Axial variation of characteristics of water conducting tissue in xylem of Catalpa bungei
-
摘要:目的本文拟探究楸树木质部边材解剖结构的轴向变化规律,为深入理解阔叶树种的水分传导机制提供参考,并为楸树人工林的栽培、中国特有温带珍贵优质用材树种的保护及木材利用提供理论依据。方法以3株楸树为研究对象,自基部向上采集树干0、1.3、3.8、6.3、8.8、11.3 m共6个高度处的边材样品,分别测量边材面积、制备横向及弦向显微切片,并利用光学显微镜观察测量导管腔直径、导管密度等木质部解剖结构特征,利用相关性分析、方差分析研究木质部解剖特征间的相互关系,利用线性回归分析研究木质部解剖特征的轴向变化规律。结果(1)早材导管腔直径、早晚材导管密度随高度变化不显著,但早材导管腔直径随取样高度增加有减小趋势,导管密度则有相反趋势。最大早晚材导管腔直径、晚材导管腔直径、纹孔膜直径随树高增加而显著减小。(2)随树高增加,边材面积与导管水力直径均显著减小。(3)边材面积、纹孔膜直径均与导管水力直径呈显著正相关。结论楸树木质部水分疏导组织构造特征的轴向变化主要表现在边材面积、导管特征和纹孔膜特征3个方面。楸树生长轮明显,早晚材导管腔直径差异较大,早材比晚材变异幅度更大。最大导管腔直径的轴向变化显著,导管密度的轴向变化不显著,边材面积和纹孔膜直径的轴向变化显著。综合来看,楸树基部导管相对大而疏,边材面积大,上部导管相对小而多,边材面积小。这是楸树木质部结构适应长距离输水功能的一种优化设计,以降低树木栓塞化风险,提高水分运输的效率和安全性。Abstract:ObjectiveThis paper intends to explore the axial variation of the anatomical structure of wood sapwood of Catalpa bungei, in order to deepen our understanding of the water conduction mechanism in broadleaved tree species, as well as to provide theoretical basis for the cultivation of C. bungei plantation, the protection of this precious tree species and the utilization of its wood.MethodThree trees of C. bungei were selected, sapwood samples were collected from tree height at 0, 1.3, 3.8, 6.3, 8.8 and 11.3 m, respectively. Meanwhile, sapwood area was measured, transverse and longitudinal sections of wood blocks were prepared. The anatomical traits of xylem such as vessel lumen diameter, vessel frequency were observed with light microscopy. Relationships among wood anatomical traits were tested by correlation analysis and analysis of variance, and axial changes of wood anatomical traits were analyzed by linear regression.Result(1) Earlywood vessel lumen diameter and vessel density do not change significantly with tree height, however, earlywood vessel lumen diameter decreased with height while vessel density had an opposite trend. Maximum vessel lumen diameter of early- and latewood, latewood vessel lumen diameter and pit membrane diameter varied significantly with tree height, which decreased with tree height. (2) Both sapwood area and hydraulic vessel diameter decreased significantly with tree height. (3) Both sapwood area and pit membrane diameter were significantly positively correlated with the hydraulic vessel diameter.ConclusionAxial variance of hydraulic structure of C. bungei is manifested in three aspects: sapwood area, vessel related traits and pit membrane properties. Growth ring of C. bungei was obvious, and the early and late vessel lumen diameter wood differed greatly with bigger variation of early wood than that of late wood. Axial variation of the maximum vessel lumen diameter, sapwood area and pit membrane diameter are significant for this tree species whereas axial variation of the vessel density is not significant. Taken together, wood at the base of C. bungei owned relatively large and sparse vessels and higher proportion of sapwood area compared to many small vessels and lower proportion of sapwood area in wood at the upper stem, and this architecture is an optimized structural design for the long-distance water transport function during xylem evolution, leading to reduction of embolization risk and improvement of efficiency and safety of water transport.
-
Keywords:
- vessel lumen diameter /
- vessel density /
- pit membrane diameter /
- sapwood area /
- axial variation
-
阔叶树木质部中的导管及其间壁的纹孔作为水分运输的主要通道,是水力结构的主要组成部分,对于树木水分传导起关键作用[1-2]。目前关于木质部水力阻力在树木高度方向是否恒定尚存争议[3-4],明确导管及其相关解剖特征的轴向变化规律,有助于理解树木水力结构特征与其导水功能的协同效应。前人通过研究不同树种水力结构特征的轴向变化规律揭示树木输导水分的最优化模式[5-6],但总体而言,所研究的树木种类非常有限。已有研究表明,导管分子的轴向变化规律在不同木本植物间有许多相似之处[7],并且其在个体发育期间基本稳定[8]。树木茎部的导管在树顶处非常狭窄,而在树顶以下,导管则自上而下逐渐变宽[9]。并且这种变化通常作用于树木顶端几米处,如果树木很高,则其基部导管直径的变化可以忽略不计[10-11]。同时导管频率与导管直径呈现负相关关系,即随树高增加,导管直径减小,导管频率增大[8]。理论上,木质部导管的理论导水率与导管直径的4次方(D4)成正比(源于Hagen-Poiseuille方程),因此,相较于导管频率,导管直径对导水效率的影响更大[12-13]。由于一般树木基部的导管大顶部的导管小,所以理论上树木导管的输水效率会随着树高增加而降低。
除导管及其相关特征外,影响树木导水效率的还包括边材特征。相较于心材,木质部边材是“活着”的部分,其内含有活细胞和贮存物质,并具有输导水分和无机盐的作用[14]。树冠的供水受边材面积和边材导水率的影响,如果水分运输长度一定,那么树木通过增加边材面积或改变影响导水率的解剖结构,如导管直径和导管频率,均可以提高树冠供水量[15]。WBE管道模型假说(Fractal-like networks model)认为,高大树木通常会最大限度地提高边材的导水效率,同时最大限度地减少横截面积以降低栓塞风险[4, 16]。一些关于针叶树的研究支持了这个假说,即边材导水率随着树木年龄和高度的增加而增加[17-18]。然而对于一些阔叶树种如桉树(Eucalyptus robusta)、栎属(Quercus)的研究结果则不支持这个假说,如边材导水率与树木高度并没有显著的相关性[5, 8, 15],或边材导水率随树高呈现驼峰状变化[14]。因此,木质部边材特征也是研究树木导水功能的重要方面。
楸树(Catalpa bungei)是紫葳科(Bignoniaceae)梓属小乔木,是我国温带特有的珍贵阔叶环孔材树种,国内对其木材结构方面的研究鲜有出现,而前人对木质部结构特征轴向变化的研究大多针对针叶树或常绿阔叶树种[19-20],因而研究楸树水力结构特征的轴向变化可为相关领域提供有益补充。本文分析楸树木质部边材面积、导管腔直径、导管密度、纹孔膜直径等多种导管相关解剖特征随树高的变化规律,以期为深入理解树木水力传导的结构和功能提供参考,并为楸树的保护及人工林培育技术研究提供依据。
1. 研究地概况与研究方法
1.1 取样立地条件
本文的楸树样本采自河南省洛阳市洛宁县的丘陵山谷(34°21′10″ ~ 34°22′20″ N、111°30′10″ ~ 111°33′50″ E,海拔620 m)楸树人工林。该地属于暖温带大陆性季风气候,植被类型为落叶阔叶林、针阔混交林,年平均气温13.9 ℃,最低气温− 12.8 ℃,年日照时长2 006 h,年降雨量560 mm,集中降雨月份在6—9月,无霜期213 d,土壤类型为褐土。
1.2 实验方法
随机取生长正常、无明显缺陷的楸树(胸径大于25 cm)共3株作为实验样木。取基部到胸高1.3 m及以上各2.5 m处圆盘至顶部,即0、1.3、3.8、6.3、8.8、11.3 m(表1)。
表 1 样木基本信息Table 1. Sample wood information样木号
Tree No.树龄/a
Tree age/year树高
Tree height/m胸径
DBH/cm圆盘数
Disk number1 33 14.9 26.3 6 2 44 20.3 30.4 6 3 36 15.8 25.5 6 将18个圆盘带回实验室后,将圆盘一面抛光,采用树木年轮测定仪(LINTAB TM6)分析其心边材宽度。之后取南北向宽度为5 cm的中心条,选取年轮生长较平均的一侧,在边材中部相同年轮处弦向选取体积为1 cm3的样品块1个,采用Leica滑走切片机(SM 2010R)制备横切面、弦切面切片,切片厚度为20 µm。采用2%番红染液将切片染色1 ~ 2 min,之后经梯度酒精脱水、二甲苯透明剂冲洗,最后采用加拿大树胶永久封片。采用光学显微镜(奥林巴斯BX50)观察并拍照,采用ImageJ软件对每个样品测量如下与导管相关的特征指标[21]。(1)导管腔直径(vessel lumen diameter,DV(μm)):早材部分的观测倍数为40倍,晚材的观测倍数为100倍,早、晚材分别在视野中随机测量100个导管,最大导管腔直径(maximum vessel lumen diameter,DMAX(μm))为所测导管腔直径的最大值。(2) 导管密度(vessel density,VD(个/mm2)):早、晚材的观测倍数均为40倍,选取5个视野测量其面积,并记录视野中所有导管的个数。(3)纹孔膜直径(pit membrane diameter,DPM(μm)):在400倍镜下观察样品选切面切片,随机测量50个纹孔膜。
根据圆面积公式计算单个导管的直径:
DV= 2√A/π ,导管密度(VD)=n/Am ,式中:n为测量区域内导管总个数,Am为测量区域的面积(mm2)。边材面积(As)=π(R2−r2) ,式中:R为圆盘半径(mm),r为心材半径(mm)。按照Sperry 等[22]的方法计算导管水力直径(μm):
DH=∑D5∑D4 式中:D为导管直径(μm)。
1.3 数据分析
采用Shapiro检验解剖指标的数据正态性,采用单因素方差分析检验取样高度间的差异显著性,采用皮尔森相关性分析检验各指标的相关性。使用R 3.5.2对数据进行统计分析,采用Origin 2015作图。
2. 结果与分析
2.1 楸树边材导管直径径级分布
楸树为环孔材,生长轮明显,早、晚材导管腔直径差异较大(图1)。早材导管腔直径为22 ~ 368 μm,相比较小的导管,100 ~ 300 μm的导管占比最多,且整体分布偏左,总的来说早材导管腔直径变异幅度大。晚材导管腔直径为7 ~ 60 μm,与早材不同,晚材导管腔直径变异幅度较小,多集中在20 μm左右,而大于40 μm的导管很少,整体分布偏右(图2)。
2.2 导管相关特征的轴向变化
由表2和图3可知,早材导管腔直径与取样高度没有显著相关性,但有随树木取样高度增加而减小的趋势。其在0 m处的平均早材导管腔直径为200 μm,在11.3 m处为178 μm,最大值在3.8 ~ 6.3 m处,且在不同高度间没有显著性差异。晚材导管腔直径与取样高度呈显著负相关(P < 0.01),其在0 m处的平均晚材导管腔直径为27 μm,在11.3 m处为20 μm,且在0 m处与11.3 m处有显著差异,中间4个高度间没有显著差异,即随树木高度增加,晚材导管腔直径呈减小趋势。早材最大导管腔直径与取样高度呈显著负相关(P < 0.001),其在0 m处的平均早材最大导管腔直径为332 μm,在11.3 m处为264 μm,且在胸径处有起伏为357 μm。方差分析显示高度的变化对其有显著影响,0 m处与8.8 m和11.3 m处有显著差异,且随树木高度增加,最大早材导管腔直径呈减小趋势。晚材最大导管腔直径与取样高度呈显著负相关(P < 0.05),其在0 m处的平均晚材最大导管腔直径为52 μm,在11.3 m处为39 μm,在胸径处出现最大值为56 μm。方差分析显示高度的变化对其无显著影响,但其中各高度间有部分差异,如1.3 m处与3.8、6.3及11.3 m处。早材导管分布密度与取样高度没有显著相关性,但随树高增加其有增加的趋势。其在0 m处的平均早材导管分布密度为9 个/mm2,在11.3 m处为14 个/mm2,方差分析显示高度的变化对其无显著影响,仅0 m处与11.3 m处有显著差异。晚材导管分布密度与取样高度没有显著相关性,但随树高增加其有增加的趋势,其在0 m处的平均晚材导管分布密度为347 个/mm2,在11.3 m处为436个 /mm2,取样高度间没有显著差异性。
表 2 木质部解剖指标高度间的差异显著性分析(ANOVA)Table 2. Significance test of xylem anatomical traits at different tree heights by ANOVA高度
Height/
m导管水力
直径
Vessel hydraulic diameter/μm边材面积
Sapwood
area/mm2早材导管
腔直径
Earlywood vessel lumen diameter/μm晚材导管
腔直径
Latewood vessel lumen diameter/μm早材最大导管
腔直径
Earlywood max. vessel lumen diameter/μm晚材最大导管
腔直径
Latewood max. vessel lumen diameter/μm早材导管密度/
(个·mm− 2)
Earlywood
vessel density/
(number·mm− 2)晚材导管密度/
(个·mm− 2)
Latewood
vessel density/
(number·mm− 2)纹孔膜直径
Pit membrane diameter/
μm0 277 ± 18a 10 566 ± 1 298a 200 ± 46a 27 ± 3a 332 ± 15ab 52 ± 9ab 9 ± 1b 347 ± 133a 9 ± 1ab 1.3 282 ± 14a 8 497 ± 489ab 200 ± 27a 26 ± 3ab 357 ± 10a 56 ± 4a 13 ± 3ab 309 ± 79a 9 ± 1a 3.8 252 ± 17bc 6 330 ± 901bc 212 ± 14a 24 ± 3ab 315 ± 19bc 40 ± 8b 10 ± 2ab 298 ± 94a 8 ± 0.5ab 6.3 264 ± 10ab 4 713 ± 2 331cd 218 ± 14a 22 ± 2ab 336 ± 9ab 38 ± 7b 11 ± 1ab 325 ± 83a 8 ± 0.4ab 8.8 234 ± 5c 3 616 ± 1 052de 201 ± 16a 22 ± 5ab 294 ± 7c 45 ± 8ab 13 ± 1ab 418 ± 55a 8 ± 0.4ab 11.3 209 ± 17d 1 993 ± 1 026e 178 ± 10a 20 ± 3b 264 ± 25d 39 ± 8b 14 ± 3a 436 ± 157a 8 ± 0.5b 注:表中数据为“平均值 ± 标准差”。同列不同字母表示差异显著(P < 0.05)。Notes: the data in the table is “average ± standard deviation”. Different letters in each column indicate significant difference (P < 0.05). 2.3 导管水力直径、边材面积和纹孔膜直径的轴向变化
由表2和图4可知,导管水力直径与取样高度呈显著负相关(P < 0.001),其在0 m处的平均水力直径为277 μm,在11.3 m处为209 μm,最大值在胸径处为282 μm。方差分析显示高度的变化对其有显著影响(P < 0.001),且0、1.3 m处与8.8、11.3 m处有显著差异,即随树木高度增加,导管水力直径呈减小趋势。边材面积与取样高度呈显著负相关(P < 0.001),在0 m处的平均边材面积为10 566 mm2,11.3 m处为1 993 mm2,即随树木高度增加,边材面积呈减小趋势。方差分析结果显示,高度的变化对其有显著影响,基部、中部与上部均有显著差异。纹孔膜直径与取样高度呈显著负相关(P < 0.01),其在0 m处的平均纹孔膜直径为9 μm,在11.3 m处为8 μm,即随高度增加,纹孔膜直径呈减小趋势。方差分析显示高度的变化对其无显著影响,但1.3 m处与11.3 m处有显著差异。
2.4 导管水力直径、边材面积和纹孔膜直径间的相关关系
由图5可知,导管水力直径与边材面积呈显著正相关(P < 0.001),随边材面积的增加,导管水力直径呈增加趋势。纹孔膜直径与导管水力直径呈显著正相关(P < 0.001),随导管水力直径的增加,纹孔膜直径呈增加趋势。
3. 讨 论
3.1 导管特征的轴向变化
在本研究中,早材导管腔直径随高度的变化不明显,晚材导管腔直径则随高度增加而减小,同时,早、晚材导管密度都有增大趋势但并不显著(图3)。随树高的增加导管水力直径呈显著减小的趋势(P < 0.001),而最大早、晚材导管腔直径则呈现不同的结果,最大早材导管腔直径随树高增加呈显著减小趋势(P < 0.001),最大晚材导管腔直径随树高增加呈显著减小趋势(P < 0.05)。虽然早晚材导管腔直径的变化趋势略有不同,但本结果与我们的假设基本相符合,即随树高增大导管水力直径减小。综合来看,树基部的导管直径大而数量少,树顶处导管直径小而数量多。其中早晚材导管直径都有不同程度的减小趋势,晚材导管直径的减小趋势比早材导管明显一些,但同时因早材导管整体都较大,尤其200 ~ 300 μm区间很多,而大的导管可以直接导致导水效率的改变,与大导管同时存在的小导管所支配的导水效率相对很小,所以我们认为采用早材最大导管直径来衡量早材导管导水能力的变化比早材平均导管直径要更合理一些。导管直径的变化趋势结果与前人的研究相符[6, 11, 19, 23-30]。大而疏的导管一定程度上可促进水分运输的效率,但同时木质部导水效率的提高是以增加空穴化风险作为代价的,因此大的导管更容易受到栓塞的伤害[20]。而上部小而密集的导管能够承受较大的水力张力,使得其在更大的水势差下也能维持正常的水分运输。
通常认为宽的导管代表着高效的水力传导,反之窄的导管代表低效的水力传导,在一些干旱的地区,树木的导管直径相对较小,虽然在一定程度上水分运输效率降低,但其导管壁加厚导致植物坍塌和被破坏的几率降低,同时导管频率的增加补偿了一部分的水分运输的有效性[31]。能够解释导管的这种变化最重要的影响因素是输水路径的长度[29]。木质部导管大小和导管密度决定了植物水分传输能力[32],导管直径越大,长度越长,水分运输效率越高[33-34]。关于幼龄桉树(Eucalyptus regnans)(8年生)的研究发现导管水力直径随树高减小,但导水率与树高之间没有显著的相关性[15]。而Pfautsch等[8]研究了树高约20 m的成年桉树,发现水力直径同理论导水率的变化在整个输水路径上的变化都是呈现驼峰形,树顶最小。范泽鑫等[20]的研究表明,6种12株常绿阔叶树的理论导水率(KS)有4株随树高增加呈线性降低,而剩余的树木在树冠以下的理论导水率无显著变化趋势,理论导水率的变化与导管水力直径变化基本一致。虽然水力直径在一定程度上影响树木的导水率,但其并不一定是全部决定因素,例如,树木的导水率还可能受到边材面积的影响。
3.2 边材面积的轴向变化
关于边材面积的轴向变化,本研究中边材面积随树高增加而减小(图4),与我们的假设相符,同时边材面积与水力直径呈显著正相关关系(图5)。这一结果的可能解释是,随树高增加水力阻力增大,边材减少可以降低栓塞风险。而Aparecido等 [35]对26种热带树种的研究表明,边材面积随着树木总高度增加呈现指数增长趋势,但边材面积与导管直径并无显著相关性。本研究与其差异的原因可能是本研究只是单一树种,应有种间差异。边材面积与树高的关系显著说明边材生长在一定程度上与树高有关,例如可以提供给树木垂直生长时的横向扩张和支撑[36−37]。同时,边材面积随树高减小的原因可能是树木需要通过减小边材面积以避免水分流失,且树木高处易受干旱问题影响,导致空穴化和栓塞,因此树木也会保持较小的边材以避免栓塞等问题。
边材面积大小影响水分运输的流量大小,从而影响边材内的液流变化情况。Pfautsch等[8]的研究表明,桉树的边材面积随树高增加而减小,边材理论导水率呈驼峰状变化,并在树冠处达到峰值。同时,树干液流是随树高增加逐渐减小的,而叶片液流是从分枝处开始至树顶逐渐增加。可能的原因是在树冠处有部分水流向了侧枝,从而供给叶片的水分需求。同步减小的边材面积和理论导水率使得叶片液流体积增加的原因可能是:顶部阳光照射的树叶比基部的树叶需求的水更多,所以树干液流随树高增加而减小。关于桉树的研究结果也可说明,边材面积在一定程度上影响和适应树木由主干至叶片的木质部水分传导网络的功能需求,且边材面积的变化与水分流动的规律基本一致[38]。未来研究可深入探讨是否楸树边材面积的变化规律与其树干、侧枝与叶片的液流需求及变化规律具有一致性。
3.3 纹孔膜直径的轴向变化
木质部在传导水分的同时需要再降低栓塞扩散的风险[9, 39]。导管上的纹孔对木质部水力效率和安全有着至关重要的作用,因为它们不仅可以使水分在相邻管道间流动,而且是阻挡气泡在管道间流通的屏障。纹孔膜上的微孔越少,气泡在扩散时的阻力越大[40-42]。本研究中纹孔膜直径随树高增加而呈现减小趋势(图4,P < 0.01),且纹孔膜直径与水力直径呈显著正相关关系(图5,P < 0.01)。可能的原因是纹孔膜直径随树高的变化规律与导管直径相似,大的导管倾向于具有大的纹孔膜,树干上部的导管小,所以此处的纹孔膜直径也小,同时树干上部小的纹孔膜也在一定程度上减小了树顶发生水力失效的概率。
纹孔结构与导水率的关系比较复杂,例如对柽柳(Tamarix chinensis)的研究表明,纹孔膜直径与木质部导水率无显著相关关系,而与外纹孔口面积则有显著正相关关系[43]。纹孔结构对树木导水效率的影响主要包括纹孔膜总面积、导管上的纹孔密度、纹孔膜厚度等。纹孔膜面积越大、数量越多,导水效率就越大,但同时会降低木质部输水安全性。纹孔面积假说[13, 44]和稀有纹孔假说[13, 45]分别解释了导管中的栓塞概率随着其上纹孔膜总面积和数量的增加而增加。本研究仅是初步探索,纹孔膜部分未能测量导管上纹孔膜总面积和密度等指标,尚不足以解释纹孔结构与树木水力效率的关系。
4. 结 论
楸树木质部水分疏导组织构造特征的轴向变化主要表现在边材面积、导管特征和纹孔膜特征3个方面。楸树生长轮明显,早晚材导管腔直径差异较大,早材比晚材变异幅度更大。最大导管腔直径的轴向变化显著,导管密度的轴向变化不显著,边材面积和纹孔膜直径的轴向变化显著。综合来看,楸树基部导管相对大而疏,边材面积大,上部导管相对小而多,边材面积小,这是楸树木质部结构适应长距离输水功能的一种优化设计,以降低树木栓塞化风险,提高水分运输的效率和安全性。
致谢 感谢中国林业科学研究院的姜笑梅老师、张永刚老师和赵荣军老师对实验开展和文章撰写提供的指导与帮助。
-
表 1 样木基本信息
Table 1 Sample wood information
样木号
Tree No.树龄/a
Tree age/year树高
Tree height/m胸径
DBH/cm圆盘数
Disk number1 33 14.9 26.3 6 2 44 20.3 30.4 6 3 36 15.8 25.5 6 表 2 木质部解剖指标高度间的差异显著性分析(ANOVA)
Table 2 Significance test of xylem anatomical traits at different tree heights by ANOVA
高度
Height/
m导管水力
直径
Vessel hydraulic diameter/μm边材面积
Sapwood
area/mm2早材导管
腔直径
Earlywood vessel lumen diameter/μm晚材导管
腔直径
Latewood vessel lumen diameter/μm早材最大导管
腔直径
Earlywood max. vessel lumen diameter/μm晚材最大导管
腔直径
Latewood max. vessel lumen diameter/μm早材导管密度/
(个·mm− 2)
Earlywood
vessel density/
(number·mm− 2)晚材导管密度/
(个·mm− 2)
Latewood
vessel density/
(number·mm− 2)纹孔膜直径
Pit membrane diameter/
μm0 277 ± 18a 10 566 ± 1 298a 200 ± 46a 27 ± 3a 332 ± 15ab 52 ± 9ab 9 ± 1b 347 ± 133a 9 ± 1ab 1.3 282 ± 14a 8 497 ± 489ab 200 ± 27a 26 ± 3ab 357 ± 10a 56 ± 4a 13 ± 3ab 309 ± 79a 9 ± 1a 3.8 252 ± 17bc 6 330 ± 901bc 212 ± 14a 24 ± 3ab 315 ± 19bc 40 ± 8b 10 ± 2ab 298 ± 94a 8 ± 0.5ab 6.3 264 ± 10ab 4 713 ± 2 331cd 218 ± 14a 22 ± 2ab 336 ± 9ab 38 ± 7b 11 ± 1ab 325 ± 83a 8 ± 0.4ab 8.8 234 ± 5c 3 616 ± 1 052de 201 ± 16a 22 ± 5ab 294 ± 7c 45 ± 8ab 13 ± 1ab 418 ± 55a 8 ± 0.4ab 11.3 209 ± 17d 1 993 ± 1 026e 178 ± 10a 20 ± 3b 264 ± 25d 39 ± 8b 14 ± 3a 436 ± 157a 8 ± 0.5b 注:表中数据为“平均值 ± 标准差”。同列不同字母表示差异显著(P < 0.05)。Notes: the data in the table is “average ± standard deviation”. Different letters in each column indicate significant difference (P < 0.05). -
[1] 张红霞, 袁凤辉, 关德新, 等. 维管植物木质部水分传输过程的影响因素及研究进展[J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(11):289−296. Zhang H X, Yuan F H, Guan D X, et al. A review on water transport in xylem of vascular plants and its affecting factors[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2017, 36(11): 289−296.
[2] Li S, Lens F, Espino S, et al. Intervessel pit membrane thickness as a key determinant of embolism resistance in angiosperm xylem[J]. IAWA Journal, 2016, 37(2): 152−171. doi: 10.1163/22941932-20160128
[3] Ryan M G, Yoder B J. Hydraulic limits to tree height and tree growth[J]. Bioscience, 1997, 47(4): 235−242. doi: 10.2307/1313077
[4] West G B, Brown J H, Enquist B J. A general model for the structure and allometry of plant vascular systems[J]. Nature, 1999, 400: 664−667.
[5] Schuldt B, Leuschner C, Brock N, et al. Changes in wood density, wood anatomy and hydraulic properties of the xylem along the root-to-shoot flow path in tropical rainforest trees[J]. Tree Physiology, 2013, 33(2): 161−174. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tps122
[6] Tommaso A, Vinicio C, Marco C, et al. Convergent tapering of xylem conduits in different woody species[J]. New Phytologist, 2006, 169(2): 279−290. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01587.x
[7] Anfodillo T, Petit G, Crivellaro A. Axial conduit widening in woody species: a still neglected anatomical pattern[J]. IAWA Journal, 2013, 34(4): 352−364. doi: 10.1163/22941932-00000030
[8] Pfautsch S, Aspinwall M J, Drake J E, et al. Traits and trade-offs in whole-tree hydraulic architecture along the vertical axis of Eucalyptus grandis[J]. Annals of Botany, 2018, 121(1): 129−141. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcx137
[9] Lechthaler S, Turnbull T L, Gelmini Y, et al. A standardization method to disentangle environmental information from axial trends of xylem anatomical traits[J]. Tree Physiology, 2019, 39(3): 495−502. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tpy110
[10] Becker P, Gribben R J, Schulte P J. Incorporation of transfer resistance between tracheary elements into hydraulic resistance models for tapered conduits[J]. Tree Physiology, 2003, 23(15): 1009−1019. doi: 10.1093/treephys/23.15.1009
[11] Petit G, Pfautsch S, Anfodillo T, et al. The challenge of tree height in Eucalyptus regnans: when xylem tapering overcomes hydraulic resistance[J]. New Phytologist, 2010, 187(4): 1146−1153. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03304.x
[12] Tyree M T, Zimmermann M H. Xylem structure and the ascent of sap[M]. Berlin: Springer, 2002: 45−56.
[13] 李荣, 姜在民, 张硕新, 等. 木本植物木质部栓塞脆弱性研究新进展[J]. 植物生态学报, 2015, 39(8):838−848. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2015.0080 Li R, Jiang Z M, Zhang S X, et al. A review of new research progress on the vulnerability of xylem embolism of woody plants[J]. Journal of Plant Ecology, 2015, 39(8): 838−848. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2015.0080
[14] Corothie H. Multilingual glossary of terms used in wood anatomy[M]. Amsterdam: IAWA, 1964: 43.
[15] England J R, Attiwill P M. Changes in sapwood permeability and anatomy with tree age and height in the broad-leaved evergreen species Eucalyptus regnans[J]. Tree Physiology, 2007, 27(8): 1113−1124. doi: 10.1093/treephys/27.8.1113
[16] Gerrish G. An explanation of natural forest dieback based on the “pipe model” analogy[J]. GeoJournal, 1988, 17(2): 295−299. doi: 10.1007/BF02432939
[17] Pothier D, Margolis H A, Waring R H. Patterns of change of saturated sapwood permeability and sapwood conductance with stand development[J]. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 1989, 19(4): 432−439. doi: 10.1139/x89-068
[18] Coyea M R, Margolis H A. Factors affecting the relationship between sapwood area and leaf area of balsam fir[J]. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 1992, 22: 1684−1693.
[19] Fan Z, Cao K, Becker P. Axial and radial variations in xylem anatomy of angiosperm and conifer trees in Yunnan, China[J]. IAWA Journal, 2009, 30(1): 1−13. doi: 10.1163/22941932-90000198
[20] 范泽鑫, 曹坤芳, 邹寿青. 云南哀牢山6种常绿阔叶树木质部解剖特征的轴向和径向变化[J]. 植物生态学报, 2005, 29(6):968−975. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1005-264X.2005.06.013 Fan Z X, Cao K F, Zou S Q. Axial and radial changes in xylem anatomical characteristics in six evergreen broadleaved tree species in Ailao Mountain, Yunnan[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2005, 29(6): 968−975. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1005-264X.2005.06.013
[21] Scholz A, Klepsch M, Karimi Z, et al. How to quantify conduits in wood?[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2013, 4: 1−11.
[22] Sperry J S, Nichols K L, Sullivan J E M, et al. Xylem embolism in ring-porous, diffuse-porous, and coniferous trees of northern Utah and interior Alaska[J]. Ecology, 1994, 75: 1736−1752. doi: 10.2307/1939633
[23] Petit G, Anfodillo T, Mencuccini M. Tapering of xylem conduits and hydraulic limitations in sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) trees[J]. New Phytologist, 2008, 177(3): 653−664. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.02291.x
[24] Petit G, Anfodillo T, Carraro V, et al. Hydraulic constraints limit height growth in trees at high altitude[J]. New Phytologist, 2011, 189(1): 241−252. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03455.x
[25] Petit G, Declerck F A J, Carrer M, et al. Axial vessel widening in arborescent monocots[J]. Tree Physiology, 2014, 34(2): 137−145. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tpt118
[26] Petit G, Anfodillo T. Plant physiology in theory and practice: an analysis of the WBE model for vascular plants[J]. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 2009, 259(1): 1−4. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2009.03.007
[27] Lintunen A, Kalliokoski T. The effect of tree architecture on conduit diameter and frequency from small distal roots to branch tips in Betula pendula, Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris[J]. Tree Physiology, 2010, 30(11): 1433−1447. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tpq085
[28] Bettiati D, Petit G, Anfodillo T. Testing the equi-resistance principle of the xylem transport system in a small ash tree: empirical support from anatomical analyses[J]. Tree Physiology, 2012, 32(2): 171−177. doi: 10.1093/treephys/tpr137
[29] Olson M E, Soriano D, Rosell J A, et al. Plant height and hydraulic vulnerability to drought and cold[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2018, 115(29): 7551−7556. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1721728115
[30] Cardoso S, Sousa V B, Quilhó T, et al. Anatomical variation of teakwood from unmanaged mature plantations in East Timor[J]. Journal of Wood Science, 2015, 61(3): 326−333. doi: 10.1007/s10086-015-1474-y
[31] 龚容, 徐霞江, 红蕾, 等. 干旱半干旱区几种典型灌木半灌木茎叶水分传导系统的结构特征[J]. 北京师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 54(4):104−112. Gong R, Xu X J, Hong L, et al. Architectural traits of stem-leaf hydraulic system in typical shrubs in arid and semi-arid regions[J]. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Natural Science), 2018, 54(4): 104−112.
[32] Zanne A E, Westoby M, Falster D S, et al. Angiosperm wood structure: global patterns in vessel anatomy and their relation to wood density and potential conductivity[J]. American Journal of Botany, 2010, 97(2): 207−215. doi: 10.3732/ajb.0900178
[33] Fan D Y, Xie Z Q. Several controversial viewpoints in studying the cavitation of xylem vessels[J]. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 2004, 28(1): 126−132.
[34] Schulte P J, Gibson A C. Hydraulic conductance and tracheid anatomy in six species of extant seed plants[J]. Canadian Journal of Botany, 1988, 66(6): 1073−1079. doi: 10.1139/b88-153
[35] Aparecido L M T, Santos J D, Higuchi N, et al. Relevance of wood anatomy and size of Amazonian trees in the determination and allometry of sapwood area[J]. Acta Amazonica, 2019, 49(1): 1−10. doi: 10.1590/1809-4392201800961
[36] Köstner B, Falge E, Tenhunen J D. Age-related effects on leaf area/sapwood area relationships, canopy transpiration and carbon gain of Norway spruce stands (Picea abies) in the Fichtelgebirge, Germany[J]. Tree Physiology, 2002, 22(8): 567−574. doi: 10.1093/treephys/22.8.567
[37] Gebauer T, Horna V, Leuschner C. Variability in radial sap flux density patterns and sapwood area among seven co-occurring temperate broad-leaved tree species[J]. Tree Physiology, 2008, 28(12): 1821−1830. doi: 10.1093/treephys/28.12.1821
[38] Meinzer F C, Bond B J, Warren J M, et al. Does water transport scale universally with tree size?[J]. Functional Ecology, 2005, 19(4): 558−565. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2005.01017.x
[39] Bass P, Ewers F W, Davis S D, et al. Evolution of xylem physiology[M]// Hemsle A R, Poole I. The evolution of plant physiology. New York: Academic Press, 2004.
[40] Jean-Christophe D, Barbara L, Meinzer F C. Bordered pit structure and function determine spatial patterns of air-seeding thresholds in xylem of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii, Pinaceae) trees[J]. American Journal of Botany, 2006, 93(11): 1588−1600. doi: 10.3732/ajb.93.11.1588
[41] Cochard H, Holtta T, Herbette S, et al. New insights into the mechanisms of water-stress-induced cavitation in conifers[J]. Plant Physiology, 2009, 151(2): 949−954. doi: 10.1104/pp.109.138305
[42] Delzon S, Douthe C, Sala A, et al. Mechanism of water-stress induced cavitation in conifers: bordered pit structure and function support the hypothesis of seal capillary-seeding[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2010, 33(12): 2101−2111.
[43] 木巴热克·阿尤普, 荆卫民, 伊丽米努尔, 等. 柽柳属6种植物侧枝木质部导水率与纹孔数量特征关系[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2017, 32(2):106−111. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2017.02.18 Mubarek A, Jing W M, Yiliminuer, et al. Relations between xylem hydraulic efficiency and inter-vessel pit features of six Tamarix L. species[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2017, 32(2): 106−111. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2017.02.18
[44] Wheeler J K, Sperry J S, Hacke U G, et al. Inter-vessel pitting and cavitation in woody Rosaceae and other vesselled plants: a basis for a safety versus efficiency trade-off in xylem transport[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2005, 28(6): 800−812.
[45] Christman M A, Sperry J S, Adler F R. Testing the ‘rare pit’ hypothesis for xylem cavitation resistance in three species of Acer[J]. New Phytologist, 2009, 182(3): 664−674. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02776.x
-
期刊类型引用(3)
1. 危学达,王玉,丁孟东,吴双,梁丹,叶梅霞,邬荣领. 利用异速生长模型和博弈论解析藏川杨主干动态生长的遗传调控机制. 北京林业大学学报. 2024(06): 154-164 . 本站查看
2. 王小林,周维,赵梅,丁钰桐,杨冬梅,张吟霜,尹梦琪,庄悦,彭国全. 雷竹和青皮竹导管结构的轴向变化. 植物生态学报. 2024(07): 915-929 . 百度学术
3. 王梦蕾,袁红娟,白宇,孙照斌. 油松不同径向深度与方位树干液流特性研究. 西北林学院学报. 2023(05): 221-227 . 百度学术
其他类型引用(5)