Advertisement

Journal of Plant Research

, 122:41 | Cite as

Maintenance mechanisms of the pipe model relationship and Leonardo da Vinci’s rule in the branching architecture of Acer rufinerve trees

  • Kosei Sone
  • Alata Antonio Suzuki
  • Shin-Ichi Miyazawa
  • Ko Noguchi
  • Ichiro TerashimaEmail author
Regular Paper

Abstract

The pipe model relationship (constancy of branch cross-sectional area/leaf area) and Leonardo da Vinci’s rule (equality of total cross-sectional area of the daughter branches and cross-sectional area of their mother branch) are empirical rules of tree branching. Effects of branch manipulation on the pipe model relationships were examined using five Acer rufinerve trees. Half the branches in each tree were untreated (control branches, CBs), and, for the others (manipulated branches, MBs), either light intensity or leaf area (both relating to photosynthetic source activity), or shoot elongation (source + sink activities), was reduced, and responses of the pipe model relationships were followed for 2 years. The pipe model relationship in MBs changed by suppression of source activity, but not by simultaneous suppression of source + sink activities. The manipulations also affected CBs in the year of manipulation and both branches in the next year. The branch diameter growth was most affected by light, followed by shoot elongation and leaf area, in that order. Because of the decussate phyllotaxis of A. rufinerve, one branching node can potentially have one main and two lateral branches. Analysis of 295 branching nodes from 13 untreated trees revealed that the da Vinci’s rule held in branching nodes having one shed branch but not in the nodes without branch shedding, indicating the necessity of natural shedding of branches for da Vinci’s rule to hold. These analyses highlight the importance of the source–sink balance and branch shedding in maintenance of these empirical rules.

Keywords

Branch shedding Diameter growth Interaction Leaf area:branch-area ratio Light intensity Source-sink 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was financially supported by a Sasakawa Scientific Research Grant from the Japan Science Society. We thank Drs. Y. Chiba, T. Hachiya, H. Ishii, T. Kubo, H. Muraoka, E. Nabeshima, K. Niiyama, R. Oguchi, T. Saito, T. Shirota, A. Sumida, A. Takenaka, H. Taneda, and K. Umeki for their constructive comments. We also thank the staff of the Ashu Experimental Forest of Kyoto University for their help and support.

References

  1. Berninger F, Nikinmaa E (1997) Implications of varying pipe model relationships on Scots pine growth in different climates. Funct Ecol 11:146–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berninger F, Mencuccini M, Nikinmaa E, Grace J, Hari P (1995) Evaporative demand determines branchiness of Scots pine. Oecologia 102:164–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buck-Sorlin GH (1998) A quantification of shoot shedding in pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.). Bot J Linn Soc 127:371–391Google Scholar
  4. Goulet J, Messier C, Nikinmaa E (2000) Effect of branch position and light availability on shoot growth of understory sugar maple and yellow birch saplings. Can J Bot 78:1077–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Handa IT, Körner C, Hättenschwiler S (2005) A test of the treeline carbon limitation hypothesis by in situ CO2 enrichment and defoliation. Ecology 86:1288–1300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hasegawa S, Koba K, Tayasu I, Takeda H, Haga H (2003) Carbon autonomy of reproductive shoots of Siberian alder (Alnus hirsuta var. sibirica). J Plant Res 116:183–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Henriksson J (2001) Differential shading of branches or whole trees: survival, growth, and reproduction. Oecologia 126:482–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Horn HS (2000) Twigs, trees, and the dynamics of carbon in the landscape. In: Brown JH, West GB (eds) Scaling in biology. Oxford, New York, pp 99–220Google Scholar
  9. Kikuzawa K (1983) Leaf survival of woody plants in deciduous broad-leaved forests. 1. Tall trees. Can J Bot 61:2133–2139Google Scholar
  10. Kimura K, Ishida A, Uemura A, Matsumoto Y, Terashima I (1998) Effects of current-year and previous-year PPFDs on shoot gross morphology and leaf properties in Fagus japonica. Tree Physiol 18:459–466PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Komiyama A, Matsuhashi T, Kurumado K, Inoue S (1989) Relationships between leaf development and trunk diameter growth in white birch forest (in Japanese). J Jpn For Soc Chubu Branch 37:51–52Google Scholar
  12. Lacointe A, Deleens E, Ameglio T, Saint-Joanis B, Lelarge C, Vandame M, Song GC, Daudet FA (2004) Testing the branch autonomy theory: a 13C/14C double-labelling experiment on differentially shaded branches. Plant Cell Environ 27:1159–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Li MH, Hoch G, Körner C (2002) Source/sink removal affects mobile carbohydrates in Pinus cembra at the Swiss treeline. Trees 16:331–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mäkelä A, Virtanen K, Nikinmaa E (1995) The effects of ring width, stem position, and stand density on the relationship between foliage biomass and sapwood area in Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris). Can J For Res 25:970–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McDowell N, Barnard H, Bond BJ, Hinckley T, Hubbard RM, Ishii H, Köstner B, Magnani F, Marshall JD, Meinzer FC, Phillips N, Ryan MG, Whitehead D (2002) The relationship between tree height and leaf area: sapwood area ratio. Oecologia 132:12–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mencuccini M, Grace J (1995) Climate influences the leaf area/sapwood area ratio in Scots pine. Tree Physiol 15:1–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Miyazaki Y, Hiura T, Kato E, Funada R (2002) Allocation of resources to reproduction in Styrax obassia in a masting year. Ann Bot 89:767–772PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nikinmaa E (1992) Analyses of the growth of Scots pine: matching structure with function. Acta For Fenn 235:1–68Google Scholar
  19. Nikinmaa E, Messier C, Sievänen R, Perttunen J, Lehtonen M (2003) Shoot growth and crown development: effect of crown position in three-dimensional simulations. Tree Physiol 23:129–136PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Palmroth S, Berninger F, Nikinmaa E, Lloyd J, Pulkkinen P, Hari P (1999) Structural adaptation rather than water conservation was observed in Scots pine over a range of wet to dry climates. Oecologia 121:302–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Richter JP (1970) The notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci. Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Ruohomäki K, Haukioja E, Repka S, Lehtila K (1997) Leaf value: effects of damage to individual leaves on growth and reproduction of mountain birch shoots. Ecology 78:2105–2117Google Scholar
  23. Shinozaki K, Yoda K, Hozumi K, Kira T (1964) A quantitative analysis of plant form—the pipe model theory. I. Basic analyses. Jpn J Ecol 14:97–105Google Scholar
  24. Sone K, Noguchi K, Terashima I (2005) Dependency of branch diameter growth in young Acer trees on light availability and shoot elongation. Tree Physiol 25:39–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Sone K, Noguchi K, Terashima I (2006) Mechanical and ecophysiological significance of the form of a young Acer rufinerve tree: vertical gradient in branch mechanical properties. Tree Physiol 26:1549–1558PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Sprugel DG (2002) When branch autonomy fails: Milton’s law of resource availability and allocation. Tree Physiol 22:1119–1124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Sprugel DG, Hinckley TM, Schaap W (1991) The theory and practice of branch autonomy. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 22:309–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stoll P, Schmid B (1998) Plant foraging and dynamic competition between branches of Pinus sylvestris in contrasting light environments. J Ecol 86:934–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Susiluoto S, Perämäki M, Nikinmaa E, Berninger F (2007) Effects of sink removal on transpilation at the treeline: implications for the growth limitation hypothesis. Environ Exp Bot 60:334–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Suzuki A (2002) Influence of shoot architectural position on shoot growth and branching patterns in Cleyera japonica. Tree Physiol 22:885–890PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Suzuki AA (2003) Shoot growth patterns in saplings of Cleyera japonica in relation to light and architectural position. Tree Physiol 23:67–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Takenaka A (2000) Shoot growth responses to light microenvironment and correlative inhibition in tree seedlings under a forest canopy. Tree Physiol 20:987–991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Terashima I, Kimura K, Sone K, Noguchi K, Ishida A, Uemura A, Matsumoto Y (2002) Differential analysis of the effects of the light environment on development of deciduous trees: basic studies for tree growth modeling. In: Nakashizuka T, Matsumoto Y (eds) Diversity and interaction in a temperature forest community: Ogawa Forest Reserve of Japan. Ecological studies vol 158. Springer, Tokyo, pp 187–200Google Scholar
  34. Terashima I, Araya T, Miyazawa S-I, Sone K, Yano S (2005) Construction and maintenance of the optimal photosynthetic systems of the leaf, herbaceous plant and tree: an eco-developmental treatise. Ann Bot 95:507–519PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Uemura A, Ishida A, Nakano T, Terashima I, Tanabe H, Matsumoto Y (2000) Acclimation of leaf characteristics of Fagus species to previous-year and current-year solar irradiances. Tree Physiol 20:945–951PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Umeki K, Seino T (2003) Growth of first-order branches in Betula platyphylla saplings as related to the age, position, size, angle, and light availability of branches. Can J For Res 33:1276–1286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Umeki K, Seino T, Lim EM, Honjo T (2006) Patterns of shoot mortality in Betula platyphylla in northern Japan. Tree Physiol 26:623–632PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. West GB, Brown JH (2005) The origin of allometric scaling laws in biology from genomes to ecosystems: towards a quantitative unifying theory of biological structure and organization. J Exp Biol 208:1575–1592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Botanical Society of Japan and Springer 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kosei Sone
    • 1
  • Alata Antonio Suzuki
    • 2
  • Shin-Ichi Miyazawa
    • 3
  • Ko Noguchi
    • 1
  • Ichiro Terashima
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Biological Sciences, Graduate School of ScienceThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Research Institute for Humanity and Nature (RIHN)KyotoJapan
  3. 3.National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences (NIAS)TsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations