| Literature DB >> 26109456 |
Shen Shikang1, Wu Fuqin1, Wang Yuehua1.
Abstract
Plant-frugivore mutualism serves an important function in multiple ecological processes. Although previous studies have highlighted the effect of frugivore gut passage on fresh seed germinability, no study has investigated the effect on seed storage after frugivore gut passage. We used the endangered plant, Euryodendron excelsum, to determine the combined effects of frugivore gut passage and storage conditions on the germination percentage and rate of seeds. In particular, three treatments that included storage periods, storage methods, and seed types were designed in the experiment. We hypothesized that seeds that passed through the gut will exhibit enhanced germination capacity and rate during storage. Results showed that the final germination percentage decreased in seeds that passed through the gut, whereas the germination rate increased during seed storage. Germination decreased in most types of seeds under both dry and wet storage after 6 months compared with storage after 1 and 3 months. The results suggest that after frugivore gut passage, E. excelsum seeds cannot form persistent soil seed bank in the field, and were not suitable for species germplasm storage. These finding underscore that seeds that passed through frugivore gut have long-term impact on their viability and germination performance.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26109456 PMCID: PMC4479827 DOI: 10.1038/srep11615
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Germination percentage, start germination time (SGT) and mean germination time (MGT) of four seed types of E. excelsum under different storage conditions. Notes: SFF: seeds separated from fruits; SFD: seeds separated from droppings; SIF: seeds in intact fruits; SID: seeds in bird droppings.
Generalised linear models (GLMs) analysis of the different storage conditions and their interactions on the germination traits of E. excelsum seeds (*** P < 0.001; ** P < 0.01; * P < 0.05)
| Storage periods | 1 | 28.5617 | 8.351e-07*** | 14.170 | 0.000317*** | 16.597 | 0.000108*** |
| Methods | 1 | 9.1826 | 0.003290** | 1.286 | 0.260243 | 3.818 | 0.054200 |
| Seed types | 3 | 9.4543 | 2.037e-05*** | 1.821 | 0.149903 | 4.871 | 0.003663** |
| Storage periods *Methods | 1 | 9.3813 | 0.002986** | 0.246 | 0.621116 | 0.000 | 0.993405 |
| Storage periods *Seed types | 3 | 4.5695 | 0.005257** | 0.003 | 0.999822 | 0.143 | 0.933935 |
| Methods*Seed types | 3 | 4.4132 | 0.006343** | 0.077 | 0.972394 | 0.472 | 0.702325 |
| Storage periods *Methods* Seed types | 3 | 3.7054 | 0.014947* | 0.096 | 0.961965 | 0.375 | 0.771448 |
Models examining the importance of storage periods (1, 3 or 6 month), storage methods (dry or wet), and seed types (seeds separated from fruits, seeds separated from droppings, seeds in intact fruits, and seeds in bird droppings) on the germination percentage, mean germination time (MGT) and start germination time (SGT)
| Germination percentage | Storage periods * Methods * Seed types | 16 | −216.34 | 471.56 | 0.00 | 1.00 |
| MGT | Storage periods + Methods + Seed types | 7 | −263.57 | 542.42 | 0.00 | 0.71 |
| Storage periods + Seed types | 6 | −265.73 | 544.41 | 1.99 | 0.26 | |
| SGT | Storage periods | 3 | −261.71 | 529.68 | 0.00 | 0.31 |
| Storage periods + Seed types | 6 | −258.61 | 530.17 | 0.49 | 0.24 | |
| Storage periods + Methods | 4 | −261.00 | 530.43 | 0.76 | 0.21 | |
| Storage periods + Methods + Seed types | 7 | −257.85 | 530.98 | 1.31 | 0.16 | |
| Storage periods* Methods | 5 | −260.86 | 532.39 | 2.71 | 0.08 |
Models are ordered by corrected Akaike information criterion (AICc) scores for small sample sizes, and only those with a ΔAICc ≤ 5 are shown. The symbol * indicates interaction and + indicates an addition. Model-selection parameters include the number of parameters (K), log-likelihood (LL), AIC scores, relative model differences in AICc (ΔAICc), and relative model weights (w).