tu KP, Oliveira RS, Santiago LS, Fisher JB, Simonin KA, Ambrose AR. 2007. Nighttime transpiration in woody plants from contrasting ecosystems. Tree Physiology 27: 561-575.
18. Ewers BE, Mackay DS, Samanta S. 2007. Interannual consistency in canopy stomatal conductance control of leaf water potential across seven tree species. Tree Physiology 27: 11-24.
19. Ewers BE, Oren R. 2000. Analyses of assumptions and errors in the calculation of stomatal conductance from sap flux measurements. Tree Physiology 20: 579-589.
20. 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 & Environment 30: 19-30.
21. Friend AD, Arneth A, Kiang NY, Lomas M, Ogee J, Rodenbeckk C, Running SW, Santaren JD, Sitch S, Viovy N et al. 2007. FLUXNET and modelling the global carbon cycle. Global Change Biology 13: 610-633.
22. Gamerman D, Lopes HF. 2006. Markov chain Monte Carlo. Boca Raton, FL, USA: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.
23. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB. 2004. Bayesian data analysis. Boca Raton, FL, USA: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.
24. Gillespie IG, Loik ME. 2004. Pulse events in Great Basin Desert shrublands: physiological responses of Artemesia tridentata and Purshia tridentata seedlings to increased summer precipitation. Journal of Arid Environments 59: 41-57.
25. Holtta T, Cochard H, Nikinmaa E, Mencuccini M. 2009. Capacitive effect of cavitation in xylem conduits: results from a dynamic model. Plant, Cell & Environment 32: 10-21.
26. Howard AR, Donovan LA. 2010. Soil nitrogen limitation does not impact nighttime water loss in Populus. Tree Physiology 30: 23-31.
27. 2 concentration: implications for the evolution of stomatal behaviour. Plant, Cell & Environment 26: 313-322.
28. Ignace DD, Huxman TE, Weltzin JF, Williams DG. 2007. Leaf gas exchange and water status responses of a native and non-native grass to precipitation across contrasting soil surfaces in the Sonoran Desert. Oecologia 152: 401-413.
29. Jones HG, Sutherland RA. 1991. Stomatal control of xylem embolism. Plant, Cell & Environment 14: 607-612.
30. Kaiser H, Kappen L. 2001. Stomatal oscillations at small apertures: indications for a fundamental insufficiency of stomatal feedback-control inherent in the stomatal turgor mechanism. Journal of Experimental Botany 52: 1303-1313.
31. 2-enriched atmosphere explained by the economics of gas exchange. Plant, Cell & Environment 32: 968-979.
32. Lambers H, Chapin FSI, Pons TL. 1998. Plant physiological ecology. New York, NY, USA: Springer.
33. Liang X, Lettenmaier DP, Wood EF, Burges SJ. 1994. A simple hydrologically based model of land surface water and energy fluxes for general circulation models. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres 99: 14415-14428.
34. Loik ME, Breshears DD, Lauenroth WK, Belnap J. 2004. A multi-scale perspective of water pulses in dryland ecosystems: climatology and ecohydrology of the western USA. Oecologia 141: 269-281.
35. Lunn D, Spiegelhalter D, Thomas A, Best N. 2009. The BUGS project: evolution, critique and future directions (with discussion). Statistics in Medicine 28: 3049-3082.
36. Marks CO, Lechowicz MJ. 2007. The ecological and functional correlates of nocturnal transpiration. Tree Physiology 27: 577-584.
37. McDowell N, Pockman WT, Allen CD, Breshears DD, Cobb N, Kolb T, Plaut J, Sperry J, West A, Williams DG et al. 2008. Mechanisms of plant survival and mortality during drought: why do some plants survive while others succumb to drought? New Phytologist 178: 719-739.
38. Medlyn BE, Duursma RA, Eamus D, Ellsworth DS, Prentice IC, Barton CVM, Crous KY, de Angelis P, Freeman M, Wingate L. 2011. Reconciling the optimal and empirical approaches to modelling stomatal conductance. Global Change Biology 17: 2134-2144.
39. Mott KA, Peak D. 2010. Stomatal responses to humidity and temperature in darkness. Plant, Cell & Environment 33: 1084-1090.
40. Mott KA, Shope JC, Buckley TN. 1999. Effects of humidity on light-induced stomatal opening: evidence for hydraulic coupling among stomata. Journal of Experimental Botany 50: 1207-1213.
41. Novick KA, Oren R, Stoy PC, Siqueira MBS, Katul GG. 2009. Nocturnal evapotranspiration in eddy-covariance records from three co-located ecosystems in the southeastern US: implications for annual fluxes. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 149: 1491-1504.
42. Ogle K, Barber JJ. 2008. Bayesian data-model integration in plant physiological and ecosystem ecology. Progress in Botany 69: 281-311.
43. Ogle K, Reynolds JF. 2002. Desert dogma revisited: coupling of stomatal conductance and photosynthesis in the desert shrub, Larrea tridentata. Plant, Cell & Environment 25: 909-921.
44. Ogle K, Wolpert RL, Reynolds JF. 2004. Reconstructing plant root area and water uptake profiles. Ecology 85: 1967-1978.
45. Oren R, Sperry JS, Katul GG, Pataki DE, Ewers BE, Phillips N, Schafer KVR. 1999. Survey and synthesis of intra- and interspecific variation in stomatal sensitivity to vapour pressure deficit. Plant, Cell & Environment 22: 1515-1526.
46. Patrick LD, Ogle K, Bell CW, Zak J, Tissue D. 2009. Physiological responses of two contrasting desert plant species to precipitation variability are differentially regulated by soil moisture and nitrogen dynamics. Global Change Biology 15: 1214-1229.
47. Phillips NG, Lewis JD, Logan BA, Tissue DT. 2010. Inter- and intra-specific variation in nocturnal water transport in Eucalyptus. Tree Physiology 30: 586-596.
48. Pieruschka R, Huber G, Berry JA. 2010. Control of transpiration by radiation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 107: 13372-13377.
49. Quero JL, Sterck FJ, Martinez-Vilalta J, Villar R. 2011. Water-use strategies of six co-existing Mediterranean woody species during a summer drought. Oecologia 166: 45-57.
50. Rambo TR, North MP. 2009. Canopy microclimate response to pattern and density of thinning in a Sierra Nevada forest. Forest Ecology and Management 257: 435-442.
51. Reynolds JF, Kemp PR, Ogle K, Fernandez RJ. 2004. Modifying the 'pulse-reserve' paradigm for deserts of North America: precipitation pulses, soil water, and plant responses. Oecologia 141: 194-210.
52. Roelfsema MRG, Hedrich R. 2005. In the light of stomatal opening: new insights into 'the Watergate'. New Phytologist 167: 665-691.
53. Rogiers SY, Greer DH, Hutton RJ, Landsberg JJ. 2009. Does night-time transpiration contribute to anisohydric behaviour in a Vitis vinifera cultivar? Journal of Experimental Botany 60: 3751-3763.
54. Saxe H. 1979. Structural and functional study of the coordinated reactions of individual Commelina communis L. stomata (Commelinaceae). American Journal of Botany 66: 1044-1052.
55. Scholz FG, Bucci SJ, Goldstein G, Meinzer FC, Franco AC, Miralles-Wilhelm F. 2007. Removal of nutrient limitations by long-term fertilization decreases nocturnal water loss in savanna trees. Tree Physiology 27: 551-559.
56. 18O signatures of foliage gas exchange observed in two forest ecosystems. Tree Physiology 27: 585-595.
57. Sellin A, Lubenets K. 2010. Variation of transpiration within a canopy of silver birch: effect of canopy position and daily versus nightly water loss. Ecohydrology 3: 467-477.
58. Šimunek J, van Genuchten MT, Šejna M. 2005. The HYDRUS-1D Software Package for Simulating the Movement of Water, Heat, and Multiple Solutes in Variably Saturated Media, Version 3.0, HYDRUS Software Series 1: Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California Riverside, Riverside, California, USA.
59. Snyder KA, James JJ, Richards JH, Donovan LA. 2008. Does hydraulic lift or nighttime transpiration facilitate nitrogen acquisition? Plant and Soil 306: 159-166.
60. 4 species: do plants lose water at night? Journal of Experimental Botany 54: 861-865.
61. Spiegelhalter D, Thomas A, Best N, Lunn D. 2003. WinBUGS version 1.4 user manual. Cambridge, UK: Medical Research Council Biostatistic Unit.
62. 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.
63. Thomas CK, Law BE, Irvine J, Martin JG, Pettijohn JC, Davis KJ. 2009. Seasonal hydrology explains interannual and seasonal variation in carbon and water exchange in a semiarid mature ponderosa pine forest in central Oregon. Journal of Geophysical Research-Biogeosciences 114: G04006, doi:.
64. West AG, Hultine KR, Sperry JS, Bush SE, Ehleringer JR. 2008. Transpiration and hydraulic strategies in a pinon-juniper woodland. Ecological Applications 18: 911-927.
65. Wong SC, Cowan IR, Farquhar GD. 1978. Leaf conductance in relation to assimilation in Eucalyptus pauciflora Sieb. ex Spreng: influence of irradiance and partial pressure of carbon dioxide. Plant Physiology 62: 670-674.
66. Yoo CY, Pence HE, Hasegawa PM, Mickelbart MV. 2009. Regulation of transpiration to improve crop water use. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 28: 410-431.
67. Zeppel M, Tissue D, Taylor D, Macinnis-Ng C, Eamus D. 2010. Rates of nocturnal transpiration in two evergreen temperate woodland species with differing water-use strategies. Tree Physiology 30: 988-1000.