Advertisement

Journal of Plant Research

, Volume 132, Issue 3, pp 311–324 | Cite as

Water transport, perception, and response in plants

  • Johannes Daniel Scharwies
  • José R. DinnenyEmail author
JPR Symposium Toward unveiling plant adaptation mechanisms to environmental stresses

Abstract

Sufficient water availability in the environment is critical for plant survival. Perception of water by plants is necessary to balance water uptake and water loss and to control plant growth. Plant physiology and soil science research have contributed greatly to our understanding of how water moves through soil, is taken up by roots, and moves to leaves where it is lost to the atmosphere by transpiration. Water uptake from the soil is affected by soil texture itself and soil water content. Hydraulic resistances for water flow through soil can be a major limitation for plant water uptake. Changes in water supply and water loss affect water potential gradients inside plants. Likewise, growth creates water potential gradients. It is known that plants respond to changes in these gradients. Water flow and loss are controlled through stomata and regulation of hydraulic conductance via aquaporins. When water availability declines, water loss is limited through stomatal closure and by adjusting hydraulic conductance to maintain cell turgor. Plants also adapt to changes in water supply by growing their roots towards water and through refinements to their root system architecture. Mechanosensitive ion channels, aquaporins, proteins that sense the cell wall and cell membrane environment, and proteins that change conformation in response to osmotic or turgor changes could serve as putative sensors. Future research is required to better understand processes in the rhizosphere during soil drying and how plants respond to spatial differences in water availability. It remains to be investigated how changes in water availability and water loss affect different tissues and cells in plants and how these biophysical signals are translated into chemical signals that feed into signaling pathways like abscisic acid response or organ development.

Keywords

Water perception Drought stress Plant water relations Stomatal regulation Aquaporins Hydropatterning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The information, data, or work presented herein was funded in part by the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), U.S. Department of Energy, under Award Number DE-AR 1565-1555 and in part by a Faculty Scholar grant from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and the Simons Foundation, both awarded to JRD.

References

  1. Ahmed MA, Zarebanadkouki M, Meunier F et al (2018) Root type matters: measurement of water uptake by seminal, crown, and lateral roots in maize. J Exp Bot 69:1199–1206.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erx439 Google Scholar
  2. Alexandersson E, Danielson JÅH, Råde J et al (2010) Transcriptional regulation of aquaporins in accessions of Arabidopsis in response to drought stress. Plant J 61:650–660.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2009.04087.x Google Scholar
  3. Assmann SM, Snyder JA, Lee YRJ (2000) ABA-deficient (aba1) and ABA-insensitive (abi1-1, abi2-1) mutants of Arabidopsis have a wild-type stomatal response to humidity. Plant Cell Environ 23:387–395.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.2000.00551.x Google Scholar
  4. Babé A, Lavigne T, Séverin J-P et al (2012) Repression of early lateral root initiation events by transient water deficit in barley and maize. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 367:1534–1541.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0240 Google Scholar
  5. Bao Y, Aggarwal P, Robbins NE et al (2014) Plant roots use a patterning mechanism to position lateral root branches toward available water. PNAS 111:9319–9324.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1400966111 Google Scholar
  6. Barberon M (2017) The endodermis as a checkpoint for nutrients. New Phytol 213:1604–1610.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14140 Google Scholar
  7. Bartlett MK, Zhang Y, Kreidler N et al (2014) Global analysis of plasticity in turgor loss point, a key drought tolerance trait. Ecol Lett 17:1580–1590.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12374 Google Scholar
  8. Batool S, Uslu VV, Rajab H et al (2018) Sulfate is incorporated into cysteine to trigger ABA production and stomata closure. Plant Cell.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.18.00612 (Epub ahead of print) Google Scholar
  9. Bauer H, Ache P, Lautner S et al (2013) The stomatal response to reduced relative humidity requires guard cell-autonomous ABA synthesis. Curr Biol 23:53–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.11.022 Google Scholar
  10. Baxter I, Hosmani PS, Rus A et al (2009) Root suberin forms an extracellular barrier that affects water relations and mineral nutrition in Arabidopsis. PLoS Genet 5:e1000492.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000492 Google Scholar
  11. Benitez-Alfonso Y, Faulkner C, Pendle A et al (2013) Symplastic intercellular connectivity regulates lateral root patterning. Dev Cell 26:136–147.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2013.06.010 Google Scholar
  12. Boyer JS, Silk WK, Watt M (2010) Path of water for root growth. Funct Plant Biol 37:1105–1116.  https://doi.org/10.1071/FP10108 Google Scholar
  13. Brady NC, Weil RR (2008) The nature and properties of soils, 14th edn. Pearson-Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  14. Buckley TN (2015) The contributions of apoplastic, symplastic and gas phase pathways for water transport outside the bundle sheath in leaves. Plant Cell Environ 38:7–22.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12372 Google Scholar
  15. Buckley TN, Sack L, Gilbert ME (2011) The role of bundle sheath extensions and life form in stomatal responses to leaf water status. Plant Physiol 156:962–973.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.111.175638 Google Scholar
  16. Byrt CS, Zhao M, Kourghi M et al (2017) Non-selective cation channel activity of aquaporin AtPIP2;1 regulated by Ca2+ and pH. Plant Cell Environ 40:802–815.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12832 Google Scholar
  17. Caldwell MM, Dawson TE, Richards JH (1998) Hydraulic lift: consequences of water efflux from the roots of plants. Oecologia 113:151–161.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050363 Google Scholar
  18. Carminati A, Vetterlein D, Weller U et al (2009) When roots lose contact. Vadose Zone J 8:805–809.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2008.0147 Google Scholar
  19. Carminati A, Passioura JB, Zarebanadkouki M et al (2017) Root hairs enable high transpiration rates in drying soils. New Phytol 216:771–781.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14715 Google Scholar
  20. Chaumont F, Tyerman SD (2014) Aquaporins: highly regulated channels controlling plant water relations. Plant Physiol 164:1600–1618.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.113.233791 Google Scholar
  21. Chaves MM, Maroco JP, Pereira JS (2003) Understanding plant responses to drought—from genes to the whole plant. Funct Plant Biol 30:239–264.  https://doi.org/10.1071/fp02076 Google Scholar
  22. Christmann A, Weiler EW, Steudle E, Grill E (2007) A hydraulic signal in root-to-shoot signalling of water shortage. Plant J 52:167–174.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2007.03234.x Google Scholar
  23. Christmann A, Grill E, Huang J (2013) Hydraulic signals in long-distance signaling. Curr Opin Plant Biol 16:293–300.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2013.02.011 Google Scholar
  24. Couvreur V, Faget M, Lobet G et al (2018) Going with the flow: multiscale insights into the composite nature of water transport in roots. Plant Physiol 178:1689–1703.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.18.01006 Google Scholar
  25. Cuevas-Velazquez CL, Dinneny JR (2018) Organization out of disorder: liquid-liquid phase separation in plants. Curr Opin Plant Biol 45:68–74.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2018.05.005 Google Scholar
  26. Cuevas-Velazquez CL, Saab-Rincón G, Reyes JL, Covarrubias AA (2016) The unstructured N-terminal region of Arabidopsis group 4 Late Embryogenesis Abundant (LEA) proteins is required for folding and for chaperone-like activity under water deficit. J Biol Chem 291:10893–10903.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M116.720318 Google Scholar
  27. Daly KR, Mooney SJ, Bennett MJ et al (2015) Assessing the influence of the rhizosphere on soil hydraulic properties using X-ray computed tomography and numerical modelling. J Exp Bot 66:2305–2314.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eru509 Google Scholar
  28. Darwin F (1898) IX. Observations on stomata. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 190:531–621.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1898.0009 Google Scholar
  29. Darwin C, Darwin F (1880) The power of movement in plants. John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Dietrich D, Pang L, Kobayashi A et al (2017) Root hydrotropism is controlled via a cortex-specific growth mechanism. Nature Plants 3:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2017.57 Google Scholar
  31. Duan L, Dietrich D, Ng CH et al (2013) Endodermal ABA signaling promotes lateral root quiescence during salt stress in Arabidopsis seedlings. Plant Cell 25:324–341.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.112.107227 Google Scholar
  32. Edwards D, Edwards DS, Rayner R (1982) The cuticle of early vascular plants and its evolutionary significance. In: Cutler DF, Alvin KL, Price CE (eds) The plant cuticle. Linnean Society Symposium Series No. 10. Academic Press, London, pp 341–361Google Scholar
  33. Feng W, Kita D, Peaucelle A et al (2018) The FERONIA receptor kinase maintains cell-wall integrity during salt stress through Ca2+ signaling. Curr Biol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.01.023 Google Scholar
  34. Fiscus EL, Kramer PJ (1975) General model for osmotic and pressure-induced flow in plant roots. PNAS 72:3114–3118.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.72.8.3114 Google Scholar
  35. Franks PJ, Farquhar GD (2007) The mechanical diversity of stomata and its significance in gas-exchange control. Plant Physiol 143:78–87.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.089367 Google Scholar
  36. Frensch J, Steudle E (1989) Axial and radial hydraulic resistance to roots of maize. Plant Physiol 91:719–726.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.91.2.719 Google Scholar
  37. Grantz DA (1990) Plant response to atmospheric humidity. Plant Cell Environ 13:667–679.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1990.tb01082.x Google Scholar
  38. Grondin A, Rodrigues O, Verdoucq L et al (2015) Aquaporins contribute to ABA-triggered stomatal closure through OST1-mediated phosphorylation. Plant Cell 27:1945–1954.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.15.00421 Google Scholar
  39. Hamanishi ET, Thomas BR, Campbell MM (2012) Drought induces alterations in the stomatal development program in Populus. J Exp Bot 63:4959–4971.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ers177 Google Scholar
  40. Hamilton ES, Jensen GS, Maksaev G et al (2015) Mechanosensitive channel MSL8 regulates osmotic forces during pollen hydration and germination. Science 350:438–441.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac6014 Google Scholar
  41. Heckman DS, Geiser DM, Eidell BR et al (2001) Molecular evidence for the early colonization of land by fungi and plants. Science 293:1129–1133.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1061457 Google Scholar
  42. Hepworth C, Doheny-Adams T, Hunt L et al (2015) Manipulating stomatal density enhances drought tolerance without deleterious effect on nutrient uptake. New Phytol 208:336–341.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13598 Google Scholar
  43. Holbrook NM, Shashidhar VR, James RA, Munns R (2002) Stomatal control in tomato with ABA-deficient roots: response of grafted plants to soil drying. J Exp Bot 53:1503–1514.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/53.373.1503 Google Scholar
  44. Jaffe MJ, Takahashi H, Biro RL (1985) A pea mutant for the study of hydrotropism in roots. Science 230:445–447.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.230.4724.445 Google Scholar
  45. Javot H, Lauvergeat V, Santoni V et al (2003) Role of a single aquaporin isoform in root water uptake. Plant Cell 15:509–522.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.008888 Google Scholar
  46. Johansson I, Karlsson M, Shukla VK et al (1998) Water transport activity of the plasma membrane aquaporin PM28A is regulated by phosphorylation. Plant Cell 10:451–459.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.10.3.451 Google Scholar
  47. Jones HG (1998) Stomatal control of photosynthesis and transpiration. J Exp Bot 49:387–398.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/49.suppl_1.387 Google Scholar
  48. Jones RJ, Mansfield TA (1972) Effects of abscisic acid and its esters on stomatal aperture and the transpiration ratio. Physiol Plant 26:321–327.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1972.tb01117.x Google Scholar
  49. Kataoka T, Hayashi N, Yamaya T, Takahashi H (2004) Root-to-shoot transport of sulfate in Arabidopsis. Evidence for the role of SULTR3;5 as a component of low-affinity sulfate transport system in the root vasculature. Plant Physiol 136:4198–4204.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.104.045625 Google Scholar
  50. Knipfer T, Fricke W (2010) Root pressure and a solute reflection coefficient close to unity exclude a purely apoplastic pathway of radial water transport in barley (Hordeum vulgare). New Phytol 187:159–170.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03240.x Google Scholar
  51. Kramer PJ, Boyer JS (1995) Water relations of plants and soils. Elsevier ScienceGoogle Scholar
  52. Kroener E, Holz M, Zarebanadkouki M et al (2018) Effects of mucilage on rhizosphere hydraulic functions depend on soil particle size. Vadose Zone J 17.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2017.03.0056
  53. Lake JA, Woodward FI (2008) Response of stomatal numbers to CO2 and humidity: control by transpiration rate and abscisic acid. New Phytol 179:397–404.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02485.x Google Scholar
  54. Leitao L, Prista C, Loureiro-Dias MC et al (2014) The grapevine tonoplast aquaporin TIP2;1 is a pressure gated water channel. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 450:289–294.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2014.05.121 Google Scholar
  55. Lucas WJ, Groover A, Lichtenberger R et al (2013) The plant vascular system: evolution, development and functions. J Integr Plant Biol 55:294–388.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jipb.12041 Google Scholar
  56. Lynch JP (2013) Steep, cheap and deep: an ideotype to optimize water and N acquisition by maize root systems. Ann Bot 112:347–357.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcs293 Google Scholar
  57. Maurel C, Kado RT, Guern J, Chrispeels MJ (1995) Phosphorylation regulates the water channel activity of the seed-specific aquaporin alpha-TIP. EMBO J 14:3028–3035.  https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1460-2075.1995.tb07305.x Google Scholar
  58. McAdam SAM, Brodribb TJ (2012) Fern and Lycophyte guard cells do not respond to endogenous abscisic acid. Plant Cell 24:1510–1521.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.112.096404 Google Scholar
  59. McAdam SAM, Brodribb TJ (2016) Linking turgor with ABA biosynthesis: Implications for stomatal responses to vapor pressure deficit across land plants. Plant Physiol 171:2008–2016.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.16.00380 Google Scholar
  60. McAdam SA, Brodribb TJ, Ross JJ (2016) Shoot-derived abscisic acid promotes root growth. Plant Cell Environ 39:652–659.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12669 Google Scholar
  61. McCourt RM, Delwiche CF, Karol KG (2004) Charophyte algae and land plant origins. Trends Ecol Evol 19:661–666.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.09.013 Google Scholar
  62. Meshcheryakov A, Steudle E, Komor E (1992) Gradients of turgor, osmotic pressure, and water potential in the cortex of the hypocotyl of growing ricinus seedlings: effects of the supply of water from the xylem and of solutes from the Phloem. Plant Physiol 98:840–852.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.98.3.840 Google Scholar
  63. Meunier F, Couvreur V, Draye X et al (2017) Towards quantitative root hydraulic phenotyping: novel mathematical functions to calculate plant-scale hydraulic parameters from root system functional and structural traits. J Math Biol 75:1133–1170.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-017-1111-z Google Scholar
  64. Molz FJ, Boyer JS (1978) Growth-induced water potentials in plant cells and tissues. Plant Physiol 62:423–429.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.62.3.423 Google Scholar
  65. Moradi AB, Carminati A, Vetterlein D et al (2011) Three-dimensional visualization and quantification of water content in the rhizosphere. New Phytol 192:653–663.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03826.x Google Scholar
  66. Morgan JM (1984) Osmoregulation and water stress in higher plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 35:299–319.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pp.35.060184.001503 Google Scholar
  67. Mott KA, Peak D (2010) Stomatal responses to humidity and temperature in darkness. Plant Cell Environ 33:1084–1090.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2010.02129.x Google Scholar
  68. Munemasa S, Hauser F, Park J et al (2015) Mechanisms of abscisic acid-mediated control of stomatal aperture. Curr Opin Plant Biol 28:154–162.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2015.10.010 Google Scholar
  69. Murthy SE, Dubin AE, Whitwam T et al (2018) OSCA/TMEM63 are an evolutionarily conserved family of mechanically activated ion channels. Elife 7.  https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41844
  70. Nakagawa Y, Katagiri T, Shinozaki K et al (2007) Arabidopsis plasma membrane protein crucial for Ca2 + influx and touch sensing in roots. PNAS 104:3639–3644.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0607703104 Google Scholar
  71. Nobel PS, Cui M (1992) Prediction and measurement of gap water vapor conductance for roots located concentrically and eccentrically in air gaps. Plant Soil 145:157–166.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00010344 Google Scholar
  72. Nonami H, Boyer JS (1993) Direct demonstration of a growth-induced water potential gradient. Plant Physiol 102:13–19.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.102.1.13 Google Scholar
  73. Oparka KJ, Prior DAM (1992) Direct evidence for pressure-generated closure of plasmodesmata. Plant J 2:741–750.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.1992.tb00143.x Google Scholar
  74. Orman-Ligeza B, Morris EC, Parizot B et al (2018) The xerobranching response represses lateral root formation when roots are not in contact with water. Curr Biol 28:3165–3173.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.074 Google Scholar
  75. Orosa-Puente B, Leftley N, von Wangenheim D et al (2018) Root branching toward water involves posttranslational modification of transcription factor ARF7. Science 362:1407–1410.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau3956 Google Scholar
  76. Ozu M, Dorr RA, Gutierrez F et al (2013) Human AQP1 is a constitutively open channel that closes by a membrane-tension-mediated mechanism. Biophys J 104:85–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2012.11.3818 Google Scholar
  77. Pantin F, Simonneau T, Rolland G et al (2011) Control of leaf expansion: a developmental switch from metabolics to hydraulics. Plant Physiol 156:803–815.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.111.176289 Google Scholar
  78. Pantin F, Monnet F, Jannaud D et al (2013) The dual effect of abscisic acid on stomata. New Phytol 197:65–72.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12013 Google Scholar
  79. Péret B, Li G, Zhao J et al (2012) Auxin regulates aquaporin function to facilitate lateral root emergence. Nat Cell Biol 14:991–998.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2573 Google Scholar
  80. Postaire O, Tournaire-Roux C, Grondin A et al (2010) A PIP1 aquaporin contributes to hydrostatic pressure-induced water transport in both the root and rosette of Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 152:1418–1430.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.109.145326 Google Scholar
  81. Qian P, Song W, Yokoo T et al (2018) The CLE9/10 secretory peptide regulates stomatal and vascular development through distinct receptors. Nat Plants 4:1071–1081.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-018-0317-4 Google Scholar
  82. Raissig MT, Matos JL, Anleu Gil MX et al (2017) Mobile MUTE specifies subsidiary cells to build physiologically improved grass stomata. Science 355:1215–1218.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal3254 Google Scholar
  83. Reinhardt H, Hachez C, Bienert MD et al (2016) Tonoplast aquaporins facilitate lateral root emergence. Plant Physiol 170:1640–1654.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.15.01635 Google Scholar
  84. Rellán-Álvarez R, Lobet G, Lindner H et al (2015) GLO-Roots: an imaging platform enabling multidimensional characterization of soil-grown root systems. Elife 4:1–26.  https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07597 Google Scholar
  85. Richards LA, Weaver LR (1943) Fifteen-atmosphere percentage as related to the permanent wilting percentage. Soil Sci 56:331.  https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-194311000-00002 Google Scholar
  86. Richards LA, Weaver LR (1944) Moisture retention by some irrigated soils as related to soil-moisture tension. J Agric Res 69:0215–0235Google Scholar
  87. Robbins NE, Dinneny JR (2016) A method to analyze local and systemic effects of environmental stimuli on root development in plants. Bio-protocol.  https://doi.org/10.21769/BioProtoc.1923 Google Scholar
  88. Robbins NE, Dinneny JR (2018) Growth is required for perception of water availability to pattern root branches in plants. PNAS 115:E822–E831.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710709115 Google Scholar
  89. Rodrigues O, Reshetnyak G, Grondin A et al (2017) Aquaporins facilitate hydrogen peroxide entry into guard cells to mediate ABA- and pathogen-triggered stomatal closure. PNAS 114:9200–9205.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704754114 Google Scholar
  90. Sade N, Shatil-Cohen A, Attia Z et al (2014) The role of plasma membrane aquaporins in regulating the bundle sheath-mesophyll continuum and leaf hydraulics. Plant Physiol 166:1609–1620.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.114.248633 Google Scholar
  91. Sade N, Shatil-Cohen A, Moshelion M (2015) Bundle-sheath aquaporins play a role in controlling Arabidopsis leaf hydraulic conductivity. Plant Signal Behav 10:e1017177.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15592324.2015.1017177 Google Scholar
  92. Saxton KE, Rawls WJ (2006) Soil water characteristic estimates by texture and organic matter for hydrologic solutions. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70:1569–1578.  https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2005.0117 Google Scholar
  93. Schenk HJ, Espino S, Romo DM et al (2017) Xylem surfactants introduce a new element to the cohesion–tension theory. Plant Physiol 173:1177–1196.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.16.01039 Google Scholar
  94. Scholander PF, Bradstreet ED, Hemmingsen EA, Hammel HT (1965) Sap pressure in vascular plants: negative hydrostatic pressure can be measured in plants. Science 148:339–346.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.148.3668.339 Google Scholar
  95. Sebastian J, Yee M-C, Goudinho Viana W et al (2016) Grasses suppress shoot-borne roots to conserve water during drought. PNAS 113:8861–8866.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1604021113 Google Scholar
  96. Sharp RE, Silk WK, Hsiao TC (1988) Growth of the maize primary root at low water potentials: I. Spatial distribution of expansive growth. Plant Physiol 87:50–57.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.87.1.50 Google Scholar
  97. Sharp RE, Poroyko V, Hejlek LG et al (2004) Root growth maintenance during water deficits: physiology to functional genomics. J Exp Bot 55:2343–2351.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh276 Google Scholar
  98. Shatil-Cohen A, Attia Z, Moshelion M (2011) Bundle-sheath cell regulation of xylem-mesophyll water transport via aquaporins under drought stress: a target of xylem-borne ABA? Plant J 67:72–80.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04576.x Google Scholar
  99. Shkolnik D, Nuriel R, Bonza MC et al (2018) MIZ1 regulates ECA1 to generate a slow, long-distance phloem-transmitted Ca2 + signal essential for root water tracking in Arabidopsis. PNAS 115:8031–8036.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804130115 Google Scholar
  100. Shope JC, Peak D, Mott KA (2008) Stomatal responses to humidity in isolated epidermis. Plant Cell Environ 31:1290–1298.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2008.01844.x Google Scholar
  101. Soil Science Division Staff (2017) Soil survey manual. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  102. Spollen WG, Sharp RE (1991) Spatial distribution of turgor and root growth at low water potentials. Plant Physiol 96:438–443.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.96.2.438 Google Scholar
  103. Steudle E (2000) Water uptake by roots: effects of water deficit. J Exp Bot 51:1531–1542.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/51.350.1531 Google Scholar
  104. Steudle E (2001) The cohesion–tension mechanism and the acquisition of water by plant roots. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 52:847–875.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.52.1.847 Google Scholar
  105. Steudle E, Peterson CA (1998) How does water get through roots? J Exp Bot 49:775–788.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/49.322.775 Google Scholar
  106. Taiz L, Zeiger E (2010) Plant physiology, 5th edn. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  107. Takahashi F, Suzuki T, Osakabe Y et al (2018) A small peptide modulates stomatal control via abscisic acid in long-distance signalling. Nature 556:235–238.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0009-2 Google Scholar
  108. Tanaka Y, Nose T, Jikumaru Y, Kamiya Y (2013) ABA inhibits entry into stomatal-lineage development in Arabidopsis leaves. Plant J 74:448–457.  https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.12136 Google Scholar
  109. Tang A, Boyer JS (2002) Growth-induced water potentials and the growth of maize leaves. J Exp Bot 53:489–503.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/53.368.489 Google Scholar
  110. Tang A-C, Boyer JS (2003) Root pressurization affects growth-induced water potentials and growth in dehydrated maize leaves. J Exp Bot 54:2479–2488.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erg265 Google Scholar
  111. Tardieu F, Davies WJ (1993) Integration of hydraulic and chemical signalling in the control of stomatal conductance and water status of droughted plants. Plant Cell Environ 16:341–349.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1993.tb00880.x Google Scholar
  112. Tardieu F, Simonneau T (1998) Variability among species of stomatal control under fluctuating soil water status and evaporative demand: modelling isohydric and anisohydric behaviours. J Exp Bot 49:419–432.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/49.suppl_1.419 Google Scholar
  113. Tardieu F, Draye X, Javaux M (2017) Root water uptake and ideotypes of the root system: whole-plant controls matter. Vadose Zone J 16:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2017.05.0107 Google Scholar
  114. Toft-Bertelsen TL, Larsen BR, MacAulay N (2018) Sensing and regulation of cell volume—we know so much and yet understand so little: TRPV4 as a sensor of volume changes but possibly without a volume-regulatory role? Channels 12:100–108.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19336950.2018.1438009 Google Scholar
  115. Tornroth-Horsefield S, Wang Y, Hedfalk K et al (2006) Structural mechanism of plant aquaporin gating. Nature 439:688–694.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04316 Google Scholar
  116. Trachsel S, Kaeppler SM, Brown KM, Lynch JP (2011) Shovelomics: high throughput phenotyping of maize (Zea mays L.) root architecture in the field. Plant Soil 341:75–87.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-010-0623-8 Google Scholar
  117. Tracy SR, Daly KR, Sturrock CJ et al (2015) Three-dimensional quantification of soil hydraulic properties using X-ray Computed Tomography and image-based modeling. Water Resour Res 51:1006–1022.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR016020 Google Scholar
  118. Tricker PJ, Gibbings JG, Lopez CMR et al (2012) Low relative humidity triggers RNA-directed de novo DNA methylation and suppression of genes controlling stomatal development. J Exp Bot 63:3799–3813.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ers076 Google Scholar
  119. Tricker P, López C, Gibbings G et al (2013) Transgenerational, dynamic methylation of stomata genes in response to low relative humidity. Int J Mol Sci 14:6674–6689Google Scholar
  120. Van den Honert TH (1948) Water transport in plants as a catenary process. Discuss Faraday Soc 3:146–153.  https://doi.org/10.1039/df9480300146 Google Scholar
  121. van der Weele CM, Spollen WG, Sharp RE, Baskin TI (2000) Growth of Arabidopsis thaliana seedlings under water deficit studied by control of water potential in nutrient-agar media. J Exp Bot 51:1555–1562.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/51.350.1555 Google Scholar
  122. Vandeleur RK, Mayo G, Shelden MC et al (2009) The role of plasma membrane intrinsic protein aquaporins in water transport through roots: diurnal and drought stress responses reveal different strategies between isohydric and anisohydric cultivars of grapevine. Plant Physiol 149:445–460.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.108.128645 Google Scholar
  123. Vandeleur RK, Sullivan W, Athman A et al (2014) Rapid shoot-to-root signalling regulates root hydraulic conductance via aquaporins. Plant Cell Environ 37:520–538.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12175 Google Scholar
  124. Vermeer JEM, von Wangenheim D, Barberon M et al (2014) A spatial accommodation by neighboring cells is required for organ initiation in Arabidopsis. Science 343:178–183.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1245871 Google Scholar
  125. Voetberg GS, Sharp RE (1991) Growth of the maize primary root at low water potentials: III. role of increased proline deposition in osmotic adjustment. Plant Physiol 96:1125–1130.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.96.4.1125 Google Scholar
  126. Waadt R, Hitomi K, Nishimura N et al (2014) FRET-based reporters for the direct visualization of abscisic acid concentration changes and distribution in Arabidopsis. Elife 3:e01739.  https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.01739 Google Scholar
  127. Walker TS, Bais HP, Grotewold E, Vivanco JM (2003) Root exudation and rhizosphere biology. Plant Physiol 132:44–51.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.102.019661 Google Scholar
  128. Westgate ME, Boyer JS (1984) Transpiration- and growth-induced water potentials in maize. Plant Physiol 74:882–889.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.74.4.882 Google Scholar
  129. Westgate ME, Boyer JS (1985) Osmotic adjustment and the inhibition of leaf, root, stem and silk growth at low water potentials in maize. Planta 164:540–549.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00395973 Google Scholar
  130. Wiegers BS, Cheer AY, Silk WK (2009) Modeling the hydraulics of root growth in three dimensions with phloem water sources. Plant Physiol 150:2092–2103.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.109.138198 Google Scholar
  131. Xing L, Zhao Y, Gao J et al (2016) The ABA receptor PYL9 together with PYL8 plays an important role in regulating lateral root growth. Sci Rep 6:27177.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep27177 Google Scholar
  132. Xu Z, Zhou G (2008) Responses of leaf stomatal density to water status and its relationship with photosynthesis in a grass. J Exp Bot 59:3317–3325.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ern185 Google Scholar
  133. Ye Q, Wiera B, Steudle E (2004) A cohesion/tension mechanism explains the gating of water channels (aquaporins) in Chara internodes by high concentration. J Exp Bot 55:449–461.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh040 Google Scholar
  134. Zambryski P, Crawford K (2000) Plasmodesmata: gatekeepers for cell-to-cell transport of developmental signals in plants. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 16:393–421.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.cellbio.16.1.393 Google Scholar
  135. Zarebanadkouki M, Meunier F, Couvreur V et al (2016) Estimation of the hydraulic conductivities of lupine roots by inverse modelling of high-resolution measurements of root water uptake. Ann Bot 118:853–864.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcw154 Google Scholar
  136. Zhang J, Schurr U, Davies WJ (1987) Control of stomatal behaviour by abscisic acid which apparently originates in the roots. J Exp Bot 38:1174–1181.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/38.7.1174 Google Scholar
  137. Zhang L, Shi X, Zhang Y et al (2018) CLE9 peptide-induced stomatal closure is mediated by abscisic acid, hydrogen peroxide, and nitric oxide in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Environ.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.13475 (Epub ahead of print) Google Scholar
  138. Zhao M, Tan H-T, Scharwies J et al (2017) Association between water and carbon dioxide transport in leaf plasma membranes: assessing the role of aquaporins. Plant Cell Environ 40:789–801.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12830 Google Scholar
  139. Zwieniecki MA, Melcher PJ, Holbrook NM (2001) Hydrogel control of xylem hydraulic resistance in plants. Science 291:1059–1062.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1057175 Google Scholar
  140. Zwieniecki MA, Brodribb TJ, Holbrook NM (2007) Hydraulic design of leaves: insights from rehydration kinetics. Plant Cell Environ 30:910–921.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.001681.x Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Botanical Society of Japan 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johannes Daniel Scharwies
    • 1
    • 2
  • José R. Dinneny
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Plant BiologyCarnegie Institution for ScienceStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations