Acta Physiologiae Plantarum

, 41:22 | Cite as

Seasonal dynamics of the water relations and photochemical efficiency of Copaifera langsdorffii Desf. co-occurring in savanna and seasonal forest

  • Angélica Lino Rodrigues
  • Angelo Albano da Silva Bertholdi
  • Luís Paulo Benetti Mantoan
  • Danilo Miralha Franco
  • Gustavo Habermann
  • Luiz Fernando Rolim de AlmeidaEmail author
Original Article


Seasonal dynamics can have important effects on vegetation structure and the physiological responses of species that co-occur in tropical savanna and seasonal forest. Few studies have revealed the physiological adjustments achieved by species that are widely distributed among diverse environments and occupying different physiognomies. We evaluated physiological parameters of Copaifera langsdorffii Desf. between periods in formations of seasonal forest and savanna in Southeast Brazil. Stomatal conductance (gs), relative water content, leaf water potential (ΨWleaf), and chlorophyll a fluorescence were evaluated throughout the course of a single year. In the dry season, C. langsdorffii exhibited partial isohydric behavior in the savanna and strict anisohydric behavior in the seasonal forest. Stomatal regulation in anisohydric plants can have a negative effect on the functioning of the photochemical apparatus. Thereby, the lower thermal dissipation increases the excitation of photosystems resulting in degradation of PSII proteins, which is associated with environmental stress. Poor control of water loss under conditions of high evaporative demand and low leaf water potential lead to lower photochemical efficiency in plants of C. langsdorffii in the seasonal forest than in the savanna.


Seasonality Drought Photosynthesis Photochemistry Leaf water relationships Rehydration 



We acknowledge the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP—Grant 2010/15585-6) and the Coordination for Improvement of Graduate Personnel (CAPES) for the scholarships to A.L. Rodrigues. We also acknowledge the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for a research productivity fellowship granted to G. Habermann (Grant 308902/2014-9).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Attia Z, Domec JC, Oren R, Way DA, Moshelion M (2015) Growth and physiological responses of isohydric and anisohydric poplars to drought. J Exp Bot 66:4373–4381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker NR (2008) Chlorophyll fluorescence: a probe of photosynthesis in vivo. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:89–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bianchini E, Pimenta JA, dos Santos FAM (2001) Spatial and temporal variation in the canopy cover in a tropical semi-deciduous forest. Braz Arch Biol Technol 44:269–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonal D, Guehl JM (2001) Contrasting patterns of leaf water potential and gas exchange responses to drought in seedlings of tropical rainforest species. Funct Ecol 15:490–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cepagri. Centro de Pesquisas Meteorológicas e Climáticas Aplicadas à Agricultura (2016) Clima dos Municípios PaulistasGoogle Scholar
  6. Corcuera L, Notivol E (2015) Differences in photosynthetic activity might explain the large-scale shifts in pine recruitment in favour of oaks in continental Mediterranean climates. Forestry 88:248–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coutinho LM (2002) O bioma do cerrado. In: Klein AL (ed) Eugen warming e o cerrado brasileiro: um século depois. UNESP, São Paulo, pp 77–91Google Scholar
  8. Dantas V, Batalha MA (2011) Vegetation structure: fine scale relationships with soil in a cerrado site. Flora Morphol Distrib Funct Ecol Plants 206:341–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. de Melo Júnior JCF, Bona C, Ceccantini G (2012) Anatomia foliar de Copaifera langsdorffii Desf. (Leguminosae): interpretações ecológicas em diferentes condições edáficas de Cerrado. Biotemas 25:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Demmig-Adams B, Adams WW III, Barker DH, Logan BA, Bowling DR, Verhoeven AS (1996) Using chlorophyll fluorescence to assess the fraction of absorbed light allocated to thermal dissipation of excess excitation. Physiol Plant 98:253–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Domec JC, Johnson DM (2012) Does homeostasis or disturbance of homeostasis in minimum leaf water potential explain the isohydric versus anisohydric behavior of Vitis vinifera L. cultivars? Tree Physiol 32:245–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Feistler AM, Habermann G (2012) Assessing the role of vertical leaves within the photosynthetic function of Styrax camporum under drought conditions. Photosynthetica 50:613–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Franco AC, Bustamante M, Caldas LS, Goldstein G, Meinzer FC, Kozovits AR, Rundel P, Coradin VTR (2005) Leaf functional traits of neotropical savanna trees in relation to seasonal water deficit. Trees Struct Funct 19:326–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gago J, de Menezes Daloso D, Figueroa CM, Flexas J, Fernie AR, Nikoloski Z (2016) Relationships of leaf net photosynthesis, stomatal conductance, and mesophyll conductance to primary metabolism: a multispecies meta-analysis approach. Plant Physiol 171:265–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Genty B, Briantais JM, Baker NR (1989) The relationship between the quantum yield of photosynthetic electron transport and quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence. Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj 990:87–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Habermann G, Ellsworth PF, Cazoto JL, Simão E, Bieras AC (2011) Comparative gas exchange performance during the wet season of three Brazilian Styrax species under habitat conditions of cerrado vegetation types differing in soil water availability and crown density. Flora 206:351–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hazrati S, Tahmasebi-sarvestani Z, Modarres-sanavy SAM, Mokhtassi-bidgoli A, Nicola S (2016) Effects of water stress and light intensity on chlorophyll fluorescence parameters and pigments of Aloe vera L. Plant Physiol Biochem 106:141–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hoffmann WA, Marchin RM, Abit P, Lau OL (2011) Hydraulic failure and tree dieback are associated with high wood density in a temperate forest under extreme drought. Glob Change Biol 17:2731–2742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hoffmann WA, Geiger EL, Gotsch SG, Rossatto DR, Silva LCR, Lau OL, Haridasan M, Franco AC (2012) Ecological thresholds at the savanna-forest boundary: how plant traits, resources and fire govern the distribution of tropical biomes. Ecol Lett 15:759–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones HG (1992) Plants and microclimate: a quantitative approach to environmental plant physiology, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. Kalaji HM, Jajoo A, Oukarroum A, Brestic M, Zivcak M, Samborska IA, Cetner MD, Lukasik I, Goltsev V, Ladle RJ (2016) Chlorophyll a fluorescence as a tool to monitor physiological status of plants under abiotic stress conditions. Acta Physiol Plant 38:102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kato MC, Hikosaka K, Hirotsu N, Makino A, Hirose T (2003) The excess light energy that is neither utilized in photosynthesis nor dissipated by photoprotective mechanisms determines the rate of photoinactivation in photosystem II. Plant Cell Physiol 44:318–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Klein T (2014) The variability of stomatal sensitivity to leaf water potential across tree species indicates a continuum between isohydric and anisohydric behaviours. Funct Ecol 28:1313–1320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Köppen W (1900) Versuch einer Klassifikation der Klimate, vorzugsweise nach ihren Beziehungen zur Pflanzenwelt. Geographische Zeitschrift 6:593–611Google Scholar
  25. Kudoyarova GR, Kholodova VP, Veselov DS (2013) Current state of the problem of water relations in plants under water deficit. Russ J Plant Physiol 60:165–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Martinez-Vilalta J, Poyatos R, Aguadé D, Retana J, Mencuccini M (2014) A new look at water transport regulation in plants. N Phytol 204:105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McDowell N, Pockman WT, Allen CD, Breshears DD, Cobb N, Kolb T, Plaut J, Sperry J, West A, Williams DG, Yepez EA (2008) Mechanisms of plant survival and mortality during drought: why do some plants survive while others succumb to drought? N Phytol 178:719–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nilkens M, Kress E, Lambrev P, Miloslavina Y, Müller M, Holzwarth AR, Jahns P (2010) Identification of a slowly inducible zeaxanthin-dependent component of non-photochemical quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence generated under steady-state conditions in Arabidopsis. Biochim Biophys Acta (BBA) Bioenergetics 1797:466–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pedroni F, Sanchez M, Santos FAM (2002) Fenologia da copaíba (Copaifera langsdorffii Desf.–Leguminosae, Caesalpinioideae) em uma floresta semidecídua no sudeste do Brasil. Rev Bras Botânica 25:183–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pinheiro MHO, Monteiro R (2006) Contribution of forest species to the floristic composition of a forested savanna in southeastern Brazil. Braz Arch Biol Technol 49:763–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ramalho JC, Zlatev ZS, Leitão AE, Pais IP, Fortunato AS, Lidon FC (2014) Moderate water stress causes different stomatal and non-stomatal changes in the photosynthetic functioning of Phaseolus vulgaris L. genotypes. Plant Biol 16:133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ramírez-Valiente JA, Sánchez-Gómez D, Aranda I, Valladares F (2010) Phenotypic plasticity and local adaptation in leaf ecophysiological traits of 13 contrasting cork oak populations under different water availabilities. Tree Physiol 30:618–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ribeiro JF, Walter BMT (2008) As principais fitofisionomias do Bioma Cerrado. In: Sano SM, Almeida SP, Ribeiro JF (eds) Cerrado: ecologia e flora Embrapa Cerrados, pp 151–212Google Scholar
  34. Roman DT, Novick KA, Brzostek ER, Dragoni D, Rahman F, Phillips RP (2015) The role of isohydric and anisohydric species in determining ecosystem-scale response to severe drought. Oecologia 179:641–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ronquim CC, Prado CH, Souza JP (2009) Growth, photosynthesis and leaf water potential in young plants of Copaifera langsdorffii Desf. (Caesalpiniaceae) under contrasting irradiances. Braz J Plant Physiol 21:197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rossatto DR, Hoffmann WA, de Carvalho Ramos Silva L, Haridasan M, Sternberg LSL, Franco AC (2013a) Seasonal variation in leaf traits between congeneric savanna and forest trees in Central Brazil: implications for forest expansion into savanna. Trees Struct Funct 27:1139–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rossatto DR, Hoffmann WA, Silva LCR, Haridasan M, Sternberg LSL, Franco AC (2013b) Seasonal variation in leaf traits between congeneric savanna and forest trees in Central Brazil: implications for forest expansion into savanna. Trees 27:1139–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Scalon MC, Rossatto DR, Domingos FMCB, Franco AC (2016) Leaf morphophysiology of a Neotropical mistletoe is shaped by seasonal patterns of host leaf phenology. Oecologia 180:1103–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schäfer KVR (2011) Canopy stomatal conductance following drought, disturbance, and death in an upland oak/pine forest of the New Jersey Pine Barrens, USA. Front Plant Sci 2:15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sheffield J, Wood EF (2008) Project changes in drought occurence under future global warming from multi-model, mult-scenario, IPCC AR4 simulations. Clim Dyn 31:79–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Silva JM, Arrabaça MC (2004) Photosynthesis in the water-stressed C4 grass Setaria sphacelata is mainly limited by stomata with both rapidly and slowly imposed water deficits. Physiol Plant 121:409–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Silvestre WVD, Silva PA, Palheta LF, de Oliveira Neto CF, de Melo Souza ROR, Festucci-Buselli RA, Pinheiro HA (2017) Differential tolerance to water deficit in two açaí (Euterpe oleracea Mart.) plant materials. Acta physiol plant 39:4Google Scholar
  43. Souza MC, Franco AC, Haridasan M, Rossatto DR, de Araújo JF, Morelatto LPC, Habermann G (2015) The length of the dry season may be associated with leaf scleromorphism in Cerrado plants. An Acad Bras Ciênc 87:1691–1699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Staver AC, Archibald S, Levin SA (2011) The global extent and determinants of savanna and forest as alternative biome states. Science 334:230–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tagesson T, Fensholt R, Cropley F, Guiro I, Horion S, Ehammer A, Ardö J (2015) Dynamics in carbon exchange fluxes for a grazed semi-arid savanna ecosystem in West Africa. Agric Ecosyst Environ 205:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Thornthwaite CW, Mather JR (1955) The water balance. Centerton: Drexel Institute of Technology. Publ Climatol 8:104Google Scholar
  47. Viani RAG, Rodrigues RR, Dawson TE, Lambers H, Oliveira RS (2014) Soil pH accounts for differences in species distribution and leaf nutrient concentrations of Brazilian woodland savannah and seasonally dry forest species. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 16:64–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wong SL, Chen CW, Huang HW, Weng JH (2012) Using combined measurements for comparison of light induction of stomatal conductance, electron transport rate and CO2 fixation in woody and fern species adapted to different light regimes. Tree Physiol 32:535–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Xu Z, Zhou G, Shimizu H (2009) Are plant growth and photosynthesis limited by pre-drought following rewatering in grass? J Exp Bot 60:3737–3749CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Franciszek Górski Institute of Plant Physiology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angélica Lino Rodrigues
    • 1
  • Angelo Albano da Silva Bertholdi
    • 1
  • Luís Paulo Benetti Mantoan
    • 1
  • Danilo Miralha Franco
    • 1
  • Gustavo Habermann
    • 2
  • Luiz Fernando Rolim de Almeida
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Botany, Institute of BiosciencesUniv Estadual Paulista (UNESP)BotucatuBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Botany, Institute of BiosciencesUniv Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Rio ClaroBrazil

Personalised recommendations