Tree shape plasticity in relation to crown exposure

Abstract

Trees outside closed forest stands differ in the relation between stem diameter, height and crown volume from trees that grew with neighbours close by. Whether this plasticity in tree shape varies between species in relation to their light requirement is unknown. We purposefully sampled 528 trees ranging 5–100 cm diameter at breast height growing in a range of light conditions. Across ten broad-leaved species observed in Sumatra or Kalimantan, a generic relationship was found between light exposure of the crown and a light-dependent a l parameter that modifies the height–diameter allometric equation (H = a l D b) from those for closed stands. In our results, vertical stretching is well predicted by light availability. In fully open conditions, trees are on average 31% shorter for the same diameter than under (partial) shade. Most of the stretching response occurs in all species as soon as some degree of lateral shading occurs. The response, however, varies by species (8–44% reduction) in a way apparently unrelated to species’ successional status. Crown volume varied less than stem height in its relationship with stem diameter across all light conditions tested. The scaling of crown volume with stem diameter, however, differed markedly between tree species.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Aasamaa K, Sõber A (2001) Hydraulic conductance and stomatal sensitivity to changes of leaf water status in six deciduous tree species. Biol Plant 44:65–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aiba M, Nakashizuka T (2009) Architectural differences associated with adult stature and wood density in 30 temperate tree species. Funct Ecol 23:265–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19:716–723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alder D, Synnott TJ (1992) Permanent sample plot techniques for mixed tropical forest, vol 25. Oxford Forestry Institute, Department of Plant Science, Oxford, pp 81–83

  5. Ballaré CL (1999) Keeping up with the neighbours: phytochrome sensing and other signalling mechanisms. Trends Plant Sci 4:97–102

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Beauchamp JJ, Olson JS (1973) Corrections for bias in regression estimates after logarithmic transformation. Ecology 54:1403–1407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bohlman S, O’Brien S (2006) Allometry, adult stature and regeneration requirement of 65 tree species on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. J Trop Ecol 22:123–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brüchert F, Gardiner B (2006) The effect of wind exposure on the tree aerial architecture and biomechanics of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis, Pinaceae). Am J Bot 93:1512–1521

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference. A practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. Burns RM, Honkala BH (eds) (1990) Silvics of North America. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cabanettes A, Auclair D, Imam W, Dupraz C (1998) Diameter and height growth curves for widely-spaced trees in European agroforestry. Agrofor Syst 43:169–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Canham CD, LePage PT, Coates KD (2004) A neighborhood analysis of canopy tree competition: effects of shading versus crowding. Can J For Res 34:778–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Collinet F (1997) Essai de regroupements des principales espèces structurantes d’une forêt dense humide d’après l’analyse de leur répartition spatiale (Forêt de Paracou-Guyane) In: vol. PhD. Université de Lyon 1, Lyon, p 313

  14. Dawkins HC (1963) Crown diameters: their relation to bole diameter in tropical forest trees. Commonw For Rev 42:318–333

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dawkins HC (1966) The productivity of tropical high-forest trees and their reaction to controllable environment. Commonwealth Forestry Institute, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  16. Enquist BJ, Niklas KJ (2002) Global allocation rules for patterns of biomass partitioning. Science 295:1517–1519

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Geoff Wang G (1998) Is height of dominant trees at a reference diameter an adequate measure of site quality? For Ecol Manag 112:49–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gilbert IR, Jarvis PG, Smith H (2001) Proximity signal and shade avoidance differences between early and late successional trees. Nature 411:792–795

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hairiah K, Dewi S, Agus F, Velarde SJ, Ekadinata A, Rahayu S, van Noordwijk M (2011) Measuring carbon stocks across land use systems: a manual. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) Southeast Asia Regional Program. Bogor, Indonesia

  20. Hastie TJ, Tibshirani RJ (1990) Generalized additive models. Chapman & Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  21. Heineman KD, Jensen E, Shapland A, Bogenrief B, Tan S, Rebarber R, Russo SE (2011) The effects of belowground resources on aboveground allometric growth in Bornean tree species. For Ecol Manag 261(11):1820–1832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hemery GE, Savill PS, Pryor SN (2005) Applications of the crown diameter–stem diameter relationship for different species of broadleaved trees. For Ecol Manag 215:285–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Henry HAL, Aarssen LW (1999) The interpretation of stem diameter-height allometry in trees: biomechanical constraints, neighbour effects, or biased regressions? Ecol Lett 2:89–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ilomaki S, Nikinmaa E, Makela A (2003) Crown rise due to competition drives biomass allocation in silver birch. Can J For Res Revue Canadienne De Recherche Forestiere 33:2395–2404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jack SB, Long JN (1991) Analysis of stand density effects on canopy structure: a conceptual approach. Trees Struct Funct 5:44–49

    Google Scholar 

  26. Jøker D (2000) Alstonia scholaris (L.) R.Br. In: Seed leaflet, vol 9. Danida Forest Seed Centre, Denmark

  27. King DA, Davies SJ, Supardi MNN, Tan S (2005) Tree growth is related to light interception and wood density in two mixed dipterocarp forests of Malaysia. Funct Ecol 19:445–453. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2005.00982.x/full

  28. Kohyama T (1994) Size-structure-based models of forest dynamics to interpret population- and community-level mechanisms. J Plant Res 107:107–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lawrence D, Suma V, Mogea JP (2005) Change in species composition with repeated shifting cultivation: limited role of soil nutrients. Ecol Appl 15:1952–1967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. LeGoff N, Ottorini JM (1996) Leaf development and stem growth of ash (Fraxinus excelsior) as affected by tree competitive status. J Appl Ecol 33:793–802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Loehle C (1997) The adaptive significance of trunk inclination on slopes: a commentary. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 264:1371–1374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Makela A, Valentine HT (2006) Crown ratio influences allometric scaling in trees. Ecology 87:2967–2972

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Muller-Landau HC et al (2006) Testing metabolic ecology theory for allometric scaling of tree size, growth and mortality in tropical forests. Ecol Lett 9:575–588

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Naidu SL, DeLucia EH, Thomas RB (1998) Contrasting patterns of biomass allocation in dominant and suppressed loblolly pine. Can J For Res 28:1116–1124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Niklas KJ (1994) Plant allometry: the scaling of form and process. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  36. Niklas KJ (1995) Size-dependent allometry of tree height, diameter and trunk-taper. Ann Bot 75:217–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Osunkoya OO, Omar-Ali K, Amit N, Dayan J, Daud DS, Sheng TK (2007) Comparative height crown allometry and mechanical design in 22 tree species of Kuala Belalong rainforest, Brunei, Borneo. Am J Bot 94:1951–1962

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Pryor SN (1988) The silviculture and yield of wild cherry. Forestry Commission Bulletin, London

    Google Scholar 

  39. Robert A, Moravie MA (2003) Topographic variation and stand heterogeneity in a wet evergreen forest of India. J Trop Ecol 19 Part 6:697–707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Skovsgaard JP, Vanclay JK (2008) Forest site productivity: a review of the evolution of dendrometric concepts for even-aged stands. Forestry 81:13–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sprugel DG (1983) Correcting for bias in log-transformed allometric equations. Ecology 64:209–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Vanclay JK, Henry N (1988) Assessing site productivity of indigenous cypress pine forest in southern Queensland. Commonw For Rev 67:53–64

    Google Scholar 

  43. Vincent G (2001) Leaf photosynthetic capacity and nitrogen content adjustment to canopy openness in tropical forest tree seedlings. J Trop Ecol 17:495–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Vincent G (2006) Leaf life span plasticity in tropical seedlings grown under contrasting light regimes. Ann Bot 97:245–255

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Vincent G, Harja D (2008) Exploring ecological significance of tree crown plasticity through three-dimensional modelling. Ann Bot 101:1221–1231

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Vincent G, De Foresta H, Mulia R (2002) Predictors of tree growth in a Dipterocarp based agroforest: a critical assessment. For Ecol Manag 161:39–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Vincent G, Azhima F, Joshi L, Healey JR (2011) Are permanent rubber agroforests an alternative to rotational rubber cultivation? An agro-ecological perspective. For Trees Livelihoods 20:85–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Wang Y, Titus SJ, LeMay VM (1998) Relationships between tree slenderness coefficients and tree or stand characteristics for major species in boreal mixedwood forests. Can J For Res 28:1171–1183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Watt MS, Palmer DJ, Kimberley MO, Hock BK, Payn TW, Lowe DJ (2010) Development of models to predict Pinus radiata productivity throughout New Zealand. Can J For Res 40:488–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Weiner J (1990) Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Tree 5:360–364

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Weiner J (2004) Allocation, plasticity and allometry in plants. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 6:207–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Weinland G (1998) Plantation. In: Turnbull SAJM (ed) A review of dipterocarps: taxonomy, ecology, and silviculture. CIFOR, Bogor, pp 151–186

    Google Scholar 

  53. Williams H, Messier C, Kneeshaw DD (1999) Effects of light availability and sapling size on stem growth and crown morphology of understory Douglas-fir and lodgepole pine. Can J For Res 29:222–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Zeide B, Vanderschaaf C (2002) The effect of density on the height–diameter relationship. In: General Technical Report SRS-48. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC, pp 463–466

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Degi Harja.

Additional information

Communicated by R. Matyssek.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harja, D., Vincent, G., Mulia, R. et al. Tree shape plasticity in relation to crown exposure. Trees 26, 1275–1285 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-012-0703-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Tree height
  • Crown shape
  • Humid tropics
  • Wood density
  • Allometry