Allometry of cells and tissues within leaves

American Journal of Botany

Volumn 100, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 1936-1948

  John, Grace P ^a   Scoffoni, Christine ^a   Sack, Lawren ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Allometry; Bundle sheath; Development; Leaf traits; Mesophyll; Scaling

Indexed keywords

ALLOMETRY; CELL ORGANELLE; DICOTYLEDON; GEOMETRY; LEAF; MICROSCOPY; XYLEM;

ALLOMETRY; ANGIOSPERM; ARTICLE; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; BIODIVERSITY; BUNDLE SHEATH; CELL SIZE; CELL WALL; CHEMISTRY; CYTOLOGY; DEVELOPMENT; ECOSYSTEM; HISTOLOGY; LEAF TRAITS; MESOPHYLL; MESOPHYLL CELL; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT LEAF; SCALING; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; XYLEM;

ALLOMETRY; BUNDLE SHEATH; DEVELOPMENT; LEAF TRAITS; MESOPHYLL; SCALING;

ANGIOSPERMS; BIODIVERSITY; CELL SIZE; CELL WALL; ECOSYSTEM; MESOPHYLL CELLS; MODELS, ANATOMIC; PLANT LEAVES; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; XYLEM;

EID: 84885359493     PISSN: 00029122     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.1200608     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. ALBERSHEIM, P., A. DARVILL, K. ROBERTS, R. SEDEROFF, and A. STAEHELIN. 2011. Plant cell walls. Taylor & Francis, New York, New York, USA.
2. BEAULIEU, J. M., I. J. LEITCH, S. PATEL, A. PENDHARKAR, and C. A. KNIGHT. 2008. Genome size is a strong predictor of cell size and stomatal density in angiosperms. New Phytologist 179: 975-986.
3. BENJAMINI, Y., and Y. HOCHBERG. 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B, Methodological 57: 289-300.
4. BLACKMAN, C. J., T. J. BRODRIBB, and G. J. JORDAN. 2010. Leaf hydraulic vulnerability is related to conduit dimensions and drought resistance across a diverse range of woody angiosperms. New Phytologist 188: 1113-1123.
5. BONNER, J. T. 2006. Why size matters. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
6. BRODRIBB, T. J., and N. M. HOLBROOK. 2003. Stomatal closure during leaf dehydration, correlation with other leaf physiological traits. Plant Physiology 132: 2166-2173.
7. BRODRIBB, T. J., G. J. JORDAN, and R. J. CARPENTER. 2013. Unified changes in cell size permit coordinated leaf evolution. New Phytologist 199: 559-570.
8. BROWN, J. H., and G. B. WEST. 2000. Scaling in biology. Oxford University Press, New York, New York, USA.
9. COCHARD, H., S. T. BARIGAH, M. KLEINHENTZ, and A. ESHEL. 2008. Is xylem cavitation resistance a relevant criterion for screening drought resistance among Prunus species? Journal of Plant Physiology 165: 976-982.
10. DONNELLY, P. M., D. BONETTA, H. TSUKAYA, R. E. DENGLER, and N. G. DENGLER. 1999. Cell cycling and cell enlargement in developing leaves of Arabidopsis. Developmental Biology 215: 407-419.
11. EDWARDS, E. J. 2006. Correlated evolution of stem and leaf hydraulic traits in Pereskia (Cactaceae). New Phytologist 172: 479-489.
12. ESAU, K. 1965. Plant anatomy. John Wiley, New York, New York, USA.
13. GARNIER, E., and G. LAURENT. 1994. Leaf anatomy, specific mass and water content in congeneric annual and perennial grass species. New Phytologist 128: 725-736.
14. GARNIER, E., J. L. SALAGER, G. LAURENT, and L. SONIE. 1999. Relationships between photosynthesis, nitrogen and leaf structure in 14 grass species and their dependence on the basis of expression. New Phytologist 143: 119-129.
15. GOWIK, U., and P. WESTHOFF. 2011. The path from C 3 to C 4 photosynthesis. Plant Physiology 155: 56-63.
16. GRANIER, C., and F. TARDIEU. 1998. Spatial and temporal analyses of expansion and cell cycle in sunfl ower leaves: A common pattern of development for all zones of a leaf and different leaves of a plant. Plant Physiology 116: 991-1001.
17. GRANIER, C., O. TURC, and F. TARDIEU. 2000. Co-ordination of cell division and tissue expansion in sunfl ower, tobacco, and pea leaves: Dependence or independence of both processes? Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 19: 45-54.
18. HABERLANDT, G. 1914. Physiological plant anatomy, 4th ed. MacMillan, London, UK.
19. HACKE, U. G., J. S. SPERRY, W. T. POCKMAN, S. D. DAVIS, and K. A. MCCULLOCH. 2001. Trends in wood density and structure are linked to prevention of xylem implosion by negative pressure. Oecologia 126: 457-461.
20. HARRINGTON, R. 2002. Controlling the false discovery rate in multiple hypothesis testing [online]. Benchmarks Online, vol. 5(4), available at http://www.unt.edu/benchmarks/archives/2002/april02/rss.htm. Research and Statistical Support, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, USA.
21. HUXLEY, J. S. 1932 [reprint 1993]. Problems of relative growth. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
22. KATTGE, J., S. DÍAZ, S. LAVOREL, I. C. PRENTICE, P. LEADLEY, G. BÖNISCH, E. GARNIER, ET AL. 2011. TRY-A global database of plant traits. Global Change Biology 17: 2905-2935.
23. KORNER, C., S. P. MENENDEZRIEDL, and P. C. L. JOHN. 1989. Why are bonsai plants small: A consideration of cell size. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 16: 443-448.
24. LENS, F., J. S. SPERRY, M. A. CHRISTMAN, B. CHOAT, D. RABAEY, and S. JANSEN. 2011. Testing hypotheses that link wood anatomy to cavitation resistance and hydraulic conductivity in the genus Acer. New Phytologist 190: 709-723.
25. nd ed., vol. II, Wood structure and conclusion of the general introduction. Oxford University Press, New York, New York, USA.
26. MEZIANE, D., and B. SHIPLEY. 1999. Interacting determinants of specific leaf area in 22 herbaceous species: Effects of irradiance and nutrient availability. Plant, Cell & Environment 22: 447-459.
27. MOGHADDAM, P. R., and D. WILMAN. 1998. Cell wall thickness and cell dimensions in plant parts of eight forage species. Journal of Agricultural Science 131: 59-67.
28. NARDINI, A., G. PEDA, and N. LA ROCCA. 2012. Trade-offs between leaf hydraulic capacity and drought vulnerability: Morpho-anatomical bases, carbon costs and ecological consequences. New Phytologist 196: 788-798.
29. NIKLAS, K. J. 1992. Plant biomechanics: An engineering approach to plant form and function. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
30. NIKLAS, K. J. 1994. Plant allometry. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
31. NOBEL, P. S. 1976. Photosynthetic rates of sun versus shade leaves of Hyptis emoryi Torr. Plant Physiology 58: 218-223.
32. NOBEL, P. S. 2009. Physicochemical and environmental plant physiology, 5th ed. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA.
33. NOBEL, P. S., L. J. ZARAGOZA, and W. K. SMITH. 1975. Relation between mesophyll surface area, photosynthetic rate, and illumination level during development for leaves of Plectranthus parvifl orus Henckel. Plant Physiology 55: 1067-1070.
34. OGUCHI, R., K. HIKOSAKA, and T. H IROSE. 2005. Leaf anatomy as a constraint for photosynthetic acclimation: Differential responses in leaf anatomy to increasing growth irradiance among three deciduous trees. Plant, Cell & Environment 28: 916-927.
35. PANTIN, F., T. SIMONNEAU, and B. MULLER. 2012. Coming of leaf age: Control of growth by hydraulics and metabolics during leaf ontogeny. New Phytologist 196: 349-366.
36. Pasquet-Kok, J., C. CREESE, and L. SACK. 2010. Turning over a new "leaf": Multiple functional significances of leaves versus phyllodes in Hawaiian Acacia koa. Plant, Cell & Environment 33: 2084-2100.
37. PEARSALL, W. H. 1927. Growth studies. VI. On the relative sizes of growing plant organs. Annals of Botany 41: 549-559.
38. Pérez-Pérez, J. M., S. Rubio-Díaz, S. DHONDT, D. Hernández-Romero, J. Sánchez-Soriano, G. T. S. BEEMSTER, M. ROSA PONCE, et al. 2011. Whole organ, venation and epidermal cell morphological variations are correlated in the leaves of Arabidopsis mutants. Plant, Cell & Environment 34: 2200-2211.
39. PITTERMANN, J., J. S. SPERRY, J. K. WHEELER, U. G. HACKE, and E. H. SIKKEMA. 2006. Mechanical reinforcement of tracheids compromises the hydraulic efficiency of conifer xylem. Plant, Cell & Environment 29: 1618-1628.
40. POORTER, H., U. NIINEMETS, L. POORTER, I. J. WRIGHT, and R. VILLAR. 2009. Causes and consequences of variation in leaf mass per area (LMA): A meta-analysis. New Phytologist 182: 565-588.
41. POORTER, H., K. J. N IKLAS, P. B. REICH, J. O LEKSYN, P. P OOT, and L. MOMMER. 2012. Biomass allocation to leaves, stems and roots: Metaanalyses of interspecific variation and environmental control. New Phytologist 193: 30-50.
42. POORTER, H., and L. SACK. 2012. Pitfalls and possibilities in the analysis of biomass allocation patterns in plants. Frontiers in Plant Science 3: 259.
43. PYANKOV, V. I., and A. V. KONDRACHUK. 2003. Basic types of structural changes in the leaf mesophyll during adaptation of Eastern Pamir plants to mountain conditions. Russian Journal of Plant Physiology: A Comprehensive Russian Journal on Modern Phytophysiology 50: 34-42
44. PYANKOV, V. I., A. V. KONDRATCHUK, and B. SHIPLEY. 1999. Leaf structure and specific leaf mass: the alpine desert plants of the Eastern Pamirs, Tadjikistan. New Phytologist 143: 131-142.
45. R DEVELOPMENT CORE TEAM. 2005. R: A language and environment for statistical computing, version 2.2.0. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, http://www.r-project.org/.
46. RICE, W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43: 223-225.
47. RODERICK, M. L., S. L. BERRY, I. R. NOBLE, and G. D. FARQUHAR. 1999. A theoretical approach to linking the composition and morphology with the function of leaves. Functional Ecology 13: 683-695.
48. SACK, L., P. D. COWAN, N. JAIKUMAR, and N. M. HOLBROOK. 2003a. The 'hydrology' of leaves: Co-ordination of structure and function in temperate woody species. Plant, Cell and Environment 26: 1343-1356.
49. SACK, L., P. J. GRUBB, and T. MARAÑÓN. 2003b. The functional morphology of juvenile plants tolerant of strong summer drought in shaded forest understories in southern Spain. Plant Ecology 168: 139-163.
50. SACK, L., and K. FROLE. 2006. Leaf structural diversity is related to hydraulic capacity in tropical rain forest trees. Ecology 87: 483-491.
51. SACK, L., C. Scoffoni, G. P. JOHN, H. Poorter, C. M. Mason, R. Mendezalonzo, and L. A. DONOVAN. 2013. How do leaf veins infl uence the worldwide leaf economic spectrum? Review and synthesis. Journal of Experimental Botany: in press.
52. SACK, L., C. SCOFFONI, A. D. MCKOWN, K. FROLE, M. RAWLS, J. C. HAVRAN, H. TRAN, ET AL. 2012. Developmentally based scaling of leaf venation architecture explains global ecological patterns. Nature Communications 3: 837.
53. Schmidt-Nielsen, K. 1984. Scaling. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
54. SHIPLEY, B., M. J. LECHOWICZ, I. WRIGHT, and P. B. R EICH. 2006. Fundamental trade-offs generating the worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Ecology 87: 535-541.
55. SOKAL, R. R., and F. J. ROHLF. 1995. Biometry, 3rd ed. Freeman, New York, New York, USA.
56. SPERRY, J. S., U. G. HACKE, and J. K. WHEELER. 2005. Comparative analysis of end wall resistivity in xylem conduits. Plant, Cell & Environment 28: 456-465.
57. TOSENS, T., U. NIINEMETS, M. WESTOBY, and I. J. WRIGHT. 2012. Anatomical basis of variation in mesophyll resistance in eastern Australian sclerophylls: News of a long and winding path. Journal of Experimental Botany 63: 5105-5119.
58. TURRELL, F. M. 1936. The area of the internal exposed surface of dicotyledon leaves. American Journal of Botany 23: 255-264.
59. WARTON, D. I., I. J. WRIGHT, D. S. FALSTER, and M. WESTOBY. 2006. Bivariate line-fitting methods for allometry. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 81: 259-291.
60. ZWIENIECKI, M. A., T. J. BRODRIBB, and N. M. HOLBROOK. 2007. Hydraulic design of leaves: Insights from rehydration kinetics. Plant, Cell & Environment 30: 910-921