Self-shading affects allometric scaling in trees

  1. Remko A. Duursma1,†,*,
  2. Annikki Mäkelä1,
  3. Douglas E.B. Reid2,
  4. Eric J. Jokela3,
  5. Annabel J. Porté4,
  6. Scott D. Roberts5

Article first published online: 17 FEB 2010

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2010.01690.x

Issue

Functional Ecology

Functional Ecology

Volume 24, Issue 4, pages 723–730, August 2010

Additional Information

How to Cite

Duursma, R. A., Mäkelä, A., Reid, D. E., Jokela, E. J., Porté, A. J. and Roberts, S. D. (2010), Self-shading affects allometric scaling in trees. Functional Ecology, 24: 723–730. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2010.01690.x

Author Information

  1. 1

    Department of Forest Ecology, University of Helsinki, Finland

  2. 2

    Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem Research, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada

  3. 3

    School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA

  4. 4

    Unité-EPHYSE, INRA, GAZINET Cedex, France

  5. 5

    Department of Forestry, and Mississippi Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, Mississippi, USA

  1. †

    Present address: Centre for Plants and the Environment, University of Western Sydney, Richmond, NSW 2753, Australia.

* Correspondence author. E-mail: remkoduursma@gmail.com

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 13 JUL 2010
  2. Article first published online: 17 FEB 2010
  3. Received 15 October 2009; accepted 12 January 2010 Handling Editor: Lawren Sack

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article with Supporting Information (HTML) Get PDF (619K)

Keywords:

  • allometry;
  • metabolic scaling theory;
  • plant architecture;
  • self-shading

Summary

1. West et al. [Science, 284 (1999) 1677] derived an optimal body-size scaling exponent under the assumption that resources are evenly distributed among exchange surfaces, leading to the well-known ¾ scaling rule. In trees, this implies a volume-filling branching network (a fractal dimension of 3 for foliage). However, there is evidence that the fractal dimension is less than 3 in trees.

2. Here, we include self-shading in the derivation of optimal fractal dimensions. With self-shading, resources are not evenly distributed among leaves because light enters the crown at the surface and is gradually attenuated within the crown. We find that the optimal fractal dimension can take values between 2 and 3, depending on light interception properties and crown size.

3. For a large data set on foliage and woody biomass in gymnosperm trees, we confirm that the fractal dimension of foliage is less than 3, and that it shows a weak dependence on crown size. However, foliage biomass scaled with crown woody biomass with an exponent of 0·78, very close to the theoretical expectation of ¾ scaling. This can be explained by a deviation from the theoretical prediction in the scaling of crown woody biomass and crown length.

4. Overall, these results confirm a deviation from volume filling in gymnosperm trees, and we provide an explanation for this deviation in terms of optimal metabolic scaling. Because ¾ scaling of foliage biomass is still approximately valid, this implies that metabolic scaling exponents may not be as tightly linked to the fractal dimension of foliage as previously assumed.

View Full Article with Supporting Information (HTML) Get PDF (619K)