, Volume 177, Issue 4, pp 1171–1181 | Cite as

Stomatal structure and physiology do not explain differences in water use among montane eucalypts

  • Mana Gharun
  • Tarryn L. Turnbull
  • Sebastian Pfautsch
  • Mark A. Adams
Physiological ecology - Original research


Understanding the regulation of water use at the whole-tree scale is critical to advancing the utility of physiological ecology, for example in its role in predictive hydrology of forested catchments. For three eucalypt species that dominate high-elevation catchments in south-eastern Australia, we examined if whole-tree water use could be related to three widely discussed regulators of water use: stomatal anatomy, sensitivity of stomata [i.e. stomatal conductance (g s)] to environmental influences, and sapwood area. While daily tree water use varied sixfold among species, sap velocity and sapwood area varied in parallel. Combined, stomatal structure and physiology could not explain differences in species-specific water use. Species which exhibited the fastest (Eucalyptus delegatensis) and slowest (Eucalyptus pauciflora) rates of water use both exhibited greater capacity for physiological control of g s [indicated by sensitivity to vapour pressure deficit (VPD)] and a reduced capacity to limit g s anatomically [indicated by greater potential g s (g max)]. Conversely, g s was insensitive to VPD and g max was lowest for Eucalyptus radiata, the species showing intermediate rates of water use. Improved knowledge of stomatal anatomy will help us to understand the capacity of species to regulate leaf-level water loss, but seems likely to remain of limited use for explaining rates of whole-tree water use in montane eucalypts at the catchment scale.


Ecophysiology Sap flow Stomatal conductance Cuticular ledge Vapour pressure deficit 



We thank Michael Kemp, Neil Murdoch, Joseph Henry, Alexandra Barlow and Rachel Walker for field assistance, Peter Franks for advice regarding stomatal analysis, Tom Buckley for constructive comments, and Kevin Simonin for clarifying discussions. This study was funded by Australian Research Council Linkage Project LP0989881.

Supplementary material

442_2015_3252_MOESM1_ESM.doc (384 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 384 kb)


  1. Adams MA (1996) Distribution of eucalypts in Australian landscapes: landforms, soils, fire and nutrition. In: Attiwill PM, Adams MA (eds) Nutrition of the eucalypts. CSIRO, CollingwoodGoogle Scholar
  2. Asbjornsen H, Goldsmith GR, Alvarado-Barrientos MS, Rebel K, Van Osch FP, Rietkerk M, Chen J, Gotsch S, Tobon C, Geissert DR, Gomez TA, Vache K, Dawson TE (2011) Ecohydrological advances and applications in plant-water relations research: a review. J Plant Ecol 4:3–22. doi: 10.1093/jpe/rtr005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrett DJ, Hatton T, Ash JE, Ball MC (1996) Transpiration by trees from contrasting forest types. Aust J Bot 44:249–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brodribb TJ, Feild TS (2000) Stem hydraulic supply is linked to leaf photosynthetic capacity: evidence from New Caledonian and Tasmanian rainforests. Plant Cell Environ 23:1381–1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brodribb TJ, Jordan GJ (2008) Internal coordination between hydraulics and stomatal control in leaves. Plant Cell Environ 31:1557–1564CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown HT, Escombe F (1900) Static diffusion of gases and liquids in relation to the assimilation of carbon and translocation in plants. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B 193:223–291. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1900.0014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buckley TN, Turnbull TL, Pfautsch S, Adams MA (2011) Nocturnal water loss in mature subalpine Eucalyptus delegatensis tall open forests and adjacent E. pauciflora woodlands. Ecol Evol 1:435–450. doi: 10.1002/ece3.44 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Buckley TN, Turnbull TL, Pfautsch S, Gharun M, Adams MA (2012) Differences in water use between mature and post-fire regrowth stands of subalpine Eucalyptus delegatensis R. Baker. For Ecol Manage 270:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2012.01.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burgess SSO, Adams MA, Turner NC, Beverly CR, Ong CK, Khan AAH, Bleby TM (2001) An improved heat pulse method to measure low and reverse rates of sap flow in woody plants. Tree Physiol 21:589–598CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Choat B, Jansen S, Brodribb TJ, Cochard H, Delzon S, Bhaskar R, Bucci SJ, Feild TS, Gleason SM, Hacke UG et al (2012) Global convergence in the vulnerability of forests to drought. Nature 491:752–755. doi: 10.1038/nature11688 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Collatz GJ, Ball JT, Grivet C, Berry JA (1991) Physiological and environmental regulation of stomatal conductance, photosynthesis and transpiration: a model that includes a laminar boundary layer. Agric For Meteorol 54:107–136. doi: 10.1016/0168-1923(91)90002-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Damour G, Simonneau T, Cochard H, Urban L (2010) An overview of models of stomatal conductance at the leaf level. Plant Cell Environ 33:1419–1438. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2010.02181 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Dawson TE (1996) Determining water use by trees and forests from isotopic, energy balance and transpiration analyses: the roles of tree size and hydraulic lift. Tree Physiol 16:263–272CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. DeMichele DW, Sharpe PJH (1973) An analysis of the mechianics of guard cell motion. J Theor Biol 41:77–96. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(73)90190-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Eagleson PS (2002) Ecohydrology: Darwinian expression of vegetation form and function. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Emanuel RE, Epstein HE, McGlynn BL, Welsch DL, Muth DJ, D’Odorico P (2010) Spatial and temporal controls on watershed ecohydrology in the northern Rocky Mountains. Water Resour Res 46:W11553. doi: 10.1029/2009WR008890 Google Scholar
  17. England JR, Attiwill PM (2006) Changes in leaf morphology and anatomy with tree age and height in the broadleaved evergreen species, Eucalyptus regnans F. Muell Trees Struct Funct 20:79–90. doi: 10.1007/s00468-005-0015-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fan S, Grossnickle SC, Russel JH (2008) Morphological and physiological variation in western redcedar (Thuja plicata) populations under contrasting soil water conditions. Trees 22:671–683. doi: 10.1007/s00468-008-0225-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Franks PJ, Beerling DJ (2009) Maximum leaf conductance driven by CO2 effects on stomatal size and density over geologic time. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:10343–10347. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0904209106 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Franks PJ, Farquhar GD (1999) A relationship between humidity response, growth form and photosynthetic operating point in C3 plants. Plant Cell Environ 22:1337–1349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Franks PJ, Drake PL, Beerling DJ (2009) Plasticity in maximum stomatal conductance constrained by negative correlation between stomatal size and density: an analysis using Eucalytpus globulus. Plant Cell Environ 32:1737–1748. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.002031.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Gharun M, Turnbull TL, Adams MA (2013a) Stand water status in relation to fire in a mixed-species eucalypt forest. For Ecol Manage 304:162–170. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.05.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gharun M, Turnbull TL, Adams MA (2013b) Validation of canopy transpiration in a mixed-species foothill eucalypt forest using a soil-plant-atmosphere model. J Hydrol 49:219–227. doi: 10.1016/j.hydrol.2013.03.051 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Horna V, Schuldt B, Brix S (2011) Environmental and tree size controlling stem sap flux in a perhumid tropical forest of Central Sulawesi. Indones Ann For Sci 68:1027–1038. doi: 10.1007/s13595-011-0110-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Körner C, Cochrane PM (1985) Stomatal responses and water relations of Eucalyptus pauciflora in summer along an elevational gradient. Oecologia 66:443–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lammertsma EI, de Boer HJ, Dekker SC, Dilcher DL, Lotter AF, Wagner-Cremer F (2011) Global CO2 rise leads to reduced maximum stomatal conductance in Florida vegetation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:4035–4040. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1100371108 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Leuning R, Cleugh HA, Zegelin SJ, Hughes D (2005) Carbon and water fluxes over a temperate Eucalytpus forest and a tropical wet/dry savanna in Australia: measurements and comparison with MODIS remote sensing estimates. Agric For Meteorol 129:151–173. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2004.12.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lucas C, Hennessy KJ, Mills GA, Bathols JM (2007) Bushfire weather in southeast Australia: recent trends and projected climate change impacts. Report for the Climate Institute of Australia, Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  29. Macfarlane C, Arndt SK, Livesley SJ, Edgar AC, White DA, Adams MA, Eamus D (2007) Estimation of leaf area index in eucalypt forest with vertical foliage, using cover and fullframe fisheye photography. For Ecol Manage 242:756–763. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.02.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Macfarlane C, Bond C, White DA, Grigg AH, Ogden GN, Silberstein R (2010) Transpiration and hydraulic traits of old and regrowth eucalypt forest in southwestern Australia. For Ecol Manage 260:96–105. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McCulloh KA, Woodruff DR (2012) Linking stomatal sensitivity and whole-tree hydraulic architecture. Tree Physiol 32:369–372. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tps036 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. McNaughton KG, Jarvis PG (1991) Effects of spatial scale on stomatal control of transpiration. Agric For Meteorol 54:279–302. doi: 10.1016/0168-1923(91)90010-N CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Meinzer FC, Goldstein G, Jackson P, Holbrook NM, Gutierrez MV, Cavelier J (1995) Environmental and physiological regulation of transpiration in tropical forest gap species: the influence of boundary layer and hydraulic properties. Oecologia 101:514–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meinzer FC, Woodruff DR, Eissenstat DM, Lin HS, Adams TS, McCulloh KA (2013) Above- and belowground controls on water use by trees of different wood types in an eastern US deciduous forest. Tree Physiol 33:345–356. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tpt012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Mitchell PJ, Benyon RG, Lane PNJ (2012) Responses of evapotranspiration at different topographic positions and catchment water balance following a pronounced drought in a mixed species eucalypt forest. Aust J Hydrol 440–441:62–74. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.03.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Motzer T, Munz N, Kueppers M, Schmitt D (2005) Stomatal conductance, transpiration and sap flow of tropical montane rainforest trees in the southern Ecuadorian Andes. Tree Physiol 25:1283–1293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Ocheltree TW, Nippert JB, Prasad PVV (2014) Stomatal responses to changes in vapor pressure deficit reflect tissue-specific differences in hydraulic conductance. Plant Cell Environ 37:132–139. doi: 10.1111/pce.12137 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. O’Grady AP, Eamus D, Hutley LB (1999) Transpiration increases during the dry season: patterns of tree water use in eucalypt open-forests of northern Australia. Tree Physiol 19:591–597. doi: 10.1093/treephys/19.9.591 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Oren R, Pataki DE (2001) Transpiration in response to variation in microclimate and soil moisture in southeastern deciduous forests. Oecologia 127:549–559. doi: 10.1007/s004420000622 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oren R, Phillips N, Katul G, Ewers BE, Pataki DE (1998) Scaling xylem sap flux and soil water balance and calculating variance: a method for partitioning water flux in forests. Ann For Sci 55:191–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Oren R, Sperry JS, Katul GG, Pataki DE, Ewers BE, Phillips N, Schafer KVR (1999) Survey and synthesis of intra- and interspecific variation in stomatal sensitivity to vapour pressure deficit. Plant Cell Environ 22:1515–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pfautsch S, Bleby TM, Rennenberg H, Adams MA (2010) Sap flow measurements reveal influence of temperature and stand structure on water use of Eucalyptus regnans forests. For Ecol Manage 259:1190–1199. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.01.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. R Development Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org
  44. Riederer M, Schreiber L (2001) Protecting against water loss: analysis of the barrier properties of plant cuticles. J Exp Bot 52:2023–2032. doi: 10.1093/jexbot/52.363.2023 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Roth-Nebelsick A, Fernandez V, Peguero-Pina JJ, Sancho-Knapik D, Gil-Pelegrin E (2013) Stomatal encryption by epicuticular waxes as a plastic trait modifying gas exchange in a Mediterranean evergreen species (Quercus coccifera L.). Plant Cell Environ 36:579–589. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2012.02597.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Royer DL (2001) Stomatal density and stomatal index as indicators of paleoatmospheric CO2 concentration. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 114:1–28. doi: 10.1016/S0034-6667(00)00074-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Tardieu F, Simonneau T (1998) Variability among species of stomatal control under fluctuating soil water status and evaporative demand: modelling isohydric and anisohydric behaviours. J Exp Bot 49:419–432. doi: 10.1093/jxb/49.Special_Issue.419 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Whitehead D (1998) Regulation of stomatal conductance and transpiration in forest canopies. Tree Physiol 18:633–644CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. World Meteorological Organization (2008) Guide to meteorological instruments and methods of observation. WMO 8Google Scholar
  50. Wullschleger SD, Meinzer FC, Vertessy RA (1998) A review of whole-plant water use studies in trees. Tree Physiol 18:499–512. doi: 10.1093/treephys/18.8-9.499 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Yee TW, Mitchell ND (1991) Generalized additive models in plant ecology. J Veg Sci 2:587–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zeppel M (2013) Convergence of tree water use and hydraulic architecture in water-limited regions: a review and synthesis. Ecohydrology 6:889–900. doi: 10.1002/eco.1377 Google Scholar
  53. Zeppel M, Murray BR, Barton C, Eamus D (2004) Seasonal responses of xylem sap velocity to VPD and solar radiation during drought in a stand of native trees in temperate Australia. Funct Plant Biol 31:461–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang L, Dawes WR, Walker GR (2001) Response of mean annual evapotranspiration to vegetation changes at catchment scale. Water Resour Res 37:701–708. doi: 10.1029/2000wr900325 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mana Gharun
    • 1
  • Tarryn L. Turnbull
    • 1
  • Sebastian Pfautsch
    • 2
  • Mark A. Adams
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Agriculture and EnvironmentUniversity of SydneyEveleighAustralia
  2. 2.Hawkesbury Institute for the EnvironmentUniversity of Western SydneyRichmondAustralia

Personalised recommendations