Posture control and skeletal mechanical acclimation in terrestrial plants: implications for mechanical modeling of plant architecture.

Self-supporting plant stems are slender, erect structures that remain standing while growing in highly variable mechanical environments. Such ability is not merely related to an adapted mechanical design in terms of material-specific stiffness and stem tapering. As many terrestrial standing animals do, plant stems regulate posture through active and coordinated control of motor systems and acclimate their skeletal growth to prevailing loads. This analogy probably results from mechanical challenges on standing organisms in an aerial environment with low buoyancy and high turbulence. But the continuous growth of plants submits them to a greater challenge. In response to these challenges, land plants implemented mixed skeletal and motor functions in the same anatomical elements. There are two types of kinematic design: (1) plants with localized active movement (arthrophytes) and (2) plants with continuously distributed active movements (contortionists). The control of these active supporting systems involves gravi- and mechanoperception, but little is known about their coordination at the whole plant level. This more active view of the control of plant growth and form has been insufficiently considered in the modeling of plant architecture. Progress in our understanding of plant posture and mechanical acclimation will require new biomechanical models of plant architectural development.

[1]  T. Mione,et al.  The evolutionary biology of plants , 1998, Economic Botany.

[2]  Bruno Moulia,et al.  A frequency lock-in mechanism in the interaction between wind and crop canopies , 2006, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[3]  Frank W Telewski,et al.  A unified hypothesis of mechanoperception in plants. , 2006, American journal of botany.

[4]  Anja Geitmann,et al.  Experimental approaches used to quantify physical parameters at cellular and subcellular levels. , 2006, American journal of botany.

[5]  N. Haritos,et al.  Mechanical stability of trees under dynamic loads. , 2006, American journal of botany.

[6]  H. Peltola,et al.  Mechanical stability of trees under static loads. , 2006, American journal of botany.

[7]  P. Schopfer,et al.  Biomechanics of plant growth. , 2006, American journal of botany.

[8]  M. Iino Toward understanding the ecological functions of tropisms: interactions among and effects of light on tropisms. , 2006, Current opinion in plant biology.

[9]  Rainer Stahlberg,et al.  Historical Overview on Plant Neurobiology , 2006, Plant signaling & behavior.

[10]  Alexia Stokes,et al.  Tree biomechanics and growth strategies in the context of forest functional ecology , 2006 .

[11]  Stuart J Warden,et al.  Cellular accommodation and the response of bone to mechanical loading. , 2005, Journal of biomechanics.

[12]  Christophe Godin,et al.  Functional-structural plant modelling. , 2005, The New phytologist.

[13]  L. Mahadevan,et al.  Physical Limits and Design Principles for Plant and Fungal Movements , 2005, Science.

[14]  L. Mahadevan,et al.  How the Venus flytrap snaps , 2005, Nature.

[15]  Janet Braam,et al.  In touch: plant responses to mechanical stimuli. , 2004, The New phytologist.

[16]  Miyo Terao Morita,et al.  Gravity sensing and signaling. , 2004, Current opinion in plant biology.

[17]  Hanns-Christof Spatz,et al.  Growth and hydraulic (not mechanical) constraints govern the scaling of tree height and mass. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  M. J. Jaffe,et al.  Thigmomorphogenesis: the effect of mechanical perturbation on plants , 1993, Plant Growth Regulation.

[19]  P. Kaufman,et al.  Cell elongation in the grass pulvinus in response to geotropic stimulation and auxin application , 2004, Planta.

[20]  H. Frost Bone's mechanostat: a 2003 update. , 2003, The anatomical record. Part A, Discoveries in molecular, cellular, and evolutionary biology.

[21]  Anthony Trewavas,et al.  Aspects of plant intelligence. , 2003, Annals of botany.

[22]  Steven Vogel,et al.  Comparative Biomechanics: Life's Physical World , 2003 .

[23]  Thierry Fourcaud,et al.  Numerical modelling of shape regulation and growth stresses in trees , 2003, Trees.

[24]  L. Lanyon,et al.  Mechanical Strain and Bone Cell Function: A Review , 2002, Osteoporosis International.

[25]  P. de Reffye,et al.  Numerical modelling of shape regulation and growth stresses in trees , 2002, Trees.

[26]  Evelyne Costes,et al.  Bending of apricot tree branches under the weight of axillary growth: test of a mechanical model with experimental data , 2001, Trees.

[27]  B. Moulia,et al.  Biomechanical study of the effect of a controlled bending on tomato stem elongation: local strain sensing and spatial integration of the signal. , 2000, Journal of experimental botany.

[28]  C. Mattheck Comments on “Wind-induced stresses in cherry trees: evidence against the hypothesis of constant stress levels” by K.J. Niklas, H.-C. Spatz, Trees (2000) 14:230–237 , 2000, Trees.

[29]  Bruno Moulia,et al.  Leaves as Shell Structures: Double Curvature, Auto-Stresses, and Minimal Mechanical Energy Constraints on Leaf Rolling in Grasses , 2000, Journal of Plant Growth Regulation.

[30]  K. Niklas,et al.  Wind-induced stresses in cherry trees: evidence against the hypothesis of constant stress levels , 2000, Trees.

[31]  Przemyslaw Prusinkiewicz,et al.  Integrating biomechanics into developmental plant models expressed using L-systems 1 , 2000 .

[32]  C. Edelin,et al.  Dynamics of Architectural Development of Isolated Plants of Maize (Zea mays L.), in a Non-limiting Environment: The Branching Potential of Modern Maize , 1999 .

[33]  A. Meskauskas,et al.  Mathematical modelling of morphogenesis in fungi: a key role for curvature compensation ('autotropism') in the local curvature distribution model. , 1999, The New phytologist.

[34]  A. Meskauskas,et al.  Spatial organization of the gravitropic response in plants: applicability of the revised local curvature distribution model to Triticum aestivum coleoptiles. , 1999, The New phytologist.

[35]  C. Wagstaff,et al.  The ups and downs of gravitropism , 1999, Trends in plant science.

[36]  Francis Hallé,et al.  Éloge de la plante : pour une nouvelle biologie , 1999 .

[37]  C H Turner,et al.  Three rules for bone adaptation to mechanical stimuli. , 1998, Bone.

[38]  K. Bennett,et al.  The power of movement in plants. , 1998, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[39]  K. Bethge,et al.  The Structural Optimization of Trees , 1998, Naturwissenschaften.

[40]  B. Moulia,et al.  Spatial re-orientation of maize leaves affected by initial plant orientation and density , 1997 .

[41]  Mechanics of the maize leaf: a composite beam model of the midrib , 1997 .

[42]  Meriem Fournier,et al.  Mechanics and form of the maize leaf: in vivo qualification of flexural behaviour , 1994, Journal of Materials Science.

[43]  P. Goldsmith Plant stems: a possible model system for the transduction of mechanical information in bone modeling. , 1994, Bone.

[44]  Henri Baillères,et al.  Tree biomechanics : growth, cumulative prestresses, and reorientations , 1994 .

[45]  C. Mattheck Trees: The Mechanical Design , 1991 .

[46]  E. David Ford,et al.  Structure and basic equations of a simulator for branch growth in the Pinaceae , 1990 .

[47]  Y. C. Fung,et al.  Biomechanical Aspects of Growth and Tissue Engineering , 1990 .

[48]  Volker Mosbrugger,et al.  The Tree Habit in Land Plants: A Functional Comparison Of Trunk Constructions With A Brief Introduction Into The Biomechanics Of Trees , 1990 .

[49]  P. West,et al.  Stresses in, and the shape of, tree stems in forest monoculture , 1989 .

[50]  Robert R. Archer,et al.  Tree Design: Some Biological Solutions to Mechanical Problems , 1979 .

[51]  J. Ledent Mechanisms Determining Leaf Movement and Leaf Angle in Wheat (Triticum aestivumL.) , 1978 .

[52]  E. W. Sinnott REACTION WOOD AND THE REGULATION OF TREE FORM , 1952 .