Get access

Growth–size scaling relationships of woody plant species differ from predictions of the Metabolic Ecology Model

Authors

  • Sabrina E. Russo,

    Corresponding author
    1. Conservation and Community Ecology Group, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EA, UK
      *E-mail: ser48@cam.ac.uk
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Susan K. Wiser,

    1. Landcare Research, PO BOX 40, Lincoln 7640, New Zealand
    Search for more papers by this author
  • David A. Coomes

    1. Conservation and Community Ecology Group, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EA, UK
    2. Landcare Research, PO BOX 40, Lincoln 7640, New Zealand
    Search for more papers by this author

Errata

This article is corrected by:

  1. Errata: (Russo et al. 2007): A re-analysis of growth–size scaling relationships of woody plant species Volume 11, Issue 3, 311–312, Article first published online: 31 January 2008

*E-mail: ser48@cam.ac.uk

Abstract

The Metabolic Ecology Model predicts that tree diameter (D) growth (dD/dt) scales with D1/3. Using data on diameter growth and height–diameter relationships for 56 and 40 woody species, respectively, from forests throughout New Zealand, we tested one prediction and two assumptions of this model: (i) the exponent of the growth–diameter scaling relationship equals 1/3 and is invariant among species and growth forms, (ii) small and large individuals are invariant in their exponents and (iii) tree height scales with D2/3. We found virtually no support for any prediction or assumption: growth–diameter scaling exponents varied substantially among species and growth forms, correlated positively with species’ maximum height, and shifted significantly with increasing individual size. Tree height did not scale invariantly with diameter. Based on a quantitative test, violation of these assumptions alone could not explain the model's poor fit to our data, possibly reflecting multiple, unsound assumptions, as well as unaccounted-for variation that should be incorporated.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary