Ontogenetic variation in light interception, self-shading and biomass distribution of seedlings of the conifer Araucaria araucana (Molina) K. Koch

Revista Chilena de Historia Natural

Volumn 79, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 321-328

  Lusk, Christopher H ^a,b   Falster, Daniel S ^b   Pérez Millaqueo, Manuel ^a   Saldaña, Alfredo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONCEPCIÓN   (Chile)

^b MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Allocation; Allometry; FLORADIG; Leaf area ratio; Virtual plants; YPLANT

Indexed keywords

ARAUCARIA ARAUCANA; CONIFEROPHYTA;

EID: 33750053280     PISSN: 0716078X     EISSN: 0716078X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4067/S0716-078X2006000300004     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. AKASAKA M & S TSUYUZAKI (2005) Tree seedling performance in microhabitats along an elevational gradient on Mount Koma, Japan. Journal of Vegetation Science 16: 647-654.
2. ENQUIST BJ, GB WEST, EL CHARNOV & JH BROWN (1999) Allometric scaling of production and life history variation in vascular plants. Nature 401: 907-911.
3. FALSTER DS & M WESTOBY (2003) Leaf size and angle vary widely across species: What consequences for light interception? New Phytologist 158: 509-525.
4. FALSTER DS, DI WARTON & IJ WRIGHT (2003) (S)MATR: Standardised major axis tests and routines. Version 1.0; http://www.bio.mq.edu.au/ecology/SMATR/
5. GÁLVEZ D & RW PEARCY (2003) Petiole twisting in the crowns of Psychotria limonensis: implications for light interception and daily carbon gain. Oecologia 135: 22-29.
6. GROSFELD J, D BARTHELEMY & C BRION (1999) Architectural variations of Araucaria araucana (Molina) K. Koch (Araucariaceae) in its natural habitat. In: Kurmann MH & AR Hemsley (eds) The evolution of plant architecture: 109-122. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, United Kingdom.
7. HUNT R (1982) Plant growth curves. Edward Arnold, London, United Kingdom. 248 pp.
8. GIVNISH TJ (1988). Adaptation to sun and shade: a whole-plant perspective. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 15: 63-92.
9. KING DA (1990) Allometry of saplings and understorey trees of a Panamanian forest. Functional Ecology 4: 27-32.
10. KOHYAMA T (1987) Significance of architecture and allometry in saplings. Functional Ecology 1: 399-404.
11. LUSK CH (2001) Leaf life spans in some conifers of the temperate rain forests of South America. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 74: 711-718.
12. LUSK CH (2004) Leaf area and growth of juvenile temperate evergreens in low light: species of contrasting shade tolerance change rank during ontogeny. Functional Ecology 18: 820-828.
13. LUSK CH, O CONTRERAS & J FIGUEROA (1997) Growth, biomass allocation and plant nitrogen concentration in Chilean temperate rainforest tree seedlings: effects of nutrient availability. Oecologia 109: 49-58.
14. NIINEMETS Ü, A SPARROW & A CESCATTI (2005) Light capture efficiency decrease with increasing tree age and size in the southern hemisphere gymnosperm Agathis australis. Trees 19: 177-190.
15. NIKLAS KJ (1994) Plant allometry: the scaling of form and process. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA. 395 pp.
16. NIKLAS KJ (1995) Size-dependent allometry of tree height, diameter and trunk-taper. Annals of Botany 75: 217-227.
17. NIKLAS KJ & BJ ENQUIST (2001) Invariant scaling relationships for interspecific plant biomass production rates and body size. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 98: 2922-2927.
18. PAZ H (2003) Root/shoot allocation and root architecture in seedlings: variation among forest sites, microhabitats, and ecological groups. Biotropica 35: 318-332.
19. PEARCY RW & W YANG (1996) A three-dimensional crown architecture model for assessment of light capture and carbon gain by understory plants. Oecologia 108: 1-12.
20. PEARCY RW & W YANG (1998) The functional morphology of light capture and carbon gain in the Redwood forest understorey plant Adenocaulon bicolor Hook. Functional Ecology 12:543-552.
21. PEARCY RW, F VALLADARES, SJ WRIGHT & E LASSO (2004) A functional analysis of the crown architecture of tropical forest Psychotria species: do species vary in light capture efficiency and consequently in carbon gain and growth? Oecologia 139: 163-167.
22. POORTER L (1999) Growth rate responses of 15 rainforest tree species to a light gradient: the relative importance of morphological and physiological traits. Functional Ecology 13: 396-410.
23. READ J (1995) The importance of comparative growth rates in determining the canopy composition of Tasmanian rainforest. Australian Journal of Botany 43: 243-271.
24. ROOM PM, JS HANAN & P PRUSINKIEWICZ (1996) Virtual plants: new perspectives for ecologists, pathologists and agricultural scientists. Trends in Plant Science 1: 33-38.
25. SACK L, T MARANON & PJ GRUBB (2002) Global allocation rules for patterns of biomass partitioning. Science 296: 1923.
26. SINOQUET H, S THANISAWANYANGKURA, H MABROUK & P KASEMSAP (1998) Characterization of the light environment in canopies using 3D digitising and image processing. Annals of Botany 82: 203-212.
27. SOKAL RR & FJ ROHLF (1995) Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. Third edition. W.H. Freeman & Co., New York, New York, USA. 887 pp.
28. STENBERG P (1995) Penumbra in within-shoot and between-shoot shading in conifers and its significance for photosynthesis. Ecological Modelling 77: 215-231.
29. TAKENAKA A (1994) Effects of leaf blade narrowness and petiole length on the light capture efficiency of a shoot. Ecological Research 9: 109-114.
30. VALLADARES F & RW PEARCY (1998) The functional ecology of shoot architecture in sun and shade plants of Heteromeles arbutifolia M. Roem, a California chaparral shrub. Oecologia 114: 1-10.
31. VALLADARES F, JB SKILLMAN & RW PEARCY (2002) Convergence in light capture efficiencies among tropical forest shade tolerant plants with contrasting crown architectures: a case of morphological compensation. American Journal of Botany 89: 1275-1284.
32. WALTERS MB, EL KRUGER & PB REICH (1996) Relative growth rate in relation to physiological and morphological traits for northern hardwood tree seedlings: species, light environment and ontogenetic considerations. Oecologia 96: 219-231.
33. WARTON DI & NC WEBER (2002) Common slope tests for bivariate structural relationships. Biometrical Journal 44: 161-174.