| Literature DB >> 20686787 |
Bradley J Butterfield1, John M Briggs.
Abstract
Plant communities vary dramatically in the number and relative abundance of species that exhibit facilitative interactions, which contributes substantially to variation in community structure and dynamics. Predicting species' responses to neighbors based on readily measurable functional traits would provide important insight into the factors that structure plant communities. We measured a suite of functional traits on seedlings of 20 species and mature plants of 54 species of shrubs from three arid biogeographic regions. We hypothesized that species with different regeneration niches-those that require nurse plants for establishment (beneficiaries) versus those that do not (colonizers)-are functionally different. Indeed, seedlings of beneficiary species had lower relative growth rates, larger seeds and final biomass, allocated biomass toward roots and height at a cost to leaf mass fraction, and constructed costly, dense leaf and root tissues relative to colonizers. Likewise at maturity, beneficiaries had larger overall size and denser leaves coupled with greater water use efficiency than colonizers. In contrast to current hypotheses that suggest beneficiaries are less "stress-tolerant" than colonizers, beneficiaries exhibited conservative functional strategies suited to persistently dry, low light conditions beneath canopies, whereas colonizers exhibited opportunistic strategies that may be advantageous in fluctuating, open microenvironments. In addition, the signature of the regeneration niche at maturity indicates that facilitation expands the range of functional diversity within plant communities at all ontogenetic stages. This study demonstrates the utility of specific functional traits for predicting species' regeneration niches in hot deserts, and provides a framework for studying facilitation in other severe environments.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20686787 PMCID: PMC3021705 DOI: 10.1007/s00442-010-1741-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oecologia ISSN: 0029-8549 Impact factor: 3.225
Functional traits measured in this study
| Trait | Abbreviation | Units | Ecological relevance | Stage measured | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seed mass | Seed | g | Energy reserves; radical size; life-history | Seedling | |||
| Total biomass | Mass | g | Energy reserves; competitive ability | Seedling | |||
| Root mass fraction | RMF | g g−1 | Light versus water/nutrient acquisition | Seedling | |||
| Leaf mass fraction | LMF | g g−1 | Light versus water/nutrient acquisition | Seedling | |||
| Height | Height | cm | Light versus water/nutrient acquisition | Seedling | |||
| Relative growth rate | RGR | t−1 | Competitive ability; responsiveness to water pulse | Seedling | |||
| Leaf dry mass | M | g | Leaf function; carbon investment on carbon return | Seedling/mature | |||
| Leaf surface area | SA | cm2 | Photosynthetic capacity; leaf temperature | Seedling/mature | |||
| Leaf mass per area | LMA | g cm−2 | Water retention; gas exchange | Seedling/mature | |||
| Leaf dry matter content | LDMC | % | Photosynthetic capacity; palatability | Seedling/mature | |||
| Specific root length | SRL | cm g−1 | Embolism resistance; responsiveness to water pulse | Seedling | |||
| Short term drought survival | Survival | days | Likelihood of individual establishment | Seedling | |||
| Leaf nitrogen content | %N | % | Photosynthetic capacity; palatability | Mature | |||
| Water use efficiency | WUE | δ13C | Balance between carbon and water economies | Mature | |||
| Mature growth form | Size | Ordinal | Storage capacity; life-history strategy | Mature | |||
Spearman rank correlation coefficients for seedling traits
| Trait | RGR | Height | Seed | Survival | LDMC | SA | M | LMA | RMF | LMF | Mass |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 0.08 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Seed | −0.72*** | 0.46* | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Survival | −0.20 | 0.41 | 0.54* | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| LDMC | −0.30 | 0.21 | 0.67** | 0.39 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| SA | 0.44 | 0.60** | 0.10 | 0.48* | 0.30 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| M | −0.11 | 0.55* | 0.50* | 0.51* | 0.32 | 0.55* | – | – | – | – | – |
| LMA | −0.70*** | 0.08 | 0.69** | 0.40 | 0.56* | −0.24 | 0.00 | – | – | – | – |
| RMF | −0.65** | −0.24 | 0.45* | 0.19 | 0.25 | −0.30 | 0.03 | 0.47* | – | – | – |
| LMF | 0.79*** | −0.02 | −0.72*** | −0.27 | −0.51* | 0.29 | 0.08 | −0.90*** | −0.67** | – | – |
| Mass | 0.06 | 0.86*** | 0.57* | 0.61** | 0.44 | 0.73*** | 0.71*** | 0.16 | −0.03 | −0.10 | – |
| SRL | 0.50* | −0.54* | −0.86*** | −0.49* | −0.66** | −0.27 | −0.57** | −0.62** | −0.40 | 0.58** | −0.70*** |
For explanation of abbreviations, see Table 1
*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Principal components analysis results for seedling traits
| Trait | PCS1 | PCS2 |
|---|---|---|
| Seed | 0.94 | <0.01 |
| SRL | −0.92 | <0.01 |
| LDMC | 0.72 | <0.01 |
| Survival | 0.67 | <0.01 |
| Mass | 0.69 | 0.67 |
| M | 0.56 | 0.56 |
| Height | 0.52 | 0.66 |
| LMA | 0.73 | −0.51 |
| LMF | −0.71 | 0.63 |
| RGR | −0.61 | 0.66 |
| RMF | 0.47 | −0.59 |
| SA | <0.01 | 0.85 |
| σ explained | 0.38 | 0.36 |
For explanation of abbreviations, see Table 1
Spearman rank correlation coefficients for mature traits
| Trait | Size | SA | M | LMA | LDMC | %N |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SA | −0.05 | |||||
| M | 0.27* | 0.47*** | ||||
| LMA | 0.31* | −0.62*** | 0.23 | |||
| LDMC | 0.03 | −0.49*** | −0.19 | 0.32* | ||
| %N | 0.10 | 0.42** | 0.37** | -0.17 | −0.57*** | |
| WUE | 0.27* | 0.09 | 0.24 | 0.03 | 0.23 | 0.03 |
For explanation of abbreviations, see Table 1
*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Principal components analysis results for mature traits
| Trait | PCM1 | PCM2 | PCM3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| %N | 0.82 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| LDMC | −0.80 | <0.01 | 0.31 |
| M | 0.62 | 0.33 | 0.44 |
| SA | 0.68 | −0.54 | 0.31 |
| LMA | <0.01 | 0.92 | <0.01 |
| Size | <0.01 | 0.60 | 0.40 |
| WUE | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.90 |
| σ explained | 0.32 | 0.23 | 0.20 |
For explanation of abbreviations, see Table 1
Fig. 1Trait loadings (vectors) and species scores for colonizers and beneficiaries (triangles and squares, respectively) along principal components axes for traits of a seedlings and b mature plants. Mean scores ± 1SE for each regeneration niche group are indicated by large, open symbols