ArticleTree physiology2026
Physiological responses and morphological adjustments in provenances of two woodland species in a chronic drought experiment.
Article in Tree physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drought-induced tree dieback is impacting forest and woodland ecosystems. One approach to mitigate this is to plant better adapted genotypes of species from warmer and drier climates. This requires understanding drought adaptation both interspecifically and intraspecifically, which we investigated in this common garden experiment. Six genotypes from two related Eucalyptus species, Eucalyptus microcarpa Maiden and Eucalyptus melliodora A.Cunn. ex Schauer, were selected from geographically disjunct locations, five of which encompass the drier ranges of each species. One-year-old saplings were planted in soil under a rainout shelter. After a 5-month adjustment period, irrigation was withheld for 17 weeks to emulate drought, while control trees were irrigated twice weekly. Predawn (Ψpd) and midday (Ψmd) water potentials and stomatal conductance (gs) was measured weekly. Trees were harvested at the end of the drought period, and biomass and leaf osmotic potential were measured. We observed significant differences between species, and only limited evidence for intraspecific variation. Neither species developed substantial water deficits during the drought, but both species exhibited osmotic adjustment. Ψpd and Ψmd were significantly lower and gs was higher in droughted E. microcarpa in comparison with droughted E. melliodora, however the differences were small. Decreases relative to control trees in biomass were greater in E. microcarpa (57%) than E. melliodora (41%). Root:shoot ratios in droughted trees were comparatively greater than well-watered trees in both species, however, dry root weight was greater in E. melliodora across both treatments. Only E. microcarpa had significantly lower specific leaf area (10%) and tree height (26%) in comparison with well-watered trees. Provenances of E. microcarpa from drier regions exhibited less negative Ψpd, less osmotic adjustment and comparatively lower height in droughted vs well-watered trees. Our results highlight the complexity of local drought adaptation and that morphological changes may be as important as physiological trait responses for drought resistance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.