ISSN 2415-8860 (online), ISSN 0372-4123 (print)
logoUkrainian Botanical Journal
  • 3 of 5
Up
Ukr. Bot. J. 2023, 80(3): 251–266
https://doi.org/10.15407/ukrbotj80.03.251
Biotechnology, Physiology and Biochemistry

Morphological, physiological, and molecular components of the adaptive response to drought in the genus Quercus (Fagaceae)

Kosakivska I.V., Voytenko L.V., Vasyuk V.A., Shcherbatiuk M.M.
Abstract

The genus Quercus consisting of approximately 500 species is one of the dominant genera of woody plants in the Northern Hemisphere. The survival and distribution of Quercus species are profoundly influenced by extreme environmental conditions, including drought. To withstand drought stress, plants employ various adaptive strategies encompassing morphological, physiological, and molecular adaptive changes. This review aims to analyze and summarize the latest research on the adaptation of Quercus species to drought conditions, with a special focus on the species growing in Ukraine. The review explores the effects of drought on growth, productivity, physiological processes, biochemical responses, and molecular characteristics within the genus Quercus. Special attention is given to the impact of drought on photosynthetic activity, antioxidant system, synthesis of secondary metabolites, and accumulation of endogenous phytohormones. Furthermore, the review discusses recent findings from molecular genetic studies, specifically those concerning the genome, transcriptome, proteome, and metabolome. Emphasis is placed on the scientific and economic significance of understanding the fundamental processes underlying drought resistance, as it contributes to the selection and development of phenotypes capable of withstanding drought conditions.

Keywords: drought resistance, genome, germination, growth, metabolism, proteome, Quercus, transcriptome

Full text: PDF (Ukr) 850K

References
  1. Ali-Rachedi S., Bouinot D., Wagner M. H., Bonnet M., Sotta B., Grappin P., Jullien M. 2004. Changes in endogenous abscisic acid levels during dormancy release and maintenance of mature seeds: studies with the Cape Verde Islands ecotype, the dormant model of Arabidopsis thaliana. Planta, 219(3): 479–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-004-1251-4
  2. Almeida T., Pinto G., Correia B., Goncalves S., Meijon M., Escandon M. 2020. In-depth analysis of the Quercus suber metabolome under drought stress and recovery reveals potential key metabolic players. Plant Science, 299: 110606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2020.110606
  3. Alonso R., Elvira S., González-Fernández I., Calvete H., García-Gómez H., Bermejo V. 2014. Drought stress does not protect from ozone effects: results from a comparative study of two subspecies differing in ozone sensitivity. Plant Biology (Stuttgart, Germany), 16(2): 375–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/plb.12073
  4. Arend M., Kuster T., Günthardt-Goerg M.S., Dobbertin M. 2011. Provenance-specific growth responses to drought and air warming in three European oak species (Quercus robur, Q. petraea and Q. pubescens). Tree Physiology, 31: 287–297. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpr004
  5. Barigah T.S., Charrier O., Douris M., Bonhomme M., Herbette S., Ameglio T., Cochard H. 2013. Water stress-induced xylem hydraulic failure is a causal factor of tree mortality in beech and poplar. Annals of Botany, 112: 1431–1437. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mct204
  6. Breitling R. 2010. What is systems biology? Frontiers in Physiology, 1-2010: Article 9, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2010.00009
  7. Broadmeadow M.S.J., Jakson S.B. 2000. Growth responses of Quercus petraea, Fraxinus excelsior and Pinus sylvestris to elevated carbon dioxide, ozone and water supply. New Phytologist, 146: 437–452. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8137.2000.00665.x
  8. Browne L., Wright J.W., Fitz-Gibbon S., Gugger P.F., Sork V.L. 2019. Adaptational lag to temperature in valley oak (Quercus lobata) can be mitigated by genome-informed assisted gene flow. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 116(50): 25179–25185. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908771116
  9. Brus R. 2011. Dendrology for Foresters. Ljubljana: Univerza v Ljubljani, Biotehniška fakulteta, 408 pp.
  10. Bussotti F., Ferrini F., Pollastrini M., Fini A. 2014. The challenge of Mediterranean sclerophyllous vegetation under climate change: from acclimation to adaptation. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 103: 80–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2013.09.013
  11. Caignard T., Kremer A., Firmat C., Nicolas M., Venner S., Delzon S. 2017. Increasing spring temperatures favor oak seed production in temperate areas. Scientific Reports, 7(1): 8555. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09172-7
  12. Cline M.G., Harrington C.A. 2006. Apical dominance and apical control in multiple flushing of temperate woody species. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 37: 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1139/x06-218
  13. Cochard H., Bréda N., Granier A. 1996. Whole tree hydraulic conductance and water loss regulation in Quercus during drought: evidence for stomatal control of embolism? Annals of Forest Science, 53: 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:19960203
  14. Contran N., Günthardt-Goerg M.S., Kuster T.M., Cerana R., Crosti P., Paoletti E. 2013. Physiological and biochemical responses of Quercus pubescens to air warming and drought on acidic and calcareous soils. Plant Biology (Stuttgart, Germany), 15(Suppl. 1): 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1438-8677.2012.00627.x
  15. Cotrozzi L., Remorini D., Pellegrini E., Landi M., Massai R., Nali C., Guidi L., Lorenzini G. 2016. Variations in physiological and biochemical traits of oak seedlings grown under drought and ozone stress. Physiologia Plantarum, 157(1): 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12402
  16. Cotrozzi L., Remorini D., Pellegrini E., Guidi L., Lorenzini G., Massai R., Nali C., Landi M. 2017a. Cross-talk between physiological and metabolic adjustments adopted by Quercus cerris to mitigate the effects of severe drought and realistic future ozone concentrations. Forests, 8: 148. https://doi.org/10.3390/f8050148
  17. Cotrozzi L., Pellegrini E., Guidi L., Landi M., Lorenzini G., Massai R., Remorini D., Tonelli M., Trivellini A., Vernieri P., Vernieri P., Nali C. 2017b. Losing the warning signal: Drought compromises the cross-talk of signaling molecules in Quercus ilex exposed to ozone. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8: 1020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01020
  18. David T.S., Henriques M.O., Kurz-Besson C., Nunes J., Valente F., Vaz M., Pereira J.S., Siegwolf R., Chaves M.M., Gazarini L.C., David J.S. 2007. Water-use strategies in two co-occurring Mediterranean evergreen oaks: surviving the summer drought. Tree Physiology, 27: 793–803. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/27.6.793
  19. Denk T., Grimm G.W., Manos P.S., Deng M., Hipp A.L. 2017. An updated infrageneric classification of the oaks: Review of previous taxonomic schemes and synthesis of evolutionary patterns. In: E. Gil-Pelegrín, J. Peguero-Pina, D. Sancho-Knapik (eds). Oaks physiological ecology. Exploring the functional diversity of genus Quercus L. Tree Physiology. Vol 7. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69099-5_2
  20. Díaz-Guerra L., Llorens L., Bell T.L., Font J., González J.A., Verdaguer D. 2019. Physiological, growth and root biochemical responses of Arbutus unedo and Quercus suber seedlings to UV radiation and water availability before and after aboveground biomass removal. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 168: 103861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2019.103861
  21. Didukh Ya.P., Burda R.I., Zyman S.M., Korotchenko I.A., Fedoronchuk M.M., Fitsaylo T.V. 2004. Ekoflora Ukrainy. Vol. 2. Ed. Ya.P. Didukh. Kyiv: Phytosociocentre, 480 pp.
  22. Dolferus R. 2014. To grow or not to grow: a stressful decision for plants. Plant Science, 229: 247–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2014.10.002
  23. Echevarría-Zomeño S., Ariza D., Jorge I., Lenz C., Del Campo A., Jorrín J.V., Navarro R.M. 2009. Changes in the protein profile of Quercus ilex leaves in response to drought stress and recovery. Journal of Plant Physiology, 166(3): 233–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2008.05.008
  24. Escandón M., Castillejo M.Á., Jorrín-Novo J.V., Rey M.-D. 2021. Molecular Research on Stress Responses in Quercus spp.: From Classical Biochemistry to Systems Biology through Omics Analysis. Forests, 12(3): 364. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12030364
  25. Espelta J.M., Cortés P., Molowny-Horas R., Sánchez-Humanes B., Retana J. 2008. Masting mediated by summer drought reduces acorn predation in Mediterranean oak forests. Ecology, 89(3):805–817. https://doi.org/10.1890/07-0217.1
  26. Espelta J.M., Cortés P., Molowny-Horas R., Sánchez-Humanes B., Retana J. 2008. Masting mediated by summer drought reduces acorn predation in Mediterranean oak forests. Ecology, 89(3): 805–817. https://doi.org/10.1890/07-0217.1
  27. Fernandez i Martí A., Romero-Rodríguez C., Navarro-Cerrillo R., Abril N., Jorrín-Novo J., Dodd R. 2018. Population genetic diversity of Quercus ilex subsp. ballota (Desf.) Samp. reveals divergence in recent and evolutionary migration rates in the Spanish dehesas. Forests, 9: 337. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9060337
  28. Finley J. 2020. Acorns: A Fickle Crop? https://ecosystems.psu.edu/research/centers/private-forests/news/acorns-a-fickle-crop
  29. Fonti P., Heller O., Cherubini P., Rigling A., Arend M. 2013. Wood anatomical responses of oak saplings exposed to air warming and soil drought. Plant Biology, 15: 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1438-8677.2012.00599.x
  30. García-Plazaola J.L., Hernández A., Fernández-Marín B., Esteban R., Peguero-Pina J.J., Verhoeven A., Cavender-Bares J. 2017. Photoprotective mechanisms in the Genus Quercus in response to winter cold and summer drought in oaks physiological ecology. In: Oaks Physiological Ecology. Exploring the Functional Diversity of Genus Quercus L. In: Tree Physiology. Vol. 7. Eds E. Gil-Pelegrín, J. Peguero-Pina, D. Sancho-Knapik.Springer Cham, pp. 361–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69099-5
  31. Gargallo-Garriga A., Preece C., Sardans J., Oravec M., Urban O., Peñuelas J. 2018. Root exudate metabolomes change under drought and show limited capacity for recovery. Scientific Reports, 8(1): 12696. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-30150-0
  32. Geburek T., Hiess K., Litschauer R., Milasowsky N. 2012. Temporal pollen pattern in temperate trees: expedience or fate? Oikos, 121: 1603–1612. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2011. 20140.x
  33. Genard-Zielinski A.-C., Boissard C., Ormeño E., Lathière J., Reiter I.M., Wortham H., Orts J.-P., Temime-Roussel B., Guenet B., Bartsch S., Gauquelin T., Fernandez C. 2018. Seasonal variations of Quercus pubescens isoprene emissions from an in natura forest under drought stress and sensitivity to future climate change in the Mediterranean area. Biogeosciences 15: 4711–4730. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-4711-2018
  34. Genard-Zielinski A-C., Ormeño E., Boissard C., Fernandez C. 2014. Isoprene Emissions from Downy Oak under Water Limitation during an Entire Growing Season: What Cost for Growth? PLoS One, 9(11): e112418. https://doi.org/doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0112418
  35. Ghanbary E., Tabari Kouchaksaraei M., Zarafshar M., Bader K.-F.M., Mirabolfathy M., Ziaei M. 2020. Differential physiological and biochemical responses of Quercus infectoria and Q. libani to drought and charcoal disease. Physiologia Plantarum, 168(4): 876–892. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.13027
  36. Ghosh D., Xu J. 2014. Abiotic stress responses in plant roots: a proteomics perspective. Frontiers in Plant Science, 5: 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00006
  37. Grantham H.S., Duncan A., Evans T.D., Jones K.R., Beyer H.L., Schuster R., Walston J., Ray J.C., Robinson J.G., Callow M., Clements T., Costa H.M., DeGemmis A., Elsen P.R., Ervin J., Franco P., Goldman E., Goetz S., Hansen A., Hofsvang E., Jantz P., Jupiter S., Kang A., Langhammer P., Laurance W.F., Lieberman S., Linkie M., Malhi Y., Maxwell S., Mendez M., Mittermeier R., Murray N.J., Possingham H., Radachowsky J., Saatchi S., Samper C., Silverman J., Shapiro A., Strassburg B., Stevens T., Stokes E., Taylor R., Tear T., Tizard R., Venter O., Visconti P., Wang S., Watson J.E.M. 2020. Anthropogenic modification of forests means only 40% of remaining forests have high ecosystem integrity. Nature Communications, 11(1): 5978. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19493-3
  38. Guerrero-Sanchez V.M., Maldonado-Alconada A.M., Amil-Ruiz F., Jorrin-Novo J.V. 2017. Holm Oak (Quercus ilex) transcriptome. De novo sequencing and assembly analysis. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, 4: 70. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2017.00070
  39. Guerrero-Sanchez V.M., Maldonado-Alconada A.M., Amil-Ruiz F., Verardi A., Jorrín-Novo J.V., Rey M.D. 2019. Ion Torrent and lllumina, two complementary RNA-seq platforms for constructing the holm oak (Quercus ilex) transcriptome. PLoS One, 14(1): e0210356. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210356
  40. Harfouche A., Meilan R., Altman A. 2014. Molecular and physiological responses to abiotic stress in forest trees and their relevance to tree improvement. Tree Physiology, 34(11): 1181–1198. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpu012
  41. Harmer R. 1990. Relation of shoot growth phases in seedling oak to development of the tap root, lateral roots and fine root tips. New Phytologist, 115: 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1990.tb00917.x
  42. Herrera C.M., Jordano P., Guitián J., Traveset A. 1998. Annual variability in seed production by woody plants and the masting concept: reassessment of principles and relationship to pollination and seed dispersal. The American Naturalist, 152: 576–594. https://doi.org/10.2307/2463358
  43. Hubert F., Grimm G.W., Jousselin E., Berry V., Franc A., Kremer A. 2014. Multiple nuclear genes stabilize the phylogenetic backbone of the genus Quercus. Systematics and Biodiversity, 12(4): 405–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/14772000.2014.941037
  44. Ivchenko I.S. 1987. Quercus. In: Opredelitel vysshikh rastenii Ukrainy. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka, pp. 60–61.
  45. Jafarnia S., Akbarinia M., Hosseinpour B., Sanavi S.A.M.M., Salami S.A. 2018. Effect of drought stress on some growth, morphological, physiological, and biochemical parameters of two different populations of Quercus brantii. iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry, 11: 212–220. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor2496-010
  46. Jorge I., Navarro R.M., Lenz C., Ariza D., Jorrín J. 2006. Variation in the holm oak leaf proteome at different plant developmental stages, between provenances and in response to drought stress. Proteomics, 6: 207–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.200500364
  47. Khodwekar S., Gailing O. 2017. Evidence for environment-dependent introgression of adaptive genes between two red oak species with different drought adaptations. American Journal of Botany, 104(7): 1088–1098. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1700060
  48. Kitin P., Funada R. 2016. Earlywood vessels in ring-porous trees become functional for water transport after bud burst and before the maturation of the current-year leaves. IAWA Journal, 37(2): 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1163/22941932-20160136
  49. Koenig W.D., Kelly D., Sork V.L., Duncan R.P., Elkinton J.S., Peltonen M. S., Westfall R.D. 2003. Dissecting components of population-level variation in seed production and the evolution of masting behavior. Oikos, 102: 581–591. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12272.x
  50. Kosakivska I.V., Voytenko L.V., Vasyuk V.A., Shcherbatiuk M.M. 2022a. Effect of priming with gibberellic acid on acorn germination and growth of plants of Quercus robur and Q. rubra (Fagaceae). Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 79(4): 253–266. https://doi.org/10.15407/ukrbotj79.04.254
  51. Kosakivska I.V., Vasyuk V.A., Voytenko L.V., Shcherbatyuk M.M., Babenko L.M., Romanenko K.O. 2022b. Effects of exogenous bacterial quorum-sensing signal molecule/messenger N-hexanoyl-L-homoserine lactone (C-HSL) on acorn germination and plant growth of Quercus robur and Q. rubra (Fagaceae). Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 79(5): 329–338. https://doi.org/10.15407/ukrbotj79.05.329
  52. Kotrade P., Sehr E.M., Wischnitzki E., Brüggemann W. 2019. Comparative transcriptomics-based selection of suitable reference genes for normalization of RT-qPCR experiments in drought-stressed leaves of three European Quercus species. Tree Genetics & Genomes, 15(3): 38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-019-1347-4
  53. Kovalenko I.M. 2018. Lisova ekologia z osnovamy lisovidnolennya ta lisorozvedennya. Sumy: Vydavnytstvo Universytetska knyga, 240 pp.
  54. Kuster T.M., Bleuler P., Arend M., Günthardt-Goerg M.S., Schulin R. 2011. Soil water, temperature regime and growth of young oak stands grown in lysimeters subjected to drought stress and air warming. Bulletin der Bodenkundlichen Gesellschaft der Schweiz, 32: 7–12.
  55. Le Provost G., Lesur I., Lalanne C., Da Silva C., Labadie K., Aury J.M., Leple J.C., Plomion C. 2016. Implication of the suberin pathway in adaptation to waterlogging and hypertrophied lenticels formation in pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.). Tree Physiology, 36: 1330–1342. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpw056
  56. Lebourgeois F., Cousseau G., Ducos Y. 2004. Climate-tree-growth relationships of Quercus petraea Mill. stand in the Forest of Bercé ("Futaie des Clos", Sarthe, France). Annals of Forest Science, Springer Nature, (since 2011)/EDP Science (until 2010), 61: 361–372. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2004029
  57. Lebourgeois F.F., Delpierre N., Dufrêne E., Cecchini S., Macé S., Croisé L., Nicolas M. 2018. Assessing the roles of temperature, carbon inputs and airborne pollen as drivers of fructification in European temperate deciduous forests. European Journal of Forest Research, Springer Verlag, 137: 249–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-018-1108-1
  58. Lind-Riehl J.F., Gailing O. 2017. Adaptive variation and introgression of a CONSTANS-like gene in North American red oaks. Forests, 8(1): 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/f8010003
  59. Leyser O. 2009. The control of shoot branching: an example of plant information processing. Plant, Cell and Environment, 32: 694–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.01930.x
  60. Lonachevskyi O.O., Hryn F.O. 1952. Quercus. In: Flora URSR. Vol. 4. Ed. M.I. Kotov. Kyiv: Vydavnytstvo AN URSR, pp. 123–138.
  61. Long T.J., Jones R.H. 1996. Seedling growth strategies and seed size effects in fourteen oak species native to different soil moisture habitats. Trees, 1(11): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004680050051
  62. López-Hidalgo C., Guerrero-Sánchez V.M., Gómez-Gálvez I., Sánchez-Lucas R., Castillejo-Sánchez M.A., Maldonado-Alconada A.M, Valledor L., Jorrín-Novo J.V. 2018. A Multi-Omics Analysis Pipeline for the Metabolic Pathway Reconstruction in the Orphan Species Quercus ilex. Frontiers in Plant Science, 9: 935. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.00935
  63. Madritsch S., Wischnitzki E., Kotrade P., Ashoub A., Burg A., Fluch S., Brüggemann W., Sehr E.M. 2019. Elucidating drought stress tolerance in European oaks through cross-species transcriptomics. G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics (Bethesda), 9(10): 3181–3199. https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.119.400456
  64. Manos P.S., Doyle J.J., Nixon K.C. 1999. Phylogeny, biogeography, and processes of molecular differentiation in Quercus subgenus Quercus (Fagaceae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 12(3): 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1006/mpev.1999.0614
  65. Mead A., Peñaloza Ramirez J., Bartlett M.K., Wright J.W., Sack L., Sork V.L. 2019. Seedling response to water stress in valley oak (Quercus lobata) is shaped by different gene networks across populations. Molecular Ecology, 28(24): 5248–5264. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.15289
  66. Mérian P., Bontemps J. D., Bergès L., Lebourgeois F. 2011. Spatial variation and temporal instability in climate-growth relationships of sessile oak (Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl.) under temperate conditions. Plant Ecology, 212: 1855–1871. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-011-9959-2
  67. Michelot A., Bréda N., Damesin C., Dufrêne E. 2012. Differing growth responses to climatic variations and soil water deficits of Fagus sylvatica, Quercus petraea and Pinus sylvestris in a temperate forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 265: 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.10.024
  68. Mijnsbrugge K.V., Turcsán A., Maes J., Duchêne N., Meeus S., Steppe K., Steenackers M. 2016. Repeated summer drought and re-watering during the first growing year of oak (Quercus petraea) delay autumn senescence and bud burst in the following spring. Frontiers in Plant Science, 7: 419. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00419
  69. Mrak T., Štraus I., Grebenc T., Gričar J., Hoshika Y., Carriero G., Paoletti E., Kraigher H. 2019. Different belowground responses to elevated ozone and soil water deficit in three European oak species (Quercus ilex, Q. pubescens and Q. robur). The Science of the Total Environment, 651(Pt 1): 1310–1320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.246
  70. Mu Z., Llusià J., Liu D., Ogaya R., Asensio D., Zhang C., Peñuelas J. 2018. Seasonal and diurnal variations of plant isoprenoid emissions from two dominant species in Mediterranean shrubland and forest submitted to experimental drought. Atmospheric Environment, 191: 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.08.010
  71. Müller D., Leyser O. 2011. Auxin, cytokinin and the control of shoot branching. Annals of Botany, 107(7): 1203–1212. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcr069
  72. Musiyenko S.I. 2018. Lisovidnovlennya ta lisorozvedennya. Kharkiv: KhNUMH im. O.M. Beketova, 131 pp.
  73. Nagamitsu T., Shimizu H., Aizawa M., Nakanishi A. 2019. An admixture of Quercus dentata in the coastal ecotype of Q. mongolica var. crispula in northern Hokkaido and genetic and environmental effects on their traits. Journal of Plant Research, 132(2): 211–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10265-018-01079-2
  74. Nicolescu V.N., Vor T., Mason W.L., Bastien J.-C., Brus R., Henin J.-M., Kupka I., Lavnyy V., La Porta N., Mohren F., Petkova K., Rédei K., Štefančik I., Wasik R., Perić S., Hernea C. 2020. Ecology and management of northern red oak (Quercus rubra L. syn. Q. borealis F. Michx.) in Europe: a review. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research, 93(4): 481–494. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpy032
  75. Nixon K.C. 1993. Infrageneric classification of Quercus (Fagaceae) and typification of sectional names. Annals of Forest Science, 50 (Supplement): 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:19930701
  76. Nogués I., Llusià J., Ogaya R., Munné-Bosch S., Sardans J., Peñuelas J., Loreto F. 2014. Physiological and antioxidant responses of Quercus ilex to drought in two different seasons. Plant Biosystems – An International Journal Dealing with all Aspects of Plant Biology, 148(2): 268–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2013.768557
  77. Nussbaumer A., Gessler A., Benham S., de Cinti B., Etzold S., Ingerslev M., Jacob F., Lebourgeois F., Levanic T., Marjanović H., Nicolas M., Ostrogović Sever M.Z., Priwitzer T., Rautio P., Roskams P., Sanders T.G.M., Schmitt M., Šrámek V., Thimonier A., Ukonmaanaho L., Verstraeten A., Vesterdal L., Wagner M., Waldner P. Rigling A. 2021. Contrasting Resource Dynamics in Mast Years for European Beech and Oak – A Continental Scale Analysis. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 4: 689836. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2021.689836
  78. Nussbaumer A., Waldner P., Etzold S., Gessler A., Benham S., Thomsen I.M., Jorgensen B.B., Timmermann V., Verstraeten A., Sioen G., Rautio P., Ukonmaanaho L., Skudnik M., Apuhtin V., Braun S., Wauer A. 2016. Patterns of mast fruiting of common beech, sessile and common oak, Norway spruce and Scots pine in Central and Northern Europe. Forest Ecology and Management, 363: 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.12.033
  79. Ogaya R., Penuels J. 2007. Species-specific drought effects on flower and fruit production in a Mediterranean holm oak forest. Forestry, 80(3): 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpm009
  80. Pang X., Liu H., Wu S., Yuan Y., Li H., Dong J., Liu Z., An C., Su Z., Li B. 2019. Species identification of oaks (Quercus L., Fagaceae) from gene to genome. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 20(23): 5940. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20235940
  81. Peguero-Pina J.J., Mendoza-Herrer O., Gil-Pelegrín E., Sancho-Knapik D. 2018. Cavitation limits the recovery of gas exchange after severe drought stress in Holm Oak (Quercus ilex L.). Forest, 9(8): 443. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9080443
  82. Peguero-Pina J.J., Sancho-Knapik D., Morales F., Flexas J., Gil-Pelegrin E. 2009. Differential photosynthetic performance and photoprotection mechanisms of three Mediterranean evergreen oaks under severe drought stress. Functional Plant Biology: FPB, 36(5): 453–462. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP08297
  83. Peñuelas J., Filella I., Comas P. 2002. Changed plant and animal life cycles from 1952 to 2000 in the Mediterranean region. Global Change Biology, 8: 531–544. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2002.00489.x
  84. Piovesan G., Adams J.M. 2001. Masting behaviour in beech: linking reproduction and climatic variation. Canadian Journal of Botany, 79: 1039–1047. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjb-79-9-1039
  85. Plomion C., Aury J.M., Amselem J., Alaeitabar T., Barbe V., Belser C., Bergès H., Bodénès C., Boudet N., Boury C., Canaguier A., Couloux A., Da Silva C., Duplessis S., Ehrenmann F., Estrada-Mairey B., Fouteau S., Francillonne N., Gaspin C., Guichard C., Klopp C., Labadie K., Lalanne C., Le Clainche I., Leplé J.C., Le Provost G., Leroy T., Lesur I., Martin F., Mercier J., Michotey C., Murat F., Salin F., Steinbach D., Faivre-Rampant P., Wincker P., Salse J., Quesneville H., Kremer A. 2016. Decoding the oak genome: public release of sequence data, assembly, annotation and publication strategies. Molecular Ecology Resource, 16 (1): 254–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12425
  86. Plomion C., Aury J.M., Amselem J., Leroy T., Murat F., Duplessis S., Faye S., Francillonne N., Labadie K., Le Provost G., Lesur I., Bartholomé J., Faivre-Rampant P., Kohler A., Leplé J.C., Chantret N., Chen J., Diévart A., Alaeitabar T., Barbe V., Belser C., Bergès H., Bodénès C., Bogeat-Triboulot M.B., Bouffaud M.L., Brachi B., Chancerel E., Cohen D., Couloux A., Da Silva C., Dossat C., Ehrenmann F., Gaspin C., Grima-Pettenati J., Guichoux E., Hecker A., Herrmann S., Hugueney P., Hummel I., Klopp C., Lalanne C., Lascoux M., Lasserre E., Lemainque A., Desprez-Loustau M.L., Luyten I., Madoui M.A., Mangenot S., Marchal C., Maumus F., Mercier J., Michotey C., Panaud O., Picault N., Rouhier N., Rué O., Rustenholz C., Salin F., Soler M., Tarkka M., Velt A., Zanne A.E., Martin F., Wincker P., Quesneville H., Kremer A., Salse J. 2018. Oak genome reveals facets of long lifespan. Nature Plants, 4(7): 440–452. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-018-0172-3
  87. Plugatar Yu.V., Kovalov M.S., Plugatar S.O. 2013. Dubovi lisy hirskoho Krymu: poshyrennya, typolohichna struktura, produktyvnist. Naukovi pratsi Lisivnychoi akademii nauk Ukrainy, 11: 1–13.
  88. Prewein, C., Endemann, M., Reinöh V., Salaj J., Sunderlikova V., Wilhelm E. 2005. Physiological and morphological characteristics during development of pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.) zygotic embryos. Trees, 20: 53–60 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-005-0012-8
  89. Prewein C., Vagner M., Wilhelm E. 2004. Changes in water status and proline and abscisic acid concentrations in developing somatic embryos of pedunculate oak (Quercus robur) during maturation and germination. Tree Physiology, 24(11): 1251–1257. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/24.11.1251
  90. Reich P., Teskey R., Johnson P., Hinckley T. 1980. Periodic root and shoot growth in oak. Forest Science, 26(4): 590–598.
  91. Rellstab C., Zoller S., Walthert L., Lesur I., Pluess A.R., Graf R., Bodénès C., Sperisen C., Kremer A., Gugerli F. 2016. Signatures of local adaptation in candidate genes of oaks (Quercus spp.) with respect to present and future climatic conditions. Molecular Ecology, 25(23): 5907–5924. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13889
  92. Rodríguez-Calcerrada J., Rodrigues A.M., Perdiguero P., António C., Atkin O.K., Li M., Collada C., Gil L. 2018. A molecular approach to drought-induced reduction in leaf CO2 exchange in drought-resistant Quercus ilex. Physiologia Plantarum, 162(4): 394–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12649
  93. Romero-Rodríguez M.C., Archidona-Yuste A., Abril N., Gil-Serrano A.M., Meijón M., Jorrín-Novo J.V. 2018. Germination and Early Seedling Development in Quercus ilex Recalcitrant and Non-dormant Seeds: Targeted Transcriptional, Hormonal, and Sugar Analysis. Frontiers in Plant Science, 9: 1508. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01508
  94. San-Eufrasio B., Sánchez-Lucas R., López-Hidalgo C., Guerrero-Sanchez V.M., Castillejo M., Maldonado-Alconada A.M., Jorrín-Novo J.V., Rey M.-D. 2020. Responses and differences in tolerance to water shortage under climatic dryness conditions in seedlings from Quercus spp. and Andalusian Q. ilex populations. Forests, 11(6): 707. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11060707
  95. Sánchez-Humanes B., Espelta J.M. 2011. Increased drought reduces acorn production in Quercus ilex coppices: thinning mitigates this effect but only in the short term. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research, 84(1): 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpq045
  96. Sanz-Pérez V., Castro-Díez P., Joffre R. 2009. Seasonal carbon storage and growth in Mediterranean tree seedlings under different water conditions. Tree Physiology, 29: 1105–1116. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpp045
  97. Scharnweber T., Manthey M., Wilmking M. 2013. Differential radial growth patterns between beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and oak (Quercus robur L.) on periodically water logged soils. Tree Physiology, 33: 425–437. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpt020
  98. Sergeant K., Spiess N., Renaut J., Wilhelm E., Hausman J.F. 2011. One dry summer: a leaf proteome study on the response of oak to drought exposure. Journal of Proteomics, 74(8): 1385–1395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2011.03.011
  99. Simova-Stoilova L.P., López-Hidalgo C., Sanchez-Lucas R., Valero-Galvan J., Romero-Rodríguez C., Jorrin-Novo J.V. 2018. Holm oak proteomic response to water limitation at seedling establishment stage reveals specific changes in different plant parts as well as interaction between roots and cotyledons. Plant Science, 276: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2018.07.007
  100. Sork V.L., Squire K., Gugger P.F., Steele S.E., Levy E.D., Eckert A.J. 2016. Landscape genomic analysis of candidate genes for climate adaptation in a California endemic oak, Quercus lobata. American Journal of Botany, 103(1): 33–46. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1500162
  101. Spieß N., Oufir M., Matušíková I., Stierschneider M., Kopecky D., Homolka A., Burg K., Fluch S., Hausman L.-F., Wilhelm E. 2012. Ecophysiological and transcriptomic responses of oak (Quercus robur) to long-term drought exposure and rewatering. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 77: 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2011.11.010
  102. Su Y.-H., Liu Y.-B., Zhang, X.-S. 2011. Auxin–cytokinin interaction regulates meristem development. Molecular Plant, 4(4): 616–625. https://doi.org/10.1093/mp/ssr007
  103. Sunderlikova V., Wilhelm E. 2002. High accumulation of legumin and Lea-like mRNAs during maturation is associated with increased conversion frequency of somatic embryos from pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.). Protoplasma, 220: 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00709-002-0025-8
  104. Suseela V., Tharayil N., Orr G., Hu D. 2020. Chemical plasticity in the fine root construct of Quercus spp. varies with root order and drought. New Phytologist, 228(6): 1835–1851. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16841
  105. Thomas F.M., Gausling T. 2000. Morphological and physiological responses of oak seedlings (Quercus petraea and Q. robur) to moderate drought. Annals of Forest Science, 57: 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2000123
  106. Timbal J., Dreyer E. 1994. Water consumption and drought resistance. In: Timbal J., Kremer A., Le Goff N. and Nepveu G. (eds). Le chêne rouge d’Amérique. INRA editions: 85–90.
  107. Top S.M., Preston C.M., Dukes J.S., Tharayil N. 2017. Climate influences the content and chemical composition of foliar tannins in green and senesced tissues of Quercus rubra. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8: 423. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00423
  108. Truffaut L., Chancerel E., Ducousso A., Dupouey J.L., Badeau V., Ehrenmann F., Kremer A. 2017. Fine-scale species distribution changes in a mixed oak stand over two successive generations. New Phytologist, 215: 126–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14561
  109. Tsakaldimi M., Tsitsoni T., Ganatsas P., Zagas T. 2009. A comparison of root architecture and shoot morphology between naturally regenerated and container-grown seedlings of Quercus ilex. Plant Soil, 324: 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-9974-4
  110. Turcsán A., Steppe K., Sárközi E., Erdélyi É., Missoorten M., Mees G., Mijnsbrugge K.V. 2016. Early summer drought stress during the first growing year stimulates extra shoot growth in oak seedlings (Quercus petraea). Frontiers in Plant Science, 7: 193. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00193
  111. Valero-Galván J., González-Fernández R., Navarro-Cerrillo R., Gil-Pelegrin E., Jorrín-Novo J. 2013. Physiological and proteomic analyses of drought stress response in Holm oak provenances. Journal of Proteome Research, 12(11): 5110–5123. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr400591n5110–5123
  112. Vanstraelen M., Benková E. 2012. Hormonal interactions in the regulation of plant development. Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology, 28: 463–487. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-cellbio-101011-155741
  113. Vivin P., Aussenac G., Levy G. 1993. Differences in drought resistance among 3 deciduous oak species grown in large boxes. Annals of Forest Science, 50(3): 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:19930301
  114. Wang W., Vinocur B., Altman A. 2003. Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta, 218: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-003-1105-5
  115. Yamaguchi M., Sharp R.E. 2010. Complexity and coordination of root growth at low water potentials: recent advances from transcriptomic and proteomic analyses. Plant, Cell & Environment, 33: 590–603. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.02064.x
  116. Yavorska O.G., Mosyakin S.L. 2001. The alien fraction of the urban flora of the Kiev Region. NaUKMA research papers. Biology and Ecology, 19: 55–68.
  117. Zwieniecki M.A., Secchi F. 2015. Threats to xylem hydraulic function of trees under 'new climate normal' conditions. Plant, Cell & Environment, 38(9): 1713–1724. https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12412
Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Website operates on sci-j-mgr