2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.actao.2015.08.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Climate change effects in a semiarid grassland: Physiological responses to shifts in rain patterns

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, in monoculture stands like our pots, higher WUE for C 4 grasses confers soil water savings, allowing stomata to remain open and extending the duration of assimilation. This has been shown in comparative analyses, in which declines in A were slower for C 4 than C 3 plants, particularly during the initial stages (2-3 weeks) of drought (Schulze and Hall, 1982;Ripley et al, 2010;Taylor et al, 2014), and is a recognized advantage under fluctuating water availability (Morgan et al, 2011;Ladrón de Guevara et al, 2015;Nie et al, 2018). Conversely, if soil water is shared between C 3 and C 4 plants, such as in mixed stands where the majority of tree and grass roots occupy upper soil layers (February and Higgins, 2010) and compete primarily for the same resources (Scholes and Archer, 1997), soils are likely to be wetter on average than in C 3 -only stands, providing a window of opportunity for C 3 grasses and trees to colonize stands of C 4 grasses.…”
Section: Stained Sapwoodmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…However, in monoculture stands like our pots, higher WUE for C 4 grasses confers soil water savings, allowing stomata to remain open and extending the duration of assimilation. This has been shown in comparative analyses, in which declines in A were slower for C 4 than C 3 plants, particularly during the initial stages (2-3 weeks) of drought (Schulze and Hall, 1982;Ripley et al, 2010;Taylor et al, 2014), and is a recognized advantage under fluctuating water availability (Morgan et al, 2011;Ladrón de Guevara et al, 2015;Nie et al, 2018). Conversely, if soil water is shared between C 3 and C 4 plants, such as in mixed stands where the majority of tree and grass roots occupy upper soil layers (February and Higgins, 2010) and compete primarily for the same resources (Scholes and Archer, 1997), soils are likely to be wetter on average than in C 3 -only stands, providing a window of opportunity for C 3 grasses and trees to colonize stands of C 4 grasses.…”
Section: Stained Sapwoodmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The photosynthetic behaviour of this species, measured as the green fraction of AGB within the canopy, also changes during the year and with landscape position in response to water availability. In fact, in the southeast of Spain, M. tenacissima L. has a growing or active period during late autumn and winter, while it remains in a latent state during spring and summer [101], leading to seasonal changes in GB that control ecosystem processes such as overall CO 2 dynamics [102]. Different studies describe good relationships between vegetation indices that represent the amount of photosynthetically active radiation such as NDVI and the GB amount [20,27,[102][103][104] and dynamics [17,18,28].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, in the southeast of Spain, M. tenacissima L. has a growing or active period during late autumn and winter, while it remains in a latent state during spring and summer [101], leading to seasonal changes in GB that control ecosystem processes such as overall CO 2 dynamics [102]. Different studies describe good relationships between vegetation indices that represent the amount of photosynthetically active radiation such as NDVI and the GB amount [20,27,[102][103][104] and dynamics [17,18,28]. However, our results demonstrate that M. tenacissima L. GB shows weak relationships with all the vegetation indices tested at the plant scale (Table 4).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We suggest that C 4 grasses are not more competitive than trees under low water availability per se; instead, the interplay between the timing and duration of A , and the capacity to exploit soil water is critical. The ability of C 4 grasses to revert quickly from low to high A in response to precipitation inputs to soils would underpin higher time‐integrated assimilation and seasonal growth (Bellasio et al, ; Ladrón de Guevara et al, ) and potentially minimise metabolic impairment (Ripley et al, ). Conversely, lower A and slower stomatal responses to water inputs would disadvantage trees under low [CO 2 ] a , making them more vulnerable to grass‐fuelled fires, suppressing recruitment from saplings to trees (Bond, ; Staver et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%