4.7 Article

Responses to mild water deficit and rewatering differ among secondary metabolites but are similar among provenances within Eucalyptus species

期刊

TREE PHYSIOLOGY
卷 36, 期 2, 页码 133-147

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/tpv106

关键词

abscisic acid; drought; intraspecific; phenol; tannin; terpene

类别

资金

  1. National Centre for Future Forest Industries (NCFFI)
  2. ARC [DP120102889]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Water deficit associated with drought can severely affect plants and influence ecological interactions involving plant secondary metabolites. We tested the effect of mild water deficit and rewatering on physiological, morphological and chemical traits of juvenile Eucalyptus globulus Labill. and Eucalyptus viminalis Labill. We also tested if responses of juvenile eucalypts to water deficit and rewatering varied within species using provenances across a rainfall gradient. Both species and all provenances were similarly affected by mild water deficit and rewatering, as only foliar abscisic acid levels differed among provenances during water deficit. Across species and provenances, water deficit decreased leaf water potential, above-ground biomass and formylated phloroglucinol compound concentrations, and increased condensed tannin concentrations. Rewatering reduced leaf carbon : nitrogen, and total phenolic and chlorogenic acid concentrations. Water deficit and rewatering had no effect on total oil or individual terpene concentrations. Levels of trait plasticity due to water deficit and rewatering were less than levels of constitutive trait variation among provenances. The overall uniformity of responses to the treatments regardless of native provenance indicates limited diversification of plastic responses when compared with the larger quantitative variation of constitutive traits within these species. These responses to mild water deficit may differ from responses to more extreme water deficit or to responses of juvenile/mature eucalypts growing at each locality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据