Search

A new proliferation of optical instruments that can be attached to towers over or within ecosystems, or 'proximal' remote sensing, enables a comprehensive characterization of terrestrial ecosystem structure, function, and fluxes of energy, water, and carbon. Proximal remote sensing can bridge the gap between individual plants, site-level eddy-covariance fluxes, and airborne and spaceborne remote sensing by providing continuous data at a high-spatiotemporal resolution. Here, we review recent advances in proximal remote sensing for improving our mechanistic understanding of plant and ecosystem processes, model development, and validation of current and upcoming satellite missions. We provide current best practices for data availability and metadata for proximal remote sensing: spectral reflectance, solar-induced fluorescence, thermal infrared radiation, microwave backscatter, and LiDAR. Our paper outlines the steps necessary for making these data streams more widespread, accessible, interoperable, and information-rich, enabling us to address key ecological questions unanswerable from space-based observations alone and, ultimately, to demonstrate the feasibility of these technologies to address critical questions in local and global ecology.

Plants differ widely in how soil drying affects stomatal conductance (gs) and leaf water potential (ψleaf), and in the underlying physiological controls. Efforts to breed crops for drought resilience would benefit from a better understanding of these mechanisms and their diversity. We grew 12 diverse genotypes of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and four of tepary bean (P. acutifolius; a highly drought resilient species) in the field under irrigation and post‐flowering drought, and quantified responses of gs and ψleaf, and their controls (soil water potential [ψsoil], evaporative demand [Δw] and plant hydraulic conductance [K]). We hypothesised that (i) common beans would be more "isohydric" (i.e., exhibit strong stomatal closure in drought, minimising ψleaf decline) than tepary beans, and that genotypes with larger ψleaf decline (more "anisohydric") would exhibit (ii) smaller increases in Δw, due to less suppression of evaporative cooling by stomatal closure and hence less canopy warming, but (iii) larger K declines due to ψleaf decline. Contrary to our hypotheses, we found that half of the common bean genotypes were similarly anisohydric to most tepary beans; canopy temperature was cooler in isohydric genotypes leading to smaller increases in Δw in drought; and that stomatal closure and K decline were similar in isohydric and anisohydric genotypes. gs and ψleaf were virtually insensitive to drought in one tepary genotype (G40068). Our results highlight the potential importance of non‐stomatal mechanisms for leaf cooling, and the variability in drought resilience traits among closely related crop legumes. Summary statement: We grew 16 genotypes of common and tepary bean in the field and found that, although genotypes fell neatly into archetypally "isohydric" or "anisohydric" syndromes, those patterns masked a surprising and counterintuitive combination of underlying physiological causes. Our novel analysis highlight the importance of non‐stomatal mechanisms for leaf cooling, and the variability in drought resilience traits among closely related crop legumes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]