The Evolutionary Ecology of Sprouting in Woody Plants

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

EPICORMIC SHOOTS INDUCTION AND ROOTING CUTTINGS OF Calophyllum brasiliense

“…It is noteworthy that girdling may causes serious and permanent damage to the girdled plants (BOND;MIDGLEY, 2003;MEI et al, 2015), as noted in this study (Figure 2 C and D). .0 ¹ t test carried out at 5% probability among all treatments; ² t test carried out at 5% probability of among coppicing and girdling treatments; ³ Statistical test was not carried out due to the small frame of replications.…”

“…The epicormic shoots induction has been associated to several factors, in which, environmental as a response to sunlight on the dormant buds (MEIER et al, 2012), physiological and hormonal, as a result of stresses (BOND; MIDGLEY, 2003;BURROWS, 2008) or even considering, moderated genetic variations among plants (MEIER et al, 2012). The largest epicormic shoots emission in plants under coppicing can be the result of sunlight incidence on the base of these plants in comparison to the other methods, once explained by onsite auxin photo oxidation (GORDON et al, 2006), consequently catalyzing the breakdown dormancy of the buds from the base of Calophyllum brasiliense stems.…”

“…The damage to the region area generates a tumescence just above the girdle ( Figure 2E), result from the onsite accumulation of soluble sugars and starch, along with the cessation of stem growth below the girdle (CHANO et al, 2015), in some cases, resulting the death of the plant (BOND; MIDGLEY, 2003) (Figure 2C and D). It is common the intense deepening of the cut, bypassing the cambium and reaching the xylem, reducing the hydraulic conductivity and the translocation of photoassimilates (GLEASON et al, 2016).…”

Fire-mediated disruptive selection can explain the reseeder–resprouter dichotomy in Mediterranean-type vegetation

“…Both resprouting and reseeding have advantages (Le Maitre and Midgley 1992;Schutte et al 1995;Vlok and Yeaton 1999;Bond and Midgley 2003). Initially after a fire, resprouters have safe underground resources from which to draw and can rapidly take advantage of the recently opened spaces, while reseeders must first germinate and establish.…”

“…Later in post-fire succession, reseeders likely incur lower costs of investing in and maintaining carbon-rich defensive structures such as bark, buds (particularly basal buds that are well insulated) and storage tissues (particularly lignotubers) required to support post-fire shoot growth (Pausas et al 2004;Pratt et al 2012). Even though the generality of this trade-off is not well established (Bond and Midgley 2003), there is evidence that seedlings of reseeders tend to grow faster than seedlings of resprouters (Pausas et al 2004;Lamont et al 2011), and the latter also tend to show slower shoot development (associated with greater root development tied to drought avoidance; Pausas et al 2004). In the fynbos and kongwan, which experience more pronounced summer drought than other Mediterraneantype regions, reseeders appear to have higher seedling survival than resprouters during the summer drought (Ojeda et al 2005;Keeley et al 2012).…”