| Literature DB >> 25485296 |
Huiliang Liu1, Daoyuan Zhang1, Xuejun Yang2, Zhenying Huang2, Shimin Duan1, Xiyong Wang1.
Abstract
Seed dispersal and germination were examined for 70 species from the cold Gurbantunggut Desert in northwest China. Mean and range (3 orders of magnitude) of seed mass were smaller and narrower than those in other floras (5-8 orders of magnitude), which implies that selection favors relatively smaller seeds in this desert. We identified five dispersal syndromes (anemochory, zoochory, autochory, barochory, and ombrohydrochory), and anemochorous species were most abundant. Seed mass (F = 3.50, P = 0.01), seed size (F = 8.31, P < 0.01), and seed shape (F = 2.62, P = 0.04) differed significantly among the five dispersal syndromes and barochorous species were significantly smaller and rounder than the others. There were no significant correlations between seed mass (seed weight) (P = 0.15), seed size (P = 0.38), or seed shape (variance) (P = 0.95) and germination percentage. However, germination percentages differed significantly among the dispersal syndromes (F = 3.64, P = 0.01) and seeds of ombrohydrochorous species had higher germination percentages than those of the other species. In the Gurbantunggut Desert, the percentage of species with seed dormancy was about 80%. In general, our studies suggest that adaptive strategies in seed dispersal and germination of plants in this area are closely related to the environment in which they live and that they are influenced by natural selection forces.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25485296 PMCID: PMC4248421 DOI: 10.1155/2014/346405
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Family, species, vegetative period, month of seed collection, seed traits (seed mass, seed size, seed shape), seed germination percentage, dispersal syndromes and dispersal strategies recorded for each of the 70 study species.
| Family | Species | Life form | Collecting time (months) | Seed mass (mg) | Seed size (mm) | Seed shape (variance) | Seed germination percentage (%) | Dispersal syndromes | Dispersal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ephedraceae |
| LS | 9 | 2.81 ± 0.071 | 3.926 ± 0.054 | 0.144 | 0 | Anemochory | Escape-protection |
|
| |||||||||
| Poaceae |
| E | 8 | 0.076 ± 0.0024 | 0.584 ± 0.021 | 0.028 | 5.5 ± 2.22 | Anemochory | escape |
|
| E | 6 | 1.78 ± 0.046 | 11.389 ± 0.792 | 0.184 | 87.33 ± 2.40 | Epizoochory | Protection | |
|
| LPH | 8 | 7.85 ± 0.68 | 9.534 ± 0.775 | 0.178 | 0.5 ± 0.5 | Epizoochory | Protection | |
|
| LP | 8 | 9.44 ± 0.14 | 13.708 ± 0.872 | 0.156 | 47 ± 2.08 | Epizoochory | Protection | |
|
| |||||||||
| Papaveraceae |
| LBP | 6 | 0.42 ± 0.0018 | 1.269 ± 0.044 | 0.065 | 30 ± 5.29 | Autochory | Escape |
|
| |||||||||
| Ranunculaceae |
| E | 6 | 1.06 ± 0.0099 | 4.614 ± 0.229 | 0.018 | 20.67 ± 1.76 | Epizoochory | Escape-protection |
|
| |||||||||
| Caryophyllaceae |
| LA | 9 | 0.20 ± 0.0087 | 0.499 ± 0.011 | 0.028 | 0 | Barochory | Escape |
|
| |||||||||
| Amaranthaceae |
| LA | 9 | 1.16 ± 0.027 | 2.208 ± 0.093 | 0.108 | 8.5 ± 2.22 | Barochory | Protection |
|
| LA | 9 | 0.70 ± 0.0046 | 2.083 ± 0.058 | 0.069 | 14.5 ± 5.50 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 10 | 0.68 ± 0.0088 | 2.115 ± 0.034 | 0.066 | 56 ± 2.00 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LS | 10 | 1.14 ± 0.020 | 2.064 ± 0.062 | 0.104 | 66.5 ± 4.03 | Anemochory | Protection | |
|
| LA | 10 | 1.10 ± 0.032 | 4.472 ± 0.355 | 0.168 | 11 ± 4.65 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 9 | 0.66 ± 0.0078 | 3.018 ± 0.145 | 0.15 | 15 ± 1.91 | Epizoochory | Protection | |
|
| LA | 10 | 0.43 ± 0.0049 | 2.958 ± 0.165 | 0.04 | 85.5 ± 4.27 | Epizoochory | Protection | |
|
| LS | 10 | 0.54 ± 0.015 | 2.238 ± 0.066 | 0.083 | 96 ± 5.48 | Anemochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 9 | 1.51 ± 0.025 | 7.624 ± 0.556 | 0.364 | 42.5 ± 2.36 | Epizoochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 7 | 0.35 ± 0.0017 | 0.964 ± 0.025 | 0.078 | 98.5 ± 0.96 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 8 | 0.11 ± 0.0022 | 0.594 ± 0.023 | 0.037 | 6.5 ± 0.96 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 9 | 0.22 ± 0.0021 | 0.864 ± 0.049 | 0.074 | 99 ± 0.58 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 10 | 0.35 ± 0.0016 | 1.776 ± 0.086 | 0.044 | 7.5 ± 2.22 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 8 | 0.73 ± 0.01 | 2.634 ± 0.083 | 0.143 | 0 | Epizoochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 10 | 1.06 ± 0.011 | 2.092 ± 0.047 | 0.088 | 77.00 ± 2.34 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LS | 10 | 0.24 ± 0.0074 | 1.798 ± 0.077 | 0.046 | 69 ± 3.00 | Anemochory | Escape | |
|
| LS | 10 | 3.89 ± 0.12 | 10.676 ± 0.419 | 0.172 | 73.5 ± 5.74 | Anemochory | Protection | |
|
| LS | 10 | 7.97 ± 0.085 | 9.528 ± 0.149 | 0.147 | 54 ± 4.55 | Anemochory | Protection | |
|
| LA | 9 | 0.23 ± 0.0057 | 0.932 ± 0.043 | 0.083 | 4 ± 1.41 | Epizoochory | Escape | |
|
| LS | 10 | 0.15 ± 0.002 | 1.568 ± 0.080 | 0.032 | 96.5 ± 1.71 | Anemochory | Escape | |
|
| LS | 10 | 0.16 ± 0.0065 | 3.712 ± 0.213 | 0.047 | 98.00 ± 0.77 | Anemochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 10 | 0.47 ± 0.008 | 0.698 ± 0.017 | 0.104 | 68 ± 2.45 | Anemochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 9 | 1.75 ± 0.015 | 0.728 ± 0.029 | 0.129 | 3 ± 1.29 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 10 | 0.055 ± 0.0004 | 1.270 ± 0.121 | 0.047 | 15 ± 3.87 | Anemochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 10 | 1.04 ± 0.004 | 6.162 ± 0.218 | 0.182 | 0 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 10 | 5.18 ± 0.069 | 10.176 ± 0.596 | 0.139 | 26 ± 8.21 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 10 | 2.68 ± 0.053 | 8.312 ± 0.537 | 0.139 | 24 ± 9.42 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 10 | 1.80 ± 0.040 | 6.690 ± 0.269 | 0.115 | 43.5 ± 3.30 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 10 | 2.71 ± 0.041 | 8.216 ± 0.424 | 0.129 | 3 ± 1.29 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 9 | 0.57 ± 0.017 | 1.463 ± 0.088 | 0.02 | 38.5 ± 1.89 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LA | 10 | 0.35 ± 0.0057 | 1.244 ± 0.033 | 0.029 | 24 ± 2.83 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LS | 10 | 0.32 ± 0.0051 | 1.086 ± 0.040 | 0.003 | 52.5 ± 5.62 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| LS | 10 | 2.48 ± 0.021 | 2.934 ± 0.162 | 0.029 | 79 ± 2.65 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LA | 10 | 0.15 ± 0.0028 | 0.792 ± 0.031 | 0.034 | 29 ± 1.91 | Barochory | Escape | |
|
| |||||||||
| Polygonaceae |
| LS | 8 | 26.72 ± 1.21 | 10.138 ± 0.369 | 0.045 | 1 ± 0.58 | Anemochory | Escape-protection |
|
| |||||||||
| Tamaricaceae |
| LS | 8 | 9.16 ± 0.12 | 6.050 ± 0.156 | 0.078 | 31.5 ± 2.50 | Anemochory | Escape-protection |
|
| |||||||||
| Plumbaginaceae |
| LP | 8 | 0.26 ± 0.0063 | 2.622 ± 0.048 | 0.051 | 34.5 ± 12.53 | Anemochory | Escape |
|
| LS | 8 | 0.30 ± 0.0052 | 2.784 ± 0.157 | 0.109 | 29 ± 6.56 | Anemochory | Escape | |
|
| |||||||||
| Fabaceae |
| LS | 10 | 4.87 ± 0.064 | 3.672 ± 0.129 | 0.078 | 7.5 ± 1.89 | Autochory | Escape-protection |
|
| LP | 8 | 37.90 ± 0.54 | 11.424 ± 0.639 | 0.091 | 8.23 ± 1.50 | Autochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LP | 8 | 9.04 ± 0.060 | 2.796 ± 0.151 | 0.038 | 7.5 ± 0.96 | Autochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LP | 8 | 19.00 ± 0.19 | 3.968 ± 0.074 | 0.039 | 9.13 ± 1.67 | Autochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| E | 6 | 1.01 ± 0.018 | 2.248 ± 0.059 | 0.105 | 14.67 ± 1.33 | Autochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| E | 6 | 0.88 ± 0.0096 | 2.100 ± 0.030 | 0.107 | 14.00 ± 3.06 | Autochory | Escape | |
|
| |||||||||
| Zygophyllaceae |
| LS | 7 | 46.00 ± 0.91 | 7.916 ± 0.174 | 0.059 | 0 | Endozoochory | Protection |
|
| LS | 8 | 106.53 ± 2.92 | 28.588 ± 1.133 | 0.051 | 83.5 ± 3.10 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LP | 7 | 2.98 ± 0.92 | 3.704 ± 0.045 | 0.123 | 50.5 ± 6.70 | Anemochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| |||||||||
| Brassicaceae |
| E | 6 | 0.37 ± 0.0050 | 1.474 ± 0.043 | 0.107 | 93.33 ± 1.76 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape |
|
| E | 6 | 0.86 ± 0.0023 | 1.024 ± 0.040 | 0.08 | 6 ± 3.06 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape | |
|
| E | 6 | 0.11 ± 0.0007 | 0.916 ± 0.025 | 0.081 | 23.33 ± 2.40 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape | |
|
| E | 6 | 0.92 ± 0.0068 | 1.016 ± 0.038 | 0.074 | 46 ± 7.21 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape | |
|
| E | 6 | 4.01 ± 0.065 | 3.740 ± 0.163 | 0.066 | 3.33 ± 0.67 | Epizoochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| E | 6 | 0.095 ± 0.0011 | 0.966 ± 0.037 | 0.117 | 54.67 ± 8.74 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape | |
|
| E | 6 | 0.21 ± 0.0039 | 1.588 ± 0.090 | 0.103 | 86.67 ± 7.33 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape | |
|
| E | 6 | 2.24 ± 0.018 | 3.038 ± 0.115 | 0.095 | 18.67 ± 5.70 | Epizoochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| |||||||||
| Plantaginaceae |
| LP | 9 | 0.55 ± 0.0055 | 1.244 ± 0.054 | 0.115 | 89.33 ± 0.67 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape |
|
| E | 6 | 1.94 ± 0.021 | 3.546 ± 0.101 | 0.129 | 97.33 ± 0.67 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| LP | 8 | 0.44 ± 0.0057 | 1.756 ± 0.054 | 0.105 | 93 ± 3.32 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape | |
|
| E | 6 | 2.04 ± 0.054 | 3.534 ± 0.090 | 0.129 | 76.67 ± 0.67 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape-protection | |
|
| |||||||||
| Compositae |
| LS | 9 | 2.46 ± 0.040 | 1.546 ± 0.033 | 0.115 | 78.5 ± 3.20 | Ombrohydrochory | Escape-protection |
|
| LP | 8 | 4.25 ± 0.041 | 4.876 ± 0.196 | 0.093 | 14 ± 2.45 | Epizoochory | Protection | |
|
| LB | 8 | 9.82 ± 0.076 | 4.852 ± 0.053 | 0.09 | 82.5 ± 2.06 | Barochory | Escape-protection | |
Notes: LA: long-lived Annuals; LBP: long-lived biennials-perennials; LPH: long-lived perennials; LS: long-lived shrubs; E: annuals/ephemerals.
Dispersal syndromes and characteristics of diaspores and number of species, genera, and families with each syndrome.
| Dispersal syndrome | Secondary dispersal syndrome | Fruit type of storage material | Fruit or seed | Number | Number | Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zoochory | Endozoochory | Berry, drupe, storage material (sugars, starches, lipids, or proteins), or capsule | Edible aril or pulp | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Epizoochory | Hook-like or sticky substance capsule | Adherence structure | 11 | 10 | 5 | |
|
| ||||||
| Anemochory | Capsule, pod, and winged nut; dust seed (<0.01 mg); hairy; and pappus | Easily dispersal by wind | 25 | 17 | 7 | |
|
| ||||||
| Autochory | Explosive capsule | Ballistic | 7 | 5 | 2 | |
|
| ||||||
| Barochory | None | Seed dispersal via gravity | 15 | 8 | 4 | |
|
| ||||||
| Ombrohydrochory | Mucilage | Seed produces mucilage when wetted | 11 | 8 | 3 | |
Figure 1Proportion of dispersal syndromes in the three different dispersal strategies of species in the Gurbantunggut Desert.
Figure 2Frequency distribution of seed mass (a), seed size (b), and seed shape (c) of the species in the Gurbantunggut Desert.
Figure 3Box plots showing mean (∘), median (—), quartiles, and outliers (-) of seed mass (a), seed size (b), and seed shape (c) of 70 species grouped by dispersal syndromes. Different letters indicate subsets with significant difference (Tukey's test, P < 0.05).
Figure 4Box plots showing mean (∘), median (—), quartiles, and outliers (-) of seed mass (a), seed size (b), and seed shape (c) of 70 species grouped by dispersal strategies. Different letters indicate subsets with significant difference (Tukey's test, P < 0.05).
Figure 5Frequency distribution of days to first germination of the species.
Figure 6Relationships between mean seed mass (log10) (a), seed size (log) (b), and seed shape (c), and mean arcsine square root final germination percentage of 70 species in the Gurbantunggut Desert.
Figure 7Mean germination percentage of four plant life forms. Biennials (<3 species) were excluded from the data.
Figure 8Box plots showing mean (∘), median (—), quartiles, and outliers (-) of seed germination percentages (arcsin) of 70 species grouped by dispersal syndromes. Difference letters indicate subsets with significant difference (Tukey's test, P < 0.05).
Figure 9Box plots showing mean (∘), median (—), quartiles, and outliers (-) of seed germination percentages (arcsin) of 70 species grouped by dispersal strategies. Difference letters indicate subsets with significant difference (Tukey's test, P < 0.05).