Comparative venation costs of monocotyledon and dicotyledon species in the eastern Colorado steppe

• Published in: Planta Vol. 260; no. 1; p. 2
• Main Authors: Drobnitch, Sarah Tepler, Kray, J. A., Gleason, Sean M., Ocheltree, Troy W.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.07.2024; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Agriculture; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Capacitance; Carbon - metabolism; Colorado; Construction costs; Dendritic structure; Ecology; Ecosystem; Forestry; Grassland; Herbivory; Leaves; Life Sciences; Magnoliopsida; Magnoliopsida - anatomy & histology; Magnoliopsida - physiology; Networks; Plant Leaves - anatomy & histology; Plant Sciences; Plant Vascular Bundle - anatomy & histology; Plant Vascular Bundle - physiology; Short Communication; Species; Steppes; Surface area; Vascular system (plant anatomy); Veins; Veins & arteries; Veins (plant anatomy); Venation; Water transport; Xylem; Xylem - anatomy & histology; Xylem - physiology; Colorado; United States > US; Dendritic venation; Carbon costs; Network optimization; Parallel venation
• ISSN: 0032-0935; 1432-2048; 1432-2048
• DOI: 10.1007/s00425-024-04434-x

Main conclusion Leaf vein network cost (total vein surface area per leaf volume) for major veins and vascular bundles did not differ between monocot and dicot species in 21 species from the eastern Colorado steppe. Dicots possessed significantly larger minor vein networks than monocots. Across the tree of life, there is evidence that dendritic vascular transport networks are optimized, balancing maximum speed and integrity of resource delivery with minimal resource investment in transport and infrastructure. Monocot venation, however, is not dendritic, and remains parallel down to the smallest vein orders with no space-filling capillary networks. Given this departure from the “optimized” dendritic network, one would assume that monocots are operating at a significant energetic disadvantage. In this study, we investigate whether monocot venation networks bear significantly greater carbon/construction costs per leaf volume than co-occurring dicots in the same ecosystem, and if so, what physiological or ecological advantage the monocot life form possesses to compensate for this deficit. Given that venation networks could also be optimized for leaf mechanical support or provide herbivory defense, we measured the vascular system of both monocot and dicots at three scales to distinguish between leaf investment in mechanical support (macroscopic vein), total transport and capacitance (vascular bundle), or exclusively water transport (xylem) for both parallel and dendritic venation networks. We observed that vein network cost (total vein surface area per leaf volume) for major veins and vascular bundles was not significantly different between monocot species and dicot species. Dicots, however, possess significantly larger minor vein networks than monocots. The 19 species subjected to gas-exchange measurement in the field displayed a broad range of A max and but demonstrated no significant relationships with any metric of vascular network size in major or minor vein classes. Given that monocots do not seem to display any leaf hydraulic disadvantage relative to dicots, it remains an important research question why parallel venation (truly parallel, down to the smallest vessels) has not arisen more than once in the history of plant evolution.