Структура и развитие годичного побега кедра сибирского (Pinus sibirica Du Tour)

Главная

Статья в Elpub

РУС ENG

Вестник Томского государственного университета. Биология. 2016; : 18-38

Структура и развитие годичного побега кедра сибирского (Pinus sibirica Du Tour)

Горошкевич С. Н.

https://doi.org/10.17223/19988591/33/2

Аннотация

Проанализированы собственные и литературные данные о структуре годичного побега мужского и женского типа у кедра сибирского (Pinus sibirica Du Tour) в связи с адаптивным значением различных морфологических элементов. На побегах мужского типа формируется лишь одна (зимующая) почка, а годичный побег состоит из одного (весеннего) элементарного побега. На побегах женского типа из зимующей почки развивается первый, весенний, побег. Кроме того, в начале сезона закладывается временная почка, из которой без периода покоя развивается второй, летний, побег. Весенний и летний побеги существенно различаются по структуре и функциям. Плодоношение осуществляется исключительно на весеннем побеге. Нарастание и фотосинтез осуществляются, в основном, за счет весеннего побега. Главной функцией летнего побега является ветвление. Лишь функция регенерации, за которую «ответственны» криптобласты (спящие почки), разделена между элементарными побегами примерно поровну. Анализ изменчивости длины междоузлий на сложном (дициклическом) годичном побеге впервые проведен в настоящей работе. Минимальная длина междоузлий была отмечена не у полюсов годичного побега, а в переходной зоне от весеннего побега к летнему. Следовательно, циклы формирования элементарных побегов совершенно не влияют на растяжение междоузлий, которое зависит исключительно от годичного цикла побегообразования.

Список литературы

1. Горошкевич С.Н. Структура и развитие элементарного побега кедра сибирского // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Биология. 2014. № 4 (28). С. 3755.

2. Barthelemy D., Caraglio Y. Plant architecture: a dynamic, multilevel and comprehensive approach to plant form, structure and ontogeny // Annals of Botany. 2007. Vol. 99. P. 375407.

3. Mutke S., Sievanen R., NikinmaaE., Perttunen J., GilL. Crown architecture of grafted stone pine (Pinus pinea L.): shoot growth and bud differentiation // Trees. 2005. Vol. 19, № 1. P. 15-25.

4. Некрасова Т.П. Биологические основы семеношения кедра сибирского. Новосибирск : Наука, 1972. 272 с.

5. Горошкевич С.Н. Различия в фенологии органогенеза как фактор дифференциации кроны кедра сибирского на генеративные ярусы // Физиология растений. 1993. Т. 40, № 2. С. 278-282.

6. Горошкевич С.Н. О морфологической структуре и развитии побегов Pinus sibirica (Pinaceae) // Ботанический журнал. 1994. Т. 79, № 5. С. 63-71.

7. Tepper H.B. Dimesional and zonational variation in dormant shoots apices of Pinus ponderosa // American Journal of Botany. 1963. Vol. 50, № 6. P. 589-596.

8. Curtis Y.D., Popham R.A. The development anatomy of long branch terminal buds of Pinus banksiana // American Journal of Botany. 1972. Vol. 59, № 2. P. 194-202.

9. Worrall J., Draper D.A., Anderson S.A. Shoot characteristics of vigorous lodgepole pines after reciprocal grafting // Canadian Journal of Forest Researches. 1985. Vol. 15, № 2. P. 365-370.

10. Foster A.S. Structure and growth of the shoot apex in Ginkgo biloba // Bulletin of Torrey Botanical Club. 1938. Vol. 65. P. 531-536.

11. Sacher J.A. Structure and seasonal activity of the shoot apices of Pinus lambertiana and Pinus ponderosa // American Journal of Botany. 1954. Vol. 41, № 9. P. 749-759.

12. SinnotE.W. The relation of organ size to tissue development in the stem // American Journal of Botany. 1936. Vol. 23, № 6. P. 418-421.

13. Buchholz J.T. Cone formation in Sequoia gigantea // American Journal of Botany. 1938. Vol. 25, № 4. P. 296-305.

14. Eggler W.A. Stem elongation and time of cone initiation in southern pines // Forest Science. 1961. Vol. 7, № 2. P. 149-158.

15. Heuret P., Meredieu C., Coudurier T., BarthelemyD. Ontogenetic trends in the morphological features of main stem annual shoots of Pinus pinaster (Pinaceae) // American Journal of Botany. 2006. Vol. 93, № 11. P. 1577-1587.

16. Businsky R. The genus Pinus L. Pines: Contribution to Knowledge. A Monograph with Cone Drawings of All Species of the World by Ludmila Businska. Acta Pruhoniciana. 2008. Vol. 88. 126 p.

17. O'Reilly C., Owens J.N. Long-shoot development, shoot growth, and foliage production in lodgepole pine // Canadian Journal of Forest Researches. 1987. Vol. 17, № 11. P. 14211433.

18. Минина Е.Г. О морфогенезе кедра // Лесоведение. 1971. № 4. С. 27-36.

19. Kozlovski T.T. Growth and development of trees. New York: Academic press, 1971. Vol. 1. 443 p.

20. Lanner R.M. Patterns of shoot development in Pinus and their relationship to growth // Tree physiology and yield improvement. L. : Academic Press, 1976. P. 223-243.

21. Isik F., Isik K., Yildirim T., Li B.L. Annual shoot growth components related to growth of Pinus brutia // Tree Physiology. Vol. 22, № 1. P. 51-58.

22. Lanner R.M. Development of the terminal bud and shoot of slash pine saplings // Forest Science. 1978. Vol. 24, № 2. P. 167-179.

23. Tepper H.B. Comparative study of long-shoot apex in the genus Pinus // Phitomorphology. 1966. Vol. 16, № 5. P. 469-474.

24. Smith W.H., Switzer G.L., Nelson L.E. Development of the shoot system of young loblolly pine. I. Apical growth // Forest Science.1970. Vol. 16, № 4. P. 483-490.

25. Bucovac M.J., Wildmoyer F.B. Observations on leaf characteristics of Afganistan pine // Journal of American Society of Horticultural Science. 1980. Vol. 105, № 3. P. 293-297.

26. Serre F. Les rapport de la croissance et du climat chez le pin d'Alep Pinus halepensis. II. L'allengement des pousses et des aiguile et le climat. Discussion generale // Oecologia Plantarum. 1976. Vol. 11, № 3. P. 201-224.

27. Lanner R.M. Origin of the summer shoot of Pinion pines // Canadian Journal of Botany. 1970. Vol. 48, № 10. P. 1759-1765.

28. Owston P.W. Multiple flushing in eastern white pine // Forest Science. 1968. Vol. 14, № 1. P. 66-67.

29. Henry A. Knospenbilder, ein Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Laubknospen und Verzweigungsart der Pflanzen // Acta Leop.-Carol. Akad. Naturf. Vehr. 1846. Bd. 22. S. 171-342.

30. Dorken V.M., Gerrit S., Stutzel T. Morphology and anatomy of anomalous short shoots in Pinus (Pinaceae) and their evolutionary meaning // Feddes Repertorium. 2010. Vol. 121, № 3-4. P. 133-155.

31. Wareing P.F. Reproductive development in Pinus sylvestris // The physiology of forest trees. N. Y. : Ronald press, 1958. P. 643-654.

32. Bhumibhamon S. Studies on Scots pine seed orchards in Finland with special emphasis on the genetic composition of the seed // Metsantuktimuslaitok Julk. 1979. Vol. 94, № 1-6. P. 1-118.

33. Смирнов В.В. Сезонный рост главнейших древесных пород. М. : Наука, 1964. 167 с.

34. Серебряков И.Г. Морфология вегетативных органов высших растений. М. : Советская наука, 1952. 392 с.

Tomsk State University Journal of Biology. 2016; : 18-38

The structure and development of Siberian stone pine (Pinus sibirica Du Tour) annual shoot

Goroshkevich S. N.

https://doi.org/10.17223/19988591/33/2

Abstract

In this review, we analyzed our own and literary information on Siberian stone pine (Pinus sibirica Du Tour) male and female annual shoot structure in connection with adaptive significance of various morphological elements. The material was collected in two so called village-side (thinned) Siberian stone pine forests: the first (100-110 years old) was located in the lower part of the forest belt of the North-Eastern Altai, the second (160-170 years old) was located in the southern taiga subzone of the Western Siberian plain (the South-East of Tomsk region). We studied 10 co-dominant trees from each of the forests. We took 5 branches of the upper part of the crown from each tree. The morphological structure of the last 10 annual shoots was registered, i.e. we fixed the number and sequence of different stem unit types. Male shoots produce only one (winter) bud and one (spring) elementary shoot during the growing season. At the beginning of the season, a temporal bud is initiated on female shoots, giving rise to the summer shoot which is formed during the season without any period of bud dormancy. Then a winter bud is formed producing the first (spring) elementary shoot in the beginning of the next season. Spring and summer shoots significantly differed in structure and functions. Cone bearing occurs solely on spring shoots. Elongation and photosynthesis occur basically due to a spring shoot. Branching is the main function of a summer shoot. Only regenerative function (acted by kryptoblasts (dormant buds)) is divided into roughly equal parts between two elementary shoots. The presence of a summer shoot automatically provides a 2-3-fold increase in the lateral long shoot number. It causes very characteristic for the Siberian stone pine and highly expedient differentiation of the branches in two qualitatively different types. Branches mainly consisting of bicyclical annual shoots become powerful (skeletal) whereas all other branches remain weak ("overgrown"). The formation of a summer shoot in the distal part of the annual shoot of the female type causes an abrupt increase in its already pronounced acrotony. In small (male) shoots, the acrotony is hardly expressed: the smallest and 'weakest' axial structures (latent buds) are situated on their distal pole. We analyzed internode length variability on a compound (bicyclical) annual shoot in this work for the first time. The minimal internode length occurred not at annual shoot poles but in the transition zone between spring and summer shoots. Therefore, the elementary shoot formation cycles do not influence internode elongation, which exclusively depends on annual shoot formation cycle. Thus, the formation of axial and lateral structures of an annual shoot occurs in fundamentally different ways. The size and the structure of a mature shoot are mostly determined during the embryonic stage of its development. Basing on these results, before the beginning of shoot elongation, not only the number and relative position of metamers of different types but also all relations and all internal correlations, including those characterizing the growth and formation of elementary branching systems, are predetermined. Funding: The work was carried out due to basic budgetary funds (Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations) with the support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project № 15-04-03924).

References

1. Goroshkevich S.N. Struktura i razvitie elementarnogo pobega kedra sibirskogo // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Biologiya. 2014. № 4 (28). S. 3755.

2. Barthelemy D., Caraglio Y. Plant architecture: a dynamic, multilevel and comprehensive approach to plant form, structure and ontogeny // Annals of Botany. 2007. Vol. 99. P. 375407.

3. Mutke S., Sievanen R., NikinmaaE., Perttunen J., GilL. Crown architecture of grafted stone pine (Pinus pinea L.): shoot growth and bud differentiation // Trees. 2005. Vol. 19, № 1. P. 15-25.

4. Nekrasova T.P. Biologicheskie osnovy semenosheniya kedra sibirskogo. Novosibirsk : Nauka, 1972. 272 s.

5. Goroshkevich S.N. Razlichiya v fenologii organogeneza kak faktor differentsiatsii krony kedra sibirskogo na generativnye yarusy // Fiziologiya rastenii. 1993. T. 40, № 2. S. 278-282.

6. Goroshkevich S.N. O morfologicheskoi strukture i razvitii pobegov Pinus sibirica (Pinaceae) // Botanicheskii zhurnal. 1994. T. 79, № 5. S. 63-71.