| Literature DB >> 22476077 |
Javier G Puntieri1, María A Damascos, Yanina Llancaqueo, Maya Svriz.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Plants are regarded as populations of modules such as axes and growth units (GUs, i.e. seasonally produced axis segments). Due to their dense arrays of GUs, cushion plants may resemble crowded plant populations in the way the number of components (GUs in plants, individuals in populations) relates to their individual sizes.Entities:
Year: 2010 PMID: 22476077 PMCID: PMC2995345 DOI: 10.1093/aobpla/plq019
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AoB Plants Impact factor: 3.276
Fig. 1(A) Mulinum spinosum plants at the steppe in summer; inflorescences may be distinguished by their yellow colour. (B) Two GUs of an M. spinosum plant derived from a common GU. Limits between annual GUs are indicated with short black lines and scars left by past inflorescences with black arrows.
Cushion size and dry mass of GUs of M. spinosum in two populations.
| Plant traits | Ñirihuau | Nahuel Huapi | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SE | SE | |||
| Height (cm) | 0.55 | 0.030 | 0.72 | 0.032 |
| Hemispherical area (m2) | 1.87 | 0.205 | 2.72 | 0.293 |
| Volume (m3) | 0.34 | 0.056 | 0.57 | 0.098 |
| No. of flowering GUs | 830 | 143.7 | 1484 | 226.3 |
| No. of vegetative GUs | 450 | 60.3 | 616 | 112.8 |
| Dry mass of flowering GUs (g)a | 215 | 38.6 | 409 | 71.7 |
| Dry mass of vegetative GUs (g)b | 85 | 23.1 | 93 | 40.2 |
Mean (μ) and standard error (SE) of the height, hemispherical area and volume of M. spinosum plants, and number and dry mass of flowering and vegetative GUs of M. spinosum plants sampled at Ñirihuau and Nahuel Huapi. n = 12 plants for each site.
aStems + leaves + flowers.
bStems + leaves.
Relationships between measures of GU size and measures of cushion size and GU density.
| dmGU | dmP | nGU | haP | nGU/ha | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | |||||
| dmGU | – | 0.35 | 0.36 | 0.09 | |
| dmP | – | 0.22 | |||
| nGU | −0.04 | – | 0.24 | ||
| haP | – | −0.31 | |||
| nGU/ha | − | 0.32 | −0.20 | – | |
| B | |||||
| dmGU | – | 0.13 | −0.37 | ||
| dmP | – | 0.10 | |||
| nGU | – | ||||
| haP | – | −0.32 | |||
Correlations between mean dry mass per GU (dmGU), dry mass per plant (dmP), number of GUs per plant (nGU), hemisperical area per plant (haP) and number of GUs per unit of hemispherical area (nGU/ha), for (A) vegetative GUs (upper side) and flowering GUs (lower side), and (B) for all last-year GUs of M. spinosum plants. Significant correlations (P< 0.05) are indicated in bold.
Fig. 2Size-density relationship for GUs of individual Relationships between the mean dry mass of flowering and vegetative GUs and the number of each GU type per unit of hemispherical area of the M. spinosum plant. The least-squares regression line for flowering GUs is drawn and its equation and coefficient of determination (r2) are indicated.
Relationships between plant attributes and the CVs of GU traits.
| GU trait | Dry mass per plant | Number of GUs per plant hemispherical area | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Length | −0.58 | *** | 0.30 | ns |
| Diameter | −0.08 | ns | 0.16 | ns |
| Number of leaves | −0.53 | *** | 0.39 | ns |
| Length · diameter−1 | −0.64 | *** | 0.39 | ns |
| Number of leaves · length−1 | −0.14 | ns | −0.05 | ns |
| Diameter · number of leaves−1 | −0.30 | ns | 0.26 | ns |
Correlation coefficients between the dry mass per plant and the number of GUs per plant hemispherical area and the CVs of the GU traits: length, diameter, number of leaves, length · diameter−1, number of leaves · length−1 and diameter · number of leaves−1.
***P < 0.001; ns, P > 0.05.
Statistical comparisons of morphological attributes between vegetative and flowering GUs of M.spinosum.
| GU trait | GU type | ANOVA | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vegetative | Flowering | GU type | Site | Plant | ||||||
| SE | SE | |||||||||
| Length (mm) | 40.7 | 1.88 | 61.9 | 1.08 | 216.0 | *** | 0.0 | ns | 8.6 | *** |
| Number of leaves | 7.7 | 0.16 | 9.3 | 0.07 | 95.2 | *** | 0.0 | ns | 5.7 | *** |
| Diameter (mm) | 1.6 | 0.02 | 1.7 | 0.02 | 40.7 | *** | 0.8 | ns | 3.4 | *** |
| Number of leaves · length−1 | 2.5 | 0.07 | 1.6 | 0.03 | 202.4 | *** | 0.0 | ns | 9.9 | *** |
| Length · diameter−1 | 25.0 | 1.00 | 36.3 | 0.61 | 136.5 | *** | 1.6 | ns | 9.2 | *** |
| Diameter · number of leaves−1 | 0.23 | 0.006 | 0.19 | 0.002 | 42.8 | *** | 3.6 | ns | 4.4 | *** |
Mean (μ) and SE of the length, number of leaves, basal diameter, number of leaves · length−1, length · diameter−1 and diameter · number of leaves−1 for flowering GUs (n = 252) and vegetative GUs (n = 240). For each variable (loge transformed), the significance levels of the differences detected with ANOVA (Fisher's F statistic, GLM for unbalanced designs) between GU types (fixed factor), site (random factor) and plant (nested factor within each site) are indicated.
***P < 0.001; ns, P > 0.05.
Comparison of the dry mass of vegetative and flowering GUs and their morphological components for M. spinosum.
| GU trait | GU type | ANOVA/Kruskal–Wallis | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vegetative | Flowering | GU type | Site | Covariable | ||||||
| SE | SE | |||||||||
| Dry mass of stems and leaf bases (g) | 0.62 | 0.075 | 1.19 | 0.093 | 23.2 | *** | 1.1 | ns | – | – |
| Dry mass of leaf blades (g) | 0.85 | 0.085 | 1.43 | 0.098 | 20.4 | *** | 1.6 | ns | – | – |
| – | – | |||||||||
| Dry mass per leaf blade (g) × 100 | 1.06 | 0.086 | 1.55 | 0.110 | 6.4 | * | 0.5 | ns | 532.8 | *** |
| Proportion of dry mass in leaf blades | 0.59 | 0.011 | 0.54 | 0.011 | 7.1 | * | 0.1 | ns | – | – |
Mean (μ) and standard error (SE) of the dry masses of stems and leaf bases, leaf blades, stems and leaves and individual leaf blades, and the ratio between the dry mass in the leaf blades and the dry mass of stems + leaves (proportion of dry mass in leaf blades) for 10 flowering GUs and 10 vegetative GUs per plant of M. spinosum (n = 24 plants). For each variable (loge transformed), the results of the statistical comparisons with ANOVA (GLM for unbalanced designs) or with Kruskal–Wallis tests (for dry mass of stems + leaves, in italics) between GU types (fixed factor) and between sampling sites (random factor) are indicated. In the case of the dry mass per leaf blade, the total biomass of all leaf blades was incorporated as a covariable in the analysis.
***P < 0.001; *P < 0.05; ns, P > 0.05.
Fig. 3Model of time variations in plant and GU attributes of (A) Variations over time in the diameter, hemispherical area, volume and number of GUs per unit of hemispherical area (GU density) for M. spinosum cushions. (B) Variations over time in the length and dry mass per GU and in the last-year dry mass per M. spinosum plant assuming an exponential reduction in mean GU size parallel to the exponential increase in the number of GUs per plant. The dry mass per GU was estimated from the equation: loge GU dry mass (g) = 1.2 loge GU length (cm) – 3.6, obtained from the sampling of GUs made in this study. See text for details.