Most trees have green leaves with chlorophyll for generating nutrients. What’s the story with red-leaved trees? They seem to thrive in the same type of environment. They don’t look sickly. So presumably they are just as able to convert sunlight into nutrients. So why do most trees have green leaves? Are red-leaved trees weaker in some way that is not apparent to the eye?
For plants on dry land, the chlorophylls (there are two different types, at least for terrestrial plants) are still there. This is a common experiment for high school students – paper chromatography. You can separate the various plant pigments to see there are several there – the bight red of Autumn leaves isn’t made in the fall, its there right now, masked by the chlorophyll. These other pigments also absorb light, and transfer some of the energy they got from light to the chlorophyll molecules. The red plants just have the relative amounts different.
Note: for seaweeds, all such bets are off, they may well lack chlorophyll and simply make do with other pigments
But which chlorophyll is more or less efficient, and by how much?
There’s more energy in the absorption of smaller wavelengths of light (blue, violet), and less in the longer wavelengths (red, orange).
Most leaves appear green, because they’re absorbing these colors for energy, and we see only the greenish wavelengths reflected back to our eyes.
I’m not a biologist, but I’m sure there might be reasons complicated, known and/or unknown as to why plants evolved for those two ends of the EM spectrum.
But with evolution/natural selection being the ultimate trial and error mechanism for life, it must have something to do with a plant’s common ancestor (and its common ancestor) and so on, as it happened to find a metabolic/biological mix of pigments that worked and flourished.
Green is very abundant in natural light so a fair amount can be reflected off, with a large amount still being absorbed. This link claims that
This site posits that the branch that led to plants did less well with green only because of the competition in those early days:
So year round red leaves may have a slight competitive advantage by absorbing more green light if what they did was have more green absorbing chlorophyll But what seems to be the case for many at least is they just have less of the green reflecting chlorophyll leaving more of the load to be carried by carotenoids that absorb green but convert the light to energy less efficiently than chlorophyll does. Such is fine enough for a smaller tree in bright light anyway.
We have Red Maples all over the place around here. They’re not the ornamental type like Japanese Maples, the leaves are indistinquishable from other maples except for the color. They regularly change from red to green through the year. They have leaves earlier in the season than the other trees, and keep them later. They grow well with conjoined trunks, and one set I planted together has a tree with only green leaves. I don’t know if it’s a mutant, recessive gene, or cross pollination.
Anyway, there’s no indication these trees don’t grow at least as well as other species in the area. Extra red chlorophyll can’t be much of a problem in this climate.
ETA: Turns out the Red Maple is the state tree of Rhode Island.
A bit of a correction: plants do not have any red chlorophyll, they have other not-green pigments, such as carotenoids and flavanoids, that show up when there is less chlorophyll present. Red shows primarily with larger amounts of anthocyanin (according to that source).
Here’s an explanation of why those Red Maples do what they do:
DSeid – For trees that have red leaves during the growing season (such as red maples), what makes the leaves red?
Anthocyanins is the general term for red pigments in terrestrial plants. Autumn leaf color - Wikipedia And it looks like I was wrong above, it appears its formed in Autumn in response to the breakdown of chlorophyll. That could mean the red-leafed varieties just have that happening all the time, instead of just in late summer. The article above gives theories on the reason why leaves change color, perhaps the same phenomena applies at all times to the red leafed varieties.
Look at this page: Plant Chromatography for Kids « The Kitchen Pantry Scientist its an experimental science page for kids. You can do that experiment, and you’ll see, the red-leafed Japanese maple leaves have some hidden green chlorophyll along with the red anthocyanin. The green ordinary maple leaf will have some yellow xanthophyll hidden by the green (but minimal red anthocyanin, it appears I was wrong above)
Yes, I should have said red leaved trees.
I took a close look at my green leafed variant. It’s leaves are identical in shape and size to the red leafed tree it has begun to conjoin with. The new branch shoots are red. I wonder what is producing this all green version. Can red maples cross pollinate with green leafed varieties and produce something like this?
The tall red maple the others sprung from is still a mix of green and red. It’s leaves usually come in mostly green in the spring, then become all red through the year.
Just want to reiterate that I am talking about trees that have red leaves during the growing season. I know about leaves that are green during the season and why they turn red in the autumn.
If red-leaved and green-leaved trees are equally efficient then why are most trees green? If red is less efficient then why do they look so healthy?
The deduction is that the same applies -
High amounts of anthocyanin and/or relatively low amounts of chlorophyll - which implies some beneficial effect of high levels of anthocyanins and/or adaptations for a very sunny environment.
In that regard a quick google finds this interesting article. High levels of anthocyanins seem to have some beneficial aspects:
-
Excess light can be harmful to a plant and there may be some role of anthocyanins as protection from excess light - “red leaf chloroplasts are exposed to less light because it is attenuated by anthocyanins, whereas green leaf chloroplasts are better equipped to dissipate excess light as heat. In addition to light attenuation, anthocyanins may participate in photoprotection through their anti oxidant capacity”
-
High levels of anthocyanins decrease damage from insect herbivores: “young red leaves of Q. coccifera are attacked less by insect consumers than young green leaves. We hypothesize that this is because anthocyanin accumulation masks the strong green reflectance that acts as an optical cue for consumers or increases the risk of consumer recognition by a predator, or both. Incidental attack may be a posteriori discouraged by the high phenolic investment of red leaves. … The reduced risk of insect attack probably compensates for the metabolic cost of chemical defense.”
FWIW.
Great find! Cool.
Where did red-leaved trees evolve? Did they all evolve in the same geographic area or in the same ecological conditions? Did they all evolve in a place where there are a lot of leaf-eating caterpillars? Are there areas where most trees have red leaves?
This article has some information. It’s something that may not be known yet. The red pigments that many trees have, or develop in the fall, may have been an adaptation to protect against insect damage, so the development of year round red leaves may not have been that big of a leap. The red maples are not as large as many other hardwood trees, and if not for insect infestations that take out the other trees the red maples may not have been so successful.