4.5 Article

Comparison of light harvesting and resource allocation strategies between two rhizomatous herbaceous species inhabiting deciduous forests

期刊

JOURNAL OF PLANT RESEARCH
卷 122, 期 2, 页码 171-181

出版社

SPRINGER TOKYO
DOI: 10.1007/s10265-008-0212-6

关键词

Gap formation; Light availability; Photosynthetic acclimation; Resource allocation; Temporal variation; Understory herb

资金

  1. JSPS Research Fellowships of the Japan Society
  2. Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science for Scientific Research [16370007, 1840501007]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16370007] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Light conditions on the floor of deciduous forests are determined by the leaf dynamics of canopy trees and gap formation. Such spatiotemporal variations of light availability should affect the resource partitioning strategies of understory herbs. Although rhizomatous species are common in understory, relationships between rhizome structure, vegetative growth, and sexual reproduction are unclear in terms of carbon allocation. We compared the photosynthetic characteristics and carbon translocation patterns in the under-canopy and light-gap sites between two summer-green perennial species: Cardamine leucantha with an annual long rhizome, and Smilacina japonica with a perennial short rhizome system. Flowering of both species occurs in early summer under decreasing light availability. In the light-gap, C. leucantha maintained high photosynthetic activity due to continuous leaf production, resulting in higher seed production than in the under-canopy. In contrast, the photosynthetic rate of S. japonica, producing leaves simultaneously, decreased with time irrespective of light conditions, resulting in stable seed production in both sites. Although seasonally decreasing light availability commonly restricts carbon assimilation of understory herbs, the responses of resource partitioning to variations in light availability depend greatly on the belowground structure of individual species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据