Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Henriksson, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ruohomäki, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Henriksson, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ruohomäki, K.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Henriksson, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ruohomäki, K.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Annals of Botany 86: 503-510, 2000
© 2000 Annals of Botany Company

Assessing Costs of Reproduction in Mountain Birch: The Importance of Considering the Modular Level

Janne Henriksson+ and Kai Ruohomäki

Section of Ecology, Department of Biology, Kevo Subarctic Research Institute, University of Turku, FIN-20014, Turku, Finland

Received: 21 March 2000 ; Returned for revision: 19 April 2000 . Accepted: 12 May 2000

We studied the effects of production of male catkins on growth and the subsequent year's male catkin production in mountain birch, Betula pubescens subsp. czerepanovii at both the shoot and branch level. (Shoot is defined here as the product of a single growing season while branch refers to a structure consisting of several shoots.) Like heterophyllous trees in general, mountain birch canopy expansion takes place via the production of long shoots. We found phenotypic trade-offs between long shoot growth and male reproduction at the shoot level in the year of catkin production. Generative parental long shoots (long shoots with male catkins) were significantly shorter than the vegetative ones (long shoots without a male catkin). In contrast, we found no effects of male reproduction on the subsequent year's male catkin production at the shoot level. Although the mean length of secondary long shoots (long shoots growing from the lateral buds of parental long shoots) did not differ between vegetative and generative parental long shoots, there was considerable between-individual variation in the response of individual trees. In addition, production of male catkins diminishes canopy expansion in mountain birch because the number of secondary long shoots produced by generative parental long shoots was smaller than that of vegetative parental long shoots. At the branch level, the association between total long shoot growth and male catkin production was positive, i.e. no trade-off was found. This may be because the strong sink strength (the ability of a branch to import assimilates from elsewhere in the tree) of branches bearing reproductive long shoots masks possible trade-offs. We emphasize the importance of considering several levels of the modular hierarchy when analysing costs of reproduction in modular organisms. Copyright 2000 Annals of Botany Company

Hierarchical structure, modularity, mountain birch, short and long shoots, trade-off, Betula pubescens subsp.czerepanovii (Orlova) Hämet-Ahti


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ANN BOT (LOND)Home page
M. I. Ishihara and K. Kikuzawa
Annual and spatial variation in shoot demography associated with masting in Betula grossa: comparison between mature trees and saplings
Ann. Bot., November 1, 2009; 104(6): 1195 - 1205.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN BOT (LOND)Home page
D. L. Marshall, J. J. Avritt, S. Maliakal-Witt, J. S. Medeiros, and M. G. M. Shaner
The impact of plant and flower age on mating patterns
Ann. Bot., October 29, 2009; (2009) mcp260v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



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.