Plant and Soil

, Volume 285, Issue 1–2, pp 5–17 | Cite as

Water-use strategy of three central Asian desert shrubs and their responses to rain pulse events

Article

Abstract

Plant water-use strategy is considered to be a function of the complex interactions between species of different functional types and the prevailing environmental conditions. The functional type of a plant’s root system is fundamental in determining the water-use strategy of desert shrubs and the physiological responses of the plant to an occasional rainfall event, or rain pulse. In this current study of Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb. Fl.Alt., Haloxylon ammodendron (C.A.Mey.) Bunge and Reaumuria soongorica (Pall.) Maxim., three dominant shrub species in the Gurbantonggut Desert (Central Asia), plant root systems were excavated in their native habitat to investigate their functional types and water-use strategies. We monitored leaf water potential, photosynthesis and transpiration rate during a 39-day interval between successive precipitation events during which time the upper soil water changed markedly. Plant apparent hydraulic conductance and water-use efficiency were calculated for the varying soil water conditions. Our results show that: 1) The three species of shrub belong to two functional groups: phreatophyte and non-phreatophyte; 2) The photosynthetic capacity and leaf-specific apparent hydraulic conductance of the three species was stable during the time that the water condition in the upper soil changed; 3) Transpiration, leaf water potential and water-use efficiency in Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb. Fl.Alt. were stable during the period of observation, but varied significantly for the other two species. Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb. Fl.Alt., as a phreatophyte, relies mostly on groundwater for survival; its physiological activity is not inhibited in any way by the deficiency in upper soil water. Non-phreatophyte Haloxylon ammodendron (C.A.Mey.) Bunge and Reaumuria soongorica (Pall.) Maxim. use precipitation-derived upper soil water for survival, and thus respond clearly to rain pulse events in terms of leaf water potential and transpiration. The observed similarity in leaf-specific photosynthesis capacity among all three species indicates that the two non-phreatophyte species are able to maintain normal photosynthesis within a wide range of plant water status. The observed stability in leaf-specific apparent hydraulic conductance indicates that the two non-phreatophyte species are able to maintain sufficient water supply to their foliage via, mostly likely, effective morphological adjustment at the scale of the individual plant.

Key words:

apparent hydraulic conductance functional type leaf water potential photosynthesis root architecture transpiration 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boyer J S (1982). Plant productivity and environment. Science 218: 443–448ADSPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Cleverly J R, Smith S D, Sala A and Devitt D A (1997). Invasive capacity of Tamarix ramosissima in a Mojave Desert floodplain: The role of drought. Oecologia 111: 12–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen Y, Fuchs M and Cohen S (1983). Resistance to water uptake in a mature citrus tree. J. Exp. Bot. 34: 451–560Google Scholar
  4. Cohen Y, Fuchs M, Falkenflug V and Moreshet S (1988). A calibrated heat pulse method for determining water uptake in cotton. Agron. J. 80: 398–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cornic G and Massacci A (1996). Photosynthesis and the Environment. Kluwer, the Netherlands, 347–366Google Scholar
  6. Deng X, Li X M, Zhang X M, Ye W H, Foezki A and Runge M (2003). Studies on gas exchange of Tamarix ramosissima Lbd. Acta Ecol. Sin. 23: 180–187Google Scholar
  7. Donovan L A and Ehleringer J R (1994). Water stress and use of summer precipitation in a great basin shrub community. Funct. Ecol. 8: 289–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eagleson P S (1982). Ecological optimality in water limited natural soil-vegetation systems. Water Resour. Res. 18: 325–354ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Farquhar G D and Caemmerer S V (1980). A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta 149: 78–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Flanagan L B, Ehleringer J R and Marshall J D (1992). Differential uptake of summer precipitation among co-occurring trees and shrubs in a pinyon-juniper woodland. Plant Cell Environ. 15: 831–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gallardo M, Eastham J, Gregory P J and Turner N C (1996). A comparison of plant hydraulic conductance in wheat and lupins. J. Exp. Bot. 47: 233–239Google Scholar
  12. Gries D, Zeng F, Foetzki A, Arndt S K, Bruelheide H, Thomas F M, Zhang X and Runge M (2003). Growth and water relations of Tamarix ramosissima and Populus euphratica on Taklamakan desert dunes in relation to depth to a permanent water table. Plant Cell Environ. 26: 725–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Horton J L, Kolb T E and Hart S C (2001). Leaf gas exchange characteristics differ among Sonoran desert riparian tree species. Tree Physiol. 21: 233–241PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiang T R, Zhang L X, Bi Y R, Jia X H, Feng J C, Tao L and Liu X M (2001). Effects of water stress on gas exchange characteristics of Haloxylon Ammodendron leaves. J. Lanzhou Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 37: 57–62Google Scholar
  15. Lawlor D W and Cornic G (2002). Photosynthetic carbon assimilation and associated metabolism in relation to water deficits in higher plants. Plant Cell Environ. 25: 275–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Levitt J (1980). Responses of Plants to Environmental Stresses. Academic Press, New York, 97–121Google Scholar
  17. Li X M, Natoli T and Kenji O (1993). Comparative studies on relation of photosynthesis to water status of two species of Haloxylon under controlled environments. Acta Bot. Sin. 35: 758–765Google Scholar
  18. Li X Y, Zhang X M, He X Y, Zeng F J, Thomas F M and Foetzki A (2004). Drought stress and irrigation effects on water relations of Tamarix ramosissima in the Qira oasis. Acta Phyto. Sin. 28: 644–650Google Scholar
  19. Li Y, Xu H and Cohen S (2005). Long-term hydraulic acclimation to soil texture and radiation load in cotton. Plant Cell Environ. 28: 492–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morgan J M (1984). Osmorregulation and water stress in higher plants. Ann. Rev. Plant Phys. 35: 229–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nobel P S (1996). Ecophysiology of roots of desert plants, with special emphasis on Agaves and Cactai. In: Waisel, Y, Eshel, A and Kafkafi, U (eds) Plant Roots: The Hidden Half, pp 823–844. Marcel Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Poorter H (1993). Interspecific variation in the growth response of plants to an elevated ambient CO2 concentration. Vegetatio 104: 77–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pyankov V I, Black C C, Artyusheva E G, Voznesenskaya E V, Ku M S B and Edwards G E (1999). Features of photosynthesis in Haloxylon species of Chenopodiaceae that are dominant plants in Central Asian deserts. Plant Cell Physiol. 40: 125–134Google Scholar
  24. Rundell P W and Nobel P S (1991). Structure and function of desert root systems. In: Atkinson, D (eds) Plant Root Growth. An Ecological Perspective, pp 349–378. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  25. Sage R F (1994). Acclimation of photosynthesis to increasing atmospheric CO2: The gas exchange perspective. Photosynth. Res. 39: 351–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schwinning S and Ehleringer J R (2001). Water use trade-offs and optimal adaptations to pulse-driven arid ecosystems. J. Ecol. 89: 464–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smith S D, Devitt D A, Sala A, Cleverly J R and Busch D E (1998). Water relations of riparian plants from warm desert regions. Wetlands 18: 687–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sperry J S and Hacke U G (2002). Desert shrub water relations with respect to soil characteristics and plant functional type. Funct. Ecol. 16: 367–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Su P X, Zhao A F, Zhang L X, Du M W and Chen H S (2003). Characteristic in photosynthesis, transpiration and water use efficiency of Haloxylon ammodendron and Calligonum mongolicum of desert species. Acta Bot. Boreal.-Occident. Sin. 23: 11–17Google Scholar
  30. Xu G Q and Wei W S (2004). Climate change of Xinjiang and its impact on eco-environment. Arid Land Geo. 27: 14–18Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fukang Station of Desert EcologyXinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of SciencesUrumqiP.R. China
  2. 2.Graduate SchoolChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingP.R. China

Personalised recommendations