BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nepenthes (Nepenthaceae, approx. 120 species) are carnivorous pitcher plants with a centre of diversity comprising the Philippines, Borneo, Sumatra and Sulawesi. Nepenthes pitchers use three main mechanisms for capturing prey: epicuticular waxes inside the pitcher; a wettable peristome (a collar-shaped structure around the opening); and viscoelastic fluid. Previous studies have provided evidence suggesting that the first mechanism may be more suited to seasonal climates, whereas the latter two might be more suited to perhumid environments. In this study, this idea was tested using climate envelope modelling. METHODS: A total of 94 species, comprising 1978 populations, were grouped by prey capture mechanism (large peristome, small peristome, waxy, waxless, viscoelastic, non-viscoelastic, 'wet' syndrome and 'dry' syndrome). Nineteen bioclimatic variables were used to model habitat suitability at approx. 1 km resolution for each group, using Maxent, a presence-only species distribution modelling program. KEY RESULTS: Prey capture groups putatively associated with perhumid conditions (large peristome, waxless, viscoelastic and 'wet' syndrome) had more restricted areas of probable habitat suitability than those associated putatively with less humid conditions (small peristome, waxy, non-viscoelastic and'dry' syndrome). Overall, the viscoelastic group showed the most restricted area of modelled suitable habitat. CONCLUSIONS: The current study is the first to demonstrate that the prey capture mechanism in a carnivorous plant is constrained by climate. Nepenthes species employing peristome-based and viscoelastic fluid-based capture are largely restricted to perhumid regions; in contrast, the wax-based mechanism allows successful capture in both perhumid and more seasonal areas. Possible reasons for the maintenance of peristome-based and viscoelastic fluid-based capture mechanisms in Nepenthes are discussed in relation to the costs and benefits associated with a given prey capture strategy.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nepenthes (Nepenthaceae, approx. 120 species) are carnivorous pitcher plants with a centre of diversity comprising the Philippines, Borneo, Sumatra and Sulawesi. Nepenthes pitchers use three main mechanisms for capturing prey: epicuticular waxes inside the pitcher; a wettable peristome (a collar-shaped structure around the opening); and viscoelastic fluid. Previous studies have provided evidence suggesting that the first mechanism may be more suited to seasonal climates, whereas the latter two might be more suited to perhumid environments. In this study, this idea was tested using climate envelope modelling. METHODS: A total of 94 species, comprising 1978 populations, were grouped by prey capture mechanism (large peristome, small peristome, waxy, waxless, viscoelastic, non-viscoelastic, 'wet' syndrome and 'dry' syndrome). Nineteen bioclimatic variables were used to model habitat suitability at approx. 1 km resolution for each group, using Maxent, a presence-only species distribution modelling program. KEY RESULTS: Prey capture groups putatively associated with perhumid conditions (large peristome, waxless, viscoelastic and 'wet' syndrome) had more restricted areas of probable habitat suitability than those associated putatively with less humid conditions (small peristome, waxy, non-viscoelastic and'dry' syndrome). Overall, the viscoelastic group showed the most restricted area of modelled suitable habitat. CONCLUSIONS: The current study is the first to demonstrate that the prey capture mechanism in a carnivorous plant is constrained by climate. Nepenthes species employing peristome-based and viscoelastic fluid-based capture are largely restricted to perhumid regions; in contrast, the wax-based mechanism allows successful capture in both perhumid and more seasonal areas. Possible reasons for the maintenance of peristome-based and viscoelastic fluid-based capture mechanisms in Nepenthes are discussed in relation to the costs and benefits associated with a given prey capture strategy.
Authors: Rachel Schwallier; Barbara Gravendeel; Hugo de Boer; Stephan Nylinder; Bertie Joan van Heuven; Anton Sieder; Sukaibin Sumail; Rogier van Vugt; Frederic Lens Journal: Ann Bot Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 4.357