Background and Aims: Temporal flooding is a common environmental stress for terrestrial plants. Aquatic adventitious roots (aquatic roots) are commonly formed in flooding-tolerant plant species and are generally assumed to be beneficial for plant growth by supporting water and nutrient uptake during partial flooding. However, the actual contribution of these roots to plant performance under flooding has hardly been quantified. As the investment into aquatic root development in terms of carbohydrates may be costly, these costs may - depending on the specific environmental conditions - offset the beneficial effects of aquatic roots. This study tested the hypothesis that the balance between potential costs and benefits depends on the duration of flooding, as the benefits are expected to outweigh the costs in long-term but not in short-term flooding. Methods: The contribution of aquatic roots to plant performance was tested in Solanum dulcamara during 1-4 weeks of partial submergence and by experimentally manipulating root production. Nutrient uptake by aquatic roots, transpiration and photosynthesis were measured in plants differing in aquatic root development to assess the specific function of these roots. Key Results: As predicted, flooded plants benefited from the presence of aquatic roots. The results showed that this was probably due to the contribution of roots to resource uptake. However, these beneficial effects were only present in long-term but not in short-term flooding. This relationship could be explained by the correlation between nutrient uptake and the flooding duration-dependent size of the aquatic root system. Conclusions: The results indicate that aquatic root formation is likely to be selected for in habitats characterized by long-term flooding. This study also revealed only limited costs associated with adventitious root formation, which may explain the maintenance of the ability to produce aquatic roots in habitats characterized by very rare or short flooding events.
Background and Aims: Temporal flooding is a common environmental stress for terrestrial plants. Aquatic adventitious roots (aquatic roots) are commonly formed in flooding-tolerant plant species and are generally assumed to be beneficial for plant growth by supporting water and nutrient uptake during partial flooding. However, the actual contribution of these roots to plant performance under flooding has hardly been quantified. As the investment into aquatic root development in terms of carbohydrates may be costly, these costs may - depending on the specific environmental conditions - offset the beneficial effects of aquatic roots. This study tested the hypothesis that the balance between potential costs and benefits depends on the duration of flooding, as the benefits are expected to outweigh the costs in long-term but not in short-term flooding. Methods: The contribution of aquatic roots to plant performance was tested in Solanum dulcamara during 1-4 weeks of partial submergence and by experimentally manipulating root production. Nutrient uptake by aquatic roots, transpiration and photosynthesis were measured in plants differing in aquatic root development to assess the specific function of these roots. Key Results: As predicted, flooded plants benefited from the presence of aquatic roots. The results showed that this was probably due to the contribution of roots to resource uptake. However, these beneficial effects were only present in long-term but not in short-term flooding. This relationship could be explained by the correlation between nutrient uptake and the flooding duration-dependent size of the aquatic root system. Conclusions: The results indicate that aquatic root formation is likely to be selected for in habitats characterized by long-term flooding. This study also revealed only limited costs associated with adventitious root formation, which may explain the maintenance of the ability to produce aquatic roots in habitats characterized by very rare or short flooding events.
Authors: Xin Chen; Heidrun Huber; Hans de Kroon; Anton J M Peeters; Hendrik Poorter; Laurentius A C J Voesenek; Eric J W Visser Journal: Ann Bot Date: 2009-08-16 Impact factor: 4.357
Authors: Heidrun Huber; Nolan C Kane; M Shane Heschel; Eric J von Wettberg; Joshua Banta; Anne-Marie Leuck; Johanna Schmitt Journal: Am Nat Date: 2004-04-19 Impact factor: 3.926
Authors: C J Murren; J R Auld; H Callahan; C K Ghalambor; C A Handelsman; M A Heskel; J G Kingsolver; H J Maclean; J Masel; H Maughan; D W Pfennig; R A Relyea; S Seiter; E Snell-Rood; U K Steiner; C D Schlichting Journal: Heredity (Edinb) Date: 2015-02-18 Impact factor: 3.821
Authors: Satyen Mondal; M Iqbal R Khan; Frederickson Entila; Shalabh Dixit; Pompe C Sta Cruz; M Panna Ali; Barry Pittendrigh; Endang M Septiningsih; Abdelbagi M Ismail Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 4.379