Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T10:57:10.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of light regime on the growth and physiology of Pentaclethra macroloba (Mimosaceae) in Costa Rica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Steven F. Oberbauer  and
Boyd R. Strain
Steven F. Oberbauer
Affiliation:
Duke Phytotron, Department of BotanyDuke University, Durham, NC 27706, USA
Boyd R. Strain
Affiliation:
Duke Phytotron, Department of BotanyDuke University, Durham, NC 27706, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Seedlings of Pentaclethra macroloba (Willd.) Kuntze, a dominant, shade-tolerant species of tropical moist forest in Costa Rica, were raised under three light conditions to assess their acclimatization and growth responses to irradiance. The light environments used were full sun, partial shade (25% of full sun), and full shade (1% of full sun). To test the effect of a sudden change in light level such as would occur in the event of a treefall gap, the seedlings in the above conditions were switched between environments after two months and grown for an additional 1.5 months. Plants in full sun and partial shade had similar total weight; switching between the two environments had no effect on biomass. Plants switched from full sun and partial shade to full shade had negative growth as a result of negative CO2, flux and leaf abscission. Plants transferred from full shade to full sun had lower growth rates than those switched from full shade to partial shade because of severe leaf damage in full sun. The previous environment significantly affected the response of most growth and size characteristics to the present environment. Maximum photosynthesis changed only 30% in response to light level during growth. However, large changes in other photosynthetic and structural characteristics were found. Leaves developed in full shade had lower respiration, leaf thickness, and stomatal density and higher apparent quantum yield, specific leaf area, and chlorophyll content than leaves from full sun. Osmotic potentials were similar between treatments. Despite only small changes in maximum photosynthesis, acclimatization to extreme shade or sun rendered leaves unsuitable for large changes in environment. Consequently, in the event of a large treefall gap, plants already present in the understory will require a substantial period of adjustment before they respond to the increase in light.

Keywords

Costa Ricagrowth analysisirradiancephotosynthesisstomatal conductancetropical tree
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , November 1985 , pp. 303 - 320
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

Augspurger, C K. 1984. Light requirements of neotropical tree seedlings: a comparative study of growth and survival. Journal of Ecology 72:777–795.Google Scholar
Barrs, H. D. 1971. Cyclic variations in stomatal aperture, transpiration, and leaf water potential under constant environmental conditions. Annual Review of Plant Physiology 22:223–236.Google Scholar
Bazzaz, F. A. & Carlson, R. W. 1982. Photosynthetic acclimation to variability in the light environment of early and late successional plants. Oecologia (Berlin) 54:313–316.Google Scholar
Bazzaz, F. A. & Pickett, S. T. A. 1980. Physiological ecology of tropical succession: a comparative review. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11:287–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björkman, O. 1981. Responses to different quantum flux densities. Pp. 57–108 in Lange, O. L., Nobel, P. S., Osmond, C B. & Ziegler, H. (eds). Encyclopedia of plant physiology, new series. Physiological plant ecology I volume 12A. Springer Verlag, Berlin. 625 pp.Google Scholar
Blackman, G. E. 1968. The application of the concepts of growth analysis to the assessment of productivity. Pp. 243–259 in Eckardt, F. E. (ed.). Functioning of terrestrial ecosystems at the primary production level UNESCO, Paris. 516 pp.Google Scholar
Brokaw, N. V. L. 1982. The definition of treefall gap and its effect on measures of forest dynamics. Biotropica 14:158–160.Google Scholar
Chabot, B. F. & Chabot, J. F. 1977. Effects of light and temperature on leaf anatomy and photosynthesis in Fragraria vesca. Oecologia (Berlin) 26:363–377.Google Scholar
Chazdon, R. L. & Fetcher, N. 1984. Photosynthetic light environments in a lowland tropical rainforest in Costa Rica. Journal of Ecology 72:553–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coombe, D. E. & Hadfield, W. 1962. An analysis of the growth of Musanga cecropioides. Journal of Ecology 50:221–234.Google Scholar
Denslow, J. S. 1980. Gap partitioning among tropical rainforest trees. Biotropica 12(supplement): 47–55.Google Scholar
Ehleringer, J. R. & Cook, C. S. 1980. Measurement of photosynthesis in the field: utility of the CO2, depletion technique. Plant, Cell and Environment 3:479–482.Google Scholar
Fetcher, N., Strain, B. R. & Oberbauer, S. F. 1983. Effects of light regime on the growth, leaf morphology, and water relations of seedlings of two species of tropical trees. Oecologia (Berlin) 58:314–319.Google Scholar
Fetcher, N., Oberbauer, S. F. & Strain, B. R. 1985. Vegetation effects on microclimate in low land tropical forest in Costa Rica. International Journal of Biometeorology 29:145–155.Google Scholar
Frankie, G. W., Baker, H. G. & Opler, P. A. 1974. Comparative phenological studies of trees in tropical wet and dry forests in the lowlands of Costa Rica. Journal of Ecology 62:881–919.Google Scholar
Hartshorn, G. S. 1972. The ecological life history and population dynamics of Pentaclethra macro-loba, a wet forest dominant, and Stryphnodendron excelsum, an occasional associate. Ph.D. thesis, University of Washington. 118 pp.Google Scholar
Hartshorn, G. S. 1975. A matrix model of tree population dynamics. Pp. 41–51 in Golley, F. B. & Medina, E. (eds). Tropical ecological systems: trends in terrestrial and aquatic research. Springer Verlag, New York. 398 pp.Google Scholar
Hartshorn, G. S. 1978. Tree falls and tropical forest dynamics. Pp. 617–638 in Tomlinson, P. B. &: Zimmermann, M. H. (eds). Tropical trees as living systems. Cambridge University Press, New York. 544 pp.Google Scholar
Hartshorn, G. S. 1980. Neotropical forest dynamics. Biotropica 12(supplement): 23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holdridge, L. R., Grenke, W. C., Hatheway, W. H., Liang, T. & Tosi, J. A. Jr 1971. Forest environments in tropical life zones: a pilot study. Pergamon Press, San Francisco. 747 pp.Google Scholar
Květ, J. J., Ondok, P., Necas, J. & Jarvis, P. J. 1971. Methods of growth analysis. Pp. 343–391 in Šesták, Z., Čatskỳ, J. & Jarvis, P. J. (eds). Plant photosynthetic production: manual of methods. Dr W. Junk N. V. Publishers, The Hague. 819 pp.Google Scholar
Langenheim, J. H., Osmond, C. B., Brooks, A. & Ferrar, P. J. 1984. Photosynthetic respon ses to light in seedlings of selected Amazonian and Australian rainforest tree species. Oecologia (Berlin) 63:215–224.Google Scholar
Loach, K. 1967. Shade tolerance in tree seedlings I. Leaf photosynthesis and respiration in plants raised under artificial shade. New Phytologist 66:607–621.Google Scholar
Loach, K. 1970. Shade tolerance in tree seedlings II: Growth analysis of plants raised under artificial shade. New Phytologist 69:273–286.Google Scholar
Mackinney, G. 1941. Absorption of light by chlorophyll solutions. Journal of Biological Chemistry 140:315–322.Google Scholar
Oberbauer, S. F. & Strain, B. R. in press. Effects of canopy position and irradiance on the leaf physiology and morphology of Pentaclethra macroloba (Mimosaceae). American Journal of Botany.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. T. & Duke, S. O. 1979. Effect of growth irradiance on the maximum photosynthetic capacity of water hyacinth (Eichomia crassipes (Mart.) Solms). Plant and Cell Physiology 20:177–184.Google Scholar
Roberts, S. W. & Knoerr, K. R. 1977. Components of water potential estimated from xylem pres sure measurements in five tree species. Oecologia (Berlin) 28:191–202Google Scholar
Roberts, S. W., Miller, P. C. & Valamanesh, A. 1981. Comparative field water relations of four co-occurring chaparral shrub species. Oecologia (Berlin) 48:360–363.Google Scholar
Robichaux, R. H. 1984. Variation in the tissue water relations of two sympatric Hawaiian Dubautia species and their natural hybrid. Oecologia (Berlin) 65:75–81.Google Scholar
Tyree, M. T. & Jarvis, P. G.. 1982 Water in tissue and cells. Pp. 35–77 in Lange, O. L., Nobel, P. S., Osmond, C. B. & Ziegler, H. (eds). Encyclopedia of plant physiology, new series. Physiological plant ecology I volume 12B. Springer Verlag, Berlin. 747 pp.Google Scholar
Wallace, L. L. & Dunn, E. L. 1980. Comparative photosynthesis of three gap phase successional tree species. Oecologia (Berlin) 45:331–340.Google Scholar
Whitmore, T. C. 1982. On pattern and process in forests. Pp. 45–59 in Newman, E. I. (ed.). The plant community as a working mechanism. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford. 128pp.Google Scholar