Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorÁlvarez, Carolina
dc.contributor.authorAcevedo Tapia, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorSandoval Rocha, Simón Pedro
dc.contributor.authorEstay, Daniela
dc.contributor.authorValero, Andrea
dc.date.accessioned2026-06-19T14:18:22Z
dc.date.available2026-06-19T14:18:22Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.identifier.issn1432-2285
dc.identifier.otherhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-026-02791-6
dc.identifier.urihttps://bibliotecadigital.infor.cl/handle/20.500.12220/33184
dc.description15 páginases_CL
dc.description.abstractUnderstanding the mechanisms underlying isohydric and anisohydric behavior in woody species is critical for predicting their performance under increasing drought stress. We combined hydraulic, anatomical, and gas exchange measurements during progressive soil drought and re-watering in three Prunus dulcis cultivars (Avijor, Isabelona, and Soleta) to evaluate how coordinated traits explain drought responses and recovery. Hydroscape analysis confirmed the isohydric–anisohydric ranking previously reported, with Avijor being the most isohydric and Soleta the most anisohydric. Across cultivars, a common sequence of responses was observed: early decline in leaf hydraulic conductivity (Kleaf), followed by turgor loss point (ΨTLP), stomatal closure, and onset of embolism. Despite this shared pattern, cultivars differed in key drought thresholds. The more anisohydric cultivars showed more negative ΨTLP, and Soleta exhibited greater stem embolism resistance than Avijor. Cultivar differentiation was also clearer in stem xylem anatomy than in leaf traits, with variation in vessel-related traits being consistent with differences in stem vulnerability. By contrast, leaf vulnerability thresholds showed no clear differences among cultivars. Relative Kleaf recovery differed among cultivars, with higher recovery in Soleta than in Avijor, while Isabelona was intermediate. This pattern may reflect that Soleta and Isabelona did not reach water potentials lower than their stem P50 during drought, unlike Avijor. The separation between leaf and stem vulnerability thresholds also varied between cultivars and was greatest in Soleta, suggesting possible inter-cultivar variability in hydraulic vulnerability segmentation. Overall, cultivar-level drought responses in almond were explained by differences in stem embolism resistance, ΨTLP, and stem xylem analysis than by stomatal behavior alone.es_CL
dc.language.isoenes_CL
dc.publisherSpringeres_CL
dc.subjectResistencia a la sequíaes_CL
dc.subjectConductividad hidráulicaes_CL
dc.subjectPotencial hídrico foliares_CL
dc.titleCoordination among hydraulic, stomatal, and anatomical traits in Prunus dulcis L. cultivars differing in degree of isohydric and anisohydric behaviores_CL
dc.typeArtículo de revistaes_CL
infor.publicadoenTrees. v.40, n.86
infor.revista.paisAlemaniaes_CL
infor.especiePrunus dulcis L.es_CL
infor.operadorkmces_CL
infor.lineasdeinvestigacionRestauración y Manejo Ecosistémico de Recursos Forestales Nativoses_CL


Ficheros en el ítem

FicherosTamañoFormatoVer

No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem