Skip to main content
Log in

Limited sex differentiation in poplars: similar physiological responses to low temperature of males and females of three cottonwood taxa

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Trees Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Key Message

Foliar physiological traits were similar in males versus females of three Populus taxa grown at warm to cool temperatures, opposing the hypothesis that males would be more tolerant of environmental stress.

Abstract

Dioecy is common in riparian (streamside) trees and shrubs, and other studies indicated that in some poplars (Populus) and willows (Salix), males are more tolerant than females of environmental limitation, including drought, salinity or high temperature (T). We investigated another environmental influence and hypothesized that males might better tolerate low T, consistent with their earlier development during cool spring weather. Branch cuttings from distinct trees of each sex from each of three taxa, narrowleaf, lanceleaf and plains cottonwoods (P. angustifolia, P. × acuminata and P. deltoides), were grown as replicated saplings in four growth chambers with (daytime) temperatures of 24, 20, 18 or 15 °C. With decreasing T, stomatal density and stomatal conductance (gs) decreased, chlorophyll content was consistent; and N concentration, photosynthesis (Asat, by area), and water use efficiency (Asat/gs) increased. None of the foliar characteristics varied significantly between the sexes, and there was no sex × T interaction for any physiological trait, opposing our hypothesis. For growth, P. deltoides and P. × acuminata males had larger leaf and root mass than females, especially at 20 °C, but an opposing pattern was observed for P. angustifolia, as females had larger leaf mass than males. We thus observe similar foliar physiological characteristics between males and females, conclude that low T adaptation has minimal contribution to sex differentiation in cottonwoods, and recommend further investigation for sex differentiation across taxa, particularly including analyses of root structure and function.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Supplemental Table 1 provides the additional physiology and growth results, beyond the figures provided.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank David Pearce for assistance with instrumentation; Samuel Woodman, Evan Hillman and Soba Kaluthota for assistance with data collection (all University of Lethbridge); and Editor Robert Guy and an anonymous reviewer for very helpful recommendations.

Funding

Funding was provided to SBR by Alberta Innovates, Alberta Environment and Parks, and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stewart B. Rood.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no financial or non-financial conflict of interest.

Additional information

Communicated by R. Guy .

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 25 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zanewich, K.P., Rood, S.B. Limited sex differentiation in poplars: similar physiological responses to low temperature of males and females of three cottonwood taxa. Trees 37, 1217–1223 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-023-02421-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-023-02421-5

Keywords

Navigation