Palaeo-adaptive properties of the xylem of Metasequoia: Mechanical/hydraulic compromises

Annals of Botany

Volumn 92, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 79-88

  Jagels, Richard ^a   Visscher, George E ^a   Lucas, John ^a   Goodell, Barry ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Decay resistance; Eocene; Metasequoia; Microfibril angle; Palaeoecology; Plastic deformation; Xylem conduction; Xylem strength

Indexed keywords

XYLEM;

CONIFEROPHYTA; METASEQUOIA; METASEQUOIA GLYPTOSTROBOIDES;

ADAPTATION; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; ELASTICITY; EVOLUTION; HISTOLOGY; MICROBIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT LEAF; PLANT STEM; TREE; WOOD;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; BIOMECHANICS; ELASTICITY; EVOLUTION; PLANT LEAVES; PLANT STEMS; TREES; WOOD;

EID: 0042234008     PISSN: 03057364     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcg117     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Anon. 2001. Test method D2017-81 (1994). Standard test method for accelerated laboratory test of natural decay resistance of woods. West Conhohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials.
2. Anon. 1999. Wood handbook - wood as an engineering material. Madison, WI: Forest Products Society.
3. Archer RA. 1987. Growth stresses and strains in trees. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
4. Astley RJ, Harrington JJ, Tang S, Neuman J. 1998. Modeling the influence of microfibril angle on stiffness and shrinkage on radiata pine. In: Butterfield BG, ed. Microfibril angle in wood. Christchurch: University of Canterbury.
5. Becker P, Tyree MT, Tsuda M. 1999. Hydraulic conductances of angiosperms versus conifers: similar transport sufficiency at the whole-plant level. Tree Physiology 19: 445-452.
6. Blanchette RA, Cease KR, Abad AR, Burnes TA, Obst JR. 1983. Ultrastructural characterization of wood from Tertiary fossil forests in the Canadian Arctic. Canadian Journal of Botany 69: 560-568.
7. Berlyn GP, Miksche JP. 1976. Botanical microtechnique and cytochemistry. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
8. Booker RE, Harrington J, Shiokura T. 1998. Variation of Young's modulus with microfibril angle, density and spiral grain. In: Butterfield BG, ed. Microfibril angle in wood. Christchurch: University of Canterbury.
9. Boyd JD. 1972. Tree growth stresses. V. Evidence of an origin in differentiation and lignification. Wood Science and Technology 6: 251-262.
10. Boyd JD. 1974. Relating lignification to microfibril angle differences between tangential and radial wall faces of all wall layers in wood cells. Drevarsky Vyskum 19: 41-54.
11. Boyd JD. 1980. Relationships between fibre morphology, growth strains and wood properties. Australian Forest Research 10: 337-360.
12. Boyd JD. 1985. Biophysical control of microfibril orientation in plant cell walls. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff/Dr W. Junk.
13. Brazier JD. 1963. The timber of young plantation-grown Metsequoia. Quarterly Journal of Forestry 57(2): 151-153.
14. Bultman JD, Beal RH, Huffman JB, Parrish KK. 1983. An investigation of the natural decay resistance of Melaleuca quinquenervia to tropical and terrestrial wood-destroying organisms. Forest Products Journal 33(3): 39-43.
15. Cave ID. 1972. A theory of the shrinkage of wood. Wood Science and Technology 6: 284-292.
16. Chu K, Cooper WS. 1950. An ecological reconnaissance in the native home of Metasequoia glyptostroboides. Ecology 31: 260-278.
17. Cowdrey DR, Preston RD. 1966. Elasticity and microfibril angle in the wood of sitka spruce. Proceedings of the Royal Society London, Series B. 166: 245-272.
18. Dinwoodie JM. 1965. The relationship between fiber morphology and paper properties, a review of literature. Technical Asssociation of the Pulp and Paper Industry 48(8): 440-447.
19. Domec JC, Gartner BL. 2002. Age- and position-related changes in hydraulic versus mechanical dysfunction of xylem: inferring the design criteria for Douglas-fir wood structure. Tree Physiology 22: 91-104.
20. Elias TS. 1987. Trees of North America. New York, NY: Gramercy Publishing Co.
21. Florin R. 1952. On Metasequoia, living fossil. Botaniska Notiser 105: 1-29.
22. Francis JE. 1991. The dynamics of polar fossil forests of Axel Heiberg island, Canadian Arctic Archipelago. Geological Survey of Canada Bulletin 403: 29-38.
23. Givnish TJ. 1995. Plant stems: biomechanical adaptation for energy capture and influence on species distributions. In: Gartner BL, ed. Plant stems: physiology and functional morphology. New York, NY: Academic Press.
24. Greenwood DR, Bassinger JF. 1994. The paleoecology of high-latitude Eocene swamp forests of Axel Heiberg island, Canadian Arctic Archipelago. Review of Paleobotany and Palynology 81: 83-97.
25. Hacke UG, Sperry JS, Pockman WT, Davis SD, McCulloh KA. 2001. Trends in wood density and structure are linked to prevention of xylem implosion by negative pressure. Oecologia 126: 457-461.
26. Haygreen JG, Bowyer JL. 1989. Forest products and wood science, 2nd edn. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
27. Hejnowicz A. 1973. Anatomical studies on the development of Metasequoia glyptostroboides Hu et Cheng wood. Acta Societatis Botanicorum Poloniae 62(3): 437-490.
28. Henry A, McIntyre M. 1926. The swamp cypresses, Glyptostrobus of China and Taxodium of America, with notes on allied genera. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 37(13): 90-124.
29. Hiller CH, Brown RS. 1967. Comparison of dimensions and fibril angles of loblolly pine tracheids formed in wet or dry growing seasons. American Journal of Botany 54: 453-460.
30. 2 microfibril angles and density on MOE in Sugi trees. In: Butterfield BG, ed. Microfibril angle in wood. Christchurch: University of Canterbury.
31. Jagels R. 1983. How reliable are wood durability ratings? WoodenBoat 54: 120-122.
32. Jagels R, Day ME. 2003. The adaptive physiology of Metasequoia to Eocene high-latitude environments. In: Hemsley AR, Poole, I, eds. Evolution of plant physiology. Vol. 2. Evolutionary physiology from whole plant to ecosystem. London: Academic Press (in press).
33. Jagels R, LePage BA, Jiang M. 2001. Definitive identification of Larix (Pinaceae) wood based on anatomy for the middle Eocene, Axel Heiberg Island, Canadian High Arctic. IAWA Journal 22: 73-83.
34. Jaroslavcev GD, Visnjakov TN. 1965. Wood of Metasequoia (in Russian). Bjulleten Glavnogo Botanicheskogo Sada 59: 97-99.
35. Kaya F, Smith I. 1993. Variation in crushing strength and some related properties of red pine. Wood Science and Technology 27: 229-239.
36. Koch EB. 1963. Fossil plants from the early Paleocene of the Agatdalen (Angmârtussut) area, central Nagssuag penninsula, northwest Greenland. Unders Grönlands Geology 172: 1-20.
37. Kuser JE. 1999. Metasequoia glyptostroboides: fifty years of growth in North America. Arnoldia 59: 76-79.
38. Li H. 1957. The discovery and cultivation of Metasequoia. Morris Arboretum Bulletin 8(4): 49-53.
39. Li JY. 1948. Anatomical study of the wood of 'Shuisha' (Metasequoia glyptostroboides Hu et Cheng). Tropical Woods 94: 28-29.
40. Liang H, Chow KY, Au CN. 1948. Properties of a living fossil wood. National Central University Forestry Institute (Nanking) Research Notes 1: 1-6.
41. Linnard W. 1966. A note on the wood of Metasequoia. Wood 31: 46.
42. McAlister RH, Powers HR, Pepper WD. 2000. Mechanical properties of stemwood and limbwood of seed orchard loblolly pine. Forest Products Journal 50(9): 91-94.
43. McCulloh KA, Sperry JS, Adler FR. 2003. Water transport in plants obeys Murray's law. Nature 421: 939-942.
44. McMahon TA. 1973. On size and shape in biology. Science 179: 1201-1204.
45. Megraw RA, Leaf G, Bremer D. 1998. Longitudinal shrinkage and microfibril angle in Loblolly pine. In: Butterfield BG, ed. Microfibril angle in wood. Christchurch: University of Canterbury.
46. Meylan BA. 1972. The influence of microfibril angle on the longitudinal shrinkage-moisture content relationship. Wood Science and Technology 6: 293-301.
47. Meylan BA, Probine MC. 1969. Microfibril angle as a parameter in timber quality assessment. Forest Products Journal 19(4): 30-34.
48. Momohara A. 1994. Paleoecology and paleobiogeography of Metasequoia. Fossils 57: 24-30.
49. 2 microfibril angle of latewood among plus-tree clones and test stands in Cryptomeria japonica D. Don. In: Butterfield BG, ed. Microfibril angle in wood. Christchurch: University of Canterbury.
50. Niklas KJ. 1992. Plant biomechanics, an engineering approach to plant form and function. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
51. Ornduff R. 1998. The Sequoia sempervirens (Coast Redwood) forest of the pacific coast, USA. In: Laderman AD, ed. Coastally restricted forests. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
52. Pallardy SG, Cermak J, Ewers FW, Kaufman MR, Parker WC, Sperry JS. 1995. Water transport dynamics in trees and stands. In: Smith WK, Hinkley TM, eds. Resource physiology of conifers; aquisition, allocation and utilization. New York, NY: Academic Press.
53. Panshin AJ, deZeeuw C. 1980. Textbook of wood technology, 4th edn. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
54. Polman JE, Michon SGL, Militz H, Helmink ATF. 1999. The wood of Metasequoia glyplostroboides (Hu et Cheng) of Dutch origin. Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 57: 215-221.
55. Rashevsky N. 1973. The principle of adequate design. In Rosen R, ed. Foundations of mathematical biology. New York, NY: Academic Press.
56. Romberger JA, Hejnowicz Z, Hill JF. 1993. Plant structure: function and development. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
57. Saka S, Thomas RJ. 1982. A study of lignification of loblolly pine tracheids by SEM-EDXA technique. Wood Science and Technology 16: 167-179.
58. Saranpää P, Serimaa R, Anderson S, Pesonen E, Suni T, Paakkari T. 1998. Variation in microfibril angle in Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) - comparing X-ray diffraction and optical methods. In: Butterfield BG, ed. Microfibril angle in wood. Christchurch: University of Canterbury.
59. Shinozaki K, Yoda K, Hozumi K, Kira TA. 1964. A quantitative analysis of plant form - the pipe model theory. I. Basic analysis. Japanese Journal of Ecology 14: 97-105.
60. Surminski J, Bojarczuk T. 1973. Drewno metasekwol chinskiej (Metasequoia glyptostroboides Hu et Cheng) polskiego pochodzenia. Rocznik Dendrologiczny 27: 159-168.
61. Tabarsa T, Chui YH. 2000. Stress-strain response of wood under radial compression. Part I. Test method and influences of cellular properties. Wood and Fiber Science 32(2): 144-152.
62. Tyree MT, Zimmermann MH. 2002. Xylem structure and the ascent of sap, 2nd edn. Berlin: Springer.
63. Tyree MT, Davis SD, Cochard H. 1994. Biophysical perspectives of xylem evolution: is there a tradeoff of hydraulic efficiency for vulnerability to dysfunction? IAWA Journal 14(4): 335-360.
64. Wardrop AB, Preston RD. 1950. The fine structure of the wall of the conifer tracheid. V. The organization of the secondary wall in relation to the growth rate of the cambium. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 6: 36-47.
65. Wellwood RW. 1962. Tensile strength of small wood samples. Pulp and Paper Magazine of Canada 63(2): T61-T67.
66. Wu S, Chern J-H. 1995. Group analysis as applied to wood anatomy of Taxodeaceae members. University of Taiwan Agriculture College Research Reports 35(3): 360-374.