4/28/2024 0 Comments Leaf shape namesConsequently, as most leaves are not rectangular in shape, the product of leaf length and width alone leads to an overestimation of leaf size, and the extent of overestimation depends on leaf shape ( Cain and De Oliveira Castro, 1959).Ĭain and De Oliveira Castro (1959) showed that L × W × 2/3 provided a robust estimate of leaf size for ovate leaves in Brazilian rainforest, describing the 2/3 value as the correction factor (CF, hereafter). Thus, the product of leaf length ( L) and width ( W) defines the area of a rectangle enclosing the leaf. Allometric scaling functions have the advantage of allowing us to deduce leaf size from easily measured leaf dimensions – which are often available from pre-existing species descriptions – without use of image recognition software.Īmong different leaf allometric relationships, functions involving the product of leaf length and width are superior estimators for leaf size estimation to functions considering just one linear dimension ( Shi et al., 2019 a Yu et al., 2020). Allometric scaling functions are based on the observation that other leaf dimensions scale with leaf size, such as leaf length, width or mass ( Bartelink, 1997 Pandey and Singh, 2011 Yu et al., 2020). Even as more digital imagery of leaves becomes available from large-scale digitization efforts in herbaria globally, a robust approach to estimating leaf size based on leaf dimensions remains overdue.Īllometric scaling functions using leaf dimensions provide an alternative method to image recognition software for leaf size estimation ( Shi et al., 2019 a). In addition, for most species, no high-quality images of leaves exist, rendering image-based methods unfeasible for large-scale gap fillings. While these methods are highly accurate and precise, in situ measurements can be challenging ( Schrader et al., 2017). Standard methods are based on image recognition software that require scans or images of (nearly) complete leaves ( Pérez-Harguindeguy et al., 2013). Obtaining accurate and precise measures of leaf size across large cohorts of species is often time- and labour-intensive. Its considerable ecological relevance makes it desirable to obtain leaf size estimations for as many species worldwide as possible. For all these reasons, leaf size is a key element of numerous studies on plant functional ecology. A number of leaf venation properties also vary predictably with leaf size ( Sack et al., 2012 Baird et al., 2021). However, larger leaves may be more susceptible to herbivory and have higher within-leaf support costs ( Niinemets et al., 2006). For example, larger leaves may be more efficient in light capture under deep shade ( Lusk et al., 2019), and achieve higher lifetime economic profitability ( Villar et al., 2021). A variety of advantages and disadvantages of larger leaves have been proposed. Leaf size also affects leaf temperature and thus photosynthesis, transpiration and respiration ( Leigh et al., 2017). In general, species with larger leaves have longer internodes, larger flowers and thicker twigs ( Westoby and Wright 2003), and deploy a larger total leaf area per branch ( Preston and Ackerly 2003) – and thus have visual and physical properties distinct from small-leaved species. There is around 10 6 variation among species in average leaf size, from ~1 mm 2 to 1 m 2, with many large-leaved species found in the tropics and many small-leaved species found in deserts and at high elevation and high latitudes ( Wright et al., 2017 Baird et al., 2021). Among leaf traits, the size of a leaf has special significance. Leaf functional traits, such as leaf size, mass and longevity, link to variation in plant ecological strategies and connect to ecosystem functioning ( Westoby et al., 2002).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |