This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mott, K. A. Articles by O'Leary, J. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mott, K. A. Articles by O'Leary, J. W. Agricola Articles by Mott, K. A. Articles by O'Leary, J. W.

Articles

Stomatal Behavior and CO₂ Exchange Characteristics in Amphistomatous Leaves ¹

Department of Cellular and Developmental Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721

The possibility that differences in stomatal conductance between upper and lower surfaces of amphistomatous leaves are adaptations to differences in CO₂ exchange characteristics for the two surfaces was investigated. The ratio of upper to lower stomatal conductance was found to change little in response to light and humidity for well-watered sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) plants. Stressing the plants ( = –17 bars) and rewatering 1 day before gas exchange measurements reduced upper conductance more severely than lower in both indoor- and outdoor-grown plants, and caused small changes in conductance ratio with light and humidity. A similar pattern was found using outdoor grown sunflower and cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) plants. Calculated intercellular CO₂ concentrations for upper and lower surfaces were always close to identical for a particular set of environmental conditions for both sunflower and cocklebur, indicating that no differences in CO₂ exchange characteristics exist between the two surfaces. By artificially creating a CO₂ gradient across the leaf, the resistance to CO₂ diffusion through the mesophyll was estimated and found to be so low that despite possible nonhomogeneity of the mesophyll, differences in CO₂ exchange characteristics for the two surfaces are unlikely. It is concluded that differences in conductance between upper and lower stomates are not adaptations to differences in CO₂ exchange characteristics.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. P. Driscoll, A. Prins, E. Olmos, K. J. Kunert, and C. H. Foyer Specification of adaxial and abaxial stomata, epidermal structure and photosynthesis to CO2 enrichment in maize leaves J. Exp. Bot., January 1, 2006; 57(2): 381 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Pieruschka, U. Schurr, and S. Jahnke Lateral gas diffusion inside leaves J. Exp. Bot., March 1, 2005; 56(413): 857 - 864. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. E. LYNN and S. WALDREN Physiological Variation in Populations of Ranunculus repens L. (Creeping Buttercup) from the Temporary Limestone Lakes (Turloughs) in the West of Ireland Ann. Bot., June 1, 2002; 89(6): 707 - 714. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Sun and J. N. Nishio Why Abaxial Illumination Limits Photosynthetic Carbon Fixation in Spinach Leaves Plant Cell Physiol., January 1, 2001; 42(1): 1 - 8. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]