The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The variability of stomatal sensitivity to leaf water potential across tree species indicates a continuum between isohydric and anisohydric behaviours
Abstract
Summary: The relationship between stomatal conductance (g s) and leaf water potential (Ψ l) is key to the understanding of plant function under changing climate. The variability among tree species gave rise to selection towards either of two contrasting water management types: isohydric or anisohydric. This study explores the variability of g s to Ψ l across tree species. Curves of g s(Ψ l) were collected from the scientific literature for 70 woody plant species. The data set is comprised of angiosperm and gymnosperm species from all major forest biomes. The hypothesis that curves from different tree species diverge between isohydric and anisohydric behaviours was tested. Species‐specific curves formed a continuum, rather than dichotomy between isohydric and anisohydric, as confirmed by distribution models. Alternatively, the water potential at 50% of the maximum g s (Ψg s 50) was used to quantitatively compare between species. A major difference emerged among xylem anatomy classes whereby ring‐porous species had higher absolute g s at Ψ l < −2 MP a than diffuse‐porous and coniferous species. A positive, linear correlation was shown between Ψg s 50 and Ψ l at 50% loss of xylem conductivity. The results suggest that stomatal sensitivity to leaf water potential strongly relates to xylem characteristics. The use of Ψg s 50 offers a quantitative alternative to the current, yet biased, distinction between isohydric and anisohydric species.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Allen, C. D., Macalady, A. K., Chenchouni, H., Bachelet, D., McDowell, N., Vennetier, M., Kitzberger, T., Rigling, A., Breshears, D. D., Hogg, E. H. (., et al. (2010) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.001 · Cited by 7,763
Cited by
Anderegg, W. R. L., Klein, T., Bartlett, M., Sack, L., Pellegrini, A. F. A., Choat, B., & Jansen, S. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1525678113 · Cited by 882
Self-citationPlant resistance to drought depends on timely stomatal closure
Martin‐StPaul, N., Delzon, S., & Cochard, H. (2017) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12851 · Cited by 820
The correlations and sequence of plant stomatal, hydraulic, and wilting responses to drought
Bartlett, M. K., Klein, T., Jansen, S., Choat, B., & Sack, L. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1604088113 · Cited by 559
Self-citationQuantifying impacts of the 2018 drought on European ecosystems in comparison to 2003
Buras, A., Rammig, A., & Zang, C. S. (2020) · Biogeosciences · doi:10.5194/bg-17-1655-2020 · Cited by 527
Urban, J., Ingwers, M. W., McGuire, M. A., & Teskey, R. O. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Botany · doi:10.1093/jxb/erx052 · Cited by 486
Metadata
- Authors
- Klein, T.
- Venue
- Functional Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-05-30
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1313-1320
- ISSN
- 0269-8463 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2435
- OpenAlex
- W2112603298
- Cited by
- 814
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 35.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The variability of stomatal sensitivity to leaf water potential across tree species indicates a continuum between isohydric and anisohydric behaviours. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1365-2435.12289
- The paper
- Klein, T. (2014). The variability of stomatal sensitivity to leaf water potential across tree species indicates a continuum between isohydric and anisohydric behaviours. Functional Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12289
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.