Plant Ecology

, Volume 217, Issue 3, pp 229–240 | Cite as

Inter- and intraspecific variation in stomatal pore area index along elevational gradients and its relation to leaf functional traits

  • Solveig Franziska BucherEmail author
  • Karl Auerswald
  • Susanne Tautenhahn
  • Anna Geiger
  • Johanna Otto
  • Annika Müller
  • Christine Römermann


Stomata are mediators of gas exchange and thus important for photosynthesis and plant performance. The aim of this study was to analyze the ecological explanatory power of the stomatal pore area index (SPI) calculated via stomatal size and density. We studied the SPI on sun leaves of 22 herbaceous species on 22 study sites being distributed along two elevational gradients in the northern Alps ranging from 700 to 1800 m a.s.l.. We analyzed its correlation with other functional traits related to plant performance namely specific leaf area (SLA), area-based leaf nitrogen and carbon (N area and C area, respectively) as well as carbon discrimination Δ13C within as well as between species. On a subset of four species we also measured light-saturated net photosynthetic rate at ambient CO2 concentration (A sat) and stomatal conductance on all sites. We found that SPI was positively correlated with A sat, yet the relation was weaker than expected. The reaction of SPI along the elevational gradients was highly species-specific and related to variations in other investigated leaf traits. The relationship with functional traits, however, differed between the inter- and intraspecific level in strength and direction. SPI was positively related to N area and C area and negatively with SLA and Δ13C for most species. However, we found no significant relation considering species mean values for Δ13C and N area. The relation of SPI to SLA was the most consistent displaying no difference when comparing the relation between and within species. This research shows that different processes may act on different organizational levels leading to the detected differences in trait–trait correlations on the inter- and intraspecific levels. It may have important consequences also for macroecological and modelling studies.


Stomatal pore area index (SPI) Potential conductance index (PCI) Plant functional traits Stomata Δ13Altitude 



The authors would like to thank the members of the Institute of Botany at the University of Regensburg, especially Patrizia König, Nina Berndt, Désirée Dotter, Melanie Hahn, Günther Kolb, Stefanie Meier, Sabine Moll, Sergey Rosbakh and Jessica Rossow for practical assistance and valuable discussions. We would also like to thank Thijs Pons and Manfred Küppers as well as two anonymous reviewers for valuable advice and comments on the manuscript. Rudi Schäufele at Technische Universität München in Freising carried out the isotope measurements. This work was supported by the Eliteförderung des Landes Bayern via provision of a scholarship (granted to SFB) and the University of Regensburg. We also acknowledge support from the Bavarian State Forest Enterprise and the district government of upper Bavaria. CR acknowledges financial support of the DFG (RO3842/3-1) and the DFG-Research Centre for integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv).

Supplementary material

11258_2016_564_MOESM1_ESM.docx (20 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 20 kb)
11258_2016_564_MOESM2_ESM.docx (20 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 19 kb)
11258_2016_564_MOESM3_ESM.docx (351 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 351 kb)
11258_2016_564_MOESM4_ESM.docx (266 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (DOCX 265 kb)
11258_2016_564_MOESM5_ESM.docx (16 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (DOCX 16 kb)
11258_2016_564_MOESM6_ESM.docx (301 kb)
Supplementary material 6 (DOCX 300 kb)


  1. Adler PB, Fajardo A, Kleinhesselink AR, Kraft NJ (2013) Trait-based tests of coexistence mechanisms. Ecol Lett 16:1294–1306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashton PMS, Berlyn GP (1994) A comparison of leaf physiology and anatomy of Quercus (section Erythrobalanus-Fagaceae) species in different light environments. Am J Bot 81:589–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beerling DJ, Chaloner WG (1993) The impact of atmospheric CO2 and temperature changes on stomatal density: observation from Quercus robur lammas leaves. Ann Bot 71:231–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bond BJ, Farnsworth BT, Coulombe RA, Winner WE (1999) Foliage physiology and biochemistry in response to light gradients in conifers with varying shade tolerance. Oecologia 120:183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brodribb TJ, Holbrook NM, Zwieniecki MA, Palma B (2005) Leaf hydraulic capacity in ferns, conifers and angiosperms: impacts on photosynthetic maxima. New Phytol 165:839–846CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown HT, Escombe F (1900) Static diffusion of gases and liquids in relation to the assimilation of carbon and translocation in plants. Proc R Soc Lond 67:124–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carpenter SB, Smith ND (1975) Stomatal distribution and size in southern Appalachian hardwoods. Can J Bot 53:1153–1156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Casson S, Gray JE (2008) Influence of environmental factors on stomatal development. New Phytol 178:9–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Chaerle L, Saibo N, Van Der Straeten D (2005) Tuning the pores: towards engineering plants for improved water use efficiency. Trends Biotechnol 23:308–315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Crawley MJ (2012) The R book. John Wiley & Sons, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans JR (1989) Photosynthesis and nitrogen relationships in leaves of C3 plants. Oecologia 78:9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ewald J (2012) BERGWALD—the vegetation database of mountain forests in the Bavarian Alps. Biodivers Ecol 4:161–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Farquhar GD, Ehleringer JR, Hubick KT (1989) Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis. Annu Rev Plant Biol 40:503–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Franks PJ, Farquhar GD (2001) The effect of exogenous abscisic acid on stomatal development, stomatal mechanics, and leaf gas exchange in Tradescantia virginiana. Plant Physiol 125:935–942CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Garnier E (1992) Growth analysis of congeneric annual and perennial grass species. J Ecol 80:665–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gay A, Hurd R (1975) The influence of light on stomatal density in the tomato. New Phytol 75:37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gindel I (1969) Stomatal number and size as related to soil moisture in tree xerophytes in Israel. Ecology 50:263–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guehl J, Picon C, Aussenac G, Gross P (1994) Interactive effects of elevated CO2 and soil drought on growth and transpiration efficiency and its determinants in two European forest tree species. Tree Physiol 14:707–724CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Guehl J, Fort C, Ferhi A (1995) Differential response of leaf conductance, carbon isotope discrimination and water-use efficiency to nitrogen deficiency in maritime pine and pedunculate oak plants. New Phytol 131:149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanson HC (1917) Leaf-structure as related to environment. Am J Bot 4:533–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hilu KW, Randall JL (1984) Convenient method for studying grass leaf epidermis. Taxon 33:413–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Holland N, Richardson AD (2009) Stomatal length correlates with elevation of growth in four temperate species. J Sustain For 28:63–73. doi: 10.1080/10549810802626142 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones HG (1998) Stomatal control of photosynthesis and transpiration. J Exp Bot 49:387–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim T-H, Maik B (2010) Guard cell signal transduction network: advances in understanding abscisic acid, CO2, and Ca2+ signaling. Annu Rev Plant Biol 61:561–591CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Körner C (2003) Alpine plant life: functional plant ecology of high mountain ecosystems. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Körner C (2007) The use of ‘altitude’ in ecological research. Trends Ecol Evol 22:569–574CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Körner C, Diemer M (1994) Evidence that Plants from High Altitudes Retain their Greater Photosynthetic Efficiency Under Elevated CO2. Funct Ecol 8:58–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Körner C, Pelaez Menendez-Riedl S (1989) The significance of developmental aspects in plant growth analysis. In: Lambers H, Cambridge ML, Konings H, Pons TL (eds) Causes and consequences of variation in growth rate and productivity of higher plants. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, pp 141–157Google Scholar
  29. Körner C, Bannister P, Mark A (1986) Altitudinal variation in stomatal conductance, nitrogen content and leaf anatomy in different plant life forms in New Zealand. Oecologia 69:577–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kraft NJ, Valencia R, Ackerly DD (2008) Functional traits and niche-based tree community assembly in an Amazonian forest. Science 322:580–582CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Kundu S, Tigerstedt P (1999) Variation in net photosynthesis, stomatal characteristics, leaf area and whole-plant phytomass production among ten provenances of neem (Azadirachta indica). Tree Physiol 19:47–52CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Lau OS, Bergmann DC (2012) Stomatal development: a plant’s perspective on cell polarity, cell fate transitions and intercellular communication. Development 139:3683–3692CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Li L, McCormack ML, Ma C, Kong D, Zhang Q, Chen X, Zeng H, Niinemets Ü, Guo D (2015) Leaf economics and hydraulic traits are decoupled in five species-rich tropical- subtropical forests. Ecol Lett 18:899–906CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Martin C, Glover BJ (2007) Functional aspects of cell patterning in aerial epidermis. Curr Opin Plant Biol 10:70–82CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Nadeau JA, Sack FD (2002) Control of stomatal distribution on the Arabidopsis leaf surface. Science 296:1697–1700CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Nogués S, Allen DJ, Morison JI, Baker NR (1999) Characterization of stomatal closure caused by ultraviolet-B radiation. Plant Physiol 121:489–496CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Osório J, Osório ML, Chaves MM, Pereira JS (1998) Effects of water deficits on 13C discrimination and transpiration efficiency of Eucalyptus globulus clones. Funct Plant Biol 25:645–653Google Scholar
  38. Pérez-Harguindeguy N et al (2013) New handbook for standardised measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Aust J Bot 61:167–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pillar VD, Blanco CC, Müller SC, Sosinski EE, Joner F, Duarte LD (2013) Functional redundancy and stability in plant communities. J Veg Sci 24:963–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Poorter H, Gifford RM, Kriedemann PE, Wong SC (1992) A quantitative-analysis of dark respiration and carbon content as factors in the growth-response of plants to elevated CO2. Aust J Bot 40:501–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Qiang W, Wang X, Chen T, Feng H, An L, He Y, Wang G (2003) Variations of stomatal density and carbon isotope values of Picea crassifolia at different altitudes in the Qilian Mountains. Trees 17:258–262Google Scholar
  42. R Development Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  43. Richardson A, Ashton P, Berlyn G, McGroddy M, Cameron I (2001) Within-crown foliar plasticity of western hemlock, Tsuga heterophylla, in relation to stand age. Ann Bot 88:1007–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Roelfsema MRG, Hedrich R (2005) In the light of stomatal opening: new insights into ‘the Watergate’. New Phytol 167:665–691CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Rosbakh S, Römermann C, Poschlod P (2015) Specific leaf area correlates with temperature: new evidence of trait variation at the population, species and community levels. Alp Bot 125:79–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sack L, Cowan P, Jaikumar N, Holbrook N (2003) The ‘hydrology’ of leaves: co-ordination of structure and function in temperate woody species. Plant, Cell Environ 26:1343–1356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wisskirchen R, Haeupler H (1998) Standardliste der Farn-und Blütenpflanzen Deutschlands: mit Chromosomenatlas von Focke Albers. Ulmer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  48. Wong S, Cowan I, Farquhar G (1979) Stomatal conductance correlates with photosynthetic capacity. Nature 282:424–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Woodward FI (1987) Stomatal numbers are sensitive to increases in CO2 from pre-industrial levels. Nature 327:617–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Woodward F, Bazzaz F (1988) The responses of stomatal density to CO2 partial pressure. J Exp Bot 39:1771–1781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Woodward F, Lake J, Quick W (2002) Stomatal development and CO2: ecological consequences. New Phytol 153:477–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wright IJ, Reich P, Westoby M, Ackerly DD, Baruch Z, Bongers F, Cavender-Bares J, Chapin T, Cornelissen JHC, Diemer M, Flexas J, Garnier E, Groom PK, Gulias J, Hikosaka K, Lamont BB, Lee T, Lee W, Lusk C, Midgley JJ, Navas M, Niinemets Ü, Oleksyn J, Osada N, Poorter H, Poot P, Prior L, Pyankov VI, Roumet C, Thomas SC, Tjoelker MG, Veneklaas EJ, Villar R (2004) The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature 428:821–827CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Biodiversity Group, Institute of Systematic BotanyFriedrich Schiller University JenaJenaGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Botany, Theoretical EcologyUniversity of RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  3. 3.Lehrstuhl für GrünlandlehreTU MünchenFreisingGermany
  4. 4.LI-COR Biosciences GmbHBad HomburgGermany
  5. 5.German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations