| Literature DB >> 30914788 |
Dèdéou A Tchokponhoué1, Sognigbé N'Danikou2, Jacob S Houéto2, Enoch G Achigan-Dako2.
Abstract
Phenotypic plasticity as a change of genotype expression in response to environmental heterogeneity varies in magnitude among crop species and can induce a shift in a plant's phenology. In Synsepalum dulcificum, a West African orphan fruit tree, such phenological plasticity is not well understood. Here, we hypothesize that light stimulation and changes in organic nutrient availability would induce an accelerated transition in S. dulcificum from its juvenile to its reproductive phase. We grew 14-month-old seedlings of S. dulcificum under a range of nutrient regimes, both in shade and in full sunlight, and measured their survival, vegetative growth, biomass allocation, and transition to reproductive maturity. The results reveal that S. dulcificum responds favourably to both shading and nutrient application, with the shading exhibiting a stronger influence on the measured variables. The species' morphological plasticity, particularly in terms of plant height and stem diameter, was found to exceed both its fitness and allocational plasticities. Under the conditions examined, we observed an accelerated transition to fruiting, at an age of only 24 months. The observed plasticity suggests S. dulcificum to be an intermediate shade-tolerant species. This finding expands our knowledge on the appropriate environmental conditions for the breeding and cultivation of this species.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30914788 PMCID: PMC6435671 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-41673-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Effect of light exposure and compost application on seedling survival in Synsepalum dulcificum. Barplots (Treatments) with the same letter are not statistically different at 5% (Least Significant Difference post-hoc test). n = 20 seedlings and error bars represent standard error.
Figure 2Vegetative growth of Synsepalum dulcificum in response to light exposure and compost application. (a) Diameter growth. (b) Height growth. (c) Branches production. (d) Leaf production. (e) Leaf area. (f) Specific leaf area. Barplots (Treatments) with the same letter are not statistically different at 5% (Least Significant Difference post-hoc test). n = 20 seedlings and error bars represent standard error.
Effect of light exposure and compost application on budding, flowering, and fruit bearing in Synsepalum dulcificum seedlings.
| Light exposure | Compost application (g/seedling) | Budding (%) | Flowering (%) | Fruiting (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shade | 0 | 0a (0) | 0a (0) | 0a (0) |
| 4.5 | 45b (11.41) | 30b (10.51) | 25b (9.93) | |
| 9.0 | 40b (11.23) | 25b (9.93) | 25b (9.93) | |
| Sun | 0 | 0a (0) | 0a (0) | 0a (0) |
| 4.5 | 0a (0) | 0a (0) | 0a (0) | |
| 9.0 | 5a (5) | 5a (5) | 0a (0) |
Values are means (S.E.). n = 20 seedlings. Means followed by the same letter in a column are not statistically different at 5% (Least Significant Difference post-hoc test). Abbreviations: S.E (Standard error).
Effect of light exposure and compost application on the timing of reproduction in Synsepalum dulcificum seedlings.
| Light exposure | Compost application (g/seedling) | Time to first budding (days) | Time to first flowering (days) | Time to first fruiting (days) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SE) | Min | Max | Mean (SE) | Min | Max | Mean (SE) | Min | Max | ||
| Shade | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 4.5 | 260.66a (22.69) | 160 | 413 | 282.33a (16.29) | 209 | 330 | 323.2b (19.08) | 297 | 399 | |
| 9.0 | 307.37a (20.69) | 246 | 399 | 329.40a (22.78) | 260 | 390 | 387.6a (13.93) | 354 | 422 | |
| Sun | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 4.5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
| 9.0 | 286 (NA) | — | — | 335 (NA) | — | — | — | — | — | |
Values are means (S.E.). n = 20 seedlings. Means followed by the same letter in a column are not statistically different at 5% (Least Significant Difference post-hoc test). Abbreviations: - (no individuals reaching the target stage); NA (not calculated as there was only one individual); Min (Minimum); Max (Maximum); S.E (Standard error).
Biomass allocation in Synsepalum dulcificum seedling growing under shade and full sunlight and different compost application doses.
| Light exposure | Compost application (g/seedling) | Leaf mass fraction (LMF) | Stem mass fraction (SMF) | Root mass fraction (RMF) | Root to shoot ratio (R/S) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shade | 0 | 0.31 (0.01) | 0.29 (0.01) | 0.39 (0.01) | 0.66 (0.05) |
| 4.5 | 0.29 (0.01) | 0.34 (0.01) | 0.36 (0.02) | 0.58 (0.06) | |
| 9.0 | 0.339 (0.02) | 0.29 (0.02) | 0.34 (0.04) | 0.56 (0.13) | |
| Sun | 0 | 0.26(0.02) | 0.24 (0.007) | 0.58 (0.03) | 0.96 (0.12) |
| 4.5 | 0.29 (0.02) | 0.24 (0.03) | 0.46 (0.05) | 0.91 (0.19) | |
| 9.0 | 0.28(0.03) | 0.24 (0.01) | 0.46 (0.02) | 0.87 (0.19) |
Values are means (S.E.). n = 3 seedlings. Statistical analyses are shown in Table 4. Abbreviations: S.E (Standard error).
ANOVA results for each biomass allocation parameter (LMF, SMF, RMF, and R/S).
| Biomass allocation parameters | Light exposure (LE) | Compost application (D) | (LE) X (D) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf mass fraction (LMF) | 11.26** | 0.23ns | 01.62ns |
| Stem mass fraction (SMF) | 8.3* | 0.54ns | 0.44ns |
| Root mass fraction (RMF) | 18.95** | 0.45ns | 0.68ns |
| Root to shoot ratio (R/S) | 25.10** | 0.36ns | 0.27ns |
Values are F statistics. Significance values are represented as follow: ns = not significant; *p < 0.05; and **p < 0.01.
Phenotypic plasticity index (based on Valladares et al.[81]) in Synsepalum dulcificum measured traits for light exposure and nutrient availability factors.
| Traits | Light exposure | Nutrient availability |
|---|---|---|
| Height | 0.72 | 0.51 |
| Diameter | 0.41 | 0.30 |
| Branching | 0.03 | 0.18 |
| Leaf production | — | 0.45 |
| Leaf area | 0.64 | — |
| Specific leaf area | 0.23 | 0.08 |
| Stem mass fraction | 0.22 | — |
| Leaf mass fraction | 0.09 | — |
| Root mass fraction | 0.21 | — |
| Root to shoot ratio | 0.34 | — |
| Fruiting time | — | 0.16 |
| Survival | 0.27 | 0.15 |
|
|
|
|
Abbreviations: - (no plasticity of the trait for the treatment under consideration).
Figure 3Mean phenotypic plasticity indices, by functional groups, for Synsepalum dulcificum.