Gas exchange (at max PPFD), CA activity, and isotopic water data (average at all PPFDs) for tobacco, soy (n = 3 and 2), and oak (n = 3, at different O2%)
| Species | Emax | gs(max) | Amax | ci(min) | Tmax | CAassay | CAleaf | VPD | δt | δe | δLW | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| × 103 | ||||||||||||
| Tobacco 1 | 5.5 | 244 | 14.1 | 274 | 27.2 | n.d | 1,6231-a | 1.37 (0.19) | −6.3 (0.9) | +12.0 (1.1) | +11.0 | |
| Tobacco 2 | 4.8 | 189 | 13.5 | 240 | 29.3 | 54.8 (13) | 598 | 1.48 (0.17) | −5.5 (0.6) | +15.6 (1.0) | +11.9 | |
| Tobacco 3 | 5.0 | 241 | 15.8 | 265 | 28.5 | 71.3 (6.3) | 670 | 1.27 (0.18) | −2.3 (0.7) | +16.4 (1.1) | +13.6 | |
| Soy 1 | 4.3 | 206 | 12.2 | 255 | 29.3 | 25.3 (2.9) | 294 | 1.51 (0.11) | −4.7 (0.9) | +11.0 (1.1) | +11.0 | |
| Soy 2 | 5.1 | 300 | 20.0 | 237 | 28.5 | 37.1 (1.6) | 342 | 1.32 (0.14) | −5.1 (0.9) | +12.7 (0.3) | +11.9 | |
| Oak - 40% | 3.3 | 142 | 11.8 | 237 | 28.9 | n.d. | – | 1.62 (0.18) | −5.6 (1.9) | +13.4 (1.4) | n.d | |
| Oak - 20% | 4.2 | 166 | 15.5 | 207 | 29.2 | n.d. | – | 1.57 (0.17) | −6.6 (0.6) | +11.8 (0.8) | n.d. | |
| Oak - 2% | 4.1 | 172 | 17.5 | 174 | 27.8 | n.d. | – | 14.6 (2.2) | −6.2 (0.7) | +13.1 (1.3) | n.d. | |
Units are: evaporation rate (E max, mmol m−2 s−1), stomatal CO2conductance (gs(max) , mmol CO2m−2 s−1), CO2 assimilation (Amax , μmol m−2s−1), sub-stomatal CO2 concentration (ci , μmol mol−1), leaf temperature (Tmax , °C), carbonic anhydrase CO2 hydration rate, under assay (CAassay , at 2°C and 35 mm[CO2], mean of three leaves), and in vivo conditions (CAleaf , at ccs andTleaf , μmol CO2 m−2s−1). For VPD (kPa) and isotopic data (‰), nos. are averages (+sd) during the entire light response. Symbols as in text.
↵F1-a In vivo CA hydration based on the meanCAassay of the other two tobacco plants.