Advertisement

Stomatal Physiology and Gas Exchange in the Field: Commentary

  • B. J. Legg
Conference paper

Summary

An optimisation theory of stomatal movement is used to show the type of survival strategy that plants might adopt during drought. The theory cannot readily be used to explain stomatal movement in cultivated crops, as they are now grown in an alien environment, but it could be used in future to determine the ideal response in any given climate.

There are still difficulties with all methods for measuring gas exchange in the field. Micrometeorological methods require a large uniform fetch and we cannot yet be sure that all the theoretical problems have been resolved. The use of field enclosures changes the environment around the vegetation: in recent studies this has not affected transpiration but has had a major effect on CO2 uptake rates. Combined micrometeorological-physiological methods are still the best in many situations, but we are not yet able to predict the surface resistance to water vapour loss for vegetation growing in dry soils.

Keywords

Vapour Pressure Deficit Surface Resistance Bowen Ratio Stomatal Resistance Stomatal Movement 
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. Biscoe PV, Gallagher JN (1978) A physical analysis of cereal yield. I Production of dry matter. Agric Prog 53: 34–50Google Scholar
  2. Blackman PG, Davies WJ (1985) Root to shoot communication in maize plants of the effects of soil drying. J Exp Bot 36: 39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clough BG, Andrews TJ, Cowan IR (1982) Physiological processes in mangroves. In: Clough BF (ed) Mangrove ecosystems in Australia. Structure, function and management. Australian National University Press, Canberra, pp 193–210Google Scholar
  4. Cowan IR (1977) Stomatal behaviour and environment. Adv Bot Res 4: 117–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cowan IR (1988) Stomatal physiology and gas exchange in the field. This volume, ppGoogle Scholar
  6. Cowan IR, Farquhar GD (1977) Stomatal function in relation to leaf metabolism and environment. In: Jenkins DH (ed) Integration of activity in the higher plant, The Soc for Exp Biol Symp No X XXI, University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Denmead OT (1983) Micrometeorological methods for measuring gaseous losses of nitrogen in the field. In: Freney JR, Simpson JR (eds) Gaseous loss of nitrogen from plant-soil systems. Martinus Nijhoff/Dr W Junk, The Hague, p 133Google Scholar
  8. Denmead OT, Simpson JR, Freney JR (1977) A direct field measurement of ammonia emission after injection of anhydrous ammonia. Soil Sci Soc Am J 41: 1001–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Denmead OT, Bradley EF (1985) Flux-gradient relationships in a forest canopy. In: Hutchison BA, Hicks BB (eds) The forest-atmosphere interaction. D Reidel, Dordrecht, pp 421–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dunin FX, Greenwood EAN (1986) Evaluation of the ventilated chamber for measuring evaporation from a forest. Hydrol Proc 1: 47–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Foster IJ, Leuning R (1987) Comparison of three methods for estimating transpiration by single trees: ventilated chamber, leaf energy budget, and Penman-Monteith equation. CSIRO Div For Res User Series 7, 34 ppGoogle Scholar
  12. Gollan T, Passioura JB, Munns R (1986) Soil water status affects the stomatal conductance of fully turgid wheat and sunflower leaves. Aust J Plant Physiol 13: 459–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Green SR, Clothier BE (1987) Water use of kiwifruit vines and apple trees by the heat-pulse technique. J Exp Bot, in pressGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanson AD, Hitz WD (1982) Metabolic responses of mesophytes to plant water deficits. Ann Rev Plant Physiol 33: 162–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Linacre, ET, Hicks BB, Sainty GR, Grauze G (1970) The evaporation from a swamp. Agric Meteorol 7: 375–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Monteith JL (1981) Evaporation and surface temperature. Q J R Meteorol Soc 107: 1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ohtaki E, Matsui T (1982) Infrared device for simultaneous measurement of fluctuations of atmospheric carbon dioxide and water vapour. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 24: 109–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Penman HL (1952) The physical bases of irrigation control. Rep 13th Int Hort Congr 2: 913Google Scholar
  19. Philip JR (1963) The damping of a fluctuating concentration by continuous sampling through a tube. Aust J Phys 16: 454–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Raupach MR (1988) Canopy transport processes. This volume, ppGoogle Scholar
  21. Raupach MR, Legg BJ (1984) The uses and limitations of flux-gradient relationships in micrometeorology. Agric Water Manage 8: 119–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Russell G (1980) Crop evaporation, surface resistance, and soil water status. Agric Meteorol 21: 213–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sakuratani T (1981) A heat balance method for measuring water flux in the stem of intact plants. J Agric Meteorol 37: 9–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sheehy JE, Cobby JM, Ryle GJA (1979) The growth of perennial ryegrass: a model. Ann Bot 43: 335–354Google Scholar
  25. Swanson RG (1983) Numerical and experimental analysis of implanted-probe heat pulse theory. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of AlbertaGoogle Scholar
  26. Webb EK, Pearman GI, Leuning R (1980) Correction of flux measurements for density effects due to heat and water vapour transfer. Q J R Meteorol Soc 106: 85–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. J. Legg
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Engineering ResearchSilsoe, BedfordUK

Personalised recommendations