A Laid Back Guy's Road To The Selumetinib Success

2009), but it is unclear whether low tree mortality in dry forests can be attributed to the trees being thicker barked and having more root reserves or because dry forests experience a lower fire intensity because of less combustible material on the forest floor (Dickinson & Kirkpatrick 1985). The aim of this study is to evaluate http://www.selleckchem.com/products/MK-1775.html how bark thickness relates to bark traits, wood traits and life-history strategies of tropical dry- and moist forest species. Apart from fire insulation and assimilate transport, bark fulfils many other functions including defence against herbivores and pathogens, avoidance of mechanic injury by large mammals, reduction in water loss from stems, provision of structural support and repair after injury (Paine et?al. 2010; Romero 2013). Bark traits are therefore likely to form part of a general stem defence syndrome (Romero & Bolker 2008; Baraloto et?al. 2010). Little is known how bark investment is related to the life-history strategies of tree species. In closed-canopy forests, light is one of the most limiting factors for tree growth and survival. Adult stature (i.e. the maximum average tree http://www.selleckchem.com/products/AZD6244.html size a species attains) and light requirements for regeneration present therefore the main strategy axes of tropical forest trees because they allow species to partition light gradients in the forest canopy and on the forest floor (Kitajima & Poorter 2008). Small-statured tree species benefit little from investment in stem bark defence because their crowns remain within reach of ground fires, and they should therefore follow a reseeder or resprouter strategy. For individuals of tall-statured species, in contrast, it may pay off to invest heavily in bark defence because, as adults they have their crowns high up in the canopy and because they are likely to experience fire during their long life spans. Light-demanding forest species tend to be fast growing, and for them, the opportunity costs of resource investments in structural defences (such as bark) are high (Coley 1987) because it comes at the expense of a reduced investment in leaves, which curtails potential growth rates. In contrast, shade-tolerant species regenerate in the low-resource environment of the forest understory where there is a premium on survival rather than potential growth. They do so by high investment in structural stem and leaf defences (Kitajima & http://www.selleck.cn/products/azd4547.html Poorter 2010). Several studies have compared bark thickness of species, but most considered a relative limited number of species (