Mean Ψpd and environmental variables for
1. Introduction
Estimates of water use by plants are becoming increasingly important to forest science. Researchers apply water use estimates to predict the control of canopy conductance and transpiration [14, 26, 46], where this information is useful to help troubleshooting the water resources management [37, 24, 32], the role of transpiration in native forests [3] and to quantify the demand for water in short rotation forests and in plantations of
The growth and development of plants is a consequence of several physiological processes controlled by environmental conditions and genetic characteristics of each plant species. Therefore, in order to better understand the growth, development and hydrological impact of a
Process-based models consist in evidence-based relationships, which necessarily contain a relation of cause and effect, whether physical or biological [42]. A fundamental aspect of ecological processes is that they are affected by spatial and temporal dimensions. In spatial terms, for example, measurements made on a leaf in terms of net primary productivity, can not be extrapolated directly to the tree’s canopy, because for this extrapolation is necessary knowledge about the distribution of the canopy, the arrangement of leaves, availability of soil water and others. Likewise, the extrapolation to the forest and the ecosystem needs information previously dispensable in smaller scales. This notion of scales and their extrapolations are essential to avoid mistaken views and phenomena in a certain scale for larger or smaller scales. As the scale is broaden, more interactions occur between the growing number of compartments of the system, making it more difficult and laborious to study the cause-effect relationships from models based on processes.
Thus, this study aims to describe the ecophysiological behavior of
2. Determining the scales
For a description and quantification on the water flow of
2.1. Ecophysiological variables
The observations of water availability in the soil were performed by measuring predawn leaf water potential (Ψpd) using a Scholander pressure chamber [38], model 3035 (Soil Moisture Equipment Corp.., USA) before sunrise in healthy leaves fully expanded. According to [45], Ψpd maintains a balanced relationship with the substrate’s water potential, due to low rates of transpiration by plants presented overnight. To do so, four branches per seedling (on pot scale) or tree (on plot and watershed scales) were collected simultaneously. The measurements were carried out immediately after material collection.
Physiological measurements of transpiration (E) and stomatal conductance (Gs) were made by infrared gas analyzer (IRGA) LC-PRO + (ADC bioscientific Ltda., UK). For this end, four randomly and fully expanded healthy leaves for each individual seedlings/tree were chosen. The readings were held at hourly intervals throughout the day in the period from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
2.2. Environmental variables
Environmental variables such as photosynthetically active radiation and vapor pressure deficit of the atmosphere were chosen to correlate with the E and Gs. The PAR on the leaf surface (Qleaf) was determined simultaneously with measurements of ecophysiological variables, using the sensor coupled to the chamber of porometers, always disposed perpendicularly to incident sunlight on the leaf surface throughout each workday.
Additional data on air temperature and relative air humidity of the specific measurement days were obtained from an automatic weather station Campbell Scientific Inc. installed at the study site for each rating scale. This information was used to calculate the vapor pressure deficit of the atmosphere (VPD), as follows [30]:
The saturation of vapor pressure (es) was calculated using the following equation:
Tar = air temperature, ° C
The partial vapor pressure (ea) was obtained by the following equation:
RH = relative humidity of the place, %.
2.3. Ecophysiological models and Scaling up
Structuring the ecophysiological model in the pot scale
The scaling up of information measured on the pot scale was performed by applying the ecophysiological model used by [45] in order to simulate the E and Gs according to Qleaf, VPD and Ψpd considering the hourly time scale of the period of study. Thus, follows the equation:
The models that relate the E and Gs (dependent variables) and environmental variables Qleaf VPD (independent variables) will be:
Where: E - leaf transpiration (mmol m-2 s-1); Gs - leaf stomatal conductance (mol m-2 s-1); Qleaf - photosynthetic active radiation (μmol m-2 s-1), VPD - vapor pressure deficit of the atmosphere (kPa), β1, β2, β3, β4 e β1´, β2´, β3´, β4´ = coefficients to be explained for each scale and model.
Ecophysiological. model calibration from pot to plot
The adjustment of the ecophysiological model developed at the pot scale was given by the angular coefficient k, obtained by the ratio between the equations generated for the pot and plot scale, thus being:
- E: Scaling up from pot to plot (EP ')
Where: Ev –equation
- Gs: Scaling up from pot to plot (Gsp')
Where: Gsv - equation
The same methodology was adopted for the adjustment of the pot scale model to watershed scale (EB' and GsB") and plot to watershed (EB´´and GsB´´), being EB - equation
The ecophysiological model between the evaluation scales were subjected to analysis of variance and when significant, the means were compared by Tukey test using Minitab 14.0 software.
3. Case study: scaling up of the ecophysiological behavior of Eucalyptus grandis x Eucalyptus urophylla experience
Table 1 shows the daily mean of Ψpd and environmental variables. The highest water comfort occurred on the plot scale, where we also observed a higher mean rate of transpiration. In assessing the environmental variables, note that the VPD situation between pot and plot, on average were similar, differing from the watershed scale that had mean lower than 33%, approximately. The energy available for physiological activity was higher in the pot scale, 100% higher than the watershed scale.
3.1. Relation between E and Gs according to Qleaf and VPD
Figure 2 shows the interactions between gas exchange and environmental variables Qleaf and VPD. The values of E followed the evolution of Qleaf and VPD being almost imperceptible the difference between the curves of the plot and watershed scale. The observed values for the pot and watershed scales were between 0.9 and 11.4 mol m-2 s-1 and for the plot scale, 1.3 to 13.3mol m-2 s-1. The Gs also accompanied the increase in Qleaf, however, the greater tendency was found in the watershed scale. As for the VPD, the Gs showed smaller response amplitude in the plot and watershed scales, concentrated on the range of 0.1 to 0.5 mol m-2 s-1. On the pot scale, it was observed the reduction of Gs with increasing VPD, with values close to 0.8mol m-2 s-1 in situations of 1.0 kPa to 0.02mol m-2 s-1 in extremes of VPD (3.0 kPa).
3.2. Interdependence of ecophysiological and environmental variables
In order to better understand the interdependence of ecophysiological variables (E and Gs) and environmental (Qleaf and VPD), it was established a ratio between the hourly mean of all values observed during the study period, E, Gs and their respective hourly mean of Qleaf and VPD (Table 2) With this mean ratio, we attempted to exclude the influence of variation of the concentration gradient of water and Qleaf or VPD in order to characterize the difference in diffusion behavior according only to the structure and physiology of the
Table 3 presents the correlation matrix between ecophysiological and environmental variables in the three scales of study. The best associations were present in the relations E and Gs with Qleaf, reinforcing the behavior displayed in Figure 2. On the plot scale, all correlations presented were significant and as in the pot scale, the relation between Gs and VPD was found to be negative, while at the watershed scale it was not consistent.
3.3. Scaling up: pot, plot and watershed
Analyses of variance among the parameters were significant at 1% probability. The mathematical equations as well as the comparison between the hourly mean values observed and simulated by the models are in Tables 4, 5, 6 and 7. Among the relations, E was associated more evenly with Qleaf, with the highest coefficients of determination (R ²) when compared to VPD, regardless of the scale of observation. For this reason, Qleaf can be used more safely than other variables for being more consistent.
In model
The scaling up with the involvement of the Qleaf in
4. Discussion
Many ecological studies are related to small spatial and temporal scales due to the easiness of operation and better understanding of the interaction of factors [18]. Considering this bias, the scaling up of information may constitute a useful tool for exploring upper scales from inferior ones and vice-versa [31]. This procedure involves a gradual process in which knowledge of how information is transferred from one scale to another is fundamental for understanding the mechanisms responsible for the natural generating of a standard phenomenon, which in turn are important for natural resource management. On the other hand, the scaling up is made from a reductionist perspective based on the detection mechanisms for determining the key processes operating at a certain level or scale, and its subsequent extrapolation to a higher or lower scale than the one studied [23].
From this principle, we could see the correlation between ecophysiological variables E and Gs with environmental variables Qleaf and VPD (Figure 2 and Table 3) in the three developmental stages of the
The behavior pattern of E and Gs according to Qleaf as observed in this study (Figure 2a, 2b, 2c), is well found in the literature [19, 22], as well as pattern of
According to [39] and [48] there are numerous observations that Gs decreases in response to an increase in VPD between the leaf and air. However, the plot and watershed scales, where individuals were more mature than the pot scale, this behavior was somewhat modest, with little variation between the values of Gs. This fact can be justified by the findings obtained by [8] and [25], where they report that with the aging of individuals, the maximum levels of stomatal conductance decrease due to the greater sensitivity of stomata to the vapor pressure deficit of the atmosphere. Table 3 also shows the drop in correlation values between Gs and VPD with increasing age (scale) until appearing to be non-significant in the watershed scale.
In the other relations it was possible to predict the ecophysiological behavior with adjustment of the proposed model from young subjects, in this case, the pot scale with 120 days of age, for individuals with 240 days (plot scale) and for individuals with 60 months (watershed scale), approximately (Tables 4, 5 and 6). However, it also could be verified the accuracy of the model proposed for extrapolating the plot scale to the watershed scale in situations involving E, Qleaf and VPD without adjusting the model (Tables 4 and 6). There is a clear similarity between the ecophysiological responses of these two scales in Figures 2a, 2b and 2c.
The use of models seeks to simplify the complexity of real world privileging certain fundamental aspects of a system at the expense of detail. To provide an approximate view of reality, a model must be simple enough to be understood and used, and complex enough to represent the system under study [1]. The idea of proposing a model based on environmental variables (Qleaf and VPD) has been strengthened by [45], stating that the model reflects the conditions of the dynamics of the transport process in the soil-plant-atmosphere system, constituting the main component responsible for the flow of water in the plant.
Although the regression of E depending on Qleaf and VPD (Figure 2a and 2c) show the proximity of the tendency of the response of E between the plot and watershed scales with increasing Qleaf and / or VPD, the mean values obtained in field were lower for the watershed scale (Tables 4 and 6). This fact may be related to the reduced number of observations to the watershed scale compared to others, which may end up masking the results. Another important detail is related to environmental variables, both Qleaf and VPD that present, on average, lower than in the days of assessment of the pot and plot scales.
In [20] throughout the work "Physiology in forest models: history and the future" discusses the importance of understanding the operation and its ecophysiological approach in models of forest production. In literature, several papers are presented in order to relate the highest rates of gas exchange and growth of individuals or young forests with more mature ones. In [5] for example, discuss that the forest productivity increases during the rotation, reaches a peak near the period when the leaf area is maximum and then decreases substantially. But the reasons for this decline are not yet completely understood [33, 47]. The latest hypothesis about the decline in productivity with age was developed by [34], called the hydraulic limitation hypothesis.
As trees age, their hydraulic properties change, and at the same time, the amount of radiation intercepted by the canopy varies substantially [17]. With the increased size of the tree, water and nutrients must be transported over increasing distances between the root and the apex [7]. The water supply to the leaves of the apex becomes constrained by gravity and hydraulic conductance. These restrictions require a greater stomatal closure to maintain a minimum water potential to prevent xylem cavitation [15], resulting in decreases in gas exchange to a point where a positive carbon balance can not be achieved [4]. Some authors, by measuring transpiration by sap flow observed that the fall in productivity is accompanied by a decline in gas exchange rates [35, 2]. [28] studied the effects of age on the transpiration of a forest of
It is recognized that low pressure of water vapor between the leaf interior and the outside air (VPD) is an important environmental factor that affects the functioning of stomata. However, the causes for this event are still much discussed in the literature. The [44] examined the stomatal response to VPD in higher plants and the possible mechanisms proposed to explain this response. According to the author, the results are conflicting. When there is stomatal response to VPD, the mechanism that causes this response is also not well understood, being two hypotheses proposed for this mechanism. The hypothesis of "feedforward," which considers the decrease of Gs directly with increasing VPD, and abscisic acid (ABA), the signal for the response. In the event of feedback, Gs decreases with increasing VPD due to the increase in leaf transpiration, which lowers the water potential in the leaf. That is, the increase in E could be responsible for stomatal closure due to increased water potential gradient between guard cells and other epidermal cells or simply by reducing the leaf water potential [11, 27, 43]. These two mechanisms have been the subject of debate in the scientific community, for there are results published in the literature to support both hypotheses.
In any case, our results agree with the behavior explained by the hypothesis of feedback, even because we did not analyze the ABA during the study. [44] concludes his work as an unresolved issue, justifying the continuation of research in this area.
The hydraulic limitation hypothesis in some other studies failed to explain the reduced growth [2, 36] and the mechanism responsible for this fact was not identified. The [33] believes that there is no universal mechanism to explain the decline in productivity with increasing tree height, but that there are various components involved.
In searching for the characterization of the ecophysiological behavior of eucalyptus at different ages, [10] related to leaf area and rate of growth of
The justification of this work for having higher gas exchange tendencies, at the leaf level, in the plot and watershed scales may be explained by the fact that individuals did not reach their peak of development, as justified by [10]. Thus, the physiological activities continue to "full steam" favoring the growth of biomass. So that, in terms of forest production, in the decision making about the best time for cutting the planted forest (
The scaling up of information held on a lower scale to a higher scale is more problematic for several reasons. The transpiration of most plant species, including eucalyptus, is determined by several factors that vary continuously. In addition to age, among them are climatic demand (solar radiation and vapor pressure deficit of the atmosphere, temperature and wind speed), the physiological mechanisms related to the stomatal response to environmental factors, water availability and soil nutrients [6, 20]. Another issue addressed by [12] which is normal to expect that the rate of perspiration varies from species to species, as well as vegetative growth.
Since transpiration is related to the development of leaf area in plantations of short duration such as eucalyptus, which have high rates of initial growth, can also happen fast maximization of water use by these crops, which ultimately generate implications for the prediction of its water needs and impacts on watershed hydrology.
A fundamental aspect of ecological processes is that they are affected by spatial and temporal dimensions. In spatial terms, for example, measurements made on a leaf in terms of net primary productivity, can not be extrapolated directly to the tree, because for this extrapolation it is necessary knowledge about the distribution of the canopy, the arrangement of leaves, availability of soil water etc. Likewise, the extrapolation to the forest and the ecosystem needs information previously dispensable in smaller scales. This study focused on all measurements, only fully expanded leaves and fully disposed to incident radiation. In fact, we know that there is no way to expand these results to an already formed canopy, since in this case, the leaves do not have a uniform development, as well as variation in the incidence of radiation and, thus, there is a need for additional data that were not addressed in this study. However, tendencies were observed and simulated by the models developed. This notion of scales and their extrapolations are essential to avoid mistaken views and phenomena in a certain scale to larger or smaller scales. As a scale is broadened, most interactions occur between the growing number of compartments of the system, making it more difficult and laborious studies of cause-effect relationships from models based on processes.
Adding to the complexity of understanding the interactions between the ecophysiological variables, there is also the difficulty of the experimental protocol. This fact reinforces the merits of the methodology presented here. As stated by [21] in order to generate practical tools, such calculations based on processes must be combined with empirical relations derived from experiments and measurements carried out over several periods.
5. Conclusions
The relations between E and Gs with Qleaf and VPD showed significant differences at 1 or 5% in all relations of scaling up, except for the relation E x VPD in scaling up of plot / watershed, and Gs x VPD pot / watershed. The relation that had the best response between E and Gs and environmental variables was E / Qleaf whose correlation was significant on all scales at 1 or 5%. The measured values of E and Gs were consistently above the plot and watershed scales compared to the pot scale. For each lower scale, a model was developed for scaling up into a higher scale. It was possible to perform the scaling up (pot, plot andwatershed scale) of E and Gs. The simulation models of E according to Qleaf / VPD and Gs and Qleaf / VPD proved robust in each of the scales. There was no need to adjust the models of scaling up between plot and watershed in relations involving E and Qleaf, and E and VPD. All results were obtained for Ψpd between 0 to -0.5 MPa. It is suggested that measurements of E and Gs are carried out in three scales in others Ψpd to confirm the findings of this study.
References
- 1.
Hydrological Forecasting. John Wiley and Sons,Anderson M. G Burt T. P 1985 - 2.
Barnard H. R Ryan M. G A test of the hydraulic limitation hypothesis in fast-growing Eucalyptus saligna Cell Environ.2003 26 1235 EOF 1245 EOF - 3.
Barrett D. J Hatton T. J Ash J. E Ball M. C Transpiration by trees from contrasting forest types Aust. J. Bot.1996 44 249 EOF 263 EOF - 4.
Burgess S. S. O Dawson T. E Predicting the limits to tree height using statistical regressions of leaf traits 2007 311 - 5.
Binkley D Stape J. L Ryan M. G Barnard H. R Fownes J Age-related decline in forest ecosystem growth: an individual-tree, stand-structure hypothesis Ecosystems2002 5 58 EOF 67 EOF - 6.
A study of evapotranspiration from tropical rain forest- West Java. J. Hydrol.Calder I. R Wright I. R Murdiyarso D 1986 89 - 7.
Age and size-relates trends in woody plant shoot developement: regulatory pathways and evidence for genetic control. Tree Physiol.Day M. E Greenwood M. G Diaz C 2002 22 - 8.
Domec J. C Gartner B. L Cavitation and water storage capacity in bole xylem segments of mature and young Douglas-fir trees Trees2011 15 204 EOF - 9.
Embrapa Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação de solos. Centro Nacional de Pesquisa de Solos;1999 - 10.
Forrester D. I Collopy J. J Morris J. D Transpiration along an age series of Eucalyptus globulus plantations in southeastern Australia Forest Ecol. Manag.2009 doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2009.04.023. - 11.
Use of a model of photosynthesis and leaf microenvironment to predict optimal stomatal conductance and leaf nitrogen partitioning. Plant Cell Environ.Friend A. D 1991 14 n.6, 895-905. - 12.
Gholz H. L Lima W. P The ecophysiological basis for productivity in the tropics In.: Nambiar E.K.S., Brown A.G. (Eds.) Management of soil, nutrients and water in tropical plantation forests. ACIAR Monograph;1997 213 246 - 13.
Hewlett J. D Principles of forest hydrology University of Georgia Press;1982 - 14.
Water relations. In.: Raghavendra A.S. (ed) Physiology of trees. New York: John Wiley Sons;Hinckley T. M Richter H Schulte P. J 1991 137 162 - 15.
Hubbard R. M Ryan M. G Stiller V Sperry J. S Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis vary linearly with plant hydraulic conductance in ponderosa pine Cell Environ.2001 24 113 EOF 121 EOF - 16.
IPT- Instituto de Pesquisas Tecnológicas de São Paulo Mapa geomorfológico do Estado de São Paulo. São Paulo,1981 - 17.
Age-related changes in ecosystem struture and function and effects on water and crabon exchange in ponderosa pine. Tree Physiol.Irvine J Law B. E Kurpius M. R 2004 24 - 18.
Jarvis P. G 1995 Scaling processes and problems Cell Environ.,18 1079 1089 - 19.
Jassal R. S Black T. A Spittlehouse D Brümmer C Nesic Z Evapotranspiration and water use efficiency in different-aged Pacific Northwest Douglas-fir stands Agric. Forest Meteorol.2009 149 1168 EOF 1178 EOF - 20.
Physiology in forest models: history and the future. FBMISLandsberg J 2003 1 - 21.
A generalised model of forest productivity using simplified concepts of radiotion-use-efficiengy, carbon balance and partioning. Forest Ecol. Manag.Landsberg J. J Waring R. H 1997 95 - 22.
Langensiepen M Fuchs M Bergamaschi H Moreshet S Cohen Y Wolff P Jutzi S. C Cohen S Rosa L. M. G Li Y Fricke T Quantifying the uncertainties of transpiration calculations with Penman-Monteith equation under different climate and optimum water supply conditions. Ag ric. Forest Meteorol.2009 149 1063 EOF 1072 EOF - 23.
Loehle C Philosophical tools: potential contributions to ecology 1988 51 97 EOF 104 EOF - 24.
Transpiration of a 64-yearold maritime pine stand in Portugal. 1. Seasonal course of water flux through maritime pine. OecologiaLoustau D Berbigier P Roumagnac P Pacheco-arruda C David J. S Ferreira M. I Pereira J. S Tavares R 1996 107 - 25.
Mcdowell N. G Phillips N Lunch C Bond B. J Ryan M. G An investigation of hydraulic limitation and compensation in large, old Douglas-fir trees. Tree Physiol.2002 22 763 774 - 26.
Meinzer F. C Goldstein G Jackson P. C Holbrook N. M Gutierrez M. V Cavelier J Environmental and physiological regulation of transpiration in tropical forest gap species : the influence of boundary layer and hydraulic propertie s.1995 101 514 EOF - 27.
Monteith J. L A reinterpretation of stomatal responses to humidity. Plant Cell Environ.1995 18 n.2, 357-364. - 28.
Moore G. W Bond B. J Jones J. A Phillips N Meinzer F Structural and compositional controls on transpiration in 40- and 450-year-old riparian forests in western Oregon, USA. Tree Physiol.2004 24 481 EOF 91 EOF - 29.
Parker G. G Davis M. M Chapotin S. M Canopy light transmittance in Douglas-fir-western hemlock stands Tree Physiol.2002 22 147 157 - 30.
Pereira A Angelocci L. R Sentelhas P. C Agrometeorologia fundamentos e aplicações. Guaíba: Agro pecuária;2002 - 31.
Stand transpiration os grassland by sequential scaling and multi-source evapotranspiration modelling. J. Hydrol.Ramirez D. A Bellot J Domingo F Blasco A 2007 342 - 32.
Roberts S Vertessy R Grayson R Transpiration from Eucalyptus sieberi (L. Johnson) forests of different age. Forest Ecol. Manag.2001 143 - 33.
Ryan M. G Phillips N Bond B. J The hydraulic limitation hypothesis revisited Cell Environ.2006 29 367 EOF 381 EOF - 34.
Ryan M. G Yoder B. J Hydraulic limits to tree height and tree growth 1997 47 235 EOF - 35.
Ryan M. G Bond B. J Law B. E Hubbard R. M Woodruff D Cienciala E Kucera J Transpiration and whole-tree conductance in ponderosa pine trees of different heights 2000 124 553 EOF 560 EOF - 36.
Ryan M. G Binkley D Fownes J. H Giardina C. P Senock R. S An experimental test of the causes of forest growth decline with stand age 2004 74 n.3,393 EOF 414 EOF - 37.
Schiller G Cohen Y Water regime of a pine forest under a Mediterranean climate Agric. Forest Meteorol.1995 74 181 EOF - 38.
. Sap pressure in vascular plants. Science .,Scholander P.F .,Hammel H.T .,Bradstreet E.D Hemmingsen E.A 1965 ;148 339 EOF 46 EOF . - 39.
Soil, water deficits and atmospheric humidity as environmental signals. In Water deficits: plant responses from cell to community. Smith J.A.C. and Griffiths H. Oxford: BIOS Scientific Publisher;Schulze E. D 1993 1993 98 125 - 40.
Soares J. V Almeida A. C Modeling de water balance and soil water fluxes in a fast growing Eucalyptus plantation in Brazil. J. Hydrol.2001 253 130 EOF 147 EOF - 41.
Stape J. L Binkley D Ryan M. G Gomes A. N Water use, water limitation, and water use efficiency in a Eucalyptus plantation Bosque2004a 25 n.2, 35-41. - 42.
Testing the utility of the 3-PG model growth of x urophylla with natural and manipulated supplies of water and nutrients. Forest Ecol. Manag.Stape J. L Ryan M. G Binkley D 2004b 193 219 234 - 43.
Stewart D. W Dwyer L. M Stomatal response to plant water deficits J. Theoret. Biol.1983 London,104 n.3,655 EOF 666 EOF - 44.
Stomatal response to water vapor pressure deficit: an unsolved issue. R. Bras. Agroc.Streck N. A 2003 9 n. 4, 317-322. - 45.
Teixeira Filho J Damesin C., Rambal S., Joffre R.Retrieving leaf conductances from sap flows in a mixed Mediterranean woodland: a scaling exercise Ann. Sci. Forestières1998 55 173 EOF 190 EOF - 46.
R. Assessing environmental controls over conductances trough the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum in an experimental olive tree plantation of southern Italy. Agric. Forest Meteorol.Tognetti R Giovannelli A Lavini A Morelli G Fragnito F D Andria 2009 149 - 47.
Vanderklein D Vilalta M Lee S Mencuccini M Plant size, not age, regulates growth and gás exchange in grafted scots pine trees. Tree Physiol.2007 27 71 EOF 9 EOF - 48.
Yong J. W. H Wong S. C Farquhar G. D Stomatal responses to changes in vapour pressure difference between the leaf and air. Cell and Environment1997 20 1213 EOF