Advertisement

Deciduous Hardwood Photosynthesis: Species Differences, Temporal Patterns, and Responses to Soil-Water Deficits

  • Kell B. Wilson
  • Paul J. Hanson
Part of the Ecological Studies book series (ECOLSTUD, volume 166)

Abstract

Changes in regional precipitation patterns will directly impact soil and foliage water status, resulting in physiological modifications in trees that can affect carbon assimilation rates (Briggs et al. 1986; Teskey et al. 1986; Ni and Pallardy 1992). Decreasing water potentials in the root and/or foliage can affect the carbon assimilation by adjusting stomatal conductance (Hinckley et al. 1978a; Epron and Dreyer 1993; Lowenstein and Pallardy 1998) or possibly by directly impacting the biochemical potential for carbon assimilation in the leaf (Lawlor 1995; Escalona et al. 1999). Tree species differ in their morphology and use of physiologic adaptations to avoid the negative impacts of drought on carbon assimilation (Hinckley et al. 1978b; Bahari et al. 1985; Briggs et al. 1986; Ni and Pallardy 1992; Abrams and Mostoller 1995; Lowenstein and Pallardy 1998; Tschaplinski et al. 1998). Species-specific differences in gas-exchange response to drought depend on characteristics such as rooting depth, stomatal sensitivity, osmotic adjustment, cavitation avoidance, and increased tolerance of desiccation (Abrams 1990; Lowenstein and Pallardy 1998; Tshaplinski et al. 1998). For example, because of their deep rooting habit, Quercus species are expected to outcompete the more mesic Acer and Cornus species in dry climates (Hinckley et al. 1979; Bahari et al. 1985; Abrams 1990). Species also may differ in their ability to recover predrought photosynthetic rates following a precipitation event (Ni and Pallardy 1992). Because of shallower rooting depths and limited water-storage capacity, photosynthesis of understory species and saplings is expected to be more sensitive to drying when compared to large overstory trees (Donovan and Ehleringer 1991; Flanagan et al. 1992).

Keywords

Assimilation Rate Understory Species Versus Cmax Quercus Species Nyssa Sylvatica 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrams MD (1990) Adaptations and responses to drought in Quercus species of North America. Tree Physiol 7: 227–238.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Abrams MD (1998) The red maple paradox. Bioscience 48:355–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abrams MD, Mostoller SA (1995) Gas exchange, leaf structure and nitrogen in contrasting successional tree species growing in open and understory sites during a drought. Tree Physiol 15:361–370.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bahari ZA, Pallardy SG, Parker WC (1985) Photosynthesis, water relations, and drought adaptation in six woody species of oak-hickory forests in central Missouri. For Sci 31:557–569.Google Scholar
  5. Bassow SL, Bazzaz FA (1998) How environmental conditions affect canopy leaf-level photosynthesis in four deciduous tree species. Ecology 79:2660–2675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Briggs TW, Jurik TW, Gates DM (1986) Non-stomatal limitation of CO2 assimilation in three tree species during natural drought conditions. Physiol Plant 66:521–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ceulemans RJ, Saugier B (1991) Photosynthesis. In Raghavendra AS (Ed) Physiology of trees, John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 21–50.Google Scholar
  8. Donovan LA, Ehleringer JR (1991) Ecophysiological differences among juvenile and reproductive plants of several woody species. Oecologia 86:594–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dougherty PM, Hinckley TM (1980) The influence of a severe drought on net photosynthesis of white oak (Quercus alba). Can J Bot 59:335–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Epron D, Dreyer E (1993) Photosynthesis of oak leaves under water stress: Maintenance of high photochemical efficiency of photosystem II and occurrence of non-uniform CO2 assimilation. Tree Physiol 13:107–117.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Escalona JM, Flexas J, Medrano H (1999) Stomatal and non-stomatal limitations of photosynthesis under water stress in field-grown grapevines. Aust J Plant Physiol 26:421–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Farquhar GD, von Caemmerer S, Berry JA (1980) A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta 149:78–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flanagan LB, Ehleringer JR, Marshall JD (1992) Differential uptake of summer precipitation among co-occurring trees and shrubs in a pinyon juniper woodland. Plant Cell Environ 15:831–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanson PJ, Todd DE, Amthor JS (2001) A six year study of sapling and large-tree growth and mortality responses to natural and induced variability in precipitation and throughfall. Tree Physiol 21:345–358.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hinckley TM, Aslin RG, Aubuchon RR, Metcalf CL, Roberts JE (1978) Leaf conductance and photosynthesis in four species of the oak-hickory forest type. For Sci 24:73–84.Google Scholar
  16. Hinckley TM, Lassoie JP, Running SW (1978) Temporal and spatial variations in the water status of forest trees. For Sci 24:1–72.Google Scholar
  17. Hinckley TM, Dougherty PM, Lassoie JP, Roberts JE, Teskey RO (1979) A severe drought: Impact on tree growth, phenology, net photosynthetic rate and water relations. Am Midi Nat 102:307–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jurik TW (1986) Seasonal patterns of leaf photosynthetic capacity in successional northern hardwood tree species. Am J Bot 73:131–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kubiske MD, Abrams MD (1994) Ecophysiological analysis of woody species in contrasting temperate communities during wet and dry years. Oecologia 98:303–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Larcher W (1969) The effect of environmental and physiological variables on the carbon dioxide gas exchange of trees. Photosynthetica 3:167–198.Google Scholar
  21. Lawlor DW (1995) The effects of water deficit on photosynthesis. In Smirnoff N (Ed) Environment and plant metabolism, Flexibility and acclimation. Bios Scientific Publishers, Oxford, England, pp 129–160.Google Scholar
  22. Loewenstein NJ, Pallardy SG (1998) Drought tolerance, xylem sap abscisic acid and stomatal conductance during soil drying: A comparison of canopy trees of three temperate deciduous angiosperms. Tree Physiol 18:431–439.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Naumberg E, Ellsworth DS (2000) Photosynthetic sunfleck utilization potential of understory saplings growing under elevated CO2 in FACE. Oecologia 122:163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ni R, Pallardy SG (1992) Stomatal and nonstomatal limitations to net photosynthesis in seedlings of woody angiosperms. Plant Physiol 99:1502–1508.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Reich PB, Walters MB, Ellsworth DS (1991) Leaf age and season influence the relationships between leaf nitrogen, leaf mass per area and photosynthesis in maple and oak trees. Plant Cell Environ 14:251–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sullivan NH, Bolstad PV, Vose JM (1996) Estimates of net photosynthetic parameters in mature forests of the Southern Appalachians. Tree Physiol. 16:397–406.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Teskey RO, Fites JA, Samuelson LJ, Bongarten BC (1986) Stomatal and nonstomatal limitations to net photosynthesis in Pinus taeda L. under different environmental conditions. Tree Physiol 2:131–142.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Tschaplinski TJ, Gebre GM, Shirshac TL (1998) Osmotic potential of several hardwood species as affected by manipulation of throughfall precipitation in an upland oak forest during a dry year. Tree Physiol 18:291–298.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wilson KB, Baldocchi DD, Hanson PJ (2000a) Spatial and seasonal variability of photosynthetic parameters and their relationship to leaf nitrogen in a deciduous forest. Tree Physiol 20:565–578.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wilson KB, Baldocchi DD, Hanson PJ (2000b) Quantifying stomatal and non-stomatal limitations to carbon assimilation resulting from leaf aging and drought in mature deciduous tree species. Tree Physiol 20:787–797.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wilson KB, Baldocchi DD, Hanson PJ (2001) Leaf age affects the seasonal pattern of photosynthetic capacity and net ecosystem exchange of carbon in a deciduous forest. Plant Cell Environ 24:571–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wullschleger S (1993) Biochemical limitations to carbon assimilation in C3 plants—a retrospective analysis of the A/Ci curves from 109 species. J Exp Bot 44:907–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wullschleger S, Hanson PJ, Tchaplinski TJ (1998) Whole-plant water flux in understory red maple exposed to altered precipitation regimes. Tree Physiol 18:71–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kell B. Wilson
  • Paul J. Hanson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations