Insert Table Chart Text Shape Media Reich et al., Figure 2 (use Table 1 for reference) Hxmus et al, Figure 3 5. As a plant increases its respiration rate, what should happen to its light compensation point (LCP)? Why? (explain your answer Tost of predictions: does this figure support or roject your prediction? Writea separate response for the following figure: Hull, Table 1 6. Given your answer to question 5, what problems would sun-adapted plants face in the shade? If they were constantly in shade, what would happen to them? Test of predictions: do these figures support or reject your prediction? Write a separate response for each of the following figures . Augspurger Figure 1 Lusk and Del Pozo, Figure 4 7. How should the light saturation points of sun and shade-adapted plants differ? Think back to question 1. What is the cost of changing Rubisco in this way? Draw the relationship between ight intensity and net energy gain for sun and shade-adapted plants. Test of predictions: does this figure support or reject your prediction? Write a separate response for the following figure Takeuchi et al, Figure 2 8. Given the way your curves in question 7 look, what disadvantage is faced by shade- adapted plants in full sunlight? Do you think they will pay a survival cost? Test of answer. do these figures support or reject your answer to the question above? Write a separate response for each of the following igures . Reich et al, Figure 1 Lusk & Del Pozo, Figure 5 Hull, Table 1 Auaspurger Figure 1 growth and survival J. Ecology 72: 777-795 (Figure 1 below) Mar Hanba, Y.T, Kogaml, H, and Tecasbioa, L 2005. The effect of growth irradiance on leaf anatomy and photosynthesis in Acer species difering in light demand. Plant, Cell and Environment 25: 1021-1030 (Figures 2 & 3 below) 2.5 2.0 151D 1.0 0.5 150 100bc 50 25 2o 15 10 ab 3.0 abo be be 9 2.0 15 A palmatum A.mono A rufinerve Figure 3. Variations in (ak.Icaf sirogen coacet on an area basiv Nw and bj. Risco content for the three Acer species growa at diffcrcat kradianoes Valucs and signsficance are as in Fig 2 Figure 2 MacBook A Hull, J.C. 2002. Photosynthetic induction dynamics to herbs with different phenglogios Int. J. Plant Scl of four deciduous forest understory 3-924. (Table 1 below) Table 1 Gas Exchange Parameters Mean SE) of Four Understory Herbs CO, exchange (amol ms Irradiance PPFD (mol m Auax 14.70 0.33* 6.04 s 047 564 t 0.74 3.93 t 0.34 1.20 : 0.03 0.71 + 0.11 043 + 0.0s 0.29 : 0.04 Lo 16.0 t 2.33 10.8 + 1.04 50 + 1.24 9.2 ± 2.38 326 + 78O 117 : 437 133 2.55 135 3.58 Note. Maximum photosymthesis (Ax; dark respiration rate (R,J; light compensation point (Lali and light saturation lsul. Values within a column with different seperscripes are signifcantly different (Pc 0.05) as determined by onc-way ANOVA for R and Aax and by least significant difference from regression analysis for Lsar and Lo 15 1.0 Hymus, G.J, Snead, T.G., Johnson, D.P, Hungate, 05 BA, and Drake, B.G. 2002. Acclimation of synthesis and z in two Scrub Oaks. Global Change Biology 8: 4317-328. (Figure 4 to the left) 0 1 1.5 b) Q geminate Note: RA respiration per unit leaf area Nu nitrogen per unit leaf area 0 5 0.0 Lvak, C.H. and Del Pozo, A. 2002. Survival and growth of seadlings of 12 Chilen rainforest trees in two Sight environments Gas exchange and biomass distibution correlates Austral Eoology 27, 173-182. Figures 4 & 5 balow 4.5 3.5 3 25 1.5 0.5 oo D 10 O 10 20300 RGR in high ight im g day 15 Compensation point in high light (umolesn’ Flg. S. Relationship berween relaive growth tes in high Plg. 4. Relationship between photosynthetic light compen- sation points of seedlings of 12 Chilean temperate rainforest trees in high light (150 umoles m ), and mortality rates in low light (12 pmoles m).Non-parametric correlation statistics appear in Table 6. (12pmokes ‘,for scodling of 12 Chilean semperate rainforest trees Non-parametric correlation statitics appear in Table 6 Reich, P.B., Tioelker, M.G., Walters, M.B., Vanderklein, D.W, and Buschena, C. 1998. Close association of RGR, leaf and root morphology, seed mass and shade tolerance in seedlings of nine boreat tree species grown in high and low light. Functional Ecology 12: 327-338 (Table 1 below) lable 1. Stody species, seed แ ass, leaf life span ind slade tolerance. Mean seed mass determined even mass of 100 seeds. Leaf life span based on field observations of trees (Reich. Walters & Ellsworth 1997 and unpablished data) Shade solerance rsakings based on USDA (1900). Because the somibined rankings of seed mass, leaf life spas and shade tolersoce ace coagors ble for the evergreen conifers except P banknona, they are listed in alphabetical order suns, leaf İade s aud shade olerance aking Seed s life p 5-6 İsaoleiut Deciduous bo031 095 1925 180-60Nay toler Reich, PB, Walters, M.B., Tieelkec M.G, Vandeklelo, D.W, and Buachene, C. 1998. Photosynthesis and respiration rates depend on leaf and root morphology and concentration in nine boreal tree species differning in relative growth rate. 395-405. (Figures 1 & 2 below) Ecology 12 200 150 50 Seed massHigh owShade tolerance Fig. 1.Relative grouth rate for nine boreal species at 5 and 25% of full sunlight. Specses me nmyed hom left to right talso in Figs 2-5) in order of increasing seed mass, shade tolerance and leaf life spas (see Table 1 for details) and ane abbreviated by the first three letters of gemus and species Data are meaas fof four blocks) at four harvests over a ks) were ble 35 30 1111 Nedefo 2 10 Note: for Figure 2, species are arranged from the most shade-intolerant on the left to the most shade-tolerant on the right (see Table 1 (last page) for reference). 50 30 20 Takeuchi, Y. Kukiske, M.E., Isebrands, J.6., Preatize K.S., Hendrey. G, and Karnosky, D.F. 2001 Photosynthesis, light and nitrogen relationships in a young deciduous forest canopy under open-air CO2 enrichment. Prant Cell and Enironment 24: 1257-1268. (Figures 1 & 2, Table 5 below) rt TableChartTextS Table 5. Mean ( SE)photosynthetdio leafinternal C0, respoese The canopies developed under curreat ambient (343 pmol mot and elevated ( 548 ㎛sol mot’) atmospheric CO, cacentntinK Parameters are maximum rate of carbonylation (Vo).maximam rate of electron trampont ),leaf concentration of rbulose 1-5 bihplsosphate carboaylloxygenane (Rabinco) and the ratio of leaf Rubinco to N concentration (RubisooN) Upper-canopy measurements were from unshaded leaves on the main terminals Mid- and lower-canopy positiom were fized at 120 and 40 m above the ground, respectively Means of s parameter withisa ow or column followed by the same letser were Matisically different (P 005). og Cenopy position mbient CO Elevated CO Upeer Mid Lower 354 s 12 43 5422387 071 19 46 107 35: ox Mid Lawer 113 144 Upper Mid Lower Upper Shid Lowes Upper Mid 03 : 99 67 r 00