Leaves Maintain a Constant Temperature

In a surprising finding, leaves on trees from the tropics to the Arctic turn out to maintain a fairly constant, comfortable temperature. Karen Hopkin reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

With temperatures approaching 100 degrees in the eastern U.S. this week, it’s amazing that the leaves on the trees don’t simply into flames. Maybe one reason they don’t is that no matter how hot or cold it gets, leaves tend to maintain themselves at a nice, climate-controlled 70 degrees. That’s according to a report in the online issue of the journal Nature.
 
Scientists had always assumed that the temperature of a leaf was the same as the surrounding air. And why wouldn’t they? It’s not like trees are warm-blooded. But University of Pennsylvania researchers examined leaves from 39 tree species in 25 different locations, ranging from inside the Arctic circle to the island of Puerto Rico. And they found that no matter where the leaf comes from, its average temperature is the same.
 
The explanation: leaves from the tropics have evolved mechanisms for keeping cool, say by angling themselves away from the sun. And trees in polar regions have come up with ways to heat their leaves, by putting out more leaves per branch, for example, so they can essentially huddle for warmth. After all, what choice does a tree have in bad weather? It can’t just pack up its trunk and leaf.

—Karen Hopkin      


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast: RSS | iTunes

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe