Biomass allocation and nutrient use efficiency in response to water stress: insight from experimental manipulation of balsam fir, concolor fir and white pine transplants

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 53 - Trang 915-933 - 2021
İsmail Koç1, Pascal Nzokou2, Bert Cregg3
1Forestry Vocational School, Düzce University, Düzce, Turkey
2Department of Forestry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA
3Department of Horticulture and Department of Forestry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA

Tóm tắt

Plants under water stress alter their normal morphological and physiological processes. However, biomass allocation and nutrient use efficiency remain largely unknown under the interactive effect of irrigation and fertilization for many economically important conifer species. In this study, we compared biomass allocation and resources use efficiency of two-year-old (plug+1) containerized balsam fir [Abies balsamea (L) Mill.] ‘Cooks’ and concolor fir [Abies concolor (Gord. & Glend.) Lindl. Ex Hildebr.] ‘Cibola’, and one-year-old bare-root white pine [Pinus strobus L.] transplants grown under variable watering and fertilization conditions. In a controlled greenhouse setting, transplants were submitted to three irrigation levels and two fertilization rates in a factorial experimental design. Fir species, mainly concolor fir, had a greater capacity to utilize water resulting in decreased stem water potential than white pine, leading to increased aboveground growth and shoot-to-root (S/R) ratio. White pine transplants had a higher assimilatory nutrient efficiency, nutrient use efficiency (NUE), root weight ratio, and a lower nitrogen availability index than the two fir species, suggesting a better ability to tolerate water stress. The high rates of fertilization increased nutrient concentration more than growth, suggesting luxury consumption. These results indicate that white pine responds to drought stress by closing their stomata and decreasing their S/R ratio to limit physiological activities, while the two fir species exhibit increased water uptake via expanded fine root networks, increasing the NUE and S/R ratio. However, there was no clear trend for the irrigation and fertilization interaction for NUE for three species, making it difficult to generalize responses.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Alam SM (1999) Nutrient uptake by plants under stress conditions. In: Pessarakli M (ed) Handbook of plant and crop stress. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 285–313 Anderegg LDL, HilleRisLambers J (2016) Drought stress limits the geographic ranges of two tree species via different physiological mechanisms. Glob Chang Biol 22(3):1029–1045. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13148 Andrews SF, Flanagan LB, Sharp EJ, Cai T (2012) Variation in water potential, hydraulic characteristics and water source use in montane Douglas-fir and lodgepole pine trees in southwestern Alberta and consequences for seasonal changes in photosynthetic capacity. Tree Physiol 32(2):146–160. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpr136 Anjum SA, Xie X-y, Wang L-c, Saleem MF, Man C, Lei W (2011) Morphological, physiological and biochemical responses of plants to drought stress. Afr J Agric Res 6(9):2026–2032 Aroca R (2012) Plant responses to drought stress. From morphological to molecular features. Springer, Berlin Becker CA, Mroz GD, Fuller LG (1987) The effects of plant moisture stress on red pine (Pinus resinosa) seedling growth and establishment. Can J For Res 17(8):813–820 Bilderback TE (1999) Fertilizer choices and recommendations. Proc of NC State Nursery Short Course 1:28-29 Bongarten BC, Teskey RO (1987) Dry weight partitioning and its relationship to productivity in loblolly pine seedlings from seven sources. For Sci 33(2):255–267 Bréda N, Huc R, Granier A, Dreyer E (2006) Temperate forest trees and stands under severe drought: a review of ecophysiological responses, adaptation processes and long-term consequences. Ann For Sci 63(6):625–644. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2006042 Brunner I, Herzog C, Dawes MA, Arend M, Sperisen C (2015) How tree roots respond to drought. Front Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00547 Chen L, Wang C, Dell B, Zhao Z, Guo J, Xu D, Zeng J (2018) Growth and nutrient dynamics of Betula alnoides seedlings under exponential fertilization. J For Res 29(1):111–119 Cregg BM (2005) Conifer nutrition. Conifer Corner. Michigan Landscape magazine. https://www.canr.msu.edu/hrt/uploads/535/78626/conifernutrition.pdf. Accessed 14 February 2021 Cuny HE, Rathgeber CBK, Lebourgeois F, Fortin M, Fournier M (2012) Life strategies in intra-annual dynamics of wood formation: example of three conifer species in a temperate forest in north-east France. Tree Physiol 32(5):612–625. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tps039 Espinoza SE, Martínez VA, Carlos RM, Ivkovic M, Santelices RE, Guerra FP, Cabrera AM (2014) Genetic control of growth, biomass allocation, and survival under drought stress in Pinus radiata D. Don seedlings. Tree Genet Genomes 10:1045–1054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-014-0741-1 Fageria NK, Gheyi HR, Carvalho MCS, Moreira A (2016) Root growth, nutrient uptake and use efficiency by roots of tropical legume cover crops as influenced by phosphorus fertilization. J Plant Nutr 39(6):781–792. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2015.1088020 Fernández ME, Gyenge JE, Varela S, Urquiza MD (2014) Effects of the time of drought occurrence within the growing season on growth and survival of Pinus ponderosa seedlings. Trees Struct Funct 28:745–756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-014-0986-1 Fu-Sheng C, De-Hui Z, Narain SA, Guang-Sheng C (2005) Effects of soil moisture and soil depth on nitrogen mineralization process under Mongolian pine plantations in Zhanggutai sandy land, P. R. China. J For Res 16(2):101–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02857899 Gilliam FS (2016) Forest ecosystems of temperate climatic regions: From ancient use to climate change. New Phytol 212:871–887. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14255 Gower ST, Vogt KA, Grier CC (1992) Carbon dynamics of Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir: influence of water and nutrient availability. Ecol Soc Am 6(1):43–65 Granier A, Reichstein M, Bréda N, Janssens IA, Falge E, Ciais P, Grünwald T, Aubinet M et al (2007) Evidence for soil water control on carbon and water dynamics in European forests during the extremely dry year: 2003. Agric For Meteorol 143(1–2):123–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2006.12.004 Grossnickle SC (2012) Why seedlings survive: influence of plant attributes. New For 43:711–738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-012-9336-6 Guarnascheli AB, Garau AM, Lemcoff JH (2012) Water stress and afforestation: a contribution to ameliorate forest seedling performance during the establishment. In Water Stress, Intech: London, UK Haase DL, Rose R (1995) Vector analysis and its use for interpreting plant nutrient shifts in response to silvicultural treatments. For Sci 41:54–66 Hamanishi ET, Campbell MM (2011) Genome-wide responses to drought in forest trees. Forestry 84(3):273–283. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpr012 Harfouchea A (2003) Retrospective early test for adult vigor of Pinus pinaster families grown under two water regimes. Implications for early selection. Ann For Sci 60:539–547. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest Hermans C, Hammond JP, White PJ, Verbruggen N (2006) How do plants respond to nutrient shortage by biomass allocation? Trends Plant Sci 11(12):610–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2006.10.007 Herzog C, Steffen J, Pannatier EG, Hajdas I, Brunner I (2014) Nine years of irrigation cause vegetation and fine root shifts in a water-limited pine forest. PLoS ONE 9(5):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0096321 Ilyas M, Nisar M, Khan N, Hazat A, Khan AH, Hayat K, Fahad S, Ullah A (2021) Drought tolerance strategies in plants: a mechanistic approach. J Plant Growth Regul 40:926–944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-020-10174-5 IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] (2013) Near-term climate change: projections and predictability. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 978–980 Jaleel CA, Manivannan P, Wahid A, Farooq M, Al-Juburi HJ, Somasundaram R, Panneerselvam R (2009) Drought stress in plants: a review on morphological characteristics and pigments composition. Int J Agric Biol 11(1):100–105 Koç İ (2021) Examining seed germination rate and seedlings gas exchange performances of some Turkish red pine provenances under water stress. Düzce Univ J Sci Tech 9(3):48–60 Kozlowski TT, Pallardy SG (2002) Acclimation and adaptive responses of woody plants to environmental stresses. Bot Rev 68(2):270–334. https://doi.org/10.1663/0006-8101(2002)068[0270:AAAROW]2.0.CO,2 Kulaç Ş, Nzokou P, Guney D, Cregg BM, Turna I (2012) Growth and physiological response of fraser fir [Abies fraseri (Pursh) Poir.] seedlings to water stress: seasonal and diurnal variations in photosynthetic pigments and carbohydrate concentration. HortScience 47(10):1512–1519 Landis TD, Dumroese RK, Haase DL (2010) The container tree nursery manual: Vol 7, seedling processing, storage, and outplanting. Agric Handbk 674. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Washington, DC, p 200 Larcher RJ (1995) Physiological plant ecology, 3rd edn. Springer, New York Levitt J (1980) Responses of plants to environmental stresses: water, radiation, salt and other stresses. Academic Press, New York Margolis HA, Brand DG (1990) An ecophysiological basis for understanding plantation establishment. Can J For Res 20:375–390 McMillin JD, Wagner MR (1995) Effects of water stress on biomass partitioning of ponderosa pine seedlings during primary root growth and shoot growth periods. For Sci 41(3):594–610 Miranda MT, Da Silva SF, Silveira NM, Pereira L, Machado EC, Ribeiro RV (2020) Root osmotic adjustment and stomatal control of leaf gas exchange are dependent on Citrus rootstocks under water deficit. J Plant Growth Regul 285:1–9 Moran E, Lauder J, Musser C, Stathos A, Shu M (2017) The genetics of drought tolerance in conifers. New Phytol 216(4):1034–1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14774 Nagarajan S, Nagarajan S (2010) Abiotic tolerance and crop improvement. In: Pareek A, Sopory S, Bohnert H (eds) Abiotic stress adaptation in plants, physiological, molecular and genomic foundation. Springer, The Netherlands, pp 1–11 Nehemy MF, Benettin P, Asadollahi M, Pratt D, Rinaldo A, McDonnell JJ (2021) Tree water deficit and dynamic source water partitioning. Hydrol Process 35(1):e14004 Nzokou P, Cregg BM (2010) Growth, biomass, and nitrogen use efficiency of containerized Fraser fir (Abies fraseri) as related to irrigation and nitrogen fertilization. HortScience 45(6):946–951 Piñol J, Sala A (2000) Ecological implications of xylem cavitation for several Pinaceae in the pacific northern USA. Funct Ecol 14(5):538–545. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2435.2000.00451.x Sánchez-Salguero R, Ortíz C, Covelo F, Ochoa V, García-Ruíz R, Seco JI, Carreira JA, Merino JA, Linares JC (2015) Regulation of water use in the southernmost European fir (Abies pinsapo Boiss.): drought avoidance matters. Forests 6(6):2241–2260. https://doi.org/10.3390/f6062241 Seleiman MF, Al-Suhaibani N, Ali N, Akmal M, Alotaibi M, Refay Y, Dindaroglu T, Abdul-Wajid HH, Battaglia ML (2021) Drought stress impacts on plants and different approaches to alleviate its adverse effects. Plants 10(2):259 Setter TL (1990) Transport/harvest index: photosynthate partitioning in stressed plants. In: Cumming JR (ed) Stress responses in plants, adaptation and acclimation mechanisms. Wiley, New York USA, pp 17–36 Sheriff DW, Margolis HA, Kaufmann MR, Reich PB (1995) Resource use efficiency. In: Smith WK, Hinckley TM (eds) Resource physiology of conifers. Academic Press, San Diego, CA USA, pp 143–178 Shults P, Nzokou P, Koc I (2020) Nitrogen contributions of alley cropped Trifolium pratense may sustain short rotation woody crop yields on marginal lands. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 117:261–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-020-10068-8 Singh B, Singh G (2004) Influence of soil water regime on nutrient mobility and uptake by Dalbergia sissoo seedlings. Trop Ecol 45(2):337–340 Teskey RO, Bongarten BC, Cregg BM, Dougherty PM, Hennessey TC (1987) Physiology and genetics of tree growth response to moisture and temperature stress: an examination of the characteristics of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). Tree Physiol 3:41–61 Timmer VR (1991) Interpretation of seedling analysis and visual symptoms. In: van den Driesscche R (ed) Mineral nutrition of conifer seedlings. DRD Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 113–134 Turner NC (1988) Measurement of plant water status by pressure chamber technique. Irrig Sci 9:289–308 Ullah A, Mushtaq H, Fahad S, Shah A, Chaudhary HJ (2017) Plant growth promoting potential of bacterial endophytes in novel association with Olea ferruginea and Withania coagulans. Microbiology 86:119–127 Vitali V, Büntgen U, Bauhus J (2017) Silver fir and Douglas fir are more tolerant to extreme droughts than Norway spruce in south-western Germany. Glob Chang Biol 23(12):5108–5119 Williams LE, Araujo FJ (2002) Correlations among predawn leaf, midday leaf, and midday stem water potential and their correlations with other measures of soil and plant water status in Vitis vinifera. J Am Soc Hort Sci 127(3):448–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yqres.2009.07.010 Wilson AR, Nzokou P, Güney D, Kulaç Ş (2013) Growth response and nitrogen use physiology of Fraser fir (Abies fraseri), red pine (Pinus resinosa), and hybrid poplar under amino acid nutrition. New For 44(2):281–295 Yang Y, Wang G, Yang L (2013) Effects of drought and warming on biomass, nutrient allocation, and oxidative stress in Abies fabri in eastern Tibetan plateau. J Plant Growth Regul 32:298–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-012-9298-0 Yordanov I, Velikova V, Tsonev T (2000) Plant responses to drought, acclimation, and stress tolerance. Photosynthetica 38(2):171–186. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007201411474 Zas R, Merlo E, Fernandez-Lopez J (2004) Juvenile – mature genetic correlations in Pinus pinaster Ait. Silvae Genet 53(3):124–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/sg-2004-0022 Zhang YJ, Meinzer FC, Qi JH, Goldstein G, Cao KF (2013) Midday stomatal conductance is more related to stem rather than leaf water status in subtropical deciduous and evergreen broadleaf trees. Plant Cell Environ 36:149–158 Zhao Q, Guo J, Shu M, Wang P, Hu S (2020) Impact of drought and nitrogen on leaf nutrient resorption and root nutrient allocation in four Tibetan plant species. Sci Total Environ 723:138106 Zia R, Nawaz MS, Siddique MJ, Hakim S, Imran A (2021) Plant survival under drought stress: implications, adaptive responses, and integrated rhizosphere management strategy for stress mitigation. Microbiol Res 242:126626