| Literature DB >> 24965183 |
Xian Yang1, Zhiyao Tang1, Chengjun Ji1, Hongyan Liu1, Wenhong Ma2, Anwar Mohhamot3, Zhaoyong Shi4, Wei Sun2, Tao Wang1, Xiangping Wang5, Xian Wu5, Shunli Yu6, Ming Yue7, Chengyang Zheng1.
Abstract
Allocation of limiting resources, such as nutrients, is an important adaptation strategy for plants. Plants may allocate different nutrients within a specific organ or the same nutrient among different organs. In this study, we investigated the allocation strategies of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) in leaves, stems and roots of 126 shrub species from 172 shrubland communities in Northern China using scaling analyses. Results showed that N and P have different scaling relationships among plant organs. The scaling relationships of N concentration across different plant organs tended to be allometric between leaves and non-leaf organs, and isometric between non-leaf organs. Whilst the scaling relationships of P concentration tended to be allometric between roots and non-root organs, and isometric between non-root organs. In arid environments, plant tend to have higher nutrient concentration in leaves at given root or stem nutrient concentration. Evolutionary history affected the scaling relationships of N concentration slightly, but not affected those of P concentration. Despite fairly consistent nutrients allocation strategies existed in independently evolving lineages, evolutionary history and environments still led to variations on these strategies.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24965183 PMCID: PMC4071319 DOI: 10.1038/srep05448
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Summary of reduced major axis (RMA) regression results
| Individual level | Species level | PICs | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| bind. | 95% CI | r2 | N | bsp | 95% CI | r2 | Nsp | bPIC | 95% CI | r2 | Ntip | bind.vs. bsp | bsp vs. bPIC | ||||
| Roots vs. leaves: | |||||||||||||||||
| N storage | 1.16–1.25 | 0.88 | <0.001 | 335 | 1.21–1.41 | 0.85 | <0.001 | 98 | 1.10–1.30 | 0.82 | <0.001 | 98 | 0.078 | 0.167 | |||
| P storage | 1.11–1.2 | 0.87 | <0.001 | 334 | 1.15–1.37 | 0.82 | <0.001 | 98 | 1.09–1.32 | 0.79 | <0.001 | 98 | 0.083 | 0.470 | |||
| N concentration | 1.68–1.91 | 0.37 | <0.001 | 613 | 1.79–2.38 | 0.51 | <0.001 | 107 | 1.72–2.43 | 0.20 | <0.001 | 107 | 0.073 | 0.721 | |||
| P concentration | 1.42–1.64 | 0.22 | <0.001 | 608 | 1.34–1.83 | 0.33 | <0.001 | 107 | 1.38–1.89 | 0.32 | <0.001 | 107 | 0.770 | 0.365 | |||
| Stems vs. leaves: | |||||||||||||||||
| N storage | 1.03–1.09 | 0.91 | <0.001 | 357 | 1.02–1.18 | 0.87 | <0.001 | 104 | 1.02 | 0.97–1.08 | 0.92 | <0.001 | 104 | 0.355 | 0.117 | ||
| P storage | 1.02 | 0.99–1.05 | 0.91 | <0.001 | 358 | 1.07 | 0.99–1.15 | 0.86 | <0.001 | 105 | 1.01 | 0.95–1.07 | 0.92 | <0.001 | 105 | 0.242 | 0.204 |
| N concentration | 1.45–1.66 | 0.23 | <0.001 | 655 | 1.49–1.99 | 0.37 | <0.001 | 115 | 1.45–2.09 | 0.04 | 0.025 | 115 | 0.201 | 0.962 | |||
| P concentration | 1.07–1.24 | 0.12 | <0.001 | 650 | 1.07 | 0.91–1.26 | 0.23 | <0.001 | 116 | 1.15 | 0.96–1.37 | 0.08 | <0.001 | 116 | 0.411 | 0.571 | |
| Roots vs. stems: | |||||||||||||||||
| N storage | 1.09–1.16 | 0.91 | <0.001 | 343 | 1.07–1.22 | 0.89 | <0.001 | 103 | 1.07–1.25 | 0.84 | <0.001 | 103 | 0.617 | 0.778 | |||
| P storage | 1.08–1.16 | 0.89 | <0.001 | 344 | 1.06–1.23 | 0.85 | <0.001 | 104 | 1.07–1.26 | 0.8 | <0.001 | 104 | 0.599 | 0.612 | |||
| N concentration | 1.09–1.19 | 0.67 | <0.001 | 652 | 1.11–1.33 | 0.75 | <0.001 | 113 | 0.94 | 0.80–1.11 | 0.34 | <0.001 | 113 | 0.185 | 0.008 | ||
| P concentration | 1.26–1.43 | 0.29 | <0.001 | 646 | 1.26–1.74 | 0.22 | <0.001 | 113 | 1.25–1.81 | 0.03 | 0.050 | 113 | 0.286 | 0.894 | |||
Abbreviations: PIC, phylogenetically independent contrast; CI, confidence interval.
Regression slopes (bind., bsp and bPIC) estimates in bold are significantly different from 1, indicate that the scaling relationship of the two traits are anisometric.
Figure 1Scatterplots showing the RMA regressions of N concentration (a–c), P concentration (d–f), N storage (g–i) and P storage (j–l) among organs for legume (black solid dots) and non-legume (gray open cycles) shrubs.
Separate lines indicate the slopes of non-legumes (blue) and legumes (red) are significantly different (likelihood ratio tests, P < 0.05), whereas a single black line indicates otherwise. Lines with the slopes equal to 1 are shown with dotted lines.
Figure 2Comparisons of the RMA regression slopes of N concentration and storage (solid dots), P concentration and storage (open cycles) among different STN levels (a), (d), STP levels (b), (e) and climatic regions (c), (f).
Line bars show 95% confidence intervals (CI). Letters above the line bars show the results of likelihood ratio tests (uppercase for N concentration and storage, lowercase for P concentration and storage). Slopes with the same letters are not significantly different (P ≥ 0.05), while those with different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Figure 3Locations of the sampling sites.
The background shows the distribution of shrubland biomes in the northern part of China based on the “Vegetation map of the People's Republic of China (1:1000000)”36. The map was generated using ArcGIS 10.3 (http://www.esri.com/).