4.7 Article

Shoot growth and crown development:: effect of crown position in three-dimensional simulations

期刊

TREE PHYSIOLOGY
卷 23, 期 2, 页码 129-136

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/23.2.129

关键词

modeling; modularity; Pinus sylvestris; tree architecture; vigor index

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trees have been increasingly considered as modular organisms, with individual shoots forming autonomous units that respond semi-independently to their surrounding environment. However, there is evidence for fairly strict hormonal control of tree crown development. Studies on the hydraulic architecture of trees suggest a closer functional connection between shoots and crown development than is postulated by the theory of branch autonomy. We studied how shoot growth pattern influences growth and crown architecture in young Scots pine trees simulated by the LIGNUM model assuming that (a) the growth of a shoot mainly depends on its light climate and (b) the growth of a shoot is influenced by its position within the crown. We determined shoot position within the crown based on a recently developed vigor index. The vigor index compares the relative axis cross-sectional area from the base of the tree to each shoot and gives a value of I to the pathway of the greatest cross-sectional area. All other shoots attain values between 0 and 1 depending on their cross-sectional areas and the cross-sectional areas of the branches leading there from the main axis. The shoot light climate is characterized by annually intercepted photosynthetically active radiation. We compared the results from simulations (a) and (b) against an independent data set. The addition of a within-shoot position index (the vigor index) to our simulation (simulation b) resulted in a more realistic tree form than that obtained with simulation (a) alone. We discuss the functional significance of the results as well as the possibilities of using an index of shoot position in simulations of crown architecture.

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