Advertisement

Ecophysiological acclimatization to cyclic water stress in Eucalyptus

  • Rogério de Souza Nóia JúniorEmail author
  • Genilda Canuto Amaral
  • José Eduardo Macedo Pezzopane
  • Mariana Duarte Silva Fonseca
  • Ana Paula Câmara da Silva
  • Talita Miranda Teixeira Xavier
Original Paper
  • 30 Downloads

Abstract

Drought is considered the main environmental factor limiting productivity in eucalyptus plantations in Brazil. However, recent studies have reported that exposure to water deficit conditions enables plants to respond to subsequent stresses. Thus, this study investigates the ecophysiological acclimatization of eucalyptus clones submitted to recurrent water deficit cycles. Eucalyptus seedlings were submitted to three recurrent water deficit cycles and anatomical, morphological and physiological changes were analyzed. The results were: (1) Eucalyptus seedlings responded to water deficits by directing carbohydrates to root and stem growth; (2) Size and number of stomata were reduced; (3) Stomatal conductance decreased which allowed the plants to reduce water losses through transpiration, increasing instantaneous water use efficiency; (4) The relationship between gas exchanges and available water contents allowed the seedlings to uptake the retained soil water at higher tensions; and, (5) Physiological recovery from subsequent water deficits became faster. As a result of these changes, the eucalyptus seedlings recovered from the same degree of water stress more rapidly.

Keywords

Carbon partition Drought Gas exchange Morpho-physiological changes Photosynthetic apparatus 

Notes

Supplementary material

11676_2019_926_MOESM1_ESM.docx (3.5 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 3582 kb)

References

  1. Adams MA, Turnbull TL, Sprent JI, Buchmann N (2016) Legumes are different: leaf nitrogen, photosynthesis, and water use efficiency. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:4098–4103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amdt S, Cliford S, Wanek W, Jones H, Popp M (2001) Physiological and morphological adaptations of the fruit tree Ziziphus rotundifolia in response to progresif drought stress. Tree Physiol 21:705–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asensi-Fabado MA, Oliván A, Munné-Bosch S (2013) A comparative study of the hormonal response to high temperatures and stress reiteration in three Labiatae species. Environ Exp Bot 94:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baldocchi DD, Xu L (2007) What limits evaporation from Mediterranean oak woodlands—The supply of moisture in the soil, physiological control by plants or the demand by the atmosphere? Adv Water Resour 30:2113–2122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bloom AJ, Chapin SF, Mooney HA (1985) Plants-an economic analogy. Annu Rev Ecol 16:363–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bota J, Medrano H, Flexas J (2004) Is photosynthesis limited by decreased Rubisco activity and RuBP content under progressive water stress? New Phytol 162:671–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruce TJA, Matthes MC, Napier JA, Pickett JA (2007) Stressful “memories” of plants: evidence and possible mechanisms. Plant Sci 173:603–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cano FJ, López R, Warren CR (2014) Implications of the mesophyll conductance to CO2 for photosynthesis and water-use efficiency during long-term water stress and recovery in two contrasting eucalyptus species. Plant, Cell Environ 37:2470–2490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chaves MM, Oliveira MM (2004) Mechanisms underlying plant resilience to water deficits: prospects for water-saving agriculture. J Exp Bot 55:2365–2384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Christina M, Le Maire G, Battie-Laclau P, Nouvellon Y, Bouillet J, Jourdan C, de Moraes Gonçalves J, Laclau J (2015) Measured and modeled interactive effects of potassium deficiency and water deficit on gross primary productivity and light-use efficiency in eucalyptus grandis plantations. Glob Chang Biol 21:2022–2039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Condon AG, Richards R, Rebetzke G, Farquhar G (2002) Improving intrinsic water use efficiency and crop yield. Crop Sci 42:122–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Correia B, Pintó-Marijuan M, Neves L, Brossa R, Dias M, Costa A, Castro B, Araújo C, Santos C, Chaves M, Pinto G (2014) Water stress and recovery in the performance of two Eucalyptus globulus clones: physiological and biochemical profiles. Physiol Plant 150:580–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Costa F, Shvaleva A, Maroco JP, Almeida M, Chaves M, Pereira J (2004) Responses to water stress in two Eucalyptus globulus clones differing in drought tolerance. Tree Physiol 24:1165–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davies WJ, Zhang J (1991) Root signals and the regulation of growth and development of plants in drying soil. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 42:55–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Diego N, Sampedro MC, Barrio RJ, Saiz-Fernández I, Moncaleán P, Lacuesta M (2013) Solute accumulation and elastic modulus changes in six radiata pine breeds exposed to drought. Tree Physiol 33:69–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ding Y, Fromm M, Avramova Z (2012) Multiple exposures to drought “train” transcriptional responses in Arabidopsis. Nat Commun 3:740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Donagema GK, de Campos DVB, Calderano SB, Teixeira W, Viana J (2011) Manual de métodos de análise de solo, 2nd edn. Embrapa Solos, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  18. Evans JR, Jakobsen I, Ögren E (1993) Photosynthetic light-response curves–2. Gradients of light absorption and photosynthetic capacity. Planta 189:191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Flexas J, Ribas-Carbo M, Bota J, Galmés J, Henkle M, Martínez-Cañellas S, Medrano H (2006) Decreased Rubisco activity during water stress is not induced by decreased relative water content but related to conditions of low stomatal conductance and chloroplast CO2 concentration. New Phytol 172:73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Friendly M, Sigal M (2014) Recent advances in visualizing multivariate linear models. Rev Colomb Estat 37:261–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Galmés J, Medrano H, Flexas J (2007) Photosynthetic limitations in response to water stress and recovery in Mediterranean plants with different growth forms. New Phytol 175:81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gittins R (1985) Canonical analysis: a review with applications in ecology springer-v, vol 12. Spriger, Berlin, p 360Google Scholar
  23. Grassi G, Magnani F (2005) Stomatal, mesophyll conductance and biochemical limitations to photosynthesis as affected by drought and leaf ontogeny in ash and oak trees. Plant, Cell Environ 28:834–849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hepworth C, Doheny-Adams T, Hunt L, Cameron D, Gray J (2015) Manipulating stomatal density enhances drought tolerance without deleterious effect on nutrient uptake. New Phytol 208:336–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hura T, Hura K, Dziurka K, Ostrowska A, Baczek-Kwinta R, Grzesiak M (2012) An increase in the content of cell wall-bound phenolics correlates with the productivity of triticale under soil drought. J Plant Physiol 169:1728–1736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. IBÁ (2016) Annual Report 2016. In: INDÚSTRIA Bras. ÁRVORES. http://iba.org/images/shared/Biblioteca/IBA_RelatorioAnual2016_.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2017
  27. Iwasaki M, Paszkowski J, Freeling M (2014) Epigenetic memory in plants. EMBO J 33:1987–1998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jarvis PG, McNaughton KG (1986) Stomatal control of transpiration: scaling up from leaf to region. Adv Ecol Res 15:1–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kadam NN, Yin X, Bindraban PS, Struik P, Jagadish K (2015) Does morphological and anatomical plasticity during the vegetative stage make wheat more tolerant of water deficit stress than rice? Plant Physiol 167:1389–1401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kamakura M, Kosugi Y, Takanashi S, Tobita H, Uemura A, Utsugi H (2012) Observation of the scale of patchy stomatal behavior in leaves of Quercus crispula using an Imaging-PAM chlorophyll fluorometer. Tree Physiol 32:839–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Keenan TF, Hollinger DY, Bohrer G, Dragoni D, Munger G, Schimid H, Richardson A (2013) Increase in forest water-use efficiency as atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations rise. Nature 499:324–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kinoshita T, Seki M (2014) Epigenetic memory for stress response and adaptation in plants. Plant Cell Physiol 55:1859–1863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kosugi Y, Takanashi S, Matsuo N, Nik AR (2009) Midday depression of leaf CO2 exchange within the crown of Dipterocarpus sublamellatus in a lowland dipterocarp forest in Peninsular Malaysia. Tree Physiol 29:505–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ladiges PY (1975) Some aspects of tissue water relations in three populations of Eucalyptus viminalis labill. New Phytol 75:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Le Gall H, Philippe F, Domon J-M, Gillet F, Pelloux J, Rayon C (2015) Cell wall metabolism in response to abiotic stress. Plants 4:112–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Li Y, Xu SS, Gao J, Pan S, Wang G (2014) Chlorella induces stomatal closure via NADPH oxidase-dependent ROS production and its effects on instantaneous water use efficiency in Vicia faba. PLoS ONE 9(3):e93290.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093290 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mansouri S, Radhouane L (2015) Is stomatal density an ideal tool to explain drought effect on photosynthesis in tunisian barley varieties? J Chem Biol Phys Sci 5:2865–2876Google Scholar
  38. Maseda PH, Fernández RJ (2015) Growth potential limits drought morphological plasticity in seedlings from six Eucalyptus provenances. Tree Physiol 36:243–251Google Scholar
  39. Merchant A, Peuke AD, Keitel C, Macfarlane C, Warren C, Adams M (2010) Phloem sap and leaf 13C, carbohydrates, and amino acid concentrations in Eucalyptus globulus change systematically according to flooding and water deficit treatment. J Exp Bot 61:1785–1793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Molinier J, Ries G, Zipfel C, Hohn B (2006) Transgeneration memory of stress in plants. Nature 442:1046–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peguero-Pina JJ, Sancho-Knapik D, Barrón E, Camarero J, Vilagrosa A, Gill-Pelegron E (2014) Morphological and physiological divergences within Quercus ilex support the existence of different ecotypes depending on climatic dryness. Ann Bot 114:301–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peguero-Pina JJ, Sisó S, Sancho-Knapik D, Díaz-Espejo A, Flexas J, Galmés J, Gil-Pelegrín E (2016) Leaf morphological and physiological adaptations of a deciduous oak (Quercus faginea Lam.) to the Mediterranean climate: a comparison with a closely related temperate species (Quercus robur L.). Tree Physiol 36:287–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Prezotti LC, Gomes JA, Dadalto GG (2007) Manual de recomendação de calagem e adubação para o Estado do Espírito Santo: 5a aproximação., INCAPER. VitóriaGoogle Scholar
  44. R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  45. Reynolds JF, Thornley JHM (1982) A shoot:root partitioning model. Ann Bot 49:585–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ricardi MM, González RM, Zhong S, Domínguez P, Duffy T, Turjanski P, Salter J, Alleva K, Carrai F, Giovannoni J, Estévez J, Iusem N (2014) Genome-wide data (ChIP-seq) enabled identification of cell wall-related and aquaporin genes as targets of tomato ASR1, a drought stress-responsive transcription factor. BMC Plant Biol 14:29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Steudle E (2000a) Water uptake by roots: effects of water deficit. J Exp Bot 51:1531–1542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Steudle E (2000b) Water uptake by plant roots: an integration of views. Plant Soil 226:45–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Taiz L, Zeiger E (2013) Plant Physiology, 5th edn. Artmed, Porto AlegreGoogle Scholar
  50. Tezara W, Mitchell V, Driscoll SP, Lawlor DW (2002) Effects of water deficit and its interaction with CO2 supply on the biochemistry and physiology of photosynthesis in sunflower. J Exp Bot 53:1781–1791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thimmanaik S, Kumar SG, Kumari GJ, Suryanarayana N, Sudhakar C (2002) Photosynthesis and the enzymes of photosynthetic carbon reduction cycle in mulberry during water stress and recovery. Photosynthetica 40:233–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Thumma BR, Sharma N, Southerton SG (2012) Transcriptome sequencing of Eucalyptus camaldulensis seedlings subjected to water stress reveals functional single nucleotide polymorphisms and genes under selection. BMC Genom 13:364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Villar E, Klopp C, Noirot C, Novaes E, Kirst M, Plomion C, Gion J (2011) RNA-Seq reveals genotype-specific molecular responses to water deficit in eucalyptus. BMC Genom 12:538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Warren CR, Aranda I, Cano FJ (2011) Responses to water stress of gas exchange and metabolites in Eucalyptus and Acacia spp. Plant, Cell Environ 34:1609–1629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. White DA, Crombie DS, Kinal J, Battaglia M, McGrath J, Mendham D, Walker S (2009) Managing productivity and drought risk in Eucalyptus globulus plantations in south-western Australia. For Ecol Manage 259:33–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Xu Z, Zhou G (2008) Responses of leaf stomatal density to water status and its relationship with photosynthesis in a grass. J Exp Bot 59:3317–3325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Xu Z, Zhou G, Shimizu H (2010) Plant responses to drought and rewatering. Plant Signal Behav 5:649–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhou S, Medlyn B, Sabaté S, Sperlich D, Prectice J (2014) Short-term water stress impacts on stomatal, mesophyll and biochemical limitations to photosynthesis differ consistently among tree species from contrasting climates. Tree Physiol 34:1035–1046CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Northeast Forestry University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rogério de Souza Nóia Júnior
    • 1
    Email author
  • Genilda Canuto Amaral
    • 2
  • José Eduardo Macedo Pezzopane
    • 2
  • Mariana Duarte Silva Fonseca
    • 2
  • Ana Paula Câmara da Silva
    • 2
  • Talita Miranda Teixeira Xavier
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biosystems Engineering ESALQUniversity of São PauloPiracicabaBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Forestry Sciences NEDTECFederal University of Espirito SantoJerônimo MonteiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations