sap flow

photosynthesis

water relations

net assimilation

water potential

stomatal conductance

leaf water

New Phytologist

Contents Summary 693 I. Introduction 693 II. Comparison of various definitions and measurement techniques of minimum conductance 694 III. Cuticular conductance 695 IV. Contribution of stomata 696 V. Environmental and ecological variation in minimum conductance 696 VI. Use of minimum conductance in models 698 VII. Conclusions 703 Acknowledgements 703 References 703 Summary When the rate of photosynthesis is greatly diminished, such as during severe drought, extreme temperature or low light, it seems advantageous for plants to close stomata and completely halt water loss. However, water loss continues through the cuticle and incompletely closed stomata, together constituting the leaf minimum conductance ( g min ). In this review, we critically evaluate the sources of variation in g min , quantitatively compare various methods for its estimation, and illustrate the role of g min in models of leaf gas exchange. A literature compilation of g min as measured by the weight loss of detached leaves is presented, which shows much variation in this trait, which is not clearly related to species groups, climate of origin or leaf type. Much evidence points to the idea that g min is highly responsive to the growing conditions of the plant, including soil water availability, temperature and air humidity – as we further demonstrate with two case studies. We pay special attention to the role of the minimum conductance in the Ball–Berry model of stomatal conductance, and caution against the usual regression‐based method for its estimation. The synthesis presented here provides guidelines for the use of g min in ecosystem models, and points to clear research gaps for this drought tolerance trait.

On the minimum leaf conductance: its role in models of plant water use, and ecological and environmental controls