Skip Navigation

Tree Physiology 2007 27(1):11-24; doi:10.1093/treephys/27.1.11
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ewers, B. E.
Right arrow Articles by Samanta, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ewers, B. E.
Right arrow Articles by Samanta, S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2007 Heron Publishing—Victoria Canada

Interannual consistency in canopy stomatal conductance control of leaf water potential across seven tree species

B. E. Ewers1,2, D. S. Mackay3 and S. Samanta4

1 Department of Botany, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Avenue Laramie, WY 82071, USA
2 Corresponding author beewers{at}uwyo.edu
3 Department of Geography, State University of New York at Buffalo Buffalo, NY 14261, USA
4 Department of Forest Ecology and Management, University of Wisconsin Madison, WI 53706, USA


   Abstract

We investigated interannual variability of canopy transpiration per unit ground area (EC) and per unit leaf area (EL) across seven tree species in northern Wisconsin over two years. These species have previously been shown to be sufficient to upscale stand-level transpiration to the landscape level during one growing season. Our objective was to test whether a simple plant hydraulic model could capture interannual variation in transpiration. Three species, wetland balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill), basswood (Tilia Americana L.) and speckled alder (Alnus rugosa (DuRoi) Spreng), had no change in EC or EL between 2000 and 2001. Red pine (Pinus resinosa Ait) had a 57 and 19% increase in EC and EL, respectively, and sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh) had an 83 and 41% increase in EC and EL, respectively, from 2000 to 2001. Quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx) had a 50 and 21% decrease in EC and EL, respectively, from 2000 to 2001 in response to complete defoliation by forest tent caterpillar (Malascoma distria Hüber) and subsequent lower total leaf area index of the reflushed foliage. White cedar (Thuja occidentalis L.) had a 20% decrease in both EC and EL caused by lowered surface water in wetlands in 2001 because of lower precipitation and wetland flow management. Upland A. balsamea increased EL and EC by 55 and 53%, respectively, as a result of release from light competition of the defoliated, overstory P. tremuloides. We hypothesized that regardless of different drivers of interannual variability in EC and EL, minimum leaf water potential would be regulated at the same value. Minimum midday water potentials were consistent over the two years within each of the seven species despite large changes in transpiration between years. This regulation was independently verified by the exponential saturation between daily EC and vapor pressure deficit (D) and the tradeoff between a reference canopy stomatal conductance (GS) and the sensitivity of GS to D, indicating that trees with high GS must decrease GS in response to atmospheric drought faster than trees with low GS. Our results show that models of forest canopy transpiration can be simplified by incorporating GS regulation of minimum leaf water potential for isohydric species.

Keywords: defoliation, sap flux, water relations, water table, wetlands

Received December 1, 2005; Accepted March 19, 2006


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.