4.7 Article

Relative growth rate and biomass allocation in ten woody species with different leaf longevity using phylogenetic independent contrasts (PICs)

Journal

PLANT BIOLOGY
Volume 7, Issue 5, Pages 484-494

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-865905

Keywords

leaf area ratio; net assimilation rate; specific leaf area; deciduous; evergreen

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, we compare the relative growth rate (RGR) and biomass allocation of 10 woody species (5 deciduous and 5 evergreen) from the Mediterranean region using phylogenetic independent contrasts (PICs) to test if these two functional groups differ in these traits. In general, the results were similar when using PICs or without taking into account phylogenetic relations. Deciduous species had a higher RGIR than evergreen species, due to the higher net assimilation rate (NAR). Deciduous species had a higher specific leaf area (SLA) but a lower leaf mass ratio (LMR), resulting in a similar LAR for deciduous and evergreen species (LAR = SLA x LMR). In some cases, the use of PICs revealed patterns that would not have appeared if phylogeny had been overlooked. For example, there was no significant correlation between RGR and final dry mass (after 4 months of growth) but PICs revealed that there was a positive relation between these two variables in all deciduous-evergreen pairs. In general, RGR decreased with time and this temporal variation was due primarily to NAR variations (r = 0.79, p < 0.01), and also to variations in LAR (r = 0.69, p < 0.05). Considering the phylogeny, the only variable constantly different for all deciduous-evergreen pairs was SLA. This result, and the fact that SLA was the best correlated variable with RGR (r = 0.81, p < 0.01), reinforce the value of SLA as a variable closely associated to growth and to the functional groups (deciduous vs. evergreen).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available