4.3 Article

The effects of clonal integration on morphological plasticity and placement of daughter ramets in black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia)

Journal

FLORA
Volume 201, Issue 7, Pages 547-554

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.flora.2005.12.002

Keywords

clonal integration; morphological plasticity; Robinia pseudoacacia; soil resources; selective placement

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We studied the field response of Robinia pseudoacacia L. to light, total soil nitrogen, available soil phosphorus and soil pH. Results indicated that there was very strong clonal integration between mother and daughter ramets. Mother ramets can provide nitrogen and phosphorus to daughter ramets sufficient for their continued growth through strong clonal integration, but cannot provide enough photosynthate. With clonal integration, soil nitrogen and phosphorus availability had no effect on biomass allocation to roots, number of ramets and length of connection roots. Biomass allocation to roots increased markedly and responded to nitrogen and phosphorus availability, when the connections were severed. Light had a significant effect on the percent of biomass allocation to leaves and number of ramets, but no effect on the length of connection roots. Daughter ramets allocated more resources to leaves, and clones placed more daughter ramets in high light patches than in low light patches. Soil pH had a significant effect on ramet number and connection root length. Clones concentrated in alkaline patches and escaped from acid patches through selective placement of daughter ramets and changing the length of connection roots. We suggest that the clonal integration may be very strong and provide sufficient soil resources to daughter ramets, then affect the daughter ramets' morphology and placement, if the size of a specific ramet is significantly larger than the other ramets in an arbor clone. (c) 2006 Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available