Paper · 2012 · IAWA Journal - KU Leuven/IAWA Journal

Anatomical Comparison of Original and Regrowth wood from coppiced and Pollarded Poincianella Pyramidalis Trees in the Caatinga of Pernambuco, Brazil

Claudia Luizon Dias Leme; Peter Gasson

3
claims
6
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Poincianella pyramidalis (Tul.) L.P. Queiroz (‘catingueira’) is one of the most used trees by rural communities for wood and charcoal in the caatinga of northeast Brazil. It grows rapidly and can survive and thrive after either wet or dry season coppicing or pollarding. This paper explores the anatomical basis for P. pyramidalis being a good choice for fuel and charcoal by comparing the proportions of the constituent cell types (vessels, fibres and parenchyma) in wood from the trunk and branches of original trees with those from regrowth branches after three and six years. Since wood density is correlated with mechanical and physiological strategies of trees, the observations suggest that the anatomical differences between branch and regrowth are the result of rapid regrowth after coppicing or pollarding. The observed differences in cell type proportions along the trunk and branches are of interest from a physiological point of view but have little bearing on whether the regrowth is good for charcoal.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wood cell type proportions differed along trunks and branches.

Taxon
Poincianella PyramidalisCenostigma pyramidalet0
Outcome
differences in cell type proportionse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cenostigma pyramidale
Cenostigma pyramidale · TaxonLucas Kaminski · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The observed differences in cell type proportions along the trunk and branches”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 817–895 · show in text ↑
t0

“Poincianella Pyramidalis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–104 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Anatomical differences between branches and regrowth are attributed to rapid regrowth after coppicing or pollarding.

Taxon
Poincianella pyramidalisCenostigma pyramidalet0
Outcome
anatomical differences between branch and regrowthe0
Qualifier
rapid regrowth after coppicing or pollardinge0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cenostigma pyramidale
Cenostigma pyramidale · TaxonLucas Kaminski · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the anatomical differences between branch and regrowth are the result of rapid regrowth after coppicing or pollarding”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 698–815 · show in text ↑
t0

“Poincianella pyramidalis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–24 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The observed cell type differences have little bearing on regrowth suitability for charcoal.

Taxon
Poincianella pyramidalisCenostigma pyramidalet0
Outcome
regrowth is good for charcoale0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cenostigma pyramidale
Cenostigma pyramidale · TaxonLucas Kaminski · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“have little bearing on whether the regrowth is good for charcoal”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 951–1015 · show in text ↑
t0

“Poincianella pyramidalis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–24 · show in text ↑