%0 Journal Article %1 Cochard2004 %A Cochard, H. %A Froux, F. %A Mayr, S. %A Coutand, C. %D 2004 %J Plant Physiology %K alpine, anatomy, bibtex-import, citeulikeExport papercopy, snowgumpapermaybe %P 401--408 %T Xylem wall collapse in water-stressed pine needles %V 134

@article{Cochard2004, added-at = {2019-03-31T01:14:40.000+0100}, author = {Cochard, H. and Froux, F. and Mayr, S. and Coutand, C.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/29d34bfaec596b1abcabb102d02e0c07b/dianella}, citeulike-article-id = {1523651}, comment = {(private-note)cryoSEM technique. 2 major constraints to water transport: 1) risk of collapse of h2o column and 2) risk of collapse of conduit walls due to centripetal forces on conduit walls. At -4MPa, tracheid walls started to bend, especially where in contact with parenchyma. The two alpine species had thicker walls, smaller lumens, much more resistant to bending stress. Phi leaf = phi xylem in dehydrating shoots. The ones with thinner walls collapsed first. *Hey, I wonder if there was a difference in embolism recovery, though. That could be the reason for differences in squashability. When walls collapse, the risk of cavitation is avoided or delayed. Collapse in leaves could minimise risk of embolism downstream (err. Upstream?) Collapse isn't desirable. If no collapse, maintain efficiency at lower water potentials.}, interhash = {5caca2de1c3b4d875a25dee571a381ab}, intrahash = {9d34bfaec596b1abcabb102d02e0c07b}, journal = {Plant Physiology}, keywords = {alpine, anatomy, bibtex-import, citeulikeExport papercopy, snowgumpapermaybe}, pages = {401--408}, pdf = {\\biostore\desktop\$\u2531135\Desktop\references ideas and theory\papers\cochardetal\_04\_Xy\_collapse\_droughted\_pine.pdf}, posted-at = {2007-07-31 06:12:43}, priority = {0}, timestamp = {2019-03-31T01:16:26.000+0100}, title = {{Xylem wall collapse in water-stressed pine needles}}, volume = 134, year = 2004 }