Advertisement

Crown structure of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. in a coppiced plantation

  • J. S. Pereira
  • C. C. Araújo
  • N. Borralho
Conference paper
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (volume 15)

Abstract

Forest biomass production is a function of photosynthetically active radiation intercepted by the foliage (Jarvis and Leverenz 1983). It has been shown that total aboveground biomass production by Eucalyptus globulus stands is linearly dependent on the solar radiation intercepted by the canopy (Linder 1985). Canopy characteristics such as leaf area index, vertical distribution of foliage, branch and leaf inclination angles, distribution of leaf azimuthal angles and grouping of foliage affect the interception of radiation and therefore forest primary productivity (Jarvis and Leverenz 1983). These canopy characteristics result from the interaction between two types of processes: 1) the genetically determined “growth plan” that may be reiterated in response to accidental damage incurred in the crown (Tomlinson 1983) and 2) environmental influences on the growth and development of branches and leaves. The objective of this work was to elaborate the crown structure of trees in a Eucalyptus globulus coppiced plantation as part of a larger study of production in these plantations.

Keywords

Leaf Area Shade Leave Order Branch Eucalyptus Globulus Bifurcation Ratio 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Borchert R, Slad NA (1981) Bifurcation ratios and the adaptative geometry of trees. Bot Gaz 142: 394–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ford ED, Newbould PJ (1971) The leaf canopy of coppiced deciduous woodland. I. Development and structure. J Ecol 59: 843–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Grier CC, Waring RH (1974) Conifer foliage mass related to sapwood area. Forest Sci 20: 205–206Google Scholar
  4. Honda H, Fisher JB (1978) Tree branch angle: maximizing effective leaf area. Science 199: 888–889PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jankiewicz LS, Stecki ZJ (1976) Some mechanisms responsible for differences in tree form. In: Cannell MGR and Last FT (eds) Tree Physiology and Yield Improvement. Academic Press, New York, pp 157–172Google Scholar
  6. Jarvis PG, Leverenz JW (1983) Productivity of temperate, deciduous and evergreen forests. In: Lange OL, Nobel PS, Osmond CB, Zieger H (eds) Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology, NS vol 12D: Physiological Plant Ecology IV. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York-Tokyo, pp 233–280Google Scholar
  7. Kaufmann MR, Troendle CA (1981) The relationship of leaf area and foliage biomass to sapwood conducting area in four subalpine forest tree species. Forest Sei 27: 477–482Google Scholar
  8. Kramer PJ, Kozlowski TT (1979) Physiology of Woody Plants. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Linder S (1985) Potential and actual production in Australian forest stands. In: Landsberg JJ, Parsons W (eds) Research for Forest Management. CSIRO, Melbourne, pp 11–55Google Scholar
  10. Long, JN, Smith FW, Scott DRM (1981) The role of Douglas-fir stem sapwood and heartwood in the mechanical and physiological support of crowns and development of stem form. Can J Forest Res 11: 459–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McMillen GG, McClendon JH (1979) Leaf angle: an adaptative feature of sun and shade leaves. Bot Gaz 140: 437–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Tenhunen JD, Meister HP, Caldwell MM, Lange OL (1984) Environmental constraints on productivity of the Mediterranean sclerophyll shrub Quercus coccifera. Proceedings of INTECOL workshop — Rates of Natural Primary Productivity and Agricultural Production. Options méditerranéennes (Instituto Agronomico Mediterráneo de Zaragoza) 84 /1: 33–53Google Scholar
  13. Tomlinson (1983) Tree architecture. Amer Sci 71: 141–149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Waring RH, Gholz HL, Grier CC, Plummer ML (1977) Evaluating stem conducting tissue as an estimator of leaf area in four woody angiosperms. Can J Bot 55: 1474–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Whitehead D, Jarvis PJ (1981) Coniferous forests and plantations. In: Kozlowski TT (ed) Water Deficits and Plant Growth. VI. Academic Press, New York, pp 49–152Google Scholar
  16. Zimmermann MH (1983) Xylem structure and the ascent of sap. Springer- Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. S. Pereira
    • 1
  • C. C. Araújo
    • 1
  • N. Borralho
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. E. FlorestalInstituto Superior de AgronomiaLisboa codexPortugal

Personalised recommendations