Journal of Forestry Research

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 301–307 | Cite as

Leaf macro- and micro-morphological altitudinal variability of Carpinus betulus in the Hyrcanian forest (Iran)

  • Iman Chapolagh Paridari
  • Seyed Gholamali JalaliEmail author
  • Ali Sonboli
  • Mehrdad Zarafshar
  • Piero Bruschi
Original Paper


We investigated the altitudinal variation of Carpinus betulus L. in the Hyrcanian forest using leaf macro-morphological and micro-morphological traits. We collected a total of 1600 leaves from two locations. In each location, we sampled six populations along an altitudinal gradient ranging from 100 m to 1,150 m. We found that trees in the higher elevations have smaller leaf lamina than those in the lower elevations. In contrast, leaf mass per area was high at low altitudes and increased newly at the higher ones. Stomatal dimension was negatively correlated with elevation, while stomatal density was positively correlated with elevation. We also found that two transects showed the same plasticity trend. Leaf area showed the highest plasticity, while the number of veins showed the lowest plasticity. This study shows that altitude, and related temperature and rainfall, represents an important driving force in Carpinus betulus leaf morphological variation. Moreover, our results suggest that leaf area, leaf mass per area and stomatal density could influence the species responses to different ecological conditions.


adaptation elevational transect leaf mountain forest stomata 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aitkin SN, Yeaman S, Holliday JA, Wang TL, Curtis-McLane S. 2008. Adaptation, migration or extirpation: climate change outcomes for tree populations. Evolutionary Applications, 1: 95–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akbarian MR, Tabari M, Akbarinia M, Zarafshar M, Meave JA, Yousefzadeh H, Satarian A. 2011. Effected of elevation gradiant on leaf and stomata morphology of Caucasian alder (Alnus subcordata) in Hyrcanian forests (Iran). Journal of Folia Oecologica, 38: 1–7.Google Scholar
  3. Ashton PMS, Olander LP, Berlyn GP, Thadani R, Cameron IR. 1998. Changes in leaf structure in relation to crown position and tree size of Betula papyrifera within fire origin stands of interior cedar-hemlock. Canadian Journal of Botany, 76: 1180–1187.Google Scholar
  4. Austrheim G. 2002. Plant diversity patterns in semi-natural grasslands along an elevational gradient in southern Norway. Plant Ecology, 161: 193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beerling DJ, Heath J, Woodward FI, Mansfield TA. 1996. Interactions in trees: observations and mechanisms. New Phytologist, 134: 235–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bresson, CC, Vitasse Y, Kremer A, Delzon S. 2011. To what extent is altitudinal variation of functional traits driven by genetic adaptation in European oak and beech. Tree Physiology, 31: 1164–1174.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruschi P. 2003. Within- and among-tree variation in leaf morphology of Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl. natural populations. Trees, 17: 164–172.Google Scholar
  8. Bruschi P. 2010. Geographical variation in morphology of Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl. as related to drought stress. Plant Biosystems, 2: 298–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dichinson TA. 1987. Another approach to leaf shape comparisons. Taxon, 36: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ehleringer JR, Cerling TE. 1995. Atmospheric CO2 and the ratio of intercellular to ambient CO2 levels in plants. Tree Physiology, 15: 105–111.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Geeske J. 1994. Leaf morphology along environmental gradients in Hawaiian Metrosideros polymorpha. Biotropica, 26: 17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Holland N, Richardson AD. 2009. Stomatal length correlates with elevation of growth in four temperate species. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 28: 63–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hovenden MJ, Vander Schoor JK. 2003. Nature versus nurture in the leaf morphology of Southern Beech, Nothofagus cunninghamii (Nothofagaceae). New Phytologis, 131: 585–594.Google Scholar
  14. Hultine KR, Marshall JD. 2000. Altitude trends in conifer leaf morphology and stable carbon isotope composition. Oecologia, 123: 32–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kao W, Chang K. 2001. Altitudinal trends in photosynthetic rate and leaf characteristics of Miscanthus populations from central Taiwan. Australian Journal of Botany, 49: 509–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Körner C. 1999. Alpine plant life: functional plant ecology of high mountain ecosystems. Springer. Berlin Heidelberg, New York. p. 344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Körner C. 2007. The use of altitude in ecological research. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 22: 567–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Körner C, Cochrane PM. 1986. Stomatal responses and water relations of Eucalyptus pauciflora in summer along an elevational gradient. Oecologia, 66: 443–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Körner C, Bannister P, Mark AF. 1986. Altitudinal variation in stomatal conductance, nitrogen content and leaf anatomy in different plant life forms in New Zealand. Oecologia, 69: 577–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Körner C, Neumayer M, Menendez-Riedl S, Smeets-Scheel A. 1989. Functional morphology of mountain plants. Flora, 182: 353–383.Google Scholar
  21. Kouwenberg LLR, Kürschner WM, McElwain JC. 2007. Stomatal frequency change over altitudinal gradients: prospects for paleoaltimetry. Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 66: 215–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Li S, Assmann SM, Albert R. 2006. Predicting essential components of signal transduction networks a dynamic model of guard cell abscisic acid signaling. PLOS Biology, 4:e312. Doi: 10.1371/journal. pbio.0040312.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lomolino MV. 2001. Elevation gradients of species diversity: historical and prospective views. — Glob. Ecology and Biogeography, 10: 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Markesteijn L, Poorter L, Bongers F. 2007. Light-dependent leaf trait variation in 43 tropical dry tree species. American Journal of Botany, 94: 515–525.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marshall JD, Monserud RA. 1996. Homeostatic gas-exchange parameters inferred from 13C/12C in tree rings of conifers. Oecologia, 105: 13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McElwain JC. 2004. Climate-independent paleoaltimetry using stomatal density in fossil leaves as proxy for CO2 partial pressure. Geology, 32: 1017–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ogaya R, Peñuelas J. 2007. “Leaf mass per area ratio in Quercus ilex leaves under a wide range of climatic conditions. The importance of low temperatures”. J Acta Oecologica, 31: 168–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Panek JA, Waring RH. 1995. Carbon isotope variation in Douglas-fir foliage: improving the δ13C-climate relationship. Tree Physiology, 15: 657.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Premoli AC, Rafafele E, Mathiasen P. 2007. Morphological and phenological differences in Nothofagus pumilio from contrasting elevations: Evidence from a common garden. Austral Ecology, 32: 515–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Roderick ML, Berry SL, Noble IR. 2000. A framework for understanding the relationship between environment and vegetation based on the surface area to volume ratio of leaves. Functional Ecology. 14: 423–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sabety H. 2001. Forestry, tree and shrubs of iran. Yazad university. p. 791.Google Scholar
  32. Sack L, Crowan PD, Holbrook NM. 2003. The major veins of mesomorphic leaves revisited: tests for conductive overload in Acer saccharum (Aceraceae) and Quercus rubra (Fagaceae). American Journal of Botany, 90: 32–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sagheb-Talebi KH, Schuetz JPH, Aas G. 2003. Influence of some site conditions on qualitative characteristics of beech saplings. Iranian Journal of Natural Resources, 55: 505–520.Google Scholar
  34. Schoettle AW, Rochelle SG. 2000. Morphological variation of Pinus flexilis (Pinaceae), a bird-dispersed pine, across a range of elevations. American Journal of Botany, 87: 1797–1806.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sletvold N, Agren J. 2012. Variation in tolerance to drought among Scandinavian populations of Arabidopsis lyrata. evolutionary ecology, 26: 559–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Valladares F, Balaguer I, Martiunez-Ferri E, Perez-Corona E, Manrique E. 2002. Plasticity, instability and canalization: Is the phenotypic variation in seedlings of sclerophyll oaks consistents with the environmental unprudectability. New Phytologist, 156: 457–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang GH, Zhou GS, Yang LM, Li ZQ. 2003. Distribution, species diversity and life-form spectra of plant communities along an altitudinal gradient in the northern slopes of Qilianshan Mountains, Gansu China. Plant Ecology. 165: 169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Woodward FI. 1986. Ecophysiological studies on the shrub Vaccinium myrtillus L. taken from a wide altitudinal range. Oecologia, 70: 580–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yousefzadeh H, Tabari M, Akbarinia M, Akbarian MR, Bussotti F. 2010. “Morphological plasticity of Parrotia persica leaves in eastern Hyrcanian forests (Iran) is related to altitude. Nordic Journal of Botany, 28: 344–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zarafshar M, Akbarinia M, Bruschi P, Hosseiny SM, Yousefzadeh H, Taieby M, Sattarian A. 2010. Phenotypic variation in chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.) natural populations in Hyrcanian forest (north of Iran), revealed by leaf morphometrics. Folia Oecologica, 37: 113–121.Google Scholar
  41. Zhang JW, Marshall JD. 1995. Variation in carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthetic gas exchange among populations of Pseudotsuga menziesii and Pinus ponderosa in different environments. Functional Ecology, 9: 402–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhu YH, Kang HZ, Xie Q, Wang Z, Yin S, Liu CJ. 2011. Pattern of leaf vein density and climate relationship of Quercus variabilis populations remains unchanged with environmental changes. Trees, 26(2): 597–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Northeast Forestry University and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Iman Chapolagh Paridari
    • 1
  • Seyed Gholamali Jalali
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ali Sonboli
    • 2
  • Mehrdad Zarafshar
    • 1
  • Piero Bruschi
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Forestry, Natural Resources FacultyTarbiat Modares UniversityNoor, Mazandaran provinceIran
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Medicinal Plants and Drugs Research InstituteShahid Beheshti UniversityTehranI.R. Iran
  3. 3.Department of Agriculture Biotechnology — Section of Environmental and Applied BotanyUniversity of FlorenceFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations