Fraxinus angustifolia vahl. subsp. Oxycarpa (Bieb. ex Willd.) Franco and Rocha Afonso ve Laurus nobilis L.'de sklerofili ve bu türlerin toprak faktörleriyle ilişkisi

Sclerophylly and foliar nutrient status and interactions between these factors in ash ( Fraxinus angustifolia Vahl. subsp. oxycarpa (Bieb. ex Willd.) Franco & Rocha Afonso) and laurel ( Laurus nobilis L.) species were examined. In addition, correlations between sclerophyll index and leaf and soil parameters were investigated. It was found that there were statistically significant differences between the mid-growing season and the end of the growing season with respect to leaf N % concentration, N/Ca and N/Mg ratios in ash, and with respect to leaf N % concentration and soil K % concentration in laurel. The sclerophyll index was negatively correlated with leaf P % concentration in both species. Some important correlations were also found between leaf and soil nutrient concentrations.

Sclerophylly in Fraxinus angustifolia Vahl. subsp. Oxycarpa (Bieb. ex willd.) Franco and Rocha Afonso and Laurus nobilis L. and edaphic relations of these species

Sclerophylly and foliar nutrient status and interactions between these factors in ash ( Fraxinus angustifolia Vahl. subsp. oxycarpa (Bieb. ex Willd.) Franco & Rocha Afonso) and laurel ( Laurus nobilis L.) species were examined. In addition, correlations between sclerophyll index and leaf and soil parameters were investigated. It was found that there were statistically significant differences between the mid-growing season and the end of the growing season with respect to leaf N % concentration, N/Ca and N/Mg ratios in ash, and with respect to leaf N % concentration and soil K % concentration in laurel. The sclerophyll index was negatively correlated with leaf P % concentration in both species. Some important correlations were also found between leaf and soil nutrient concentrations.

___

  • 1.Loveless, A.R., A nutritional interpretation of sclerophylly basedon differences in the chemical composition of sclerophyllous andmesophytic leaves, Annals of Botany, 25, 168-176 (1961).
  • 2.Monk, C.D., An ecological significance of evergreenness, Ecology,47,504-505, (1966).
  • 3.Specht, R.L., Rundel, P.W., Sclerophylly and foliar nutrient statusof Mediterranean-climate plant communities in SouthernAustralia, Australian Journal of Botany, 38, 459-474 (1990).
  • 4.Loveless, A.R., Further evidence to support a nutritionalinterpretation of sclerophylly, Annals of Botany, 26, 551-561(1962).
  • 5.Monk, C.D., Sclerophylly in Quercus virginiana Mill, Castanea, 52:256-261 (1987).
  • 6.Kutbay, H.G., Kılınç, M., Sclerophylly in Quercus cerris var. cerrisand Phillyrea latifolia L. and edaphic relations of these species,Vegetatio, 113, 93-97 (1994).
  • 7.Specht, R.L., Moll, E.J., Mediterranean type heathlands andsclerophyllous shrublands of the world: an overview, pp, 42-65,In Kruger, F.J., Mitchell, D.T., Jarvis, J.U.M. (eds.) Mediterranean-Type Ecosystems, The Role of Nutrients. Springer-VerlagPublications, Berlin (1983).
  • 8.Chabot, B.F., Hicks, D.J., The ecology of leaf life spans. AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics, 13,229-259, (1982).
  • 9.Jayasekera, R., Interelement relationships in leaves of tropicalmontane trees, Vegetatio, 109, 149-151 (1993).
  • 10.Environmental Problems Foundation of Turkey, Wetlands ofTurkey, EPFT, Ankara, Turkey, 178 (1989).
  • 11.Tarım Bakanlığı, Meteoroloji Bülteni, Ortalama ve EkstremSıcaklık ve Yağış Değerleri, Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara,Türkiye (1994).
  • 12.Grubb, P.J., Control of forest growth and distribution on wettropical mountains, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics,8, 38-107, (1977).
  • 13.Medina, E.; Nutrient balance and physiological processes at theleaf level. pp. 139-154, In: Medina, E., Mooney, H.A., Vasquez-Yanes, C. (eds.) Physiological Ecology of Plants of the WetTropics, Junk, The Hague (1984).
  • 14.Allen, S.E., Grimshaw, H.M., Rowland, A.P., Chemical Analysis,pp. 285-344, In Chapman, S.B., Moore, P.P. (eds.) Methods inplant ecology, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford (1986).
  • 15.Rundel, P.W., Vegetation, nutrition and climate, date tables: foliaranalysis, pp. 63-80, In: Specht, R.L. (eds.) Mediterranean-typeEcosystems, A data source book, Kluwer Academic Publishers,Dordrecht (1988a).
  • 16.Rundel, P.W., Leaf structure and nutrition in mediterraneanclimate sclerophylls, pp. 157-167, In: Specht, R.L. (eds.)Mediterranean-type ecosystems, A data source book, KluwerAcademic Publishers, Dordrecht (1988 b).
  • 17.Chapman, H.D., Pratt, P.F., Methods of analysis for soils, plantsand waters, University of California Press, Riverside, California(1973).
  • 18.Schaefer, R.L., Anderson, R.B., The student edition of MINITAB,User’s manual, Addison Wesley Publishing Company Inc,California, New York (1989).
  • 19.Cromack, K., Monk, C.D., Litter production, decomposition andnutrient cycling in a mixed hardwood watershed and a white pinewatershed, pp. 609- 624, In: Howell, F.B., Gentry, J.B., Smith,H.H. (eds.) Mineral cycling in southeastren ecosystems, ERDASymposium Series (1975).
  • 20.Goldberg, D.E., The distribution of evergreen and deciduous treesrelative to soil type: an example from the Sierra Madre, Mexicoand a general model, Ecology, 63,942.951 (1982).
  • 21.Nàtr, L., Influence of mineral nutrients on photosynthesis higherplants, Photosynthetica, 6, 80-99 (1972).
  • 22.Salisbury, F.B., Ross, C.W., Plant physiology, 3rdedition,Wadsworth, California, (1985).
  • 23.Knops, J.M.H., Koenig, W.D., Site fertility and leaf nutrients ofsympatric evergreen and deciduous species of Quercus in centralcoastal California, Plant Ecology, 130, 121-131 (1997)