| Literature DB >> 29321846 |
José L A Silva1, Alexandre F Souza2, Adriano Caliman2, Eduardo L Voigt3, Juliana E Lichston4.
Abstract
A core question involving both plant physiology and community ecology is whether traits from different organs are coordinated across species, beyond pairwise trait correlations. The strength of within-community trait coordination has been hypothesized to increase along gradients of environmental harshness, due to the cost of adopting ecological strategies out of the viable niche space supported by the abiotic conditions. We evaluated the strength of trait relationship and coordination in a stressful environment using 21 leaf and stem traits of 21 deciduous and evergreen woody species from a heath vegetation growing on coastal sandy plain in northeastern South America. The study region faces marked dry season, high soil salinity and acidity, and poor nutritional conditions. Results from multiple factor analyses supported two weak and independent axes of trait coordination, which accounted for 25%-29% of the trait variance using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Trait correlations on the multiple factor analyses main axis fit well with the global plant economic spectrum, with species investing in small leaves and dense stems as opposed to species with softer stems and large leaves. The species' positions on the main functional axis corresponded to the competitor-stress-tolerant side of Grime's CSR triangle of plant strategies. The weak degree of trait coordination displayed by the heath vegetation species contradicted our expectation of high trait coordination in stressful environmental habitats. The distinct biogeographic origins of the species occurring in the study region and the prevalence of a regional environmental filter coupled with local homogeneous conditions could account for prevalence of trait independence we observed.Entities:
Keywords: Brazil; CSR triangle; leaf biochemistry; leaf‐shedding behavior; litterfall production; plant anatomy
Year: 2017 PMID: 29321846 PMCID: PMC5756860 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.3547
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Pairwise Pearson correlations between leaf and stem traits, based on raw data (below the diagonal) and phylogenetically independent contrasts (shaded cells above the diagonal)
| Leaf morphology | Productivity | Leaf anatomy | Leaf biochemistry | Stem morphology | Stem anatomy | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ldmass | Lmois | Larea | SLA | Litter | Vlitter | Meso | P/S | M/T | Cuticle | Starch | Sucrose | TSP | Smois | Sdens | Bark | Slength | Sdiam | Vdiam | Vdens | Vindex | |
| Ldmass | 0.39 |
|
| 0.18 |
|
|
| 0.10 | 0.36 |
|
|
| 0.47 |
| 0.69 | 0.11 | 0.16 |
|
| 0.47 | |
| Lmois | 0.30 | 0.44 | 0.20 | 0.46 |
| 0.44 |
|
|
|
|
| 0.44 |
| 0.01 | 0.19 | 0.12 | 0.36 | 0.15 |
| 0.00 | |
| Larea |
| 0.29 |
| 0.22 |
|
|
| 0.20 | 0.36 |
|
|
| 0.37 |
|
| 0.25 | 0.31 |
|
| 0.46 | |
| SLA |
| 0.04 | 0.14 |
| 0.17 | 0.09 |
| 0.39 |
| 0.45 |
|
|
| 0.31 |
| 0.24 | 0.28 |
| 0.17 |
| |
| Litter | 0.20 | 0.08 | 0.17 |
|
| 0.36 |
| 0.53 |
|
|
|
|
| 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.40 | 0.45 | 0.04 |
| 0.06 | |
| Vlitter |
|
| 0.02 | 0.04 |
|
| 0.21 |
|
| 0.26 |
| 0.04 |
| 0.43 |
|
|
|
| 0.67 |
| |
| Meso |
| 0.30 |
|
| 0.02 |
|
|
| 0.18 |
|
|
| 0.43 |
|
| 0.10 |
|
|
|
| |
| P/S |
| 0.14 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.13 | 0.16 |
|
|
|
| 0.13 |
|
| 0.55 |
| 0.00 |
| 0.00 | 0.81 |
| |
| M/T |
|
|
|
| 0.13 | 0.06 | 0.44 |
| 0.11 |
|
| 0.32 | 0.23 |
|
| 0.44 | 0.65 |
|
|
| |
| Cuticle | 0.26 |
| 0.09 |
|
| 0.12 | 0.39 |
| 0.13 | 0.15 |
| 0.17 | 0.01 |
|
|
|
| 0.12 |
|
| |
| Starch |
| 0.10 | 0.15 | 0.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.24 | 0.18 | 0.58 |
| 0.06 |
|
|
|
| 0.38 | |
| Sucrose | 0.10 |
| 0.08 |
|
| 0.21 |
| 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.36 |
| 0.20 | 0.35 |
|
|
| 0.11 | 0.29 | 0.22 | 0.03 | |
| TSP |
| 0.09 |
|
|
|
| 0.47 |
| 0.16 | 0.24 |
| 0.23 |
|
| 0.27 |
| 0.28 | 0.15 |
| 0.31 | |
| Smois | 0.36 | 0.47 | 0.31 | 0.04 |
|
| 0.07 |
|
| 0.13 | 0.33 | 0.02 |
|
| 0.66 |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Sdens |
|
|
| 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.42 |
| 0.07 | 0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.37 | 0.19 |
|
|
| |
| Bark | 0.64 | 0.07 |
|
| 0.10 |
|
|
|
| 0.27 |
| 0.31 | 0.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.64 | |
| Slength | 0.22 |
| 0.28 | 0.25 |
|
|
| 0.28 | 0.03 |
| 0.03 |
|
|
| 0.13 | 0.06 | 0.75 |
|
| 0.20 | |
| Sdiam |
| 0.06 |
| 0.05 | 0.29 |
| 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.06 |
|
| 0.35 | 0.10 | 0.20 |
| 0.11 |
| 0.25 |
| 0.41 | |
| Vdiam | 0.43 | 0.03 | 0.39 |
| 0.15 |
|
|
|
| 0.17 |
| 0.16 | 0.03 |
|
|
| 0.24 | 0.40 |
|
| |
| Vdens |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Vindex | 0.32 | 0.04 | 0.29 |
| 0.10 |
|
| 0.02 |
| 0.29 |
| 0.14 | 0.10 |
|
|
| 0.33 |
|
|
| |
Traits and abbreviations are as in Tables S2 and S3. For all traits, we used n = 33 species, except for leaf anatomical and biochemical traits (n = 21 species). Only significant (p < .05) correlations are shown.
Multiple factor analysis (MFA) based on raw data and phylogenetically independent contrasts (PICs) for sets of leaf and stem traits of 21 Restinga species
| Raw data | PIC values | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MFA1 | MFA2 | MFA1 | MFA2 | |
| Eigenvalue | 1.33 | 1.04 | 1.53 | 1.33 |
| % of var. | 23 | 18 | 29 | 25 |
| Leaf | ||||
| Ldmass |
| 0.23 |
| 0.30 |
| Lmois | 0.30 |
| 0.21 | 0.31 |
| Larea |
| 0.50 |
| 0.35 |
| SLA | 0.10 |
| 0.08 | 0.42 |
| Litter |
| 0.23 |
| 0.58 |
| Vlitter |
| 0.16 | 0.41 |
|
| Meso |
|
| 0.25 |
|
| P/S | 0.23 |
|
|
|
| M/T |
|
|
|
|
| Cuticle | 0.32 |
| 0.12 | 0.23 |
| Starch | 0.11 | 0.16 |
|
|
| Sucrose | 0.26 |
|
|
|
| TSP | 0.02 |
|
| 0.39 |
| Stem | ||||
| Smois |
|
|
| 0.36 |
| Sdens |
| 0.32 |
|
|
| Bark |
|
|
|
|
| Vdiam |
|
| 0.44 |
|
| Vdens |
| 0.14 |
|
|
| Vindex |
|
|
|
|
| Slength |
|
|
| 0.46 |
| Sdiam | 0.32 | 0.00 | 0.05 |
|
Significant eigenvalues and percentage of variance explained (axis features [% of var.]) from the MFA axes are shown. High loadings of traits on the MFA axes are shown in boldface. Traits and abbreviations are as in Tables S2 and S3.
Figure 1Biplot of functional relationships among leaf and stem traits from multiple factor analysis (MFA) based on phylogenetically independent contrasts (PICs). Traits and abbreviations: Leaf dry mass (Ldmass), leaf area (Larea), litterfall production (Litter), temporal variability in litterfall production (Vlitter), mesophyll layer (Meso), palisade to spongy parenchyma ratio (P/S), mesophyll to total leaf thickness (M/T), starch, sucrose, total soluble protein (TSP),stem moisture (Smois), bark (Bark), stem density (Sdens), vessel density (Vdens), vulnerability index (Vindex), stem length (Slength), and stem diameter (Sdiam). Thin arrows are correlated to axis 1, while thick arrows are correlated to axis 2
Figure 2Two representations of the functional space occupied by species of the Restinga heath ecosystem in CSR ternary and multiple factor analysis (MFA) plots. The ternary plot (a) is characterized by the leaf area (C‐strategy), leaf dry mass (S‐strategy), and specific leaf area (R‐strategy) according to the CSR classification, while the MFA plot (b) is characterized by multiple covariation of 14 traits. In B, white dots represent evergreen species, while black dots represent semideciduous or deciduous species. Species’ acronyms are as in Table S1