The key to longevity may not lie in a miraculous essence of water,
but rather in the structure and function of cells within a plant and not
a special, mysterious, rare plant, but one that we may think of as
being quite commonplace, even ordinary – the palm, researchers say.
For centuries, humans have been exploring, researching, and, in some
cases, discovering how to stave off life-threatening diseases, increase
life spans, and obtain immortality.
Biologists, doctors, spiritual
gurus, and even explorers have pursued these quests — one of the most
well-known examples being the legendary search by Ponce de Leon for the
“Fountain of Youth”.
P. Barry Tomlinson from The Kampong Garden of
the National Tropical Botanical Garden, Miami, teamed up with graduate
student Brett Huggett from Harvard University to write a review paper
exploring the idea that palms may be the longest-lived tree, and whether
this might be due to genetic underpinnings.
Having retained his
essay in his personal files, Tomlinson found that it provided an
excellent literature background for working on the question of cell
longevity in relation to palms.
A component of an organism’s life
span that biologists have been particularly interested in is whether
longevity is genetically determined and adaptive.
For botanists,
discovering genetic links to increasing crop production and the
reproductive lifespan of plants, especially long-lived ones such as
trees, would be invaluable.
In their paper, Tomlinson and Huggett
emphasize that in many respects, an organisms’ life span, or longevity,
is determined by the period of time in which its cells remain
functionally metabolically active.
In this respect, plants and
animals differ drastically, and it has to do with how they are
organized—plants are able to continually develop new organs and tissues,
whereas animals have a fixed body plan and are not able to regenerate
senescing organs. Thus, plants can potentially live longer than animals.
“The difference in potential cell longevity in plants versus animals is a significant point,” Tomlinson said.
“It
is important to recognize that plants, which are so often neglected in
modern biological research, can be informative of basic cell biological
features in a way that impacts human concern at a fundamental level,”
Tomlinson said.
The authors focused their review on palm trees
because palms have living cells that may be sustained throughout an
individual palm’s lifetime, and thus, they argue, may have some of the
longest living cells in an organism.
As a comparison, in most
long-lived trees, or lignophytes, the main part, or trunk, of the tree
is almost entirely composed of dead, woody, xylem tissues, and in a
sense is essentially a supportive skeleton of the tree with only an
inner ring of actively dividing cells.
In contrast, the trunks of
palms consist of cells that individually live for a long time, indeed
for the entire life of an individual.
Which brings up the question
of just how long can a palm tree live? The authors point out that palm
age is difficult to determine, primarily because palms do not have
secondary growth and therefore do not put down annual or seasonal growth
rings that can easily be measured.
However, age can be quite
accurately assessed based on rate of leaf production and/or visible
scars on the trunk from fallen leaves.
Accordingly, the authors
found that several species of palm have been estimated to live as long
as 100 and even up to 740 years. The important connection here is that
while the “skeleton” of the palm may not be as old as a pine, the
individual cells in its trunk lived, or were metabolically active, as
long as, or longer than those of the pine’s.
Most plants, in
addition to increasing in height as they age, also increase in girth,
putting down secondary vascular tissue in layers both on the inner and
outer sides of the cambium as they grow.
However, palms do not
have secondary growth, and there is no addition of secondary vascular
tissue. Instead, stem tissues are laid down in a series of
interconnected vascular bundles—thus, not only is the base of the palm
the oldest and the top the youngest, but these tissues from old to
young, from base to top, must also remain active in order to provide
support and transport water and nutrients throughout the tree.
Indeed,
the authors illustrate this by reviewing evidence of sustained primary
growth in two types of palms, the coconut and the sago palm.
These
species represent the spectrum in tissue organization from one where
cells are relatively uniform and provide both hydraulic and mechanical
functions to one where these functions are sharply divided with the
inner cells functioning mainly for transporting water and nutrients and
the outer ones for mechanical support. This represents a progression in
specialization of the vascular tissues.
Moreover, there is
evidence of continued metabolic activity in several types of tissues
present in the stems of palms, including vascular tissue, fibres, ground
tissue, and starch storage.
Since the vascular tissues in palms
are nonrenewable, they must function indefinitely, and Tomlinson and
Huggett point out that sieve tubes and their companion cells are
remarkable examples of cell longevity as they maintain a long-distance
transport function without replacement throughout the life of the stem,
which could be for centuries.
Despite several unique
characteristics of palms, including the ability to sustain metabolically
active cells in the absence of secondary tissues, seemingly
indefinitely, unlike conventional trees, in which metabolically active
cells are relatively short-lived, the authors do not conclude that the
extended life span of palms is genetically determined.
“We are not
saying that palms have the secret of eternal youth, and indeed claim no
special chemical features which allows cells in certain organisms to
retain fully differentiated cells with an indefinite lifespan,”
Tomlinson said.
“Rather, we emphasize the distinctive
developmental features of palm stems compared with those in conventional
trees,” Tomlinson added.
The study has been published in the American Journal of Botany.
No comments:
Post a Comment