Hydraulic limits on tree performance Transpiration, carbon gain and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

hydraulic limits on tree performance
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Hydraulic limits on tree performance Transpiration, carbon gain and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Hydraulic limits on tree performance Transpiration, carbon gain and growth of trees by Mel Tyree USDA Forest Service Northeastern Experiment Station Burlington, Vermont USA Soil-plant continuum model and the Cohesion-Tension Theory


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Hydraulic limits on tree performance

Transpiration, carbon gain and growth

  • f trees

by

Mel Tyree

USDA Forest Service Northeastern Experiment Station Burlington, Vermont USA

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Soil-plant continuum model

and the Cohesion-Tension Theory Connects:

  • Soil water potential, Ψsoil
  • Leaf water potential, ΨL
  • Transpiration, E
  • Plant hydraulic resistance (Rplant) or conductance (Kplant)

plant soil plant soil L

K E E R − Ψ = − Ψ = Ψ

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Ci

Stomatal response curve ACi curve of photosynthesis Lockhart growth curve

slide-4
SLIDE 4
slide-5
SLIDE 5

CASE ONE Does tree size affect tree hydraulics and performance?

Answers from a study on sugar maple Acer saccharum

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Shoot hydraulics versus basal diameter (D): Kshoot = 0.06 D1.402 Shoot leaf area versus basal diameter (D): AL = 4667 D2.007

slide-7
SLIDE 7

From the previous slide and our plant-model we can compute:

ΨL ≅ - 1.6x105 D0.605 E Which means: As maple trees get larger ΨL grows more negative. But this is a problem for stomatal conductance because⇒

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Stomatal conductance, gs, declines with ΨL

  • 3.0
  • 2.5
  • 2.0
  • 1.5
  • 1.0
  • 0.5

0.0 40 80 120 160 200 240 Stomatal conductance, mmol s-1m-2 Leaf water potential, MPa

gs is linked to E because: E = gs ∆X where ∆X is the difference in ‘humidity’ between the leaf and the outside air.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Kplant, kg s-1MPa-1

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1

Theoretical maximum gs, mmol s-1m-2

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 <0.03 <0.06 <0.1 <0.25 <0.5

Kplant/AL, kg s-1m-2MPa-1

0.8 2 3 5 8 1 10

Theoretical maximum gs, mmol s-1m-2

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

x10-5

Putting all this together we can figure out how changes in tree size affect gs

slide-10
SLIDE 10

CASE TWO Is there evidence that short-term changes in plant conductance changes performance?

Answers from a study on a pine Pinus ponderosa

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Pinus ponderosa Hubbard et al 2001 Shows the effect of short term changes on plant hydraulic conductance caused by embolism = xylem dysfunction

slide-12
SLIDE 12

CASE THREE Is there an observable relationship between plant hydraulic conductance and tree performance?

Answers from surveys of sapling to mature trees in field studies.

slide-13
SLIDE 13
slide-14
SLIDE 14

CASE FOUR Are differences in plant hydraulic conductance manifested from the seedling stage?

Answers from comparisons of slow growing and fast growing seedlings of tropical trees.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

k / DW, kg s-1MPa-1gDW-1X10-7 10 20 30 40

Roots Shoots Species

Tt Pr Gs Am Ma

k/ AL, kg s-1MPa-1m-2X10-5

2 4 6 8 10

A comparison of light-demanding (fast growing) seedlings to shade-tolerant (slow growing) seedling all under intermediate light regime.

Fast growing:

  • Am = Apeiba membranacea
  • Ma = Miconia argentia

Slow growing:

  • Tt = Trichiliaq tubersculata
  • Pr = Pouteria reticulata
  • Gs = Gustavia superba
slide-16
SLIDE 16

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the above and my experiences in the tropics generally

There are a number of necessary conditions for rapid tree growth

 High Kplant/AL  High photosynthetic capacity of leaves  Low leaf-area index  Resistance to pests (at least some)  Cold tolerance (in temperate climates)

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Fast-growing Eucalyputs hybrids grown my MONDI of South Africa

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Thank you! I hope that some day you will visit the beautiful State of Vermont.