4.7 Article

Testing the equi-resistance principle of the xylem transport system in a small ash tree: empirical support from anatomical analyses

期刊

TREE PHYSIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 2, 页码 171-177

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/tpr137

关键词

conduit multiplication; conduit tapering; equi-resistance; furcation; hydraulic architecture; xylem anatomy

类别

资金

  1. University of Padova [CPDR081920]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In plants, water flows from roots to leaves through a complex network of xylem conduits. The xylem architecture is characterized by the conduit enlargement towards the stem base and the multiplication of conduits near the apices of lateral branches. The xylem architecture of a small ash tree was analysed by measuring the vessel hydraulic diameter (Dh) and number (N) at different heights along the stem and branches. Along the stem, Dh and N increased from the apex to the point of crown insertion. Below, Dh and N decreased and remained constant, respectively. In branches, the Dh and N of apices increased with distance from the ground (PL) (P < 0.001 and P < 0.0001, respectively), indicating that apical resistance (R-APEX) becomes lower in the most peripheral branches (P < 0.0001). At the level of branch nodes along the stem, the total conductive area (AC) of the stem and branches just above the node was 11% higher than that of the stem just below the node (P = 0.024), whereas the conductivity (Kh) remained invariant above and below (P = 0.76). The difference in AC (delta AC) between the branches and stem above each node increased with the distance of the node position from the stem apex (L). The xylem architecture of the analysed tree was characterized by anatomical modifications likely aimed at equilibrating the different path length effects on the hydraulic resistance of the different branches. Conduit tapering and multiplication seem to play a crucial role for the achievement of equal hydraulic resistance of all the leaves in the crown.

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

4.7
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