Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22016424›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental botany2012

Dynamics of leaf hydraulic conductance with water status: quantification and analysis of species differences under steady state.

Christine Scoffoni, Athena D McKown, Michael Rawls, Lawren Sack

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental botany, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 149 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Loss of conductance between mesophyll symplasm and intercellular air spaces explains nonstomatal control of transpiration.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The AlkB Homolog SlALKBH10B Negatively Affects Drought and Salt Tolerance inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christine ScoffoniDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, 621 Charles E. Young Drive South, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1606, USA. cscoffoni@ucla.edu
Athena D McKown
Michael Rawls
Lawren Sack
University of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Leaf hydraulic conductance (K(leaf)) is a major determinant of photosynthetic rate in well-watered and drought-stressed plants. Previous work assessed the decline of K(leaf) with decreasing leaf water potential (Ψ(leaf)), most typically using rehydration kinetics methods, and found that species varied in the shape of their vulnerability curve, and that hydraulic vulnerability correlated with other leaf functional traits and with drought sensitivity. These findings were tested and extended, using a new steady-state evaporative flux method under high irradiance, and the function for the vulnerability curve of each species was determined individually using maximum likelihood for 10 species varying strongly in drought tolerance. Additionally, the ability of excised leaves to recover in K(leaf) with rehydration was assessed, and a new theoretical framework was developed to estimate how rehydration of measured leaves may affect estimation of hydraulic parameters. As hypothesized, species differed in their vulnerability function. Drought-tolerant species showed shallow linear declines and more negative Ψ(leaf) at 80% loss of K(leaf) (P(80)), whereas drought-sensitive species showed steeper, non-linear declines, and less negative P(80). Across species, the maximum K(leaf) was independent of hydraulic vulnerability. Recovery of K(leaf) after 1 h rehydration of leaves dehydrated below their turgor loss point occurred only for four of 10 species. Across species without recovery, a more negative P(80) correlated with the ability to maintain K(leaf) through both dehydration and rehydration. These findings indicate that resistance to K(leaf) decline is important not only in maintaining open stomata during the onset of drought, but also in enabling sustained function during drought recovery.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalDehydrationDroughtsFluid TherapyMagnoliopsidaModels, BiologicalPhotosynthesisPlant LeavesPlant StomataPlant TranspirationSpecies SpecificityWaterWater

Identifiers

PMID22016424
PMCPMC3254676
OpenAlexW2141885125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.