Advertisement

Photochemistry and hydric responses of congeneric Croton species at restoration sites under dry season: implications for species selection

  • Angélica L. Rodrigues
  • Angelo A. S. Bertholdi
  • Luís Paulo B. Mantoan
  • Gabriela M. Vasconcellos
  • Luiz Fernando R. AlmeidaEmail author
Article
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

The success of the ecological restoration depends on the appropriate determination of species for implantation in restoration areas. The use of physiological performance as a criterion may help in the selection of species that are less susceptible to abiotic stress, and consequently experience a lower mortality rate. Species of the same genus can even exhibit differences in physiological responses to water deficiency. Thus, we hypothesize that congeneric species have different physiological responses to annual variation in water availability. Our objective was to determine which physiological parameters are more responsive to the differentiation of iso × anisohidric performances between the congeneric species Croton floribundus and Croton urucurana. In addition investigate whether these intrinsic differences are due to the influence of seasonality. We evaluated leaf water potential, stomatal conductance and chlorophyll a fluorescence of the two congeneric species in an ecological restoration area throughout the course of an entire year. Our results show that congeneric species exhibited similar partial isohydric performance, but they differ in stomatal conductance, predawn leaf water potential and photochemistry, especially in the activation of energy dissipation mechanisms via fluorescence due to the influence of seasonal changes, particularly the dry season. We conclude that using these species in the restoration of riparian forests would be advantageous due to their resistance to annual variation in water availability.

Keywords

Seasonality Stomatal conductance Water potential Chlorophyll fluorescence Croton 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP—Grant# 2010/15585-6) and CAPES (Coordination of improvement of Higher Level Personnel - CAPES—001) for the financial support.

References

  1. Arévalo R, van Ee BW, Riina R, Berry PE, Wiedenhoeft AC (2017) Force of habit: shrubs, trees and contingent evolution of wood anatomical diversity using Croton (Euphorbiaceae) as a model system. Ann Bot 119:563–579.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcw243 Google Scholar
  2. Baker NR (2008) Chlorophyll fluorescence: a probe of photosynthesis in vivo. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:89–113.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092759 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker NR, Rosenqvist E (2004) Applications of chlorophyll fluorescence can improve crop production strategies: an examination of future possibilities. J Exp Bot 55:1607–1621.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh196 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbieri DSV, Tonial F, Lopez PA, Maia BHLN, Santos GD, Ribas MO, Glienke C, Vicente VA (2014) Antiadherent activity of Schinusterebinthifolius and Croton urucurana extracts on in vitro biofilm formation of Candida albicans and Streptococcusmutans. Arch Oral Biol 59:887–896.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2014.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellotto AA, Rodrigues RR, Nave AG (2009) Pacto para a restauração ecológica da Mata Atlântica. Princ Iniciat Restaur florest Mata Atlântica Evol Metodol Conceitos 1:3–60Google Scholar
  6. Braga NS, Vitória AP, Souza GM, Barros CF, Freitas L (2016) Weak relationships between leaf phenology and isohydric and anisohydric behavior in lowland wet tropical forest trees. Biotropica 48(4):453–464.  https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruel BO, Marques M, Britez RM (2010) Survival and growth of tree species under two direct seedling planting systems. Restor Ecol 18:414–417.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2009.00634.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Calatayud A, Barreno E (2001) Chlorophyll a fluorescence, antioxidant enzymes and lipid peroxidation in tomato in response to ozone and benomyl. Environ Pollut 115:283–289.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0269-7491(01)00101-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cano FJ, López R, Warren CR (2014) Implications of the mesophyll conductance to CO2 for photosynthesis and water-use efficiency during long-term water stress and recovery in two contrasting Eucalyptus species. Plant Cell Environ 37:2470–2490.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12325 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chaves MM, Flexas J, Pinheiro C (2009) Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: regulation mechanisms from whole plant to cell. Ann Bot 103:551–560.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcn125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Demmig-Adams B, Adams WW (1996) The role of xanthophyll cycle carotenoids in the protection of photosynthesis. Trends Plant Sci 1:21–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1360-1385(96)80019-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Demmig-Adams B, Adams WW, Baker DH, Logan BA, Bowling DR, Verhoeven AS (1996) Using chlorophyll fluorescence to assess the fraction of absorbed light allocated to thermal dissipation of excess excitation. Physiol Plant 98:253–264.  https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-3054.1996.980206.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Efeoğlu B, Ekmekçi Y, Çiçek N (2009) Physiological responses of three maize cultivars to drought stress and recovery. S Afr J Bot 75:34–42.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2008.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Franco AC, Bustamante M, Caldas LS, Goldstein G, Meinzer FC, Kozovits AR, Rundel P, Coradin VTR (2005) Leaf functional traits of Neotropical savanna trees in relation to seasonal water deficit. Trees 19:326–335.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-004-0394-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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 30:19–30.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2006.01600.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frodin DG (2004) History and concepts of big plant genera. Taxon 53:753–776.  https://doi.org/10.2307/4135449 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Galmés J, Flexas J, Savé R, Medrano H (2007) Water relations and stomatal characteristics of Mediterranean plants with different growth forms and leaf habits: responses to water stress and recovery. Plant Soil 290:139–155.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-006-9148-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Genty B, Briantais JM, Baker NR (1989) The relationship between the quantum yield of photosynthetic electron transport and quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence. Biochim Biophys Acta 990:87–92.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-4165(89)80016-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hirayama T, Shinozaki K (2010) Research on plant abiotic stress responses in the post-genome era: past, present and future. Plant J 61:1041–1052.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04124.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hoffmann WA, Franco AC (1992) The importance of evolutionary history in studies of plant physiological ecology: examples from cerrados and forests of central Brazil. Braz J Plant Physiol 20:247–256.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-04202008000300008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones HG (1992) Plants and microclimate: a quantitative approach to environmental plant physiology, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Kato MC, Hikosaka K, Hirotsu N, Makino A, Hirose T (2003) The excess light energy that is neither utilized in photosynthesis nor dissipated by photoprotective mechanisms determines the rate of photoinactivation in photosystem II. Plant Cell Physiol 44:318–325.  https://doi.org/10.1071/FP09276 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Köppen W (1884) Die Wärmezonen der Erde, nach der Dauer der heissen, gemässigten und kaltenZeit und nach der Wirkung der Wärme auf die organische Welt betrachtet. (The thermal zones of the earth according to the duration of hot, moderate and cold periods and to the impact of heat on the organic world). Meteorol. Z. 1, 215–226. (translated and edited by E Volken, S Brönnimann. Meteorol. Z. 20:351–360, 2011).  https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2011/105
  24. Kudoyarova GR, Kholodova VP, Veselov DS (2013) Current state of the problem of water relations in plants under water deficit. Russ J Plant Physiol 60:165–175.  https://doi.org/10.1134/S1021443713020143 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lin C, Gentine P, Huang Y, Guan K, Kimm H, Zhou S (2018) Diel ecosystem conductance response to vapor pressure deficit is suboptimal and independent of soil moisture. Agric For Meteorol 250–251:24–34.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.12.078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liu F, Cohen Y, Fuchs M, Plaut Z, Grava A (2006) The effect of vapor pressure deficit on leaf area and water transport in flower stems of soil-less culture rose. Agric Water Manag 81:216–224.  https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2007.751.50 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Locosselli GM, Buckeridge MS (2017) Dendrobiochemistry, a missing link to further understand carbon allocation during growth and decline of trees. Trees 31:1745–1758.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-017-1599-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lohbeck M, Lebrija-Trejos E, Martínez-Ramos M, Meave JA, Poorter L, Bongers F (2015) Functional trait strategies of trees in dry and wet tropical forests are similar but differ in their consequences for succession. PLoS ONE.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123741 Google Scholar
  29. Luchi AE (2004) Anatomia do lenho de CrotonurucuranaBaill. (Euphorbiaceae) de solos com diferentes níveis de umidade. Acta Bot Bras 27:271–280.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-84042004000200007 Google Scholar
  30. Lusk CH, Jorgensen MA, Bellingham PJ (2015) A conifer–angiosperm divergence in the growth vs. shade tolerance trade-off underlies the dynamics of a New Zealand warm-temperate rain forest. J Ecol 103:479–488.  https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.rf025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marenco RA, Antezana-Vera SA, dos Santos Gouvêa PR, Camargo MAB, de Oliveira MF, da Silva Santos JK (2015) Fisiologia de espécies florestais da Amazônia: fotossíntese, respiração e relações hídricas. Ceres 61:7.  https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-737x201461000004 Google Scholar
  32. Martinez-Vilalta J, Poyatos R, Aguadé D, Retana J, Mencuccini M (2014) A new look at water transport regulation in plants. New Phytol 204:105–115.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12912 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maxwell K, Johnson GN (2000) Chlorophyll fluorescence: a practical guide. J Exp Bot 51:659–668.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/51.345.659 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mishra KB, Iannacone R, Petrozza A, Mishra A, Armentano N, La Vecchia G, Trtílek M, Cellini F, Nedbal L (2012) Engineered drought tolerance in tomato plants is reflected in chlorophyll fluorescence emission. Plant Sci 182:79–86.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2011.03.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moriana A, Villalobos FJ, Fereres E (2002) Stomatal and photosynthetic responses of olive (Oleaeuropaea L.) leaves to water deficits. Plant Cell Environ 25:395–405.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0016-8025.2001.00822.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nishiyama Y, Allakhverdiev SI, Murata N (2006) A new paradigm for the action of reactive oxygen species in the photoinhibition of photosystem II. Biochim Biophys Acta 1757:742–749.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbabio.2006.05.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nogueira A, Martinez CA, Ferreira LL, Prado CHBA (2004) Photosynthesis and water use efficiency in twenty tropical tree species of differing succession status in a Brazilian reforestation. Photosynthetica 42:351–356.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PHOT.0000046152.05364.77 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ohnishi N, Allakhverdiev SI, Takahashi S, Higashi S, Watanabe M, Nishiyama Y, Murata N (2005) Two-step mechanism of photodamage to photosystem II: step 1 occurs at the oxygen-evolving complex and step 2 occurs at the photochemical reaction center. Biochemistry 44:8494–8499.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bi047518q CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oliveira RE, Engel VL (2017) Indicadores de monitoramento da restauração na Floresta Atlântica e atributos para ecossistemas restaurados. Sci Plena 13:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.14808/sci.plena.2017.127301 Google Scholar
  40. PuglielliG Redondo-Gómez S, Gratani L, Mateos-Naranjo E (2017) Highlighting the differential role of leaf paraheliotropism in two Mediterranean Cistus species under drought stress and well-watered conditions. J Plant Physiol 213:199–208.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2017.02.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Reymond M, Muller B, Leonardi A, Charcosset A, Tardieu F (2003) Combining quantitative trait loci analysis and an ecophysiological model to analyze the genetic variability of the responses of maize leaf growth to temperature and water deficit. Plant Physiol 131:664–675.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.013839 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Roman DT, Novick KA, Brzostek ER, Dragoni D, Rahman F, Phillips RP (2015) The role of isohydric and anisohydric species in determining ecosystem-scale response to severe drought. Oecologia 179:641–654.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-015-3380-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Romero P, Botía P (2006) Daily and seasonal patterns of leaf water relations and gas exchange of regulated deficit-irrigated almond trees under semiarid conditions. Environ Exp Bot 56:158–173.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2005.01.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rossatto DR, Hoffmann WA, Silva LCR, Haridasan M, Sternberg LSL, Franco AC (2013) Seasonal variation in leaf traits between congeneric savanna and forest trees in Central Brazil: implications for forest expansion into savanna. Trees 27:1139–1150.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-013-0864-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schäfer KVR (2011) Canopy stomatal conductance following drought, disturbance, and death in an upland oak/pine forest of the New Jersey Pine Barrens, USA. Front Plant Sci 15:7pGoogle Scholar
  46. Schierenbeck KA, Marshall JD (1993) Seasonal and diurnal patterns of photosynthetic gas exchange forLonicerasempervirens and L. japonica (Caprifoliaceae). Am J Bot 80:1292–1299.  https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1993.tb15367.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. SilvestriniM Pinto-Maglio CAF, Zucchi MI, Santos FAM (2013) Cytogenetics and characterization of microsatellite loci for a South American pioneer tree species, Croton floribundus. Genome 56:743–751.  https://doi.org/10.1139/gen-2013-0159 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Socias FX, Correia MJ, Chaves MM, Medrano H (1997) The role of abscisic acid and water relations in drought responses of subterranean clover. J Exp Bot 48:1281–1288.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/48.6.1281 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Szabó I, Bergantino E, Giacometti GM (2005) Light and oxygenic photosynthesis: energy dissipation as a protection mechanism against photo-oxidation. EMBO Rep 6:629–634.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400460 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tóth SZ, Schansker G, Strasser RJ (2005) In intact leaves, the maximum fluorescence level (F M) is independent of the redox state of the plastoquinone pool: a DCMU-inhibition study. Biochim Biophys Acta 1708:275–282.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbabio.2005.03.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Urbieta IR, Pérez-Ramos IM, Zavala MA, Marañón T, Kobe RK (2008) Soil water content and emergence time control seedling establishment in three co-occurring Mediterranean oak species. Can J For Res 38:2382–2393.  https://doi.org/10.1139/X08-089 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vaz M, Pereira JS, Gazarini LC, David TS, David JS, Rodrigues A, Maroco J, Chaves MM (2010) Drought-induced photosynthetic inhibition and autumn recovery in two Mediterranean oak species (Quercus ilex and Quercussuber). Tree Physiol 30:946–956.  https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpq044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Webster GL (1993) A provisional synopsis of the sections of the genus Croton (Euphorbiaceae). Taxon 42:793–823.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1223265 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wortley L, Hero J-M, Howes M (2013) Evaluating ecological restoration success: a review of the literature. Restor Ecol 21:537–543.  https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yan M, Zheng S, Zhong Y, Shangguan Z (2017) Contrasting dynamics of leaf potential and gas exchange during progressive drought cycles and recovery in Amorphafruticosa and Robiniapseudoacacia. Nature 7:4470.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-04760-z Google Scholar
  56. Zha TS, Wu YJ, Jia X, Zhang MY, Bai YJ, Liu P, Peltola H (2017) Diurnal response of effective quantum yield of PSII photochemistry to irradiance as an indicator of photosynthetic acclimation to stressed environments revealed in a xerophytic species. Ecol Indic 74:191–197.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2015.02.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zlatev Z, Yordanov I (2004) Effects of soil drought on photosynthesis and chlorophyll fluorescence in bean plants. Bulg J Plant Physiol 30:3–18.  https://doi.org/10.2478/v10182-011-0007-2 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Brazilian Society of Plant Physiology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angélica L. Rodrigues
    • 1
  • Angelo A. S. Bertholdi
    • 1
  • Luís Paulo B. Mantoan
    • 1
  • Gabriela M. Vasconcellos
    • 1
  • Luiz Fernando R. Almeida
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Botany, Institute of BiosciencesUniv. Estadual Paulista (UNESP)BotucatuBrazil

Personalised recommendations