4.5 Article

Microscopic structure of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris (L.)) needles during ageing and autumnal senescence

期刊

TREES-STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION
卷 21, 期 6, 页码 645-659

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00468-007-0157-8

关键词

ageing; senescence; microscopic structure; needle; Pinus sylvestris

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Needle ageing and senescence were studied in Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) trees growing in natural conditions with minimal anthropogenic influence. The four existing needle generations were analyzed by light and transmission electron microscopy before and during autumnal yellowing of the oldest needle generation. The change from green to yellow occurred within less than 4 days in central Finland. The structure of the oldest needles remained largely intact as long as they were green. Increase in mitochondrion size and hypertrophy of the phloem parenchyma were the only changes, probably related to the approaching senescence. In the yellow needles, the structure of the mesophyll tissue varied from nearly intact with reduced chloroplasts and higher numbers of plastoglobuli, to totally disintegrated cells. In the disintegrated cells, peroxisomes were absent, and chloroplasts were smaller with a patchy appearance and degraded, eventually empty-looking stroma. Mitochondria were enlarged, but retained integrity until the last stages of deterioration, and lipids increased. At the light microscopic level, vacuolar volume in mesophyll cells and cavity formation in transfusion tissue increased. Ageing was characterized by increases in the vacuolar volume and cytoplasmic lipids, altered appearance of vacuolar tannin from homogenous 'sandy', to large spherical drops and finally to a large mass in the mesophyll, and by hypertrophy and tannin accumulation in the phloem parenchyma. Changes related to needle ageing, senescence and cell location in the mesophyll tissue were discussed relative to findings with stress by strong light, weather conditions and ozone.

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