Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp 296–302 | Cite as

Ecology of SO2 resistance: II. Photosynthetic changes of shrubs in relation to SO2 absorption and stomatal behavior

  • William E. Winner
  • Harold A. Mooney
Article

Summary

In an effort to predict SO2 sensitivity of plants from their morphological and physiological features, the effects of SO2 on photosynthesis were partitioned between stomatal and nonstomatal components for a drought deciduous shrub, Diplacus aurantiacus, and an evergreen shrub, Heteromeles arbutifolia. As predicted, the drought deciduous shrub had the higher gas conductance, and hence SO2 absorptance. However, nonstomatal components also play a role in determining SO2 sensitivity. Apparently a plant with a high intrinsic photosynthetic capacity will be more sensitive to SO2 than one with a lower capacity.

Keywords

Photosynthesis Physiological Feature Photosynthetic Capacity Lower Capacity Evergreen Shrub 
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. Ashenden, T.W.: Effects of SO2 and NO2 pollution on transpiration in Phaseolus vulgaris L. Environ. Pollut. 18, 45–50 (1979)Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, J.H., Hill, A.C., Gates, D.M.: A model for gaseous pollutant sorption by leaves. J. Air Pollut. Control Assn. 23, 957–962 (1973)Google Scholar
  3. Biscoe, P.J., Unsworth, M.H., Pinckney, H.R.: The effects of low concentrations of sulphur dioxide on stomatal behavior in Vicia faba. New Phytol. 72, 1299–1306 (1973)Google Scholar
  4. Bressan, R.A., Wilson L.G., Filner, P.: Mechanisms of resistance to sulfur dioxide in the Cucurbitaceae. Plant Physiol. 61, 761–767 (1978)Google Scholar
  5. Bull, J.N., Mansfield, T.A.: Photosynthesis in leaves exposed to SO2 and NO2. Nature 250, 443–444 (1974)Google Scholar
  6. Caput, C., Belot, Y., Auclair, D., Decourt, N.: Absorption of sulphur dioxide by pine needles leading to acute injury. Environ. Pollut. 16, 3–15 (1978)Google Scholar
  7. Daines, R.H.: Sulphur dioxide and plant response. J. Occupational Medicine 10, 516–526 (1968)Google Scholar
  8. Elkiey, T., Ormrod, D.P.: Physiological and morphological mechanisms of ozone and sulfur dioxide sensitivity in Petunia. Abstract only in Plant Physiol. Suppl. 63 150 (1979)Google Scholar
  9. Fowler, D., Unsworth, M.H.: Dry deposition of sulphur dioxide on wheat. Nature 249, 389–390 (1974)Google Scholar
  10. Godzik, S., Sassen, M.A.: A scanning electron microscope examination of Aesculus hippocastanum leaves from control and air-polluted areas. Environ. Pollut. 17, 13–18 (1978)Google Scholar
  11. Harrison, A.T., Small, E., Mooney, H.A.: Drought relationships and distribution of two Mediterranean-climate California plant communities. Ecology 52, 869–875 (1971)Google Scholar
  12. Levitt, J.: Responses of Plants to Environmental Stresses, pp. 697. New York: Academic Press 1972Google Scholar
  13. Majernik, O., Mansfield, T.A.: Direct effect of SO2 pollution on the degree of opening of stomata. Nature 227, 377–378 (1970)Google Scholar
  14. Majernik O., Mansfield, T.A.: Effects of SO2 on stomatal movements in Vicia faba. Phytopath. Z. 71, 123–128 (1971)Google Scholar
  15. Majernik, O., Mansfield, T.A.: Stomatal responses to raised atmospheric CO2 concentrations during exposure of plants to SO2 pollution. Environ. Pollut. 3, 1–7 (1972)Google Scholar
  16. Mansfield, T.A., Heath, O.J.S.: An effect of ‘smog’ on stomatal behavior. Nature 200, 596 (1963)Google Scholar
  17. Mansfield, T.A., Majernik, O.: Can stomata play a part in protecting plants against air pollutants? Environ. Pollut. 1, 149–154 (1970)Google Scholar
  18. Mooney, H.A., Dunn, E.L.: Photosynthetic systems of mediterranean climate shrubs and trees of California and Chile. Am. Natur. 104, 447–453 (1970)Google Scholar
  19. Mooney, H.A., Ehleringer, J., Berry, J.A.: High photosynthetic capacity of a winter annual in Death Valley. Science 194, 322–324 (1976)Google Scholar
  20. Mooney, H.A., Björkman, O., Collatz, G.J.: Photosynthetic acclimation to temperature and water stress in the desert shrub Larrea divaricata. Carnegie Inst. Yearbook 76, 328–335 (1977)Google Scholar
  21. Mooney, H.A., Ferrar, P.J., Slatyer, R.O.: Photosynthetic capacity and carbon allocation patterns in diverse growth forms of Eucalyptus. Oecologia 36, 103–111 (1978)Google Scholar
  22. Sharma, G.K.: Leaf surface effects of environmental pollution on sugar maple (Acer saccharum) in Montreal. Can J. Bot. 53, 2312–2314 (1975)Google Scholar
  23. Sharma, G.K., Butler, J.: Environmental pollution: leaf cuticular patterns in Trifolium pratense L. Ann. Bot. 39, 1087–1090 (1975)Google Scholar
  24. Taylor, G.E., Jr.: Plant and leaf resistance to gaseous air pollution stress. New Phytol 80, 523–534 (1978)Google Scholar
  25. Thomas, M.D.: Effects of air pollutants on plants, pp. 233–278. In: Air Pollution. WHO Monograph Series 46. Geneva, Switzerland (1961)Google Scholar
  26. Unsworth, M.H., Biscoe, P.J., Pinckney, H.R.: Stomatal responses to sulphur dioxide. Nature 239, 458–459 (1972)Google Scholar
  27. Winner, W.E., Bewley, J.D., Krouse, H.R., Brown, H.M.: Stable isotope analysis of SO2 pollution impact on vegetation. Oecologia 36, 351–361 (1978)Google Scholar
  28. Winner, W.E., Mooney, H.A.: Ecology of SO2 resistance: I. effects of fumigations on gas exchange of deciduous and evergreen shrubs. Oecologia (Berl.) 44, 290–295 (1980)Google Scholar
  29. Ziegler, I.: The effects of SO2 pollution on plant metabolism. Residue Reviews 56, 79–105 (1975)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • William E. Winner
    • 1
  • Harold A. Mooney
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesStandord UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations