Seasonal patterns of CO2 and water vapor exchange of three salt marsh succulents

Oecologia ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann E. Antlfinger ◽  
E. L. Dunn
Estuaries ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne P. Thompson ◽  
Hans W. Paerl ◽  
Malia C. Go

Wetlands ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kayleigh E. Granville ◽  
Sean Khan Ooi ◽  
Lauren E. Koenig ◽  
Beth A. Lawrence ◽  
Chris S. Elphick ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 106 (D11) ◽  
pp. 12183-12191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui He ◽  
Xuhui Lee ◽  
Ronald B. Smith

Wetlands ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharyn E. Boyer ◽  
Peggy Fong ◽  
Richard R. Vance ◽  
Richard F. Ambrose

Author(s):  
R. C. Moretz ◽  
G. G. Hausner ◽  
D. F. Parsons

Electron microscopy and diffraction of biological materials in the hydrated state requires the construction of a chamber in which the water vapor pressure can be maintained at saturation for a given specimen temperature, while minimally affecting the normal vacuum of the remainder of the microscope column. Initial studies with chambers closed by thin membrane windows showed that at the film thicknesses required for electron diffraction at 100 KV the window failure rate was too high to give a reliable system. A single stage, differentially pumped specimen hydration chamber was constructed, consisting of two apertures (70-100μ), which eliminated the necessity of thin membrane windows. This system was used to obtain electron diffraction and electron microscopy of water droplets and thin water films. However, a period of dehydration occurred during initial pumping of the microscope column. Although rehydration occurred within five minutes, biological materials were irreversibly damaged. Another limitation of this system was that the specimen grid was clamped between the apertures, thus limiting the yield of view to the aperture opening.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document