International Journal of Biometeorology

, Volume 48, Issue 3, pp 119–127 | Cite as

Stomatal conductance in a tropical xerophilous shrubland at a lava substratum

  • Víctor L. Barradas
  • Alfredo Ramos-Vázquez
  • Alma Orozco-Segovia
Original Article

Abstract

Diurnal variation in leaf stomatal conductance (gs) of three xerophilous species (Buddleia cordata, Senecio praecox and Dodonaea viscosa) was measured over a 10-month period during the dry and wet seasons in a shrubland that is developing in a lava substratum in Mexico. Averaged stomatal conductances were 147 and 60.2 (B. cordata), 145 and 24.8 (D. viscosa) and 142.8 and 14.1 mmol m–2 s–1 (S. praecox) during the wet and dry season respectively. Leaf water potential (Ψ) varied in a range of –0.6 to –1.2 (S. praecox), –0.6 to –1.8 (B. cordata) and –0.9 to –3.4 MPa (D. viscosa) during the same measurement periods. Stomata were more sensitive to changes in irradiance, air temperature and leaf–air vapour pressure difference in the rainy season than the dry season. Although stomatal responses to Ψ were difficult to distinguish in any season (dry or rainy), data for the entire period of measurement showed a positive correlation, stomata tending to open as Ψ increased, but there is strong evidence of isohydric behaviour in S. praecox and B. cordata. A multiplicative model relating gs to environmental variables and to Ψ accounted for 79%–83% of the variation of gs in three sites (pooled data); however, the performance of the model was poorer (60%–76%) for individual species from other sites not included in the pooled data.

Keywords

Buddleia cordata Dodonaea viscosa Isohydric behaviour Leaf water potential Senecio praecox 

References

  1. Allen LH, Valle RR, Mishoe JJ, Jones JW (1994) Soybean leaf gas-exchange responses to carbon dioxide and water stress. Agron J 86:625–636Google Scholar
  2. Aphalo PJ, Jarvis PG (1991) Do stomata respond to relative humidity? Plant Cell Environ 14:127–132Google Scholar
  3. Barradas VL, Tejeda-Martinez A, Jauregui E (1999) Energy balance measurements in a suburban vegetated area in Mexico City. Atmos Environ 33:4109–4113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates LM, Hall AE (1981) Stomatal closure with soil depletion not associated with changes in bulk leaf water status. Oecologia 50:62–65Google Scholar
  5. Beadle CL, Turner NC, Jarvis PG (1978) Critical water potential for stomatal closure in Sitka spruce. Physiol Plant 43:160–165Google Scholar
  6. Borchert R (1994) Water status and development of tropical trees during seasonal drought. Trees 8:115–125Google Scholar
  7. Borel C, Simonneau T, This D, Tardieu F (1997) Stomatal conductance and ABA concentration in the xylem sap of barley lines of contrasting genetic origins. Aust J Plant Physiol 24:607–615Google Scholar
  8. Bunce JA (1985) Effect of boundary layer conductance on the respond of stomata to humidity. Plant Cell Environ 8:55–57Google Scholar
  9. Comstock J, Mencuccini M (1998) Control of stomatal conductance by leaf water potencial in Hymenoclea salsola (T. & G.), a desert subshrub. Plant Cell Environ 21:1029–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dolman AJ (1993) A multiple-source land surface energy balance model for use in general circulation models. Agric For Meteorol 65:21–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dolman AJ, Gash JHC, Roberts J, Shuttleworth WJ (1991) Stomatal and surface conductance of tropical rain forest. Agric For Meteorol 54:303–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fanjul L, Barradas VL (1985) Stomatal behaviour of two heliophile understorey species of a tropical deciduous forest in Mexico. J Appl Ecol 22:943–954Google Scholar
  13. Franks PJ, Cowan IR, Farquhar GD (1997) The apparent feedforward response of stomata to air vapour pressure deficit: information revealed by different experimental experimental procedures with two rainforest trees. Plant Cell Environ 20:142–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Henson IE, Jensen CR, Turner NC (1989) Leaf gas exchange and water relations of lupins and wheat. I. Shoot responses to soil water deficits. Aust J Plant Physiol 16:401–413Google Scholar
  15. Hubbard RM, Ryan MG, Stiller V, Sperry JS (2001) Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis vary linearly with plant hydraulic conductance in ponderosa pine. Plant Cell Environ 24:113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ita-Martínez C de, Barradas VL (1986) El clima y los patrones de producción agrícola en una selva baja caducifolia de la costa de Jalisco, México. Biótica 11:237–245Google Scholar
  17. Jarvis PG (1976) The interpretation of the variation in leaf water potential and stomatal conductance found in canopies in the field. Philos Trans R Soc Lond [Biol] 273:593–610Google Scholar
  18. Jones HG (1992) Plants and microclimate. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Kramer PJ (1988) Changing concepts regarding plant water relations. Plant Cell Environ 11:565–568Google Scholar
  20. Körner CH (1995) Leaf diffusive conductances in the major vegetation types of the globe. In: Schulze E-D, Caldwell MM (eds) Ecophysiology of photosynthesis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 463–490Google Scholar
  21. Mansfield TA, Wilson JA (1981) Regulation of gas exchange in water-stressed plants. In: Johnson CB (ed) Physiological processes limiting plant productivity. Butterworth, London, pp 237–252Google Scholar
  22. Maroco JP, Pereira JS, Chaves MM (1997) Stomatal responses to leaf-to-air vapour pressure deficit in sahelian species. Aust J Plant Physiol 24:381–387Google Scholar
  23. Matson P (1990) Plant-soil interactions in primary succesion at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Oecologia 85:241–246Google Scholar
  24. Meinzer FC (2002) Co-ordination of vapour and liquid phase water transport properties in plants. Plant Cell Environ 25:265–274PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Meinzer FC, Goldstein G, Holbrook NM, Jackson P, Cavelier J (1993) Stomatal and environmental control of transpiration in a lowland tropical forest tree. Plant Cell Environ 16:429–436Google Scholar
  26. Meinzer FC, Andrade JL, Goldstein G, Holbrok NM, Cavelier J, Jackson J (1997a) Control of transpiration from the upper canopy of a tropical forest: the role of stomatal, boundary layer and hydraulic architecture components. Plant Cell Environ 20:1242–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Meinzer FC, Hinckley TM, Ceulemans R (1997b) Apparent responses of stomata to transpiration and humidity in a hybrid poplar canopy. Plant Cell Environ 20:1301–1308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Monteith JL (1995) A reinterpretation of stomatal responses to humidity. Plant Cell Environ 18:357–364Google Scholar
  29. Murphy PG, Lugo AE (1986) Ecology of tropical dry forest. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17:67–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Neilson RE, Jarvis PG (1975) Photosynthesis in Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong) Carr.). VI. Responses of stomata to temperature. J Appl Ecol 12:879–891Google Scholar
  31. Nilsen ET, Sharifi MR, Rundell PW, Forseth IN, Ehleringer JR (1990) Water relations of stem succulent trees in north-central Baja California. Oecologia 82:299–303Google Scholar
  32. Pitman JI (1996) Ecophysiology of tropical dry evergreen forest, Thailand: measured and modelled stomatal conductance of Hopea ferrea, a dominant canopy emergent. J Appl Ecol 33:1366–1378Google Scholar
  33. Raschke K (1976) How stomata solve the dilemma of opposing priorities. Philos Trans R Soc Lond [Biol] 273:551–560Google Scholar
  34. Roberts J, Cabral OMR, Aguiar LF de (1990) Stomatal and boundary layer conductances in an Amazonian terra firme rain forest. J Appl Ecol 27:336–353Google Scholar
  35. Rojo A (1994) Reserva ecológica el Pedregal de San Angel: ecología, historia natural y manejo. UNAM, Mexico, DFGoogle Scholar
  36. Rzedowski J (1954) Vegetación del Pedregal de San Angel. An Esc Nac Cienc Biol 8:59–129Google Scholar
  37. Saliendra NZ, Meinzer FC (1989) Relationship between root/soil hydraulic properties and stomatal behaviour in sugarcane. Aust J Plant Physiol 16:241–250Google Scholar
  38. Sánchez-Huerta JBC (1990) Análisis de algunas variables meteorológicas y su área de influencia en Ciudad Universitaria, D.F., durante el periodo 1963 a 1983. Bachelor in Geography thesis, Colegio de Geografía, UNAM, Mexico, DFGoogle Scholar
  39. Scholander PF, Hammel HT, Hemmingsen EA, Bradstreet ED (1964) Hydrostatic pressure and osmotic potential in leaves of mangroves and some other plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 52:119–125Google Scholar
  40. Scholander PF, Hammel HT, Bradstreet ED, Hemmingsen EA (1965) Sap pressure in vascular plants. Science 148:339–346Google Scholar
  41. Schulze E-D (1986) Carbon dioxide and water vapour exchange in response to drought in the atmosphere and in the soil. Ann Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 37:247–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schulze E-D, Hall AE (1982) Stomatal responses, waterloss and CO2 assimilation rates of plants in contrasting environments. In: Lange OL, Nobel PS, Osmond CB, Ziegler H (eds) Physiological plant ecology. II. Encyclopedia of plant physiology. (New series 12 B) Springer. Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 181–230Google Scholar
  43. Steinberg SL, McFarland MJ, Miller JC (1989) Effect of water stress on stomatal conductance and leaf water relations of leaves along current-year branches of peach. Aust J Plant Physiol 16:549–560Google Scholar
  44. Stewart JB (1988) Modelling surface conductance of pine forest. Agric For Meteorol 43:19–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tardieu F, Simmonneau T (1998) Variability among species of stomatal control under fluctuating soil water status and evaporative demand: modeling isohydric and anisohydric behaviours. Plant Cell Environ 49:419–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tardieu F, Zhang J, Gowing DJG (1993) Stomatal control by both [ABA] in the xylem sap and leaf water status: test of a model and of alternative hypothesis for droughted or ABA-fed field-grown maize. Plant Cell Environ 15:193–197Google Scholar
  47. Tardieu F, Lafarge T, Simonneau T (1996) Stomatal control by fed or endogenous xylem ABA in sunflower: interpretation of observed correlations between leaf water potential and stomatal conductance in anisohydric species. Plant Cell Environ 19:75–84Google Scholar
  48. Turner NC (1981) Techniques and experimental approaches for the measurement of plant water status. Plant Soil 58:339–366Google Scholar
  49. Valiente-Banuet A, Luna García E de (1990) Una lista actualizada para la reserva del Pedregal de San Angel. Acta Bot Mex 9:13–30Google Scholar
  50. Wartinger A, Heilmeier H, Hartung W, Schulze E-D (1990) Daily and seasonal courses of leaf conductance and absicic acid in the xylem sap of almod tree (Prunus dulcis M) under desert conditions. New Phytol 116:581–587Google Scholar
  51. Whitehead D, Okali DJJ, Fasehun FE (1981) Stomatal responses to environmental variables in two tropical forest species during the dry season in Nigeria. J Appl Ecol 18:571–587Google Scholar
  52. Wright IR, Gash JHC, Rocha HR de, Roberts JM (1996) Modelling stomatal conductance for Amazonian pasture and forest. In: Gash JHC, Nobre CA, Roberts JM, Victoria RL (eds) Amazonian deforestation and climate. Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford, pp 437–457Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ISB 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Víctor L. Barradas
    • 1
  • Alfredo Ramos-Vázquez
    • 1
  • Alma Orozco-Segovia
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto de Ecología, UNAM, Apartado Postal 70-275, Circuito Exterior, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510 México, D.F., México

Personalised recommendations