Sunday, December 25, 2005

Why Christmas trees are not extinct

Why Christmas trees are not extinct, University of Utah study suggests why conifers did not die of thirst long ago. University of Utah

Conifer trees such these in Utah's Wasatch Range dominate many of Earth's temperate forests despite an internal plumbing problem: very short Conifer trees such these in Utah's Wasatch Range dominate many of Earth's temperate forests despite an internal plumbing problem: very short 'pipes' that carry water up from the roots.
A University of Utah study found that conifer trees have highly efficient valves that make up for that handicap and let water to flow easily, allowing conifers to compete well with flowering trees. Credit: Uwe Hacke, University of Utah.

Conifers such as Christmas trees suffer a severe plumbing problem. The "pipes" that carry water through firs, pines and other conifers are 10 times shorter than those in flowering trees. But a University of Utah study suggests why conifers not only survive but thrive: efficient microscopic valves let water flow through conifers about as easily as it flows through other trees.

"When you are sitting around and admiring your Christmas tree, consider that it owes its existence in part to this clever microscopic valve," says John Sperry, a University of Utah biology professor who led the research team. "Without these valves, conifers could be much less common than they are, and conceivably their survival might be marginal."

The journal Science is publishing the study Dec. 23, two days before Christmas.

Sperry says that if conifers had not evolved easy-flow valves to make up for the short length of their water pipes or conduits, "it is doubtful they could hold their own with angiosperms [flowering trees] in today's forests. It's doubtful they would dominate whole regions of North America."

While scientists cannot really know if conifers might have gone extinct without their efficient type of water valve, "what this study shows is that without this valve, it would be 38 times harder for conifers to take up water, which would put them at a serious disadvantage in competition with flowering trees in temperate forests," says Sperry.

The study was part of a University of Utah doctoral thesis by Jarmila Pitterman, now a postdoctoral fellow at the University of California, Berkeley. She and Sperry conducted the study with other University of Utah biologists: Uwe Hacke, a research assistant professor; lab technician James Wheeler, who has since left for graduate school at Harvard University; and Elzard Sikkema, an undergraduate.

The Plumbing System of Trees

The numerous parallel "pipes" that carry water upward through the woody trunks of evergreen coniferous trees are single-celled conduits called "tracheids" and are only a few millimeters long (about one eighth of an inch). In flowering trees, the pipes are multicellular conduits called vessels and are 10 times longer, or a few centimeters long (more than one inch).

As a result, water moving up through an evergreen must pass through 10 times as many valves (known technically as "pits") as water moving up through the trunk of other trees. Sperry said that should be a severe handicap for conifers in competing against flowering trees for water.

Yet conifers thrive, and they dominate forests in many regions of Earth. Hacke says the planet's tallest trees are conifers: redwoods and sequoias. So are the oldest trees, bristlecone pines. So how did conifers overcome the handicap of short pipes?

Scientists already knew that the valves between water pipes or conduits are far different in conifers than in angiosperms, or flowering trees, but they did not know how that difference affected water flow. In the new study, the biologists measured water flow through twigs from 18 species of conifers and 29 species of angiosperms.

Conifers studied included Douglas fir, subalpine fir, white fir, lodgepole pine, various spruces, Utah juniper, Rocky Mountain juniper, redwoods, bald cypress and conifers known as podocarps and araucarias from New Zealand and New Caledonia.

Angiosperms included oaks, willows, ash, various maples, hickory, mulberry, creosote bushes, manzanita, serviceberry, mountain mahogany, grapevine and others.

The researchers connected both ends of each twig to plastic tubing, used an elevated reservoir's gravity to force water into one end of each twig, and then used an electronic balance to weigh water dripping out the other end. Then, based on the number of conduits and valves in twigs and their known dimensions, the biologists calculated the resistance to water flow of both the conduits and the valves.

The scientists found that for conduits of the same diameter, resistance to water flow in conifers was only 1.2 times greater than in flowering trees – essentially the same. Sperry calls that "remarkable." And water flow actually was better in conifers than in flowering trees in terms of resistance to flow per unit area of wood.

The pits or valves that connect the water conduits in trees not only carry water up trees from the roots, but also prevent air from entering the conduits and killing trees.

The Structure of Water Valves in Trees

Sperry says the range of conduit diameters vary but overlap for conifers and flowering trees. The conduits or tracheids in conifers range from 10 to 50 microns (millionths of a meter) in diameter, while the conduits or vessels in flowering trees range from 15 to 110 microns.

The valves are in "end walls" at both ends of water conduits. In conifers, there are about 25 to 50 valves at each end of a conduit; in flowering trees there are many more.

These valves are disk-shaped membranes. In flowering trees, the membranes are homogenous, with water seeping through microscopic pores. But in conifers, the valve membranes have what is known as "torus-margo" structure that resembles a bird's-eye-view of a circular trampoline.

"It's like a trampoline in that the torus is the mat, and the margo represents the supporting springs with holes between them," Sperry says. "The margo holds the torus in place just like springs hold the trampoline in place."

Water cannot pass through the central torus, but easily flows through the margo pores, which are about 100 times larger than the pore in flowering tree valves – on the scale of one 10-millionth of a meter versus one billionth of a meter.

The bottom line is that conifers have shorter conduits and fewer valves, both of which would increase resistance to water flow, "but they compensate for that because each individual valve is so much more efficient," Sperry says. "The flow resistance through a valve of a given size is 59 times lower in a Christmas tree than in an oak tree."

Flowering trees have longer, more efficient conduits, but less efficient valves.

Evolution Produces Two Ways to Water a Tree

Sperry says conifers and flowering trees evolved with "two solutions to the same problem."

Conifers, which arose more than 280 million years ago, have primitive conduits that are short and inefficient and evolved in some of the oldest plants some 400 million years ago. The highly efficient, torus-margo valves evolved in conifers and their relatives no later than 220 million years ago, Sperry says.

Flowering plants evolved at least 146 million years ago and retained inefficient valves that first appeared some 400 million years ago in ferns, cycads and other primitive plants. But flowering plants evolved longer conduits to get around the problem.

"The evolution of the specialized valve and the specialized conduit are both ways of achieving more efficient water transport within a tree," for conifers and flowering trees, respectively, Sperry says.

He says that as angiosperms evolved and competed with conifers for water, "it is quite possible that if conifers hadn't evolved this efficient valve, they wouldn't have been as conspicuous an element of today's forests. Being at such a tremendous disadvantage in the competition for water, it is unlikely they would be such a dominant element in modern forests." ###

Contact: John Sperry professor of biology
sperry@biology.utah.edu office: 801-585-0379 lab: 801-585-0381

Lee Siegel science news specialistUniversity of Utah Public Relations
leesiegel@ucomm.utah.edu office: 801-581-8993 cellular: 801-244-5399

University of Utah Public Relations201 S Presidents Circle, Room 308Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9017(801) 581-6773 fax: 585-3350
www.utah.edu/unews

more at
or and or and or or and or

Related: Keyword Agriculture Sunday, May 08, 2005
Laser Shows if Fruit's Beauty is Only Skin Deep, Saturday, May 28, 2005 5th World Bonsai Convention, Sunday, May 29, 2005 regarding over-fortified corn soy blend, Monday, June 06, 2005 From a Few Wild Ancestors, a Citrus Cornucopia, Sunday, July 03, 2005 Grafting Watermelon Makes Firmer, Healthier Fruit, Sunday, July 24, 2005 Prehistoric Native Americans maize cultivation, Sunday, August 28, 2005 Coffee is number one source of antioxidants, Sunday, November 27, 2005 Give thanks for the cranberry, say dental researchers,

The Cosmic Christmas Ghost

NGC 2467 and Surroundings (VLT + FORS2)Open Cluster Haffner 18 (2.2m ESO/MPG + WFI)
[HiRes - 978k][HiRes - 836k]
Just like Charles Dickens' Christmas Carol takes us on a journey into past, present and future in the time of only one Christmas Eve, two of ESO's telescopes captured various stages in the life of a star in a single image.

ESO PR Photo 42a/05 shows the area surrounding the stellar cluster NGC 2467, located in the southern constellation of Puppis ("The Stern"). With an age of a few million years at most, it is a very active stellar nursery, where new stars are born continuously from large clouds of dust and gas.

The image, looking like a colourful cosmic ghost or a gigantic celestial Mandrill [1] , contains the open clusters Haffner 18 (centre) and Haffner 19 (middle right: it is located inside the smaller pink region - the lower eye of the Mandrill), as well as vast areas of ionised gas.

The bright star at the centre of the largest pink region on the bottom of the image is HD 64315, a massive young star that is helping shaping the structure of the whole nebular region.

ESO PR Photo 42a/05 was taken with the Wide-Field Imager camera at the 2.2m MPG/ESO telescope located at La Silla, in Chile.

Another image of the central part of this area is shown as ESO PR Photo 42b/05. It was obtained with the FORS2 instrument at ESO's Very Large Telescope on Cerro Paranal, also in Chile.

ESO PR Photo 42b/05 zooms in on the open stellar cluster Haffner 18, perfectly illustrating three different stages of this process of star formation: In the centre of the picture, Haffner 18, a group of mature stars that have already dispersed their birth nebulae, represents the completed product or immediate past of the star formation process. Located at the bottom left of this cluster, a very young star, just come into existence and, still surrounded by its birth cocoon of gas, provides insight into the very present of star birth. Finally, the dust clouds towards the right corner of the image are active stellar nurseries that will produce more new stars in the future.

Haffner 18 contains about 50 stars, among which several short lived, massive ones. The massive star still surrounded by a small, dense shell of hydrogen, has the rather cryptic name of FM3060a. The shell is about 2.5 light-years wide and expands at a speed of 20 km/s. It must have been created some 40,000 years ago. The cluster is between 25,000 and 30,000 light-years away from us [2].

Technical information: ESO PR Photo 42a/05 is based on images obtained with the WFI instrument on the ESO/MPG 2.2-m telescope for Rubio/Minniti/Barba/Mendez on December, 2003. The 49 observations were done in six different filters : U (2 hour exposure) B, OIII, V, H-alpha and R (1 hour exposure each). The data were extracted from the
ESO Science Archive. The raw observations were reduced and combined by Benoît Vandame (ESO). The final image is based on the data from the U, OIII and H-alpha filters. North is right and East is to the top. The field of view is about 30x30 arcmin. ESO PR Photo 42a/05 is a colour-composite image obtained with the FORS2 multi-mode instrument on Kueyen, the second Unit Telescope of the Very Large Telescope. The data was collected during the commissioning of the instrument in February 2000, through 4 filters: B, V, R and I, for a total exposure time of only 11 minutes. The observations were extracted from the ESO Science Archive and reduced by Henri Boffin (ESO). North is above and East is to the left. Final processing of ESO PR Photo 42a/05 and 42b/05 was done by Kristina Boneva and Haennes Heyer (ESO).

Notes
[1]: NGC 2467 is also sometimes referred as the "Skull and Crossbones".
[2]: A study of the cluster Haffner 18 is presented in Moreno-Corral et al. (2005), Rev. Mex. A&A 41, 69 and in Munari et al. (1998), MNRAS 297, 867. ESO Media Contacts are on the Public Affairs Dept. Contact page.

National contacts for the media:

Belgium - Dr. Rodrigo Alvarez +32-2-474 70 50 rodrigo.alvarez@oma.be
Finland - Ms. Terhi Loukiainen +358 9 7748 8385 terhi.loukiainen@aka.fi
Denmark - Dr. Michael Linden-Vørnle +45-33-18 19 97 mykal@tycho.dk
France - Dr. Daniel Kunth +33-1-44 32 80 85 kunth@iap.fr
Germany - Dr. Jakob Staude +49-6221-528229 staude@mpia.de
Italy - Prof. Massimo Capaccioli +39-081-55 75 511 capaccioli@na.astro.it
The Netherlands - Ms. Marieke Baan +31-20-525 74 80 mbaan@science.uva.nl
Portugal - Prof. Teresa Lago +351-22-089 833 mtlago@astro.up.pt
Sweden - Dr. Jesper Sollerman +46-8-55 37 85 54 jesper@astro.su.se
Switzerland - Dr. Martin Steinacher +41-31-324 23 82 martin.steinacher@sbf.admin.ch
United Kingdom - Mr. Peter Barratt +44-1793-44 20 25 Peter.Barratt@pparc.ac.uk

more at
or and or and or and or

Related: Tuesday, January 04, 2005
The Cassini-Huygens mission to Saturn, Friday, January 14, 2005 Deep Impact spacecraft comet Tempel, Sunday, July 31, 2005 cosmic string warps the space-time around it., Sunday, August 07, 2005 black holes,