Veerle De Schepper1, Kathy Steppe. 1. Laboratory of Plant Ecology, Department of Applied Ecology and Environmental Biology, Ghent University, Coupure links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. Veerle.DeSchepper@UGent.be
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Girdling, or the removal of a strip of bark around a tree's outer circumference, is often used to study carbon relationships, as it triggers several carbon responses which seem to be interrelated. METHODS: An existing plant model describing water and carbon transport in a tree was used to evaluate the mechanisms behind the girdling responses. Therefore, the (un)loading functions of the original model were adapted and became a function of the phloem turgor pressure. KEY RESULTS: The adapted model successfully simulated the measured changes in stem growth induced by girdling. The model indicated that the key driving variables for the girdling responses were changes in turgor pressure due to local changes in sugar concentrations. Information about the local damage to the phloem system was transferred to the other plant parts (crown and roots) by a change in phloem pressure. After girdling, the loading rate was affected and corresponded to the experimentally observed feedback inhibition. In addition, the unloading rate decreased after girdling and even reversed in some instances. The model enabled continuous simulation of changes in starch content, although a slight underestimation was observed compared with measured values. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time a mechanistic plant model enabled simulation of tree girdling responses, which have thus far only been experimentally observed and fragmentally reported in literature. The close agreement between measured and simulated data confirms the underlying mechanisms introduced in the model.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Girdling, or the removal of a strip of bark around a tree's outer circumference, is often used to study carbon relationships, as it triggers several carbon responses which seem to be interrelated. METHODS: An existing plant model describing water and carbon transport in a tree was used to evaluate the mechanisms behind the girdling responses. Therefore, the (un)loading functions of the original model were adapted and became a function of the phloem turgor pressure. KEY RESULTS: The adapted model successfully simulated the measured changes in stem growth induced by girdling. The model indicated that the key driving variables for the girdling responses were changes in turgor pressure due to local changes in sugar concentrations. Information about the local damage to the phloem system was transferred to the other plant parts (crown and roots) by a change in phloem pressure. After girdling, the loading rate was affected and corresponded to the experimentally observed feedback inhibition. In addition, the unloading rate decreased after girdling and even reversed in some instances. The model enabled continuous simulation of changes in starch content, although a slight underestimation was observed compared with measured values. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time a mechanistic plant model enabled simulation of tree girdling responses, which have thus far only been experimentally observed and fragmentally reported in literature. The close agreement between measured and simulated data confirms the underlying mechanisms introduced in the model.
Authors: P Högberg; A Nordgren; N Buchmann; A F Taylor; A Ekblad; M N Högberg; G Nyberg; M Ottosson-Löfvenius; D J Read Journal: Nature Date: 2001-06-14 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Kurt Johnsen; Chris Maier; Felipe Sanchez; Peter Anderson; John Butnor; Richard Waring; Sune Linder Journal: Plant Cell Environ Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 7.228
Authors: Tom De Swaef; Steven M Driever; Lieven Van Meulebroek; Lynn Vanhaecke; Leo F M Marcelis; Kathy Steppe Journal: Ann Bot Date: 2012-11-27 Impact factor: 4.357
Authors: Roman Zweifel; Sophia Etzold; Frank Sterck; Arthur Gessler; Tommaso Anfodillo; Maurizio Mencuccini; Georg von Arx; Martina Lazzarin; Matthias Haeni; Linda Feichtinger; Katrin Meusburger; Simon Knuesel; Lorenz Walthert; Yann Salmon; Arun K Bose; Leonie Schoenbeck; Christian Hug; Nicolas De Girardi; Arnaud Giuggiola; Marcus Schaub; Andreas Rigling Journal: New Phytol Date: 2020-05-09 Impact factor: 10.151
Authors: Amy M Trowbridge; Henry D Adams; Adam Collins; Lee Turin Dickman; Charlotte Grossiord; Megan Hofland; Shealyn Malone; David K Weaver; Sanna Sevanto; Paul C Stoy; Nate G McDowell Journal: Oecologia Date: 2021-10-17 Impact factor: 3.225