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 ISI Web of Science 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 (4) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sanson, G. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Sanson, G. Agricola Articles by Sanson, G.

The biomechanics of browsing and grazing¹

School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia

ABSTRACT

Terrestrial plant leaves are complex structures of composite materials. Resistance to fracture is achieved by a number of mechanisms, which operate at the molecular, cell, tissue, and structural levels. Leaves of dicots have different venation patterns and cell wall volume fractions from those of grasses, and consequently, they potentially resist fracture in different ways. Animals mechanically process plants in order to rupture the cell wall in preparation for enzymic hydrolysis, for which the imperative is to maximize new surface area and/or to expedite access to cell contents, ideally by promoting elastic fracture. The two different plant types are fed on by two different groups of organisms of very different sizes, digestive physiologies, mechanical processing abilities and properties, and nutritional requirements. Small insects can feed in or on parts of leaves, while larger mammals generally have to feed on the whole leaf. The scale of feeding also differs for the two groups of herbivores, but how this interacts with the scale of the mechanical properties of the leaf is not well understood. Plant leaves are attacked at all scales and probably can only produce generalized responses to specialized herbivores. In addition, the opportunities that these different scales of interactions open for the different herbivores remain unexplored.

Key Words: browsing • chewing • fracture biomechanics • grazing • leaf biomechanics • leaf toughness

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Read, G. D. Sanson, E. Caldwell, F. J. Clissold, A. Chatain, P. Peeters, B. B. Lamont, M. De Garine-Wichatitsky, T. Jaffre, and S. Kerr Correlations between leaf toughness and phenolics among species in contrasting environments of Australia and New Caledonia Ann. Bot., December 19, 2008; (2008) mcn246v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. J. Dominy, P. J. Grubb, R. V. Jackson, P. W. Lucas, D. J. Metcalfe, J.-C. Svenning, and I. M. Turner In Tropical Lowland Rain Forests Monocots have Tougher Leaves than Dicots, and Include a New Kind of Tough Leaf Ann. Bot., June 1, 2008; 101(9): 1363 - 1377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. J. Niklas, H.-C. Spatz, and J. Vincent Plant biomechanics: an overview and prospectus Am. J. Botany, October 1, 2006; 93(10): 1369 - 1378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Read and A. Stokes Plant biomechanics in an ecological context Am. J. Botany, October 1, 2006; 93(10): 1546 - 1565. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]