Skip Navigation



Journal of Plant Ecology Advance Access published online on October 4, 2009

Journal of Plant Ecology, doi:10.1093/jpe/rtp018
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Whitman, T.
Right arrow Articles by Aarssen, L. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Botanical Society of China. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The leaf size/number trade-off in herbaceous angiosperms

Thea Whitman and Lonnie W. Aarssen*

Department of Biology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6

* Correspondence address. Department of Biology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6. Tel:+1-1-613-533-6133; Fax: +1-1-613-533-6617; E-mail: aarssenl{at}queensu.ca

Aims: In this study, we examined the extent to which between-species leaf size variation relates to variation in the intensity of leaf production in herbaceous angiosperms. Leaf size variation has been most commonly interpreted in terms of biomechanical constraints (e.g. affected by plant size limitations) or in terms of direct adaptation associated with leaf size effects in optimizing important physiological functions of individual leaves along environmental gradients (e.g. involving temperature and moisture). An additional interpretation is explored here, where adaptation may be more directly associated with the number of leaves produced and where relatively small leaf size then results as a trade-off of high ‘leafing intensity’—i.e. number of leaves produced per unit plant body size.

Methods: The relationships between mean individual leaf mass, number of leaves and plant body size were examined for 127 species of herbaceous angiosperms collected from natural populations in southern Ontario, Canada.

Important Findings: In all, 88% of the variation in mean individual leaf mass across species, spanning four orders of magnitude, is accounted for by a negative isometric (proportional) trade-off relationship with leafing intensity. These results parallel those reported in recent studies of woody species. Because each leaf is normally associated with an axillary bud or meristem, having a high leafing intensity is equivalent to having a greater number of meristems per unit body size—i.e. a larger ‘bud bank’. According to the ‘leafing intensity premium’ hypothesis, because an axillary meristem represents the potential to produce either a new shoot or a reproductive structure, high leafing intensity should confer greater architectural and/or reproductive plasticity (with relatively small leaf size required as a trade-off). This greater plasticity, we suggest, should be especially important for smaller species since they are likely to suffer greater suppression of growth and reproduction from competition within multi-species vegetation. Accordingly, we tested and found support for the prediction that smaller species have not just smaller leaves generally but also higher leafing intensities, thus conferring larger bud banks, i.e. more meristems per unit plant body size.

Keywords: bud bank • leafing intensity • meristems • plant size • plasticity • reproductive economy


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.