Oecologia

, Volume 68, Issue 2, pp 279–284 | Cite as

Comparative water use and nitrogen relationships in a mistletoe and its host

  • James R. Ehleringer
  • Craig S. Cook
  • Larry L. Tieszen
Original Papers

Summary

The impact of the xylem-tapping mistletoe Phoradendron juniperinum on the nitrogen and water relations of its host Juniperus osteosperma was investigated under natural field conditions. Leaf conductance, leaf water potential, and leaf Kjeldahl nitrogen contents were followed through the growing season on mistletoes, infected junipers (separating infected from uninfected stems) and uninfected junipers. Infected trees experienced lower leaf water potentials than uninfected trees and also had lower leaf conductances and lower leaf nitrogen contents. Infected juniper stems had higher conductances than uninfected stems. Mistletoes had higher leaf nitrogen contents than their hosts and much of this nitrogen appeared as arginine, a potential nitrogen storage compound. Photosynthetic rates (per unit leaf area) were significantly higher in junipers than in the mistletoe, and higher in the uninfected than infected junipers. Water use efficiencies as estimated by carbon isotope ratios were significantly lower in mistletoes than in their hosts. Increased mistletoe infestation appeared to increase absolute water use efficiency of both host and mistletoe.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Calder M, Bernhardt P (eds) (1983) The biology of mistletoes. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Ehleringer JR (1983) Ecophysiology of Amaranthus palmeri, a Sonoran Desert summer annual. Oecologia 57:107–112Google Scholar
  3. Ehleringer JR, Schulze E-D (1985) Mineral concentrations in an autoparasitic Phoradendron californicum growing on a parasitic P. californicum and its host, Cercidium floridum. Amer J Bot 72:568–571Google Scholar
  4. Ehleringer JR, Schulze E-D, Ziegler H, Lange OL, Farquhar GD, Cowan IR (1985) Xylem mistletoes: water or nutrient parasites? Science 227:1479–1481Google Scholar
  5. Farquhar GD, O'Leary MH, Berry JA (1982a) On the relationship between carbon isotope discrimination and the intercellular carbon dioxide concentration in leaves. Aust J Plant Physiol 9:121–137Google Scholar
  6. Farquhar GD, Ball MC, von Caemmerer S, Roksandic Z (1982b) Effect of salinity and humidity on δ13C value of halophytes — evidence for diffusional fractionation determined by the ratio of intercellular/atmospheric partial pressure of CO2 under different environmental conditions. Oecologia (Berlin) 52:121–124Google Scholar
  7. Field CB, Mooney HA (1985) The nitrogen-photosynthesis relationship in wild plants. In: Givnish TJ (ed) On the economy of plant form and function. Cambridge Univ Press (in press)Google Scholar
  8. Glatzel G (1983) Mineral nutrition and water relations of hemiparasitic mistletoes: a question of partitioning. Experiments with Loranthus europeus on Quercus petraea and Quercus robur. Oecologia 56:193–201Google Scholar
  9. Härtel O (1937) Über den Wasserhaushalt von Viscum album L. Ber Dtsch Botan Ges 55:310–321Google Scholar
  10. Hellmuth EO (1971) Eco-physiological studies on plants in arid and semi-arid regions of Western Australia. IV. Comparison of the field physiology of the host, Acacia grasbyi, and its hemiparasite, Amyema nestor under optimal and stress conditions. J Ecol 59:351–363Google Scholar
  11. Hollinger DY (1983) Photosynthesis and water relations of the mistletoe, Phoradendron villosum, and its host, the California valley oak, Quercus lobata. Oecologia 60:396–400Google Scholar
  12. Kamerling Z (1910) Verdunstungsversuche mit tropischen Loranthaceen. Ber Dtsch Bot Ges 32:17–24Google Scholar
  13. Kuijt J (1969) The biology of flowering parasitic plants. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  14. Lamont B (1983) Mineral nutrition of mistletoes. In: Calder M, Bernhardt P (eds) The biology of mistletoes. Academic Press, New York, pp 185–204Google Scholar
  15. Leonard OA, Hull RJ (1965) Translocation relationships in and between mistletoes and their hosts. Hilgardia 37:115–153Google Scholar
  16. Raven JA (1983) Phytophages of xylem and phloem: a comparison of animal and plant sap-feeders. Adv Ecol Res 13:136–234Google Scholar
  17. Schulze E-D, Ehleringer JR (1984) The effect of nitrogen supply and water-jse efficiency of xylem-tapping mistletoes. Planta 162:268–275Google Scholar
  18. Schulze E-D, Turner NC, Glatzel G (1984) Carbon, water and nutrient relations of two mistletoes and their hosts: a hypothesis. Plant Cell Environ 7:293–299Google Scholar
  19. Tieszen LL, Hein D, Quortrup S, Troughton J, Imbamba S (1979) Use of δ13C values to determine vegetation selectivity in East African herbivores. Oecologia 37:351–359Google Scholar
  20. Ullmann I, Lange OL, Ziegler H, Ehleringer JR, Schulze E-D, Cowan IR (1985) Diurnal courses of leaf conductance and transpiration of mistletoes and their hosts in central Australia. Oecologia (in press)Google Scholar
  21. Vareschi V, Pannier F (1953) Über den Wasserhaushalt tropischer Loranthaceen am natürlichen Standort. Phyton 5:140–152Google Scholar
  22. Wolff EV (1880) Aschenanalysen von landwirtschaftlichen Produkten II. Teil. Weigant Hempel, Parey, BerlinGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • James R. Ehleringer
    • 1
  • Craig S. Cook
    • 1
  • Larry L. Tieszen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyAugustana CollegeSioux FallsUSA

Personalised recommendations