The effects of seasonality and leaf dehydration on foliar water uptake rehydration kinetics in the mangrove Sonneratia alba, Daintree River, QLD, DP150104437 and DP180102969.

Abridged data specific methods (See publication for unabridged experimental methods: "Foliar water uptake via cork warts in mangroves of the Sonneratia genus" Plant, Cell and Environment, 2021.) Plant material was sourced between November 2017 and October 2019 from naturally occurring trees on Daintree River, Daintree National Park, Far North Queensland, Australia. Sonneratia alba material was collected closer to the estuary mouth (16deg 17'24.8"S 145deg 24'36.8"E). One branch was collected from each of 3-5 co-occurring trees of each species and transported to the lab in black plastic bags with moistened paper towel to prevent water loss.

Pathway kinetics and effect of season and dehydration.
Rehydration kinetics associated with FWU pathways were assessed in S. alba only due to the short, flattened petioles of S. caseolaris making it difficult to measure water potential in intact leaves. The effect of seasonality on leaf conductance to surface water was assessed in S. alba in wet season (Dec 2017) and again in dry season (August 2018). Branches from wet season (n = 3) and dry season (n = 4) were transported back to the lab in black plastic and allowed to air dry for 4-5 h, to achieve similar starting water potentials, -2.91 +/- 0. 16 MPa and -3.19 +/- 0.08 MPa, for the wet and dry season respectively (mean +/- SD, F = 0.069, P = 0.002, Two-tailed t-test). After dehydration branches were allowed to equilibrate in black plastic bags for 40 min. At 20:00 h, nine pairs of mature healthy leaves, each sharing a single node were selected from each branch. The Ψleaf of one leaf from each leaf pair was measured using a Scholander pressure chamber (1050D, PMS Instrument Albany, USA) as a proxy for its partner and the fresh weight of the opposite leaf was measured. Weighed leaves' petioles were wrapped in Nesco-film to preclude water entry, and were then hung with delicate clothes pegs on a dowel rod spanning a clear, 50 l polypropylene chamber. Leaves were subjected to a wetting treatment using a spraying bottle until all leaf surfaces and chamber walls were wet. Additionally, the chamber was filled with 5 cm of water with several wads of sponge placed semi-emerged in the water to increase evaporative surface area and maintain humidity. Rehydration kinetics were of leaves were assessed at eight intervals (t = 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 h). Following wetting exposure, leaves were removed from the chamber, excess surface water was removed by blotting with a paper towel, then leaves were measured for change in fresh mass and change in Ψ. Leaf area was then measured using a flatbed scanner (LiDE scan 110, Canon, Sydney, Australia) and ImageJ (Schneider, Rasband & Eliceiri 2012). To maintain leaf surface wetting of leaves remaining in the chamber, leaf surfaces were re-misted seven times over a 12 h period, i.e. every time the chamber was opened for resampling. Foliar water uptake (FWU; mol H2O/ m^2) was calculated as: ((FWU= ((fm_f- fm_i ))/(LA * M ) ) where fmi and fmf are the initial and final leaf fresh mass respectively, LA is the two-sided leaf area and M is the molar mass of water (Limm, Simonin, Bothman & Dawson 2009). Leaf conductance to surface water (Ksurf; ∆ umol H2O /m^2/ s/ MPa) was calculated as: (K_surf=(C_leaf ln(Ψ_i/Ψ_f ))/t ) where Ψi and Ψf are the initial and final leaf water potentials respectively, Cleaf is FWU divided by the absolute change in Ψ (Ψf - Ψi) measured on individual leaves, and t is the duration leaf wetting (Brodribb & Holbrook 2003; Binks et al. 2019; Guzman‐Delgado et al. 2021).

The effect of leaf dehydration on leaf conductance to surface water was assessed in S. alba in leaves sampled in April 2019. Branches from five trees (n = 5) were subjected to three statistically distinct dehydration treatments differing in initial Ψleaf. -1.82 +/- 0.20, -2.26 +/- 0.09, -3.81 +/- 1.49 (mean +/- SD, F8 = 533.41, P < 0.001, One-way repeated measures ANOVA). Water relations between early and late dry season have been characterized by for S. alba at this study site previously (Bryant 2019). The dehydration levels selected in the present study span the expected points of bulk leaf turgor loss, measured as -2.9 +/- 0.1 MPa and -3.4 +/- 0.1 MPa during early and late dry season, respectively, as well as water potentials associated with 50% stomatal closure, -3.10 +/- 0.15 MPa, and approaching 88% stomatal closure, ~ -4.10 MPa (Bryant 2019). After dehydration, branches were allowed to equilibrate in black plastic bags for 40 min. Foliar water uptake rehydration kinetics were measured using the same protocol as seasonality FWU kinetics, however with only four leaf pairs from each branch arrayed over an 8 h period (t = 2, 4, 6, 8 h).

经过精简的特定实验方法（完整实验方法详见发表论文：《Foliar water uptake via cork warts in mangroves of the Sonneratia genus》，*Plant, Cell and Environment*，2021）。
植物材料采集于2017年11月至2019年10月，采自澳大利亚昆士兰州远北地区丹翠国家公园丹翠河沿岸的天然红树林植株。海莲（*Sonneratia alba*）的采集样本更靠近河口（16°17'24.8"S 145°24'36.8"E）。每个物种选取3-5株伴生植株，每株采集1根枝条，装入带有湿润纸巾的黑色塑料袋中以防止水分流失，随后转运至实验室。

水分吸收途径动力学及季节与脱水的影响
由于红茄苳（*S. caseolaris*）的叶柄短而扁平，难以测定完整叶片的水势，因此仅针对海莲开展叶部水分吸收（foliar water uptake, FWU）途径的复水动力学评估。针对叶片表面水分导度的季节效应，于湿季（2017年12月）和干季（2018年8月）分别对海莲开展评估。湿季（n=3）与干季（n=4）采集的枝条均以黑色塑料袋封装运回实验室，随后风干4~5小时以达到相近的初始水势：湿季为-2.91±0.16 MPa，干季为-3.19±0.08 MPa（平均值±标准差；F=0.069，P=0.002，双侧t检验）。脱水完成后，将枝条置于黑色塑料袋中平衡40分钟。当日20:00时，从每根枝条上选取9对成熟健康叶片，每对叶片共享同一个节位。选取每对叶片中的一片，使用斯科兰德压力室（1050D型，美国PMS仪器公司，奥尔巴尼）测定其叶水势（Ψ_leaf），以该值作为另一片对应叶片的参考，并测定另一片叶片的鲜重。将已称重叶片的叶柄用Nesco-film包裹以阻止水分进入，随后用细衣物夹将叶片固定在横跨50L透明聚丙烯密闭舱的圆杆上。使用喷壶对叶片进行加湿处理，直至所有叶片表面及舱壁均被打湿。此外，向舱内注入5cm深的清水，并放置数团半浸于水中的海绵以增加蒸发表面积并维持舱内湿度。在8个时间节点（t=1、2、3、4、6、8、10、12 h）对叶片的复水动力学进行测定。加湿处理结束后，将叶片从舱中取出，用纸巾吸去表面残留水分，随后测定其鲜重变化与水势变化。随后使用平板扫描仪（LiDE scan 110型，佳能公司，澳大利亚悉尼）与ImageJ软件（Schneider、Rasband与Eliceiri，2012）测定叶片面积。为维持舱内留存叶片的表面湿度，在12小时实验期间共进行7次补喷加湿，即每次打开舱进行取样时均对叶片表面进行加湿。叶部水分吸收（FWU；单位：mol H₂O/m²）的计算公式为：FWU = (fm_f - fm_i)/(LA × M)，其中fm_i与fm_f分别为叶片初始与最终鲜重，LA为叶片双面总面积，M为水的摩尔质量（Limm、Simonin、Bothman与Dawson，2009）。叶片表面水分导度（K_surf；单位：μmol H₂O/m²/s/MPa）的计算公式为：K_surf = (C_leaf × ln(Ψ_i/Ψ_f))/t，其中Ψ_i与Ψ_f分别为叶片初始与最终水势，C_leaf为单叶FWU与水势绝对变化量（Ψ_f - Ψ_i）的比值，t为叶片加湿持续时长（Brodribb与Holbrook，2003；Binks等，2019；Guzman‐Delgado等，2021）。

针对叶片脱水对其表面水分导度的影响，本研究于2019年4月采集海莲叶片开展相关评估。从5株海莲上采集枝条（n=5），设置3组具有统计学差异的脱水处理，其初始叶水势分别为-1.82±0.20 MPa、-2.26±0.09 MPa与-3.81±1.49 MPa（平均值±标准差；F₈=533.41，P<0.001，单因素重复测量方差分析）。本研究站点的海莲植株在旱季早期与晚期的水分关系特征此前已有报道（Bryant，2019）。本研究选取的脱水梯度覆盖了海莲植株在旱季早期与晚期的整体叶片膨压丧失点（分别为-2.9±0.1 MPa与-3.4±0.1 MPa），同时也包含了对应50%气孔关闭的水势（-3.10±0.15 MPa）以及接近88%气孔关闭的水势（约-4.10 MPa）（Bryant，2019）。脱水完成后，将枝条置于黑色塑料袋中平衡40分钟。叶部水分吸收复水动力学的测定流程与季节效应FWU动力学实验一致，但仅从每根枝条上选取4对叶片，在8小时内进行取样测定（t=2、4、6、8 h）。