ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
MonthYearCodeInd.LWP PDLWP MDΔ LWPLOG Δ LWP
points excluded for hydroscape and delta slope
2
september
2016BU70-2.1-2.4666666670.36666666670.135662602
point where LWP MD = LWP PD
y = mx +b
3
june2016BU70-1.53-2.4250.8950.2776092143INDICESBUunit
4
june2017BU70-1.86-2.3750.5150.1804126328slope all0.4536the m value in the 1st graph
is the slope of a linear regression fitted to the entire trajectory of LWP MD x LWP PD; slope = 0 isohydric; slope = 1 anisohydric
5
july2016BU4-0.85-2.31.450.3891660844
slope LWP MD = LWP PD
0.2426the m value in the 2nd graph
6
october2016BU70-1.45-2.20.750.2430380487
LWP MD @ LWP PD = 0
-1.7092Mpathe b value in the 2nd graph
is the predicted ψMD in fully saturated soil (y-intercept)
7
september
2016BU4-0.75-2.151.40.3802112417
LWP MD = LWP PD
-2.24Mpadetermine (Image J) the point where the line intercept 1:1
is the threshold at which stomata closure is no longer effective in limiting ψMD as ψPD become more negative
8
july2016BU70-1.85-2.10.250.09691001301
hydroscape
1.971Mpa²determine (Image J) the area contained in the red polygon
area over which stomata are effective in controling leaf water potential and plant is able to sustain net CO2 assimilation. A larger hydroscape is linked to a larger degree of anisohydry
9
june2017BU4-1.12-2.0550.9350.2866809694Δslope0.1859the m value in the 3rd graph
the lower the slope, the more anisohydric
10
may2017BU4-0.685-2.051.3650.3738311451
11
january2017BU4-0.69-21.310.3636119799
12
april2017BU70-0.995-1.9750.980.2966651903
13
april2017BU4-1.085-1.9650.880.2741578493STEPS
14
february2017BU4-0.505-1.871.3650.3738311451
15
january2017BU70-0.665-1.851.1850.3394514413
1. exclude any points where LWP PD < LWP MD (that is any point where Δ LWP is negative, which also means any point above 1:1 line in the graphs)
16
october2016BU4-0.8-1.810.3010299957
2. determine the slope all by fitting a regression line across the LWP MD andLWP PD values in the first graph
17
may2017BU70-0.665-1.7751.110.3242824553
3. order the LWP MD values from the more negative to less negative ones
18
february2017BU70-0.375-1.651.2750.356981401
4. determine the point where LWP PD = LWP MD (point closer to the 1:1 line, and also the lowest value of ΔLWP)
19
march2017BU4-0.45-1.40.950.2900346114
5. select the LWP PD = LWP MD and points below until the R² in the second graph reaches its highest value
20
march2017BU70-0.43-1.40.970.2944662262
6. determine de slope LWP MD = LWP PD and the y intercept (ψMD @ ψPD = 0 )
21
7. Save the second graph as a Image and open in the Image J
22
8. Using the Figure calibration app determine de hydroscape area and LWP MD = LWP PD point
23
9. In the third graph determine the delta slope value (using only the points used to obtain the hydroscape in the second graph)
24
10. the bigger plot below show all the results for all these different approaches to determine the iso-anisohydric behaviour
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100