Annals of Botany 86: 913-920, 2000
© 2000 Annals of Botany Company
REVIEW |
Mechanical Defences to Herbivory
Department of Anatomy, University of Hong Kong, Li Shu Fan Building, 5 Sassoon Road, Hong Kong S.A.R., P.R. China Singapore Botanic Gardens, National Parks Board, 1 Cluny Road, Singapore, Republic of Singapore 259569
Received: 27 March 2000 ; Returned for revision: 5 June 2000 . Accepted: 11 July 2000
The two major mechanical defences of plants are toughness and hardness. These have different material causes and ecological functions. In any non-metal, high toughness is achieved by composite construction (i.e. by an organized mixture of components). The primary source of toughening in plants is the composite cell wall (cellulosic microfibrils set in a hemicellulose and, sometimes, lignin matrix), with a toughness of 3.45 kJ m-2, which is ten-times the probable toughness of its individual components if they could be isolated. The toughness of most plant tissues is roughly proportional to the volume fraction of tissue occupied by cell wall (Vc) and, compared to animal tissues and non-biological composites, is very low. High toughness in plant cells is not produced by the walls themselves, but by their plastic intracellular collapse. This is a truly cellular toughening mechanism, one of the most potent ever discovered by materials scientists, depending on an elongate cell shape with microfibrils directed uniformly at a small angle to the cellular axis. Only ‘woody’ cells, tracheids and fibres, have this framework and only in the S2 layer of their secondary wall. Despite this non-optimum configuration, toughness is elevated by this mechanism ten-times above that due to cell wall resistance alone. The effectiveness of toughness in preventing herbivory is indisputable, but largely indirect due to confusion over a false equivalence between nutritional ‘fibre content’ and toughness. In contrast, generalized hardness requires high density. If hardness is due to high Vc , this conflicts with ‘woody’ toughness because there is then no lumen for cell walls to collapse into. Thus, dense seed shells may be brittle (i.e. low toughness) even if built from fibres. However, solid cell wall is not very hard. Instead, high hardness in plants is associated with amorphous silica and is always localized. The efficacy of hardness is more difficult to evaluate than toughness because some animals specialize in coping with it. Copyright 2000 Annals of Botany Company
Review, hardness, toughness, mechanical defence, herbivory, cell wall, plastic buckling, silica
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. Read, G. D. Sanson, E. Caldwell, F. J. Clissold, A. Chatain, P. Peeters, B. B. Lamont, M. De Garine-Wichatitsky, T. Jaffre, and S. Kerr Correlations between leaf toughness and phenolics among species in contrasting environments of Australia and New Caledonia Ann. Bot., March 1, 2009; 103(5): 757 - 767. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. S. Strait, G. W. Weber, S. Neubauer, J. Chalk, B. G. Richmond, P. W. Lucas, M. A. Spencer, C. Schrein, P. C. Dechow, C. F. Ross, et al. The feeding biomechanics and dietary ecology of Australopithecus africanus PNAS, February 17, 2009; 106(7): 2124 - 2129. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. Grubb, R. V. Jackson, I. M. Barberis, J. N. Bee, D. A. Coomes, N. J. Dominy, M. A. S. De La Fuente, P. W. Lucas, D. J. Metcalfe, J.-C. Svenning, et al. Monocot Leaves are Eaten Less than Dicot Leaves in Tropical Lowland Rain Forests: Correlations with Toughness and Leaf Presentation Ann. Bot., June 1, 2008; 101(9): 1379 - 1389. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. J. Dominy, P. J. Grubb, R. V. Jackson, P. W. Lucas, D. J. Metcalfe, J.-C. Svenning, and I. M. Turner In Tropical Lowland Rain Forests Monocots have Tougher Leaves than Dicots, and Include a New Kind of Tough Leaf Ann. Bot., June 1, 2008; 101(9): 1363 - 1377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Read, G. D. Sanson, M. d. Garine-Wichatitsky, and T. Jaffre Sclerophylly in two contrasting tropical environments: low nutrients vs. low rainfall Am. J. Botany, November 1, 2006; 93(11): 1601 - 1614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Sanson The biomechanics of browsing and grazing Am. J. Botany, October 1, 2006; 93(10): 1531 - 1545. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Read and A. Stokes Plant biomechanics in an ecological context Am. J. Botany, October 1, 2006; 93(10): 1546 - 1565. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. A. E. Stromberg Evolution of hypsodonty in equids: testing a hypothesis of adaptation Paleobiology, March 1, 2006; 32(2): 236 - 258. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. RUUHOLA and S. YANG Wound-induced Oxidative Responses in Mountain Birch Leaves Ann. Bot., January 1, 2006; 97(1): 29 - 37. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Dudley Ethanol, Fruit Ripening, and the Historical Origins of Human Alcoholism in Primate Frugivory Integr. Comp. Biol., August 1, 2004; 44(4): 315 - 323. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Farren, S. Shayler, and A. R. Ennos The fracture properties and mechanical design of human fingernails J. Exp. Biol., February 15, 2004; 207(5): 735 - 741. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. J. Dominy, P. W. Lucas, and S. J. Wright Mechanics and chemistry of rain forest leaves: canopy and understorey compared J. Exp. Bot., September 1, 2003; 54(390): 2007 - 2014. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|