Literature DB >> 16159941

Specific leaf area and dry matter content estimate thickness in laminar leaves.

Denis Vile1, Eric Garnier, Bill Shipley, Gérard Laurent, Marie-Laure Navas, Catherine Roumet, Sandra Lavorel, Sandra Díaz, John G Hodgson, Francisco Lloret, Guy F Midgley, Hendrik Poorter, Mike C Rutherford, Peter J Wilson, Ian J Wright.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Leaf thickness plays an important role in leaf and plant functioning, and relates to a species' strategy of resource acquisition and use. As such, it has been widely used for screening purposes in crop science and community ecology. However, since its measurement is not straightforward, a number of estimates have been proposed. Here, the validity of the (SLA x LDMC)(-1) product is tested to estimate leaf thickness, where SLA is the specific leaf area (leaf area/dry mass) and LDMC is the leaf dry matter content (leaf dry mass/fresh mass). SLA and LDMC are two leaf traits that are both more easily measurable and often reported in the literature.
METHODS: The relationship between leaf thickness (LT) and (SLA x LDMC)(-1) was tested in two analyses of covariance using 11 datasets (three original and eight published) for a total number of 1039 data points, corresponding to a wide range of growth forms growing in contrasted environments in four continents. KEY RESULTS AND
CONCLUSIONS: The overall slope and intercept of the relationship were not significantly different from one and zero, respectively, and the residual standard error was 0.11. Only two of the eight datasets displayed a significant difference in the intercepts, and the only significant difference among the most represented growth forms was for trees. LT can therefore be estimated by (SLA x LDMC)(-1), allowing leaf thickness to be derived from easily and widely measured leaf traits.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16159941      PMCID: PMC4247101          DOI: 10.1093/aob/mci264

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Bot        ISSN: 0305-7364            Impact factor:   4.357


  3 in total

1.  Internal leaf anatomy and photosynthetic resource-use efficiency: interspecific and intraspecific comparisons.

Authors:  S Mediavilla; A Escudero; H Heilmeier
Journal:  Tree Physiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 4.196

2.  On the conservative nature of the leaf mass-area relationship.

Authors:  Michael L Roderick; Michelle J Cochrane
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.357

3.  Variability in Leaf Morphology and Chemical Composition as a Function of Canopy Light Environment in Coexisting Deciduous Trees.

Authors: 
Journal:  Int J Plant Sci       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 1.785

  3 in total
  52 in total

1.  Is leaf dry matter content a better predictor of soil fertility than specific leaf area?

Authors:  J G Hodgson; G Montserrat-Martí; M Charles; G Jones; P Wilson; B Shipley; M Sharafi; B E L Cerabolini; J H C Cornelissen; S R Band; A Bogard; P Castro-Díez; J Guerrero-Campo; C Palmer; M C Pérez-Rontomé; G Carter; A Hynd; A Romo-Díez; L de Torres Espuny; F Royo Pla
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 4.357

2.  Exposure of pollinators to plant protection products.

Authors:  Stefania Barmaz; Claudia Vaj; Alessio Ippolito; Marco Vighi
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 2.823

3.  Individual species affect plant traits structure in their surroundings: evidence of functional mechanisms of assembly.

Authors:  Julia Chacón-Labella; Marcelino de la Cruz; David S Pescador; Adrián Escudero
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Two measurement methods of leaf dry matter content produce similar results in a broad range of species.

Authors:  María Victoria Vaieretti; Sandra Díaz; Denis Vile; Eric Garnier
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2007-03-12       Impact factor: 4.357

5.  Do we underestimate the importance of leaf size in plant economics? Disproportional scaling of support costs within the spectrum of leaf physiognomy.

Authors:  Ulo Niinemets; Angelika Portsmuth; David Tena; Mari Tobias; Silvia Matesanz; Fernando Valladares
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2007-06-22       Impact factor: 4.357

6.  Ecophysiological response of Crambe maritima to airborne and soil-borne salinity.

Authors:  Arjen C de Vos; Rob Broekman; Maartje P Groot; Jelte Rozema
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 4.357

7.  Mistletoes and their eucalypt hosts differ in the response of leaf functional traits to climatic moisture supply.

Authors:  Jeannine H Richards; Jonathan J Henn; Quinn M Sorenson; Mark A Adams; Duncan D Smith; Katherine A McCulloh; Thomas J Givnish
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Non-destructive measurement of soybean leaf thickness via X-ray computed tomography allows the study of diel leaf growth rhythms in the third dimension.

Authors:  Johannes Pfeifer; Michael Mielewczik; Michael Friedli; Norbert Kirchgessner; Achim Walter
Journal:  J Plant Res       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 2.629

9.  Differences in functional traits between invasive and native Amaranthus species under different forms of N deposition.

Authors:  Congyan Wang; Jiawei Zhou; Jun Liu; Kun Jiang
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2017-06-30

10.  Quantitative genetic analysis indicates natural selection on leaf phenotypes across wild tomato species (Solanum sect. Lycopersicon; Solanaceae).

Authors:  Christopher D Muir; James B Pease; Leonie C Moyle
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 4.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.