Premium
PHYSIOLOGICAL AND MORPHOLOGICAL MODIFICATIONS OF PLANTAGO MAJOR (PLANTAGINACEAE) IN RESPONSE TO LIGHT CONDITIONS
Author(s) -
Niklas Karl J.,
Owens Thomas G.
Publication year - 1989
Publication title -
american journal of botany
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.218
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1537-2197
pISSN - 0002-9122
DOI - 10.1002/j.1537-2197.1989.tb11324.x
Subject(s) - biology , rosette (schizont appearance) , irradiance , photosynthesis , botany , plantaginaceae , interception , plantago , shading , chlorophyll , specific leaf area , light intensity , horticulture , sunlight , ecology , art , physics , quantum mechanics , astronomy , optics , immunology , visual arts
Physiological and morphological differences between Plantago major L. (Plantaginaceae) growing in full sunlight and shaded conditions were examined. Photosynthesis of isolated leaves was saturated by irradiance around 300 μ E m −‐2 sec −‐1 and 170 μ E m −‐2 sec −‐1 , respectively. In contrast to previous studies of sun/shade leaf responses, initial slopes of curves from shaded plants are significantly less than those taken from full‐sun plants. Within the 400–500 nm and 600–700 nm ranges, leaves 5.0 cm or longer are essentially opaque, transmitting less than 1.25% of incident light. Chlorophyll content per unit leaf area is nearly equivalent for leaves from plants growing under the two extremes in light levels. Morphometric comparisons indicate shaded plants bear fewer leaves, have less leaf overlap, lower total leaf area, and longer petioles than full‐sun plants. Leaf elongation rates are lower and the duration between the emergence of successive leaves is longer in shaded plants. Computer analyses of both types of rosette morphology reveal shaded plants have an equal or greater capacity to intercept light than full‐sun plants, principally because of the minimization of leaf overlap and the large variation in the deflection angles of leaves in shaded rosette morphologies. Simulations, calculated on the basis of light interception, and taking into account the transition between photosynthate‐importing and ‐exporting leaves, predict relative growth rates for full‐sun and shaded rosette morphologies that are in reasonable agreement with empirically determined leaf growth rates. However, the data indicate that significant physiological and morphological differences exist among leaves from a single rosette, and among developmentally comparable leaves from rosettes growing under different ambient light environments. Differences among leaves on a single plant must be accommodated in computerized techniques attempting to simulate light interception and its consequences on potential growth rates.