2013
DOI: 10.1007/s10342-013-0728-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ten-year exposure to elevated CO2 increases stomatal number of Pinus koraiensis and P. sylvestriformis needles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
0
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We found epidermal developmental adjustments to elevated CO 2 , particularly an increased SD and ED ( Table 1 ). This increase in SD at elevated CO 2 has rarely been documented ( Ferris, 1996 ; Reid, 2003 ; Zhou et al, 2013 ) and is contrary to our expectation of SD reductions ( Lin et al, 2001 ; Kouwenberg et al, 2003 ; Haworth et al, 2011 ) or no changes in SD ( Apple et al, 2000 ; Kurepin et al, 2018 ). While SD and ED increased, we found SI to remain unaffected ( Table 1 ), rejecting our hypothesis that—as in many angiosperms—a reduced initiation of stomata occurred in response to elevated CO 2 in Aleppo pine seedlings.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…We found epidermal developmental adjustments to elevated CO 2 , particularly an increased SD and ED ( Table 1 ). This increase in SD at elevated CO 2 has rarely been documented ( Ferris, 1996 ; Reid, 2003 ; Zhou et al, 2013 ) and is contrary to our expectation of SD reductions ( Lin et al, 2001 ; Kouwenberg et al, 2003 ; Haworth et al, 2011 ) or no changes in SD ( Apple et al, 2000 ; Kurepin et al, 2018 ). While SD and ED increased, we found SI to remain unaffected ( Table 1 ), rejecting our hypothesis that—as in many angiosperms—a reduced initiation of stomata occurred in response to elevated CO 2 in Aleppo pine seedlings.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…Although plants typically decrease stomatal density and area in response to eCO 2 (Poorter et al., ), we found the opposite for P. australis . However, our results are not unique, as a number of studies have reported increases (Apel, ; Watson‐Lazowski et al., ; Zhou et al., ) or no change (Field, Duckett, Cameron, & Pressel, ; Luomala, Laitinen, Sutinen, Kellomaki, & Vapaavuori, ; Reid et al., ; Tricker et al., ) in response to eCO 2 . Our data are comparable to previously published data on stomatal size and density in introduced P. australis (Hansen, Lambertini, Jampeetong, & Brix, ; Saltonstall, ), although these studies did not evaluate effects of eCO 2 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 44%
“…Although plants typically decrease stomatal density and area in response to eCO 2 (Poorter et al, 2012), we found the opposite for P. australis. However, our results are not unique, as a number of studies have reported increases (Apel, 1989;Watson-Lazowski et al, 2016;Zhou et al, 2013) or no change (Field, Duckett, Cameron, & Pressel, 2015;Luomala, Laitinen, Sutinen, Kellomaki, & Vapaavuori, 2005;Reid et al, 2003;Tricker et al, 2005) in response to eCO 2 .…”
Section: Salinity (Ppt)mentioning
confidence: 45%
“…20,21 A prominent increase in leaf area expansion with e[CO 2 ] under drought stress is associated with enhanced CO 2 assimilation and improved water use efficiency by reducing the stomatal density and transpiration rate, therefore leading to higher crop growth and productivity. 22,23 Moreover, e[CO 2 ] could possibly decrease the oxidative damage to plants by reducing the ROS levels via maintenance of a higher antioxidant potential, which successively helps the plants to survive in drought environments. 24 An e[CO 2 ] environment also assists the plants in synthesizing carbohydrates and starch contents through upregulation of the antioxidant metabolism, hence contributing to a higher grain weight and yield under drought conditions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As predicted, the varied responses of plants to e [CO 2 ] depend on the CO 2 exposure that the maternal or offspring plant experiences. It is well known that plants exposed to e [CO 2 ] for two or three generations show a higher growth response than those grown for one generation in an e [CO 2 ] environment. , The positive effect of e [CO 2 ] of promoting the net photosynthetic efficiency, which subsequently increased the crop yield and quality, have been shown in numerous studies. , A prominent increase in leaf area expansion with e [CO 2 ] under drought stress is associated with enhanced CO 2 assimilation and improved water use efficiency by reducing the stomatal density and transpiration rate, therefore leading to higher crop growth and productivity. , Moreover, e [CO 2 ] could possibly decrease the oxidative damage to plants by reducing the ROS levels via maintenance of a higher antioxidant potential, which successively helps the plants to survive in drought environments . An e [CO 2 ] environment also assists the plants in synthesizing carbohydrates and starch contents through upregulation of the antioxidant metabolism, hence contributing to a higher grain weight and yield under drought conditions …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%