Two varieties of Aucuba japonica differ in ways that can be considered adaptive to differing geo-climatic conditions in their respective distribution ranges. Irrespective of growth stage, the mean leaf size of A. japonica var. japonica was significantly larger than A. japonica var. borealis. Smaller leaf size and ultimately smaller stature of A. japonica var. borealis are an advantage under the higher snow load and lower temperatures in the forests along the East Sea where the variety grows. Snow load also acted as an important driving force for structural modifications of A. japonica var. borealis from cellular level in leaves to the organization of branch extension growth. Global warming by changing snowfall patterns in Japan may lead to range shifts in the two varieties of A. japonica.
The geo-climatic distribution range of the genus
Both
Snow cover may act as a driving force for distribution of varieties of
In
As snowfall regimes respond to global warming, the consequences for the two varieties of
We sampled var.
The types and structure of buds play a key role in initiating morphological changes such as anisophylly and EU dimorphism that determine plant form.
To describe features of anisophylly and to find a causal relationship, we used various methods to measure the different but inter-related growth attributes given below.
We measured dimensions of randomly selected terminal reproductive buds on mature plants of var.
>
Measurement of individual leaf area of mature leaves
For both
>
Measurement of the degree of anisophylly
>
Measurement of total leaf area per node
To compare leaf area and to display at each nodal position of an EU, we calculated total leaf area, i.e., the sum of area of the two leaves at a node.
>
Determination of specific leaf area (SLA)
To compare SLA between the two varieties, we sampled eighty, current season EUs (with two to three pairs of leaves each) from around the crown of mature plants. We measured laminar dimensions of all the leaves. Sampled leaves (
>
Paraffin embedding of sample, sectioning and staining
For anatomical comparison, we sampled ten pairs of leaves at the second nodal position (acropetally) for each variety and preserved them immediately in 4% Formalin- Acetic-Alcohol (FAA). Samples we collected from Tsurugi experimental station in Ishikawa Prefecture.
We followed standard methods (Takasoh et al. 1997) for leaf anatomy. Sections of 10 μm thickness were prepared using a rotary microtome. For leaves, a small piece was cut from between the third and fourth lateral vein and inbetween the mid rib and the margin of lamina for sectioning.
>
Measurement of EU length and diameter on mature plants
EU was defined as the lateral axis that has grown out in a year from the axillary bud enveloped by the bud scales of the terminal bud. To compare EU length between two varieties, we measured length of all EUs on randomly selected clumps. To obtain a representative EU length with minimum temporal effect, we defined the entire extension growth of a selected EU over last five years as a clump (Ali and Kikuzawa 2012). Clump selection was random and irrespective of branch order. We measured the diameter of current EUs by a caliper around the middle of the EU.
>
Determination of stem wood density
For determination of stem wood density we collected current-year EUs. Immediately after harvesting, we separated stems and leaves. We measured stem length and diameter. Diameter was measured at the middle of the EU. Samples were oven dried at 80℃ to constant weight.
To estimate EU wood density (g/cm3), assuming cylindrical shape, we estimated EU wood volume (cm3) as VS = μr2h, where r = D/2 (D is stem diameter in cm) and h = EU length (cm).
>
Measurement of mature plant height
We measured adult male plant height along the stem from ground level to the growing tip (
For statistical analyses, One-way ANOVA in case of homogenous data set, Two-way ANOVA to test interaction effect, and Mann-Whitney U test for heterogeneous data set were used. To obtain graphs, SPSS ver. 8.5 (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA) and Excel were used.
Total leaf area per node of var.
[Table 1.] Comparison of terminal reproductive bud size (cm3) between varieties of Aucuba japonica
Comparison of terminal reproductive bud size (cm3) between varieties of Aucuba japonica
leaf size on sprouts of var.
Comparison of leaf size (cm2) between varieties of Aucuba japonica in context of growth stages (juvenile and adult)
[Table 3.] Comparison of Specific Leaf Area (SLA) (cm2/g) between varieties of Aucuba japonica
Comparison of Specific Leaf Area (SLA) (cm2/g) between varieties of Aucuba japonica
[Table 4.] Comparison of Extension Unit (EU) length (cm) between two varieties of Aucuba japonica
Comparison of Extension Unit (EU) length (cm) between two varieties of Aucuba japonica
The histology of fully expanded anisophyllous leaves of both varieties did not differ in terms of cell shape and size, cell wall thickness or the number of cell layers (Fig. 3). Leaves had 10 to 12 layers of foliar cells including the epidermal layers. The single layered epidermis was covered with a thick cuticle layer mainly on the adaxial side; stomata were confined to the abaxial epidermis. Chlorenchyma was composed of two layers of large, rectangular cells (in surface view); chloroplasts were mainly concentrated adaxially. Spongy parenchyma was composed of round, elongated cells suppressed at both ends.
The mean individual plant height of var.
The terminal reproductive bud of
plays a pivotal role in modulating organ shape and size. The larger the apical dome, the greater the space available for growing organs. A larger apical dome contributed to development of the larger leaves of var.
[Table 5.] Comparison of wood density (g/cm3) of current EUs between varieties of Aucuba japonica
Comparison of wood density (g/cm3) of current EUs between varieties of Aucuba japonica
[Table 6.] Comparison of plant height (m) between varieties of Aucuba japonica
Comparison of plant height (m) between varieties of Aucuba japonica
leaves of var.
Differences in temperature regime in the regions could have significant impact on the production ecology (Yano and Terashima 2004). Differential timing and duration of the leaf expansion period leads to different leaf size even on a single EU (Kawano and Takasu 2004, Ali and Kikuzawa 2005a). In the absence of snow, low temperature alone is likely to reduce leaf growth, particularly in the early leaves (at N1 and N2 nodes) on an EU of var.
The similar pattern of anisophylly in both varieties may be explained by their common decussate phyllotaxis (Ohi et al. 2003), but variation in the degree of anisophylly can be affected by differences in their environmental regimes. Disproportionate mechanical stress on inner and outer leaf primordia in the bud leads to differential growth initiating anisophylly in
The difference in plant stature of these varieties can be explained by the difference in their opportunities for photosynthetic activity in winter (Kume 2005). Stored reserves in the above and belowground parts of plant (Chapin et al. 1990) along with a warmer snow-free environment (Kimbal et al. 2006) leads to larger leaf production on sprouts of var.
Anisophylly in
While analyzing plant growth attributes it surfaced up that