HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (8) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Niklas, K. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Niklas, K. J. Agricola Articles by Niklas, K. J.

The mechanical role of bark¹

Section of Plant Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853-5908

The ability of stem bark to resist bending forces was examined by testing in bending segments of Acer saccharum, Fraxinus americana, and Quercus robur branches with and without their bark. For each species, the bark contributed significantly to the ability of stem segments differing in age to resist bending forces, but its contribution was age-dependent and differed among the three species. The importance of the mechanical role of the bark decreased basipetally with increasing age of F. americana and Q. robur stem segments and was superceded by that of the wood for segments 6 yr old. A. saccharum bark was as mechanically important as the wood for stem segments 7 yr old but was not a significant stiffening agent for younger or older portions of stems. On average, the stiffness of the bark from all three species was 50% that of the wood. However, the geometric contribution to the flexural rigidity of stems made by the bark (i.e., the bark's second moment of area) was sufficiently large to offset its lower stiffness (Young's modulus) relative to that of the wood. A simple model is presented that shows that the bark must be as mechanically important as the wood when its radial thickness equals 32% that of the wood and its stiffness is 50% that of the wood. Based on this model, which is shown to comply with the data from three species purported to have stiff woods, it is evident that the role of the bark cannot be neglected when considering the mechanical behavior of juvenile woody stems subjected to externally applied bending forces.

Key Words: bark • flexural rigidity • phellem • plant biomechanics • tissue stiffness • woody stems

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Jaouen, T. Almeras, C. Coutand, and M. Fournier How to determine sapling buckling risk with only a few measurements Am. J. Botany, October 1, 2007; 94(10): 1583 - 1593. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Rosell and M. E. Olson Testing implicit assumptions regarding the age vs. size dependence of stem biomechanics using Pittocaulon (Senecio) praecox (Asteraceae) Am. J. Botany, February 1, 2007; 94(2): 161 - 172. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]