An Assessment of the Remodeling of Bifurcations in Hazel (Corylus avellana L.) in Response to Bracing, Drilling, and Splitting

LITERATURE CITED

1. ↵
   1. Badel, E.,
   2. F.W. Ewers,
   3. H. Cochard, and
   4. F.W. Telewski

   . 2015. Acclimation of mechanical and hydraulic functions in trees: Impact of the thigmomorphogenetic process. Frontiers in Plant Science 6:266.

   OpenUrl
2. ↵
   1. Biro, R.L.,
   2. E.R. Hunt,
   3. Y. Erner, and
   4. M.J. Jaffe

   . 1980. Thigmomorphogenesis: Changes in cell division and elongation in the internodes of mechanically perturbed or ethrel-treated bean plants. Annals of Botany 45:655–664.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
3. ↵
   1. Braam, J., and
   2. R.W. Davis

   . 1990. Rain-, wind-, and touch-induced expression of calmodulin and calmodulin-related genes in Arabidopsis. Cell 60:357–364.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. ↵
   1. Coutand, C.

   2010. Mechanosensing and thigmomorphogenesis, a physiological and biomechanical point of view. Plant Science 179:168–182.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
5. ↵
   1. Farnsworth, K.D., and
   2. K.J. Niklas

   . 1995. Theories of optimization, form and function in branching architecture in plants. Functional Ecology 9:355–363.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
6. ↵
   1. G.L. Gartner

   1. Gartner, B.L.

   1995. Patterns of xylem variation within a tree and their hydraulic and mechanical consequences. In: G.L. Gartner (Ed.). Plant Stems: Physiological and Functional Morphology. Academic Press, New York, New York, U.S.
7. ↵
   1. Gilman, E.F.

   2003. Branch to stem diameter affects strength of attachment. Journal of Arboriculture 29:291–294.

   OpenUrl
8. ↵
   1. Grace, J.

   1977. Plant Responses to Wind. Academic Press, London, UK.
9. ↵
   1. Hughes, S.W.

   2005. Archimedes revisited: A faster, better, cheaper method of accurately measuring the volume of small objects. Physics Education 40(5):468–474.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
10. ↵
    1. Jaffe, M.J.

    1973. Thigmomorphogenesis: The response of plant growth and development to mechanical stimulation. Planta 114:143–157.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. ↵
    1. Jaffe, M.J., and
    2. S. Forbes

    . 1993. Thigmomorphogenesis: The effect of mechanical perturbation on plants. Plant Growth Regulation 12:313–324.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. ↵
    1. Jungnikl, K.,
    2. J. Goebbels,
    3. I. Burgert, and
    4. P. Fratzl

    . 2009. The role of material properties for the mechanical adaptation at branch junctions. Trees: Structure and Function 23:605–610.

    OpenUrl
13. ↵
    1. Kane, B.,
    2. R. Farrell,
    3. S.M. Zedaker,
    4. J.R. Loferski, and
    5. D.W. Smith

    . 2008. Failure mode and prediction of the strength of branch attachments. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 34:308–316.

    OpenUrl
14. ↵
    1. Lev-Yadun,
    2. S., and
    3. R. Aloni

    . 1990. Vascular differentiation in branch junctions of trees: Circular patterns and functional significance. Trees: Structure and Function 4:49–54.

    OpenUrl
15. ↵
    1. Lonsdale, D.

    1999. The Principles of Tree Hazard Assessment and Management. TSO, London, UK.
16. ↵
    1. Mattheck, C., and
    2. W. Linnard

    . 1998. Design in Nature. Springer, Berlin, Germany.
17. ↵
    1. Monshausen, G.B., and
    2. E.S. Haswell

    . 2013. A force of nature: Molecular mechanisms of mechanoperception in plants. Journal of Experimental Botany 64:4663–80.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
18. ↵
    1. Philipson, W.,
    2. J.M. Ward, and
    3. B.G. Butterfield

    . 1971. The vascular cambium: Its development and activity. Chapman & Hall Ltd., London, UK.
19. ↵
    1. Pruyn, M.L.,
    2. B.J. Ewers III., and
    3. F.W. Telewski

    . 2000. Thigmomorphogenesis: Changes in the morphology and mechanical properties of two Populus hybrids in response to mechanical perturbation. Tree Physiology 20:535–540.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. ↵
    1. Shigo, A.L.

    1991. Modern Arboriculture. Shigo and Trees Associates, Durham, New Hampshire, U.S.
21. ↵
    1. Slater, D., and
    2. A.R. Ennos

    . 2013. Determining the mechanical properties of hazel forks by testing their component parts. Trees: Structure and Function 27(6):1515–1524.

    OpenUrl
22. ↵
    1. Slater, D., and
    2. A.R. Ennos

    . 2015. The level of occlusion of included bark affects the strength of bifurcations in hazel (Corylus avellana L.). Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 41(4):194–207.

    OpenUrl
23. ↵
    1. Slater, D.,
    2. R.S. Bradley,
    3. P.J. Withers, and
    4. A.R. Ennos

    . 2014. The anatomy and grain pattern in forks of hazel (Corylus avellana L.) and other tree species. Trees: Structure and Function 28(5):1437–1448.

    OpenUrl
24. ↵
    1. Smiley, E.T.,
    2. C.M. Greco, and
    3. J.G. Williams

    . 2000. Brace rods for co-dominant stems: Installation location and breaking strength. Journal of Arboriculture 26:170–176.

    OpenUrl
25. ↵
    1. Steucek, G.L., and
    2. R.M. Kellogg

    . 1972. The influence of a stem discontinuity on xylem development in Norway spruce (Picea abies). Canadian Journal of Forest Research 2:217–222.

    OpenUrl
26. ↵
    1. Telewski, F.W.

    2006. A unified hypothesis of mechanoperception in plants. American Journal of Botany 93:1466–76.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
27. ↵
    1. Telewski, F.W.

    2012. Is windswept tree growth negative thigmotropism? Plant Science 184:20–28.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. ↵
    1. Vincent, J.

    2012. Structural Biomaterials, third edition, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, U.S.
29. ↵
    1. Whitehead, F.H.

    1963. Experimental studies of the effect of wind on plant growth and anatomy. New Phytologist 62:80–85.

    OpenUrl