Premium
New possible mechanisms of embolism formation when measuring vulnerability curves by air injection in a pressure sleeve
Author(s) -
Yin Pengxian,
Cai Jing
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
plant, cell and environment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.646
H-Index - 200
eISSN - 1365-3040
pISSN - 0140-7791
DOI - 10.1111/pce.13163
Subject(s) - tension (geology) , centrifuge , mechanics , hydraulic conductivity , stress (linguistics) , materials science , chemistry , environmental science , composite material , soil science , physics , compression (physics) , nuclear physics , soil water , linguistics , philosophy
Since 1988, researchers have exposed stems to positive pressures to displace water in vessels and measure the impact of applied pressure on hydraulic conductivity. The pressure‐sleeve technique has been used in more than 60 publications to measure vulnerability curves (VCs), which are a measure of how water stress impacts the ability of plants to transport water because water stress induces embolism in vessels that blocks water flow. It is thought that the positive pressure in a sleeve required to induce 50% loss of conductivity (PLC), P 50 , is the same magnitude as the tension that causes 50% PLC, T 50 , where the tension can be induced by either bench‐top dehydration or by a centrifuge technique. The unifying concept that P 50 = T 50 and that the entire VC is the same regardless of method is referred to as the air‐seeding hypothesis. In the current study, we performed experiments to further test the air‐seeding hypothesis in pressure sleeves and concluded that an “effervescence” mechanism caused embolism formation under positive pressure. This mechanism explains why VCs measured using positive pressure do not always match VCs obtained by other methods that induce water tension.