Abstract
Climate change presents a challenge for plants to acclimate their water relations under changing environmental conditions, and may increase the risks of hydraulic failure under stress. In this study, maize plants were acclimated to two different CO2 concentrations ([CO2]; 400 ppm and 700 ppm) while under either water stress (WS) or soil salinity (SS) treatments, and their growth and hydraulic traits were examined in detail. Both WS and SS inhibited growth and had significant impacts on hydraulic traits. In particular, the water potential at 50% loss of stem hydraulic conductance (P50) decreased by 1 MPa in both treatments at 400 ppm. When subjected to elevated [CO2], the plants under both WS and SS showed improved growth by 7-23%. Elevated [CO2] also significantly increased xylem vulnerability (measured as loss of conductivity with decreasing xylem pressure), resulting in smaller hydraulic safety margins. According to the plant desiccation model, the critical desiccation degree (time×vapor pressure deficit) that the plants could tolerate under drought was reduced by 43-64% under elevated [CO2]. In addition, sensitivity analysis showed that P50 was the most important trait in determining the critical desiccation degree. Thus, our results demonstrated that whilst elevated [CO2] benefited plant growth under WS or SS, it also interfered with hydraulic acclimation, thereby potentially placing the plants at a higher risk of hydraulic failure and increased mortality.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 13
Claim · model-written summary
Water stress inhibited maize growth.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both WS and SS inhibited growth and had significant impacts on hydraulic traits.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil salinity inhibited maize growth.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both WS and SS inhibited growth and had significant impacts on hydraulic traits.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Water stress significantly affected hydraulic traits.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both WS and SS inhibited growth and had significant impacts on hydraulic traits.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil salinity significantly affected hydraulic traits.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both WS and SS inhibited growth and had significant impacts on hydraulic traits.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Water stress decreased P50 by 1 MPa at 400 ppm CO2.
- Treatment
- water deficitt1
- Outcome
- water potential at 50% loss of stem hydraulic conductance (P50)e0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 1 MPae0
- Qualifier
- at 400 ppme0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the water potential at 50% loss of stem hydraulic conductance (P50) decreased by 1 MPa in both treatments at 400 ppm.”
t0“maize”
t1“Elevated CO2 concentration increases maize growth under water deficit or soil salinity but with a higher risk of hydraulic failure”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil salinity decreased P50 by 1 MPa at 400 ppm CO2.
- Treatment
- soil salinityt1
- Outcome
- water potential at 50% loss of stem hydraulic conductance (P50)e0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 1 MPae0
- Qualifier
- at 400 ppme0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the water potential at 50% loss of stem hydraulic conductance (P50) decreased by 1 MPa in both treatments at 400 ppm.”
t0“maize”
t1“Elevated CO2 concentration increases maize growth under water deficit or soil salinity but with a higher risk of hydraulic failure”
Claim · model-written summary
Elevated CO2 improved growth under water stress by 7-23%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When subjected to elevated [CO2], the plants under both WS and SS showed improved growth by 7-23%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Elevated CO2 improved growth under salinity by 7-23%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When subjected to elevated [CO2], the plants under both WS and SS showed improved growth by 7-23%.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Elevated CO2 increased xylem vulnerability significantly.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Elevated [CO2] also significantly increased xylem vulnerability (measured as loss of conductivity with decreasing xylem pressure)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Elevated CO2 resulted in smaller hydraulic safety margins.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“resulting in smaller hydraulic safety margins.”
e1“Elevated [CO2] also significantly increased xylem vulnerability”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The desiccation model estimated a 43-64% lower critical desiccation degree under elevated CO2.
- Treatment
- elevated [CO2]e0
- Outcome
- critical desiccation degree (time×vapor pressure deficit)e0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 43-64%e0
- Qualifier
- under droughte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the critical desiccation degree (time×vapor pressure deficit) that the plants could tolerate under drought was reduced by 43-64% under elevated [CO2].”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Sensitivity analysis ranked P50 as the most important determinant of critical desiccation degree.
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorTreatmentComparatorSettingDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sensitivity analysis showed that P50 was the most important trait in determining the critical desiccation degree.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude elevated CO2 may raise hydraulic failure and mortality risk under stress.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“thereby potentially placing the plants at a higher risk of hydraulic failure and increased mortality.”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
co2 · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
54 papers more in this group
See all 58 papers →salinity · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
38 papers more in this group
See all 42 papers →drought · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
151 papers more in this group
See all 155 papers →salinity · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
230 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
253 papers more in this group
See all 257 papers →drought · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
307 papers in the same direction as this paper · 77 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
381 papers more in this group
See all 385 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.