Biologia Plantarum

, 22:42 | Cite as

Gradients of several leaf characteristics on stems of two forest herbs

  • P. Eliáś
Original Papers


The plants of two herbaceous species, namelyPulmonaria officinalis L. andSymphytum tuberosum L., growing in two deciduous forests in SW. Slovakia, were used for analysis of anatomicphysiological gradients along the insertion level of individual leaves. The gradients were established for six leaf characteristics. Specific leaf area and development of leaf area increased, while leaf tissue hydration, degrees of succulence and consistency decreased with height of insertion of leaves upon the stems. The gradients indicate the decreasing of the leaf water content and dry mass with height of the leaf on the stem. Stomatal resistance was usually the lowest in basal leaves and the highest in apical leaves of the plant. The anatomic-physiological heterogeneity of leaves of a plant is large and cannot be neglected in any anatomical or physiological investigations.


Specific Leaf Area Leaf Water Content Leaf Characteristic Forest Herb Stomatal Frequency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Davies, W. J., Kozlowski, T. T.: Stomatal responses of five woody angiosperms to light intensity and humidity. — Can. J. Bot.52: 1525–1534, 1974.Google Scholar
  2. Davies, W. J., Kozlowski, T. T., Lee, K. J.: Stomatal characteristics ofPinus resinosa andPinus strobus in relation to transpiration and antitranspirant efficiency. — Can. J. Forest. Res.4: 571–574, 1974.Google Scholar
  3. Eliáš, P.: Some ecophysiological features in leaves of plants in an oak-hornbeam forest. — Folia geobot. phytotax.14: 29–42, 1979.Google Scholar
  4. Eliáš, P., Kozinka, V.: Stomata in the leaves ofAsperula odorata L. andPulmonaria officinalis L. subsp.maculosa (Hayne) Gams. — Biológia (Bratislava)31: 33–40, 1976.Google Scholar
  5. Farkas, G. L., Rajháthy, T.: Untersuchungen über die xeromorphischen Gradienten einiger Kulturpflanzen. — Planta45: 535–548, 1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Heichel, G. H.: Stomatal movements, frequencies, and resistances in two maize varieties differing in photosynthetic capacity. — J. exp. Bot.22: 644–649, 1971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jones, H. G.: Transpiration in barley lines with differing stomatal frequencies. — J. exp. Bot.28: 162–168, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jurko, A., Duda, M.: Research Projeot Báb (IBP), Progress Report I, Institute of Botany, Slov. Acad. Sci., Bratislava 1970.Google Scholar
  9. Kozlowski, T. T., Davees, W. J., Carlson, S. D.: Transpiration rates ofFraxinus americana andAcer saccharum leaves.— Can. J. Forest. Res.4: 259–269, 1974.Google Scholar
  10. Krasnosel’skaya-Maksimova, T. A.: [Daily variations in the water content of leaves.] In Russ. — Trudy Tiflis. bot. Sada19: 1–22, 1917.Google Scholar
  11. Maximov, N. A.: The Plant in Relation to Water. — Allen and Unwin, London 1929.Google Scholar
  12. Migahid, A. M., Abu Raya, M. A.: Studies in stomatal frequency. II. Stomatal frequency in relation to position of the leaf upon the plant. — Bull. Inst. Fouad. I. Désert, Cairo2/2: 60 to 63, 1952.Google Scholar
  13. Pazourek, J.: Anatomical gradients. — Acta Univ. Carolinae-Biol. Suppl.1966 (1/2): 19 to 25, 1966.Google Scholar
  14. Pazourek, J.: The effect of light intensity on stomatal frequency in leaves ofIris hollandica hort., var. Wedgwood. — Biol. Plant.12: 208–215, 1970.Google Scholar
  15. Pazourek, J.: The density of stomata in leaves of different ecotypes ofPhragmites communis. — Folia geobot. phytotax.8: 15–21, 1973.Google Scholar
  16. Pereira, J. S., Kozlowski, T. T.: Leaf anatomy and water relations ofEucalyptus camaldulensis andE. globulus seedlings. — Can. J. Bot.54: 2868–2880, 1976.Google Scholar
  17. Pospíšilová, J.: Water potential, water saturation deficit and their relationship in leaves of different insertion level. — Biol. Plant.16: 140–143, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Prat, H.: Histo-physiological gradients and plant organogenesis. — Bot. Rev.14: 603–643, 1948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Richter, H.: Fractional potential losses and total water potential in plants: a re-evaluation. — J. exp. Bot.24: 983–994, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rychnovská, M.: A contribution to the autecology ofPhragmites communis Trin. I. Physiological heterogeneity of leaves. — Folia geobot. phytotax.2: 179–188, 1967.Google Scholar
  21. Wilson, J. R.: Variation of leaf characteristics with level of insertion on a grass tiller. III. Tissue water relations. — Aust. J. Plant Physiol.4: 733–743, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yapp, R. H., Mason, U. C.: The distribution of water in the shoot of certain herbaceous plants. — Ann. Bot.46: 159–181, 1932.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Academia 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Eliáś
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Experimental Biology and EcologySlovak Academy of SciencesBratislavaCzechoslovakia

Personalised recommendations