| Literature DB >> 29043498 |
Jeanne Tonnabel1, Patrice David2, John R Pannell3.
Abstract
The differential plasticity hypothesis suggests that sexual dimorphism in dioecious plants could evolve in response to sex-specific resource requirements for reproduction (i.e., high carbon requirements for ovules and high nitrogen demands for pollen). When resources become limiting during growth, males and females should, therefore, adjust their allocation to resource-harvesting organs differently. To investigate the potential for plants to respond to resource limitation late in life and to test the differential plasticity hypothesis, we grew male and female individuals of the annual wind-pollinated plant Mercurialis annua in a common garden. Late in the growth season, we simulated a change in competition by decreasing plant density in half of the replicates. We measured both allocation to vegetative and reproductive traits and analyzed the relative allocation to reproduction vs. growth. Males and females differentially adjusted their resource allocation in response to varying plant densities, despite the fact that they were reproductively mature. Males maintained the same relative allocation of resource to reproductive vs. vegetative tissues at both densities. In contrast, females reduced vegetative growth proportionally less than seed production at the higher density. Our results highlight the dynamic nature of allocation decisions taken by plants, which respond quickly and in a sexually dimorphic way to changes in their competitive circumstances. The existence of resource 'currencies' limiting male and female functions differently have potentially led to the evolution of sex-specific strategies of resource acquisition and deployment, with females conserving resources for vegetative organs to ensure their future carbon-rich reproduction.Entities:
Keywords: Carbon limitation; Light competition; Plasticity; Resource allocation; Sexual dimorphism
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29043498 PMCID: PMC5681607 DOI: 10.1007/s00442-017-3966-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oecologia ISSN: 0029-8549 Impact factor: 3.225
Results of the ANOVAs for the effect of density (low vs. high) on male and female traits of M. annua grown at contrasted density in a common garden, and on the difference between male and female traits within each pot
| Traits | Effect of density on trait values | Effect of density on difference between sexes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Females | Males |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Vegetative traits | ||||||||
| Plant height | −0.46 | 0.12 | 0.73 | −0.36 | 0.06 | 0.81 | 1.30 | 0.25 |
| Plant biomass | −0.66 | 3.60 | 0.06 | − |
|
| 0.91 | 0.34 |
| Mean length of the first branches | −0.74 | 1.04 | 0.31 | − |
|
| 0.30 | 0.58 |
| Plant diameter | −0.97 | 3.77 | 0.05 | −0.38 | 2.10 | 0.15 | 2.58 | 0.11 |
| Reproductive traits | ||||||||
| Total seed weight | − |
|
| |||||
| Mean seed size | − |
|
| |||||
| Seed number | − |
|
| |||||
| Total inflorescence weight | − |
|
| |||||
| Total number of inflorescences | − |
|
| |||||
| Length of the higher peduncle | − |
|
| |||||
| Number of peduncles above the plant | −0.07 | 0.92 | 0.34 | |||||
| Relative allocation to vegetative and reproductive traits | ||||||||
| Total seed weight/plant biomass | − |
|
| |||||
| Total peduncle weight/plant biomass | −0.01 | 0.14 | 0.70 | |||||
β indicates the value of the linear coefficient for plant density. β, χ 2 and p value are in bold when the p value < 0.05 (ddl = 1)
Fig. 1Effect of density on allocation to vegetative tissues for both males and females of M. annua grown in a common garden. Data are given as means across populations ± SE
Fig. 2Effect of density on allocation to reproductive tissues for both males and females of M. annua grown in a common garden. Data are given as means across populations ± SE. Seed size is a relative scale with no unit. Peduncle length corresponds to the length of the highest peduncle and peduncle numbers to the number of peduncles displayed above the plant
Fig. 3Effect of density on reproductive effort and allocation to vegetative and reproductive tissues relative to their average allocation; values are means across population (± SE) at low density, for males and females of M. annua grown in a common garden. a Reproductive effort (inflorescence and seed weight divided by total biomass); b vegetative and c reproductive allocations are calculated as percentage change in biomass of the respective tissues compared to the mean allocation to these tissues across populations at low density
Summary of the experimental studies investigating the differential plasticity hypothesis and providing the name of the species studied, the treatment applied and whether or not a support for differential plasticity was displayed in the study (yes or no)
| References | Species name | Treatment variation | Differential plasticity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conn and Blum ( |
| Plant density and nutrient availability | Yes |
| Zimmerman and Lechowicz ( |
| Water availability | Yes |
| Lovett-Doust et al. ( |
| Plant density | Yes |
| Gehring and Linhart ( |
| Light, water, nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium availability | No |
| Dorken and Barrett ( |
| Nitrogen availability | Yes |
| Delph and Bell ( |
| Water availability | No |
| Harris and Pannell ( |
| Nitrogen availability | Yes |
| Herlihy and Delph ( |
| Water and nutrient availability | Yes |
| Hesse and Pannell ( | Gender of the competitor and nitrogen availability | Yes | |
| Sánchez Vilas and Pannell ( |
| Intra-species and interspecies competition | Yes |
| Cheng et al. ( |
| Nitrogen availability | Yes |
| Labouche and Pannell ( |
| Plant density | Yes |
| Teitel et al. ( |
| Nitrogen availability | Yes |