Plant and Soil

, Volume 313, Issue 1–2, pp 113–127 | Cite as

Linking the patterns in soil moisture to leaf water potential, stomatal conductance, growth, and mortality of dominant shrubs in the Florida scrub ecosystem

  • Sonali SahaEmail author
  • Theresa M. Strazisar
  • Eric S. Menges
  • Patrick Ellsworth
  • Leonel Sternberg
Regular Article


Patterns in soil moisture availability affect plant survival, growth and fecundity. Here we link patterns in soil moisture to physiological and demographic consequences in Florida scrub plants. We use data on different temporal scales to (1) determine critical soil moisture content that leads to loss of turgor in leaves during predawn measurements of leaf water status (Ψ crit), (2) describe the temporal patterns in the distribution of Ψ crit, (3) analyze the strength of relationship between rainfall and soil moisture content based on 8 years of data, (4) predict soil moisture content for 75 years of rainfall data, and (5) evaluate morphological, physiological and demographic consequences of spring 2006 drought on dominant shrubs in Florida scrub ecosystem in the light of water-uptake depth as determined by stable isotope analysis (δ18O). Based on 1998–2006 data, the soil moisture content at 50 cm depth explained significant variation in predawn leaf water potential of two dominant shrubs, Quercus chapmanii and Ceratiola ericoides (r 2 = 0.69). During 8 years of data collection, leaves attained Ψ crit only during the peak drought of 2000 when the soil moisture fell below 1% by volume at 50 and 90 cm depth. Precipitation explained a significant variation in soil moisture content (r 2 = 0.62). The patterns in predicted soil moisture for 75 year period, suggested that the frequency of drought occurrence has not increased in time. In spring 2006, the soil reached critical soil moisture levels, with consequences for plant growth and physiological responses. Overall, 24% of plants showed no drought-induced damage, 51% showed damage up to 50%, 21% had intense leaf shedding and 2% of all plants died. Over the drought and recovery period (May–October 2006), relative height growth was significantly lower in plants with greater die-back. All species showed a significant depression in stomatal conductance, while all but deep-rooted palms Sabal etonia and Serenoa repens showed significantly lower predawn (Ψ pd) and mid-day (Ψ md) leaf water potential in dry compared to wet season. Plants experiencing less severe die-back exhibited greater stomatal conductance, suggesting a strong relationship between physiology and morphology. Based on results we suggest that the restoration efforts in Florida scrub should consider the soil moisture requirements of key species.


Die-back Leaf water potential Oaks Palms Soil moisture Stomatal conductance 



stomatal conductance


predawn leaf water potential


predawn leaf water potential at turgor loss


mid-day leaf water potential


permanent wilting point


relative water content, δ18O = (R sample / R SMOW − 1) × 1,000, in which R sample and R SMOW represent the heavy to light isotopes ratio of the sample and standard (Vienna standard mean ocean water) respectively



The authors thank E. Boughton, A. Catenazzi, F. Nicklen, A. Saha, J. Schafer and C. Weekley for comments on the manuscript. The study was funded by National Science Foundation’s grant (DEB98-15370) to ESM.


  1. Abrahamson WG, Abrahamson CR (2002) Persistent palmettos: effects of 2000–2001 drought on Sabal etonia and Serenoa repens in Florida scrub ecosystem. Fla Sci 65:281–289Google Scholar
  2. Abrahamson WG, Johnson AF, Layne JN, Peroni PA (1984) Vegetation of the Archbold Biological Station, Florida: an example of the southern Lake Wales Ridge. Fla Sci 47:209–250Google Scholar
  3. Abrams MD, Menges ES (1992) Leaf ageing and plateau effects on seasonal pressure–volume relationships in three sclerophyllous Quercus species in south–eastern USA. Funct Ecol 6:353–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen CD, Breshears DD (1998) Drought-induced shift of a forest–woodland ecotone: rapid landscape response to climate variation. Ecology 95:14839–14842Google Scholar
  5. Ameglio T, Archer P, Cohen M, Valancogne C, Daudet FA, Dayau S et al (1998) Significance and limits in the use of predawn leaf water potential for tree irrigation. Plant Soil 207:155–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Asensio D, Penuelas J, Ogaya R, Llusia J (2007) Seasonal soil and leaf CO2 exchange rates in a Mediterranean Holm oak forest and their responses to drought conditions. Atmos Environ 41:2447–2455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barton AM, Teeri JA (1993) The Ecology of elevational positions in plants: drought resistance in five montane pine species in southeastern Arizona. Am J Bot 80:5–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borchert R (1994) Soil and stem water storage determine phenology and distribution of tropical dry forest trees. Ecology 75:1437–1449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boughton EA, Quintana-Ascencio P, Boughton RJ, Menges ES (2006) Association of ecotones with relative elevation and fire in an upland Florida landscape. J Veg Sci 17:361–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Breshears DD, Cobb NS, Rich PM, Price KP, Allen CD, Balice RG et al (2005) Regional vegetation die-off in response to global-change-type drought. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:15144–15148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brodribb TJ, Holbrook NM (2003) Stomatal closure during leaf dehydration, correlation with other leaf physiological traits. Plant Physiol 132:2166–2173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brodribb TJ, Holbrook NM, Gutierrez MV (2002) Hydraulic and photosynthetic co-ordination in seasonally dry tropical forest trees. Plant Cell Environ 25:1435–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown RB, Stone E, Carlisle V (1990) Soils. In: Myers RL, Ewel JJ (eds) Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando, pp 35–69Google Scholar
  14. Buckley TN (2005) The control of stomata by water balance. New Phytol 168:275–291PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carter JL, Lewis D, Crockett L, Vega J (1989) Soils survey of Highlands County, Florida. National Cooperative Soil Survey, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen E, Gerber JF (1990) Climate. In: Myers RL, Ewel JJ (eds) Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando, pp 11–34Google Scholar
  17. Ciais PM, Reichstein N, Viovy A, Granier J, Ogee V, Allard M et al (2005) Europe-wide reduction in primary productivity caused by the heat and drought in 2003. Nature 437:529–533PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Comstock J, Mencuccini M (1998) Control of stomatal conductance by leaf water potential in Hymenoclea salsola (T. & G.), a desert subshrub. Plant Cell Environ 21:1029–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. da Silva CR, Folegatti MV, da Silva TJA, Alves J, Souza CF, Ribeiro RV (2005) Water relations and photosynthesis as criteria for adequate irrigation management in ‘Tahiti’ lime trees. Sci Agricola 62:415–422Google Scholar
  20. Damesin C, Rambal S (1995) Field study of leaf photosynthetic performance by a Mediterranean deciduous oak tree (Quercus pubescens) during a severe summer drought. New Phytol 13:159–167Google Scholar
  21. Donovan LA, Linton MJ, Richards JH (2001) Predawn plant water potential does not necessarily equilibrate with soil water potential under well-watered conditions. Oecologia 129:328–335Google Scholar
  22. Ehleringer JR, Dawson TE (1992) Water uptake by plants—perspectives from stable isotope composition. Plant Cell Environ 15:1073–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Enfield DB, Mestas-Nunez AM, Trimble PJ (2001) The Atlantic multidecadal oscillation and its relation to rainfall and river flows in the continental US. Geophys Res Lett 28:2077–2080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fay PA, Carlisle JD, Danner BT, Lett MS, McCarron JK, Stewart C et al (2002) Altered rainfall patterns, gas exchange, and growth in grasses and forbs. Int J Plant Sci 163:549–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fensham RJ, Fairfax RJ (2007) Drought related tree death of savanna eucalypts: species susceptibility, soil conditions and root architecture. J Veg Sci 18:71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Franks PJ, Drake PL, Froend RH (2007) Anisohydric but isohydrodynamic: seasonally constant plant water potential gradient explained by a stomatal control mechanism incorporating variable plant hydraulic conductance. Plant Cell Environ 30:19–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gebrekirstos A, Teketay D, Fetene M, Mitlohner R (2006) Adaptation of five co-occurring tree and shrub species to water stress and its implication in restoration of degraded lands. For Ecol Manage 229:259–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gitlin AR, Sthultz CM, Bowker MA, Stumpf SA, Paxton CA, Kennedy K et al (2006) Mortality gradients within and among dominant plant populations as barometers of ecosystem change during extreme drought events. Conserv Biol 20:1477–1486PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gobron N, Pinty B, Melin F, Taberner M, Verstraete MM, Belward A et al (2005) The state of vegetation in Europe following the 2003 drought. Int J Remote Sens 26:2013–2020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Griffin JR (1973) Xylem sap tension in three woodland oaks of central California. Ecology 54:152–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hawkes CV, Casper BB (2002) Lateral root function and root overlap among mycorrhizal and nonmycorrhizal herbs in a Florida shrubland measured using rubidium as a nutrient analog. Am J Bot 89:1289–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ho MD, Rosas JC, Brown KM, Lynch JP (2005) Root architectural tradeoffs for water and phosphorus acquisition. Funct Plant Biol 32:737–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Holbrook NM, Sinclair TR (1992) Water-balance in the arborescent palm, Sabal palmetto. 1. Stem structure, tissue water release properties and leaf epidermal conductance. Plant Cell Environ 15:393–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jones HG (1998) Stomatal control of photosynthesis and transpiration. J Exp Bot 49:387–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jones HG (2007) Monitoring plant and soil water status: established and novel methods revisited and their relevance to studies of drought tolerance. J Exp Bot 58:119–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jones PD, Mann ME (2004) Climate over past millennia. Rev Geophys 42:RG2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kanemasu ET, Tanner CB (1969) Stomatal diffusion resistance of snap beans. I. Influence of leaf water potential. Plant Physiol 44:1547–1552PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kerr RA (2000) A North Atlantic climate pacemaker for the centuries. Science 288:1984–1986PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Klujn N, Black TA, Griffis TJ, Barr AG, Gaumont-Guay D, Morgenstern K et al (2006) Response of net ecosystem productivity of three boreal forest stands to drought. Ecosystems (N Y, Print) 9:1128–1144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Koide RT, Robichaux RH, Morse SR, Smith CM (1989) Plant water status, hydraulic resistance and capacitance. In: Pearcy RW, Ehleringer J, Mooney HA, Rundel PW (eds) Plant Physiological Ecology-Field Methods and Instrumentation. Chapman and Hall, New York, pp 161–178Google Scholar
  41. Krishnan P, Black TA, Grant NJ, Barr AG, Hogg ETH, Jassal RS et al (2006) Impact of changing soil moisture distribution on net ecosystem productivity of a boreal aspen forest during and following drought. Agric For Meteorol 139:208–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lambers H, Stuart C III, Pons TI (1998) Plant physiological ecology. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Leuzinger S, Zotz G, Asshoff R, Körner C (2005) Responses of deciduous forest trees to severe drought in Central Europe. Tree Physiol 25:641–650PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Li JH, Johnson DP, Dijkstra P, Hungate BA, Hinkle CR, Drake BG (2007) Elevated CO2 mitigates the adverse effects of drought on daytime net ecosystem CO2 exchange and photosynthesis in a Florida scrub-oak ecosystem. Photosynthetica 45:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lite SJ, Stromberg JC (2005) Surface water and ground-water thresholds for maintaining PopulusSalix forests, San Pedro River, Arizona. Biol Conserv 125:153–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mann ME (2007) Climate over the past two millennia. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 35:111–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Menges ES (1999) Ecology and conservation of Florida scrub. In: Anderson RC, Fralish JS, Baskin J (eds) Savannas, barrens, and rock outcrop plant communities of North America. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 7–22Google Scholar
  48. Menges ES (2007) Integrating demography and fire management: an example from Florida scrub. Aust J Bot 55:261–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Myers R (1990) Scrub and high pine scrub. In: Myers RL, Ewel JJ (eds) Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando, pp 150–193Google Scholar
  50. Nepstad DC, Moutinho P, Dias MB, Davidson E, Cardinot G, Markewitz D, Figueiredo R, Vianna N, Chambers J, Ray D, Guerreiros JB, Lefebvre P, Sternberg L, Moreira M, Barros L, Ishida FY, Tohlver I, Belk E, Kalif K, Schwalbe K (2002) The effects of partial throughfall exclusion on canopy processes, aboveground production, and biogeochemistry of an Amazon forest. J Geophys Res Atmospheres 107(D20):8085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nobel PS (1999) Physiochemical and environmental plant physiology, 2nd edn. Academic, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  52. Orwig DA, Abrams MD (1997) Variation in radial growth responses to drought among species, site, and canopy strata. Trees (Berl) 11:474–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Otieno DO, Schmidt MWT, Kinyamario JI, Tenhunen J (2005) Responses of Acacia tortilis and Acacia xanthophloea to seasonal changes in soil water availability in the savanna region of Kenya. J Arid Environ 62:377–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Otieno DO, Kurz-Besson C, Liu J, Schmidt MWT, Do RVL, David TS et al (2006) Seasonal variations in soil and plant water status in a Quercus suber L. Stand: roots as determinants of tree productivity and survival in the Mediterranean-type ecosystem. Plant Soil 283:119–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Padilla FM, Pugnaire FI (2007) Rooting depth and soil moisture control Mediterranean woody seedling survival during drought. Funct Ecol 21:489–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pellegrino A, Lebon E, Voltz M, Wery J (2004) Relationships between plant and soil water status in vine (Vitis vinifera L.). Plant Soil 266:129–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Petrie CL, Hall AE (1992) Water relations in cowpea and pearl millet under soil water deficits. III. Extent of predawn equilibrium in leaf water potential. Aust J Plant Physiol 19:601–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pinheiro HA, DaMatta FM, Chaves ARM, Loureiro ME, Ducatti C (2005) Drought tolerance is associated with rooting depth and stomatal control of water use in clones of Coffea canephora. Ann Bot (Lond) 96:101–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Piper FI, Corcuera LJ, Alberdi M, Lusk C (2007) Differential photosynthetic and survival responses to soil drought in two evergreen Nothofagus species. For Sci 64:447–452Google Scholar
  60. Rodriguez-Iturbe I, Porporato A, Laio F, Ridolfi L (2001) Intensive or extensive use of soil moisture: plant strategies to cope with stochastic water availability. Geophys Res Lett 28:4495–4497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rundel PW, Jarrell WM (1989) Water in the environment. In: Pearcy RW, Ehleringer J, Mooney HA, Rundel PW (eds) Plant physiological ecology—field methods and instrumentation. Chapman and Hall, New York, pp 29–56Google Scholar
  62. Saha S, Bassirirad H, Gladwin J (2005) Phenology and water relations of tree sprouts and seedlings in a tropical deciduous forest of South India. Trees (Berl) 19:322–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sakcali MS, Ozturk M (2004) Eco-physiological behaviour of some Mediterranean plants as suitable candidates for reclamation of degraded areas. J Arid Environ 57:141–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Silva JS, Rego FC (2003) Root distribution of a Mediterranean shrubland in Portugal. Plant Soil 255:529–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sutton RT, Hudson LR (2005) Atlantic forcing of North American and European summer climate. Science 309:115–118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Swemmer AM, Knapp AK, Smith MD (2006) Growth responses of two dominant C4 grass species to altered water availability. Int J Plant Sci 167:1001–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tardieu F, Davies WJ (1993) Integration of hydraulic and chemical signaling in the control of stomatal conductance and water status of droughted plants. Plant Cell Environ 16:341–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tyree MT, Jarvis PG (1982) Water in tissues and cells. In: Lange OS, Nobel PS, Osmond CB, Ziegler H (eds) Encyclopedia of plant physiology, new series vol. 12B. Springer, Berlin, pp 35–77Google Scholar
  69. Tyree MT, Zimmermann MH (2002) Xylem structure and the ascent of sap. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  70. Warwick RA (1975) Drought hazard in the United States: a research assessment. University of Colorado, Monograph No. NSF/RA/E-75/004Google Scholar
  71. Weekley CW, Gagnon D, Quintana-Ascencio P, Menges ES, Saha S (2007) Variation in soil moisture in relation to rainfall, vegetation, gaps, and time-since-fire in Florida scrub. Ecoscience 14:71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wunderlin RP, Hansen BF (2004) Atlas of Florida vascular plants. [S. M. Landry and K. N. Campbell (application development), Florida Center for Community Design and Research.] Institute for Systematic Botany, University of South Florida, Tampa.
  73. Xu H, Li Y, Xu GQ, Zou T (2007) Ecophysiological response and morphological adjustment of two Central Asian desert shrubs towards variation in summer precipitation. Plant Cell Environ 30:399–409PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zhang JH, Davies WJ (1989) Sequential response of whole plant water relations to prolonged soil drying and the involvement of xylem sap ABA in the regulation of stomatal behavior of sunflower plants. New Phytol 113:167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sonali Saha
    • 1
    Email author
  • Theresa M. Strazisar
    • 1
  • Eric S. Menges
    • 1
  • Patrick Ellsworth
    • 2
  • Leonel Sternberg
    • 2
  1. 1.Archbold Biological StationLake PlacidUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUniversity of MiamiCoral GablesUSA

Personalised recommendations