The leaf size/number trade-off in trees

Journal of Ecology

Volumn 95, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 376-382

  Kleiman, David ^a   Aarssen, Lonnie W ^a  

^a QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Allometry; Bud bank; Isometry; Leafing intensity; Meristem allocation; Plasticity; Strategy

Indexed keywords

ALLOMETRY; ANGIOSPERM; BIOMASS ALLOCATION; BUD; DECIDUOUS FOREST; FITNESS; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; INTRASPECIFIC VARIATION; LEAF MORPHOLOGY; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; REPRODUCTIVE COST; SELECTION; SHOOT GROWTH; VEGETATIVE REPRODUCTION;

NORTH AMERICA;

MAGNOLIOPHYTA;

EID: 33846951533     PISSN: 00220477     EISSN: 13652745     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2006.01205.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Aarssen, L.W. (2005) Why don't bigger plants have proportionately bigger seeds? Oikos, 111, 199-207.
2. Aarssen, L.W. & Jordan, C.Y. (2001) Between-species patterns of covariation in plant size, seed size and fecundity in monocarpic herbs. Ecoscience, 8, 471-477.
3. Aarssen, L.W., Schamp, B. & Pither, J. (2006) Why are there so many small plants? Implications for species coexistence. Journal of Ecology, 94, 569-580.
4. Ackerly, D.D. & Donoghue, M.J. (1998) Leaf size, sapling allometry, and Corner's rules: phylogeny and correlated evolution in maples (Acer). American Naturalist, 152, 459-470.
5. Ackerly, D.D., Knight, C.A., Weiss, S.B., Barton, K. & Starmer, K.P. (2002) Leaf size, specific leaf area and microhabitat distribution of chaparral woody plants: contrasting patterns in species level and community level analyses. Oecologia, 130, 449-457.
6. Ackerly, D.D. & Reich, P.B. (1999) Convergence and correlation among leaf size and function in seed plants: a comparative test using independent contrasts. American Journal of Botany, 86, 1272-1281.
7. Bond, W.J. & Midgley, J. (1988) Allometry and sexual differences in leaf size. American Naturalist, 131, 901-910.
8. Bonser, S.P. & Aarssen, L.W. (1994) Plastic allometry in young sugar maple: adaptive responses to light availability. American Journal of Botany, 81, 400-406.
9. Bonser, S.P. & Aarssen, L.W. (1996) Meristem allocation: a new classification theory for adaptive strategies in herbaceous plants. Oikos, 77, 347-352.
10. Bragg, J.G. & Westoby, M. (2002) Leaf size and foraging for light in a sclerophyll woodland. Functional Ecology, 16, 633-639.
11. Brouat, C., Giberneau, M., Amsellem, L. & McKey, D. (1998) Corner's rules revisited: ontogenetic and interspecifc patterns in leaf-stem allometry. New Phytologist, 139, 459-470.
12. Brown, V.K. & Lawton, J.H. (1991) Herbivory and the evolution of leaf size and shape. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (B), 333, 265-272.
13. Cornelissen, J.H.C. (1999) A triangular relationship between leaf size and seed size among woody species: allometry, ontogeny, ecology and taxonomy. Oecologia, 118, 248-255.
14. Corner, E.J.H. (1949) The durian theory or the origin of the modern tree. Annals of Botany, 13, 367-414.
15. Dudley, S.A. (1996) Differing selection on plant physiological traits in response to environmental water availability: a test of adaptive hypotheses. Evolution, 50, 92-102.
16. Falster, D.S. & Westoby, M. (2003) Leaf size and angle very widely across species: what consequences for light interception? New Phytologist, 158, 509-525.
17. Farrar, J.L. (1995) Trees in Canada. Fitzhenry and Whiteside Ltd and the Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada, in cooperation with Public Works and Government Services Canada, Markham and Ottawa.
18. Gates, D.M. (1980) Biophysical Ecology. Springer-Verlag, New York.
19. Givnish, T.J. (1978) Ecological aspects of plant morphology: leaf form in relation to environment. Theoretical Plant Morphology (ed. R. Sattler), pp. 83-142. Leiden University Press, Leiden.
20. Givnish, T.J. (1979) On the adaptive significance of leaf form. Topics in Plant Population Biology (eds O.T. Solbrig, S. Jain, G.B. Johnson & P.H. Raven), pp. 375-407. Columbia University Press, New York.
21. Givnish, T.J. & Vermeij, G.J. (1976) Sizes and shapes of liane leaves. American Naturalist, 110, 743-778.
22. Gleason, H.A. & Cronquist, A. (1991) Manual of the Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx.
23. Halle, F., Oldeman, R.A.A. & Tomlinson, P.B. (1978) Tropical Trees and Forests. An Architectural Analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York.
24. Henery, M.L. & Westoby, M. (2001) Seed mass and seed nutrient content as predictors of seed output variation between species. Oikos, 92, 479-490.
25. Holmgren, N.H. (1998) Illustrated Companion to Gleason and Conquist's Manual: Illustrations of the Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx.
26. Horn, H.S. (1971) The Adaptive Geometry of Trees. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
27. Jakobsson, A. & Eriksson, O. (2000) A comparative study of seed number, seed size, seedling size, and recruitment in grassland plants. Oikos, 88, 494-502.
28. King, D.A. (1998) Influence of leaf size on tree architechture: first branch height and crown dimensions in tropical rain forest trees. Trees, 12, 438-445.
29. Kuppers, M. (1989) Ecological significance of above-ground architectural patterns in woody plants: a question of costbenefit relationships. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 4, 375-379.
30. MacDonald, P.G., Fonseca, C.R., McCoverton, J. & Westoby, M. (2003) Leaf-size divergence along rainfall and soil-nutrient gradients: is the method of size reduction common among clades? Functional Ecology, 17, 50-57.
31. Moles, A.T., Falster, D.S., Leishman, M.R. & Westoby, M. (2004) Small-seeded species produce more seeds per square meter of canopy per year, but not per individual per lifetime. Journal of Ecology, 92, 384-396.
32. Moles, A.T. & Westoby, M. (2000) Do small leaves expand faster than large leaves, and do shorter expansion times reduce herbivore damage? Oikos, 90, 71-524.
33. Niinemets, U., Portsmuth, A. & Tobias, M. (2006) Leaf size modifies support biomass distribution among stems, petioles and mid-ribs in temperate plants. New Phytologist, 171, 91-104.
34. Parkhurst, D.F. & Loucks, O.L. (1972) Optimal leaf size in relation to environment. Journal of Ecology, 60, 505-537.
35. Pickup, M., Westoby, M. & Basten, A. (2005) Dry mass cost of deploying leaf area in relation to leaf size. Functional Ecology, 19, 88-97.
36. Shipley, B. (1995) Structured interspecific determinants of specific leaf area in 34 species of herbaceous angiosperms. Functional Ecology, 9, 312-319.
37. Shipley, B. & Dion, J. (1992) The allometry of seed production in herbaceous angiosperms. American Naturalist, 139, 467-483.
38. Sun, S., Jin, D. & Shi, P. (2006) The leaf size-twig size spectrum of temperate woody species along an altitudinal gradient: an invariant allometric scaling relationhip. Annals of Botany, 97, 97-107.
39. Vesk, P.A. & Westoby, M. (2004) Funding the bud bank: a review of the costs of buds. Oikos, 106, 200-208.
40. Westoby, M., Falster, D.S., Moles, A.T., Vesk, P.A. & Wright, I.J. (2002) Plant ecological strategies: some leading dimensions of variation between species. Annual Review of Ecological Systematics, 33, 125-159.
41. Westoby, M. & Wright, I.J. (2003) The leaf size - twig size spectrum and its relationship to other important spectra of variation among species. Oecologia, 135, 621-628.
42. White, P.S. (1983a) Corner's rules in eastern deciduous trees: allometry and its implications for the adaptive architecture of trees. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, 110, 203-212.
43. White, P.S. (1983b) Evidence that temperate east North American evergreen woody plants follow Corner's rules. New Phytologist, 95, 139-145.
44. Wright, I.J., Reich, P.B., Cornelissen, J.H.C., Falster, D.S., Garnier, E., Hikosaka, K. et al. (2005) Assessing the generality of global leaf trait relationships. New Phytologist, 166, 485-496.
45. Zar, J.H. (1999) Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.