Serveur d'exploration sur le peuplier

Attention, ce site est en cours de développement !
Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts.
Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

How does drought tolerance compare between two improved hybrids of balsam poplar and an unimproved native species?

Identifieur interne : 002E37 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 002E36; suivant : 002E38

How does drought tolerance compare between two improved hybrids of balsam poplar and an unimproved native species?

Auteurs : Marie Larchevêque [Canada] ; Marion Maurel ; Annie Desrochers ; Guy R. Larocque

Source :

RBID : pubmed:21444373

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Poplars are one of the woody plants that are very sensitive to water stress, which may reduce the productivity of fast-growing plantations. Poplars can exhibit several drought tolerance strategies that may impact productivity differently. Trees from two improved hybrids, Populus balsamifera × Populus trichocarpa Torr. & Gray (clone B × T) and P. balsamifera × Populus maximowiczii A. Henry (clone B × M), having P. balsamifera L. as a parent and trees from native and unimproved P. balsamifera were subjected to a 1-month drying cycle in a growth chamber and then rewatered. The unimproved and native B clone maintained higher stomatal conductance (g(s)) than the hybrids, and high photosynthetic activity and transpiration, even when soil water content was nearly zero. As a result, both instantaneous water use efficiency (WUE(i)) and leaf carbon isotope composition (δ(13)C) indicated that this clone was less affected by drought than both hybrids at maximal drought stress. However, this clone shed its leaves when the drought threshold was exceeded, which implied a greater loss of productivity. The B × M hybrid showed a relatively conservative response to water stress, with the greatest decrease in transpiring versus absorbing surface (total leaf area to root biomass ratio). This clone was also the only one to develop new leaves after rewatering, and its total biomass production was not significantly decreased by drought. Among the two hybrids, clone B × T was the most vigorous, with the greatest transpiration (E(i)) and net CO(2) assimilation (A) rates, allowing for high biomass production. However, it had a more risky strategy under drought conditions by keeping its stomata open and high E(i) rates under moderate drought, resulting in a lower recovery rate after rewatering. The opposite drought response strategies of the two hybrids were reflected by clone B × T having lower WUE(i) values than clone B × M at maximal drought, with a very low Ψ(min) value of -3.2 MPa, despite closed stomata and stopped photosynthetic activity. Positive linear relationships between A and g(s) for the three hybrids indicated strong stomatal control of photosynthesis. Moreover, the three poplar clones showed anisohydric behaviour for stomatal control and their use under long-term drought should be of interest, especially the B × M clone.

DOI: 10.1093/treephys/tpr011
PubMed: 21444373


Affiliations:


Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)


Le document en format XML

<record>
<TEI>
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title xml:lang="en">How does drought tolerance compare between two improved hybrids of balsam poplar and an unimproved native species?</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Larcheveque, Marie" sort="Larcheveque, Marie" uniqKey="Larcheveque M" first="Marie" last="Larchevêque">Marie Larchevêque</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1">
<nlm:affiliation>Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Chaire Industrielle CRSNG-UQAT-UQAM en Aménagement Forestier Durable, 341 Principale Nord, Amos, QC, Canada. marie.larcheveque@uqat.ca</nlm:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr">Canada</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Chaire Industrielle CRSNG-UQAT-UQAM en Aménagement Forestier Durable, 341 Principale Nord, Amos, QC</wicri:regionArea>
<wicri:noRegion>QC</wicri:noRegion>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Maurel, Marion" sort="Maurel, Marion" uniqKey="Maurel M" first="Marion" last="Maurel">Marion Maurel</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Desrochers, Annie" sort="Desrochers, Annie" uniqKey="Desrochers A" first="Annie" last="Desrochers">Annie Desrochers</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Larocque, Guy R" sort="Larocque, Guy R" uniqKey="Larocque G" first="Guy R" last="Larocque">Guy R. Larocque</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno>
<date when="2011">2011</date>
<idno type="RBID">pubmed:21444373</idno>
<idno type="pmid">21444373</idno>
<idno type="doi">10.1093/treephys/tpr011</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Corpus">002E61</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Main" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">002E61</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">002E61</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Main" wicri:step="Curation">002E61</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">002E61</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc>
<biblStruct>
<analytic>
<title xml:lang="en">How does drought tolerance compare between two improved hybrids of balsam poplar and an unimproved native species?</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Larcheveque, Marie" sort="Larcheveque, Marie" uniqKey="Larcheveque M" first="Marie" last="Larchevêque">Marie Larchevêque</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1">
<nlm:affiliation>Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Chaire Industrielle CRSNG-UQAT-UQAM en Aménagement Forestier Durable, 341 Principale Nord, Amos, QC, Canada. marie.larcheveque@uqat.ca</nlm:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr">Canada</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Chaire Industrielle CRSNG-UQAT-UQAM en Aménagement Forestier Durable, 341 Principale Nord, Amos, QC</wicri:regionArea>
<wicri:noRegion>QC</wicri:noRegion>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Maurel, Marion" sort="Maurel, Marion" uniqKey="Maurel M" first="Marion" last="Maurel">Marion Maurel</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Desrochers, Annie" sort="Desrochers, Annie" uniqKey="Desrochers A" first="Annie" last="Desrochers">Annie Desrochers</name>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Larocque, Guy R" sort="Larocque, Guy R" uniqKey="Larocque G" first="Guy R" last="Larocque">Guy R. Larocque</name>
</author>
</analytic>
<series>
<title level="j">Tree physiology</title>
<idno type="eISSN">1758-4469</idno>
<imprint>
<date when="2011" type="published">2011</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc>
<textClass>
<keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en">
<term>Biomass (MeSH)</term>
<term>Carbon Dioxide (metabolism)</term>
<term>Carbon Isotopes (analysis)</term>
<term>Chimera (physiology)</term>
<term>Dehydration (MeSH)</term>
<term>Droughts (MeSH)</term>
<term>Photosynthesis (MeSH)</term>
<term>Plant Leaves (physiology)</term>
<term>Plant Roots (growth & development)</term>
<term>Plant Stomata (physiology)</term>
<term>Plant Transpiration (MeSH)</term>
<term>Populus (physiology)</term>
<term>Soil (MeSH)</term>
<term>Water (metabolism)</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="KwdFr" xml:lang="fr">
<term>Biomasse (MeSH)</term>
<term>Chimère (physiologie)</term>
<term>Dioxyde de carbone (métabolisme)</term>
<term>Déshydratation (MeSH)</term>
<term>Eau (métabolisme)</term>
<term>Feuilles de plante (physiologie)</term>
<term>Isotopes du carbone (analyse)</term>
<term>Photosynthèse (MeSH)</term>
<term>Populus (physiologie)</term>
<term>Racines de plante (croissance et développement)</term>
<term>Sol (MeSH)</term>
<term>Stomates de plante (physiologie)</term>
<term>Sécheresses (MeSH)</term>
<term>Transpiration des plantes (MeSH)</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" qualifier="analysis" xml:lang="en">
<term>Carbon Isotopes</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" type="chemical" qualifier="metabolism" xml:lang="en">
<term>Carbon Dioxide</term>
<term>Water</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="analyse" xml:lang="fr">
<term>Isotopes du carbone</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="croissance et développement" xml:lang="fr">
<term>Racines de plante</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="growth & development" xml:lang="en">
<term>Plant Roots</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="métabolisme" xml:lang="fr">
<term>Dioxyde de carbone</term>
<term>Eau</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="physiologie" xml:lang="fr">
<term>Chimère</term>
<term>Feuilles de plante</term>
<term>Populus</term>
<term>Stomates de plante</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="physiology" xml:lang="en">
<term>Chimera</term>
<term>Plant Leaves</term>
<term>Plant Stomata</term>
<term>Populus</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en">
<term>Biomass</term>
<term>Dehydration</term>
<term>Droughts</term>
<term>Photosynthesis</term>
<term>Plant Transpiration</term>
<term>Soil</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="fr">
<term>Biomasse</term>
<term>Déshydratation</term>
<term>Photosynthèse</term>
<term>Sol</term>
<term>Sécheresses</term>
<term>Transpiration des plantes</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front>
<div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Poplars are one of the woody plants that are very sensitive to water stress, which may reduce the productivity of fast-growing plantations. Poplars can exhibit several drought tolerance strategies that may impact productivity differently. Trees from two improved hybrids, Populus balsamifera × Populus trichocarpa Torr. & Gray (clone B × T) and P. balsamifera × Populus maximowiczii A. Henry (clone B × M), having P. balsamifera L. as a parent and trees from native and unimproved P. balsamifera were subjected to a 1-month drying cycle in a growth chamber and then rewatered. The unimproved and native B clone maintained higher stomatal conductance (g(s)) than the hybrids, and high photosynthetic activity and transpiration, even when soil water content was nearly zero. As a result, both instantaneous water use efficiency (WUE(i)) and leaf carbon isotope composition (δ(13)C) indicated that this clone was less affected by drought than both hybrids at maximal drought stress. However, this clone shed its leaves when the drought threshold was exceeded, which implied a greater loss of productivity. The B × M hybrid showed a relatively conservative response to water stress, with the greatest decrease in transpiring versus absorbing surface (total leaf area to root biomass ratio). This clone was also the only one to develop new leaves after rewatering, and its total biomass production was not significantly decreased by drought. Among the two hybrids, clone B × T was the most vigorous, with the greatest transpiration (E(i)) and net CO(2) assimilation (A) rates, allowing for high biomass production. However, it had a more risky strategy under drought conditions by keeping its stomata open and high E(i) rates under moderate drought, resulting in a lower recovery rate after rewatering. The opposite drought response strategies of the two hybrids were reflected by clone B × T having lower WUE(i) values than clone B × M at maximal drought, with a very low Ψ(min) value of -3.2 MPa, despite closed stomata and stopped photosynthetic activity. Positive linear relationships between A and g(s) for the three hybrids indicated strong stomatal control of photosynthesis. Moreover, the three poplar clones showed anisohydric behaviour for stomatal control and their use under long-term drought should be of interest, especially the B × M clone.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<pubmed>
<MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM">
<PMID Version="1">21444373</PMID>
<DateCompleted>
<Year>2011</Year>
<Month>08</Month>
<Day>25</Day>
</DateCompleted>
<DateRevised>
<Year>2017</Year>
<Month>11</Month>
<Day>16</Day>
</DateRevised>
<Article PubModel="Print-Electronic">
<Journal>
<ISSN IssnType="Electronic">1758-4469</ISSN>
<JournalIssue CitedMedium="Internet">
<Volume>31</Volume>
<Issue>3</Issue>
<PubDate>
<Year>2011</Year>
<Month>Mar</Month>
</PubDate>
</JournalIssue>
<Title>Tree physiology</Title>
<ISOAbbreviation>Tree Physiol</ISOAbbreviation>
</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>How does drought tolerance compare between two improved hybrids of balsam poplar and an unimproved native species?</ArticleTitle>
<Pagination>
<MedlinePgn>240-9</MedlinePgn>
</Pagination>
<ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.1093/treephys/tpr011</ELocationID>
<Abstract>
<AbstractText>Poplars are one of the woody plants that are very sensitive to water stress, which may reduce the productivity of fast-growing plantations. Poplars can exhibit several drought tolerance strategies that may impact productivity differently. Trees from two improved hybrids, Populus balsamifera × Populus trichocarpa Torr. & Gray (clone B × T) and P. balsamifera × Populus maximowiczii A. Henry (clone B × M), having P. balsamifera L. as a parent and trees from native and unimproved P. balsamifera were subjected to a 1-month drying cycle in a growth chamber and then rewatered. The unimproved and native B clone maintained higher stomatal conductance (g(s)) than the hybrids, and high photosynthetic activity and transpiration, even when soil water content was nearly zero. As a result, both instantaneous water use efficiency (WUE(i)) and leaf carbon isotope composition (δ(13)C) indicated that this clone was less affected by drought than both hybrids at maximal drought stress. However, this clone shed its leaves when the drought threshold was exceeded, which implied a greater loss of productivity. The B × M hybrid showed a relatively conservative response to water stress, with the greatest decrease in transpiring versus absorbing surface (total leaf area to root biomass ratio). This clone was also the only one to develop new leaves after rewatering, and its total biomass production was not significantly decreased by drought. Among the two hybrids, clone B × T was the most vigorous, with the greatest transpiration (E(i)) and net CO(2) assimilation (A) rates, allowing for high biomass production. However, it had a more risky strategy under drought conditions by keeping its stomata open and high E(i) rates under moderate drought, resulting in a lower recovery rate after rewatering. The opposite drought response strategies of the two hybrids were reflected by clone B × T having lower WUE(i) values than clone B × M at maximal drought, with a very low Ψ(min) value of -3.2 MPa, despite closed stomata and stopped photosynthetic activity. Positive linear relationships between A and g(s) for the three hybrids indicated strong stomatal control of photosynthesis. Moreover, the three poplar clones showed anisohydric behaviour for stomatal control and their use under long-term drought should be of interest, especially the B × M clone.</AbstractText>
</Abstract>
<AuthorList CompleteYN="Y">
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Larchevêque</LastName>
<ForeName>Marie</ForeName>
<Initials>M</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Chaire Industrielle CRSNG-UQAT-UQAM en Aménagement Forestier Durable, 341 Principale Nord, Amos, QC, Canada. marie.larcheveque@uqat.ca</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Maurel</LastName>
<ForeName>Marion</ForeName>
<Initials>M</Initials>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Desrochers</LastName>
<ForeName>Annie</ForeName>
<Initials>A</Initials>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Larocque</LastName>
<ForeName>Guy R</ForeName>
<Initials>GR</Initials>
</Author>
</AuthorList>
<Language>eng</Language>
<PublicationTypeList>
<PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType>
<PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType>
<PublicationType UI="D013485">Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't</PublicationType>
</PublicationTypeList>
<ArticleDate DateType="Electronic">
<Year>2011</Year>
<Month>03</Month>
<Day>28</Day>
</ArticleDate>
</Article>
<MedlineJournalInfo>
<Country>Canada</Country>
<MedlineTA>Tree Physiol</MedlineTA>
<NlmUniqueID>100955338</NlmUniqueID>
<ISSNLinking>0829-318X</ISSNLinking>
</MedlineJournalInfo>
<ChemicalList>
<Chemical>
<RegistryNumber>0</RegistryNumber>
<NameOfSubstance UI="D002247">Carbon Isotopes</NameOfSubstance>
</Chemical>
<Chemical>
<RegistryNumber>0</RegistryNumber>
<NameOfSubstance UI="D012987">Soil</NameOfSubstance>
</Chemical>
<Chemical>
<RegistryNumber>059QF0KO0R</RegistryNumber>
<NameOfSubstance UI="D014867">Water</NameOfSubstance>
</Chemical>
<Chemical>
<RegistryNumber>142M471B3J</RegistryNumber>
<NameOfSubstance UI="D002245">Carbon Dioxide</NameOfSubstance>
</Chemical>
</ChemicalList>
<CitationSubset>IM</CitationSubset>
<CommentsCorrectionsList>
<CommentsCorrections RefType="CommentIn">
<RefSource>Tree Physiol. 2011 Mar;31(3):237-9</RefSource>
<PMID Version="1">21512097</PMID>
</CommentsCorrections>
</CommentsCorrectionsList>
<MeshHeadingList>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D018533" MajorTopicYN="N">Biomass</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D002245" MajorTopicYN="N">Carbon Dioxide</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000378" MajorTopicYN="N">metabolism</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D002247" MajorTopicYN="N">Carbon Isotopes</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000032" MajorTopicYN="N">analysis</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D002678" MajorTopicYN="N">Chimera</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="N">physiology</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D003681" MajorTopicYN="N">Dehydration</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D055864" MajorTopicYN="Y">Droughts</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D010788" MajorTopicYN="N">Photosynthesis</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D018515" MajorTopicYN="N">Plant Leaves</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="N">physiology</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D018517" MajorTopicYN="N">Plant Roots</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000254" MajorTopicYN="N">growth & development</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D054046" MajorTopicYN="N">Plant Stomata</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="N">physiology</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D018526" MajorTopicYN="N">Plant Transpiration</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D032107" MajorTopicYN="N">Populus</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="Y">physiology</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D012987" MajorTopicYN="N">Soil</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D014867" MajorTopicYN="N">Water</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000378" MajorTopicYN="Y">metabolism</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
</MeshHeadingList>
</MedlineCitation>
<PubmedData>
<History>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez">
<Year>2011</Year>
<Month>3</Month>
<Day>30</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed">
<Year>2011</Year>
<Month>3</Month>
<Day>30</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline">
<Year>2011</Year>
<Month>8</Month>
<Day>27</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
</History>
<PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus>
<ArticleIdList>
<ArticleId IdType="pubmed">21444373</ArticleId>
<ArticleId IdType="pii">tpr011</ArticleId>
<ArticleId IdType="doi">10.1093/treephys/tpr011</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</PubmedData>
</pubmed>
<affiliations>
<list>
<country>
<li>Canada</li>
</country>
</list>
<tree>
<noCountry>
<name sortKey="Desrochers, Annie" sort="Desrochers, Annie" uniqKey="Desrochers A" first="Annie" last="Desrochers">Annie Desrochers</name>
<name sortKey="Larocque, Guy R" sort="Larocque, Guy R" uniqKey="Larocque G" first="Guy R" last="Larocque">Guy R. Larocque</name>
<name sortKey="Maurel, Marion" sort="Maurel, Marion" uniqKey="Maurel M" first="Marion" last="Maurel">Marion Maurel</name>
</noCountry>
<country name="Canada">
<noRegion>
<name sortKey="Larcheveque, Marie" sort="Larcheveque, Marie" uniqKey="Larcheveque M" first="Marie" last="Larchevêque">Marie Larchevêque</name>
</noRegion>
</country>
</tree>
</affiliations>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Bois/explor/PoplarV1/Data/Main/Exploration
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 002E37 | SxmlIndent | more

Ou

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 002E37 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Bois
   |area=    PoplarV1
   |flux=    Main
   |étape=   Exploration
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     pubmed:21444373
   |texte=   How does drought tolerance compare between two improved hybrids of balsam poplar and an unimproved native species?
}}

Pour générer des pages wiki

HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/RBID.i   -Sk "pubmed:21444373" \
       | HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd   \
       | NlmPubMed2Wicri -a PoplarV1 

Wicri

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.37.
Data generation: Wed Nov 18 12:07:19 2020. Site generation: Wed Nov 18 12:16:31 2020