Correction to “A new empirical framework to quantify the hydraulic effects of soil and atmospheric drivers on plant water status”

Mencuccini, M., Anderegg, W. R. L., Binks, O., Knipfer, T., Konings, A. G., Novick, K., Poyatos, R., & Martínez-Vilalta, J. (2024). A new empirical framework to quantify the hydraulic effects of soil and atmospheric drivers on plant water status. Global Change Biology, 30(3), e17222. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.17222

Figure 1 of the paper reports a theoretical analysis intended to facilitate the interpretation of the stringency metric presented in the paper, as then exemplified in Figure 2. The numerical scale on the X axis of Figure 1 should be identical to the numerical scale on the Y axis, as expected from the plot of a 1:1 line along the diagonal. Unfortunately, the numerical scale of the X axis was mistakenly multiplied by a factor of 2. This multiplier has no effect on the rest of the paper.

Figure 1 Conceptual diagram of the relationships between leaf water potential Ψ_leaf, measured at either predawn (pd) or midday (md) and the combined hydraulic effects caused by Ψ_soil plus VPD (Ψ_hf). For both panels, blue line, springtime day, close-to-zero Ψ_pd; red line, summertime day, negative Ψ_pd. At springtime, the effect of Ψ_soil (assumed equal to Ψ_pd) equals $$$ \overline{{\mathrm{A}}^{\prime }{\mathrm{O}}^{\prime }} $$$ and the effect of VPD equals $$$ \overline{{\mathrm{C}}^{\prime }{\mathrm{A}}^{\prime }} $$$. At summertime, the effect of Ψ_soil equals $$$ \overline{{\mathrm{B}}^{\prime }{\mathrm{O}}^{\prime }} $$$, and the effect of VPD equals $$$ \overline{{\mathrm{E}}^{\prime }{\mathrm{B}}^{\prime }} $$$, respectively. In both days, the observed Ψ_md is less negative than the total hydraulic effect predicted based by Ψ_hf (compare D with C and F with E). The vertical segments $$$ \overline{\mathrm{DC}} $$$ with $$$ \overline{\mathrm{FE}} $$$ give the regulation S_i against VPD, while -ΔΨ = Ψ_md-Ψ_pd is the regulation against VPD that the plant did not do. Left-hand panel, a perfectly isohydric plant (at the seasonal time scale) in which Ψ_md remains constant through the season despite changes in the two drivers (compare Ψ_leaf at D with F); right-hand panel, a perfectly anisohydric plant in which stringency of regulation remains constant despite changes in the two drivers (compare $$$ \overline{\mathrm{DC}} $$$ with $$$ \overline{\mathrm{FE}} $$$). Note that the hydraulic effect caused by VPD for the two plants depends on plant-specific values of $$$ \hat{\frac{g_{\mathrm{tot}}}{k_{\mathrm{L}}}} $$$ and therefore likely to change between the two idealized cases, but this is not represented in the figure. Beside the two cases presented here, other scenarios are possible, depending on the balance between regulation against VPD and Ψ_pd.

We apologize for this error.