| Literature DB >> 34795359 |
Rocío Chaves1, Pablo Ferrandis2, Adrián Escudero1, Arantzazu L Luzuriaga3.
Abstract
Although the role played by phylogeny in the assembly of plant communities remains as a priority to complete the theory of species coexistence, experimental evidence is lacking. It is still unclear to what extent phylogenetic diversity is a driver or a consequence of species assembly processes. We experimentally explored how phylogenetic diversity can drive the community level responses to drought conditions in annual plant communities. We manipulated the initial phylogenetic diversity of the assemblages and the water availability in a common garden experiment with two irrigation treatments: average natural rainfall and drought, formed with annual plant species of gypsum ecosystems of Central Spain. We recorded plant survival and the numbers of flowering and fruiting plants per species in each assemblage. GLMMs were performed for the proportion of surviving, flowering, fruiting plants per species and for total proportion of surviving species and plants per pot. In water limited conditions, high phylogenetic diversity favored species coexistence over time with higher plant survival and more flowering and fruiting plants per species and more species and plants surviving per pot. Our results agree with the existence of niche complementarity and the convergence of water economy strategies as major mechanisms for promoting species coexistence in plant assemblages in semiarid Mediterranean habitats. Our findings point to high phylogenetic diversity among neighboring plants as a plausible feature underpinning the coexistence of species, because the success of each species in terms of surviving and producing offspring in drought conditions was greater when the initial phylogenetic diversity was higher. Our study is a step forward to understand how phylogenetic relatedness is connected to the mechanisms determining the maintenance of biodiversity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34795359 PMCID: PMC8602379 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-01991-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Conceptual model illustrating the hypotheses on the mechanisms involved in the assembly of the annual plant community related to phylogenetic diversity. (1) If phylogenetic relatedness predicts the intensity of niche overlap-differentiation among species, then plants will coexist more readily in high phylogenetic diversity scenarios due to functional/niche complementarity. Conversely, if phylogenetic relatedness predicts the competitive ability of species, then coexistence will be more likely to occur in low phylogenetic diversity scenarios (i.e., competition symmetry will enhance the coexistence among similar competitors). (2) If functional traits related to water economy are phylogenetically conserved, the response of plants to drought would be more heterogeneous in high diversity assemblages, resulting in a faster decline of species richness. In contrast, if water economy traits in the species pool are convergent among distantly related taxa, phylogenetically diverse assemblages will be more resistant to drought than those formed by close relatives.
Figure 2Distance-based phylogenetic tree for the 28 annual plant species used to prepare the experimental scenarios. Based on “V.PhyloMaker” package in R. The capital letters between brackets next to the names of species indicate the species combinations in which they participated. In nonbold typeface, the high phylogenetic diversity scenarios (A and B combinations); in bold, the low phylogenetic diversity scenarios (C and D combinations).
Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) for the proportion of surviving, flowering and fruiting plants per species and pot.
| Fixed effects | Df | Proportion of surviving plants per species (n = 7700) | Proportion of flowering plants per species (n = 14,626) | Proportion of fruiting plants per species (n = 769) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef (± SE) | CI | CI | Wald Chisq | Coef (± SE) | CI | CI | Wald Chisq | Coef (± SE) | CI | CI | Wald Chisq | ||
| Intercept | 1 | 0.84 (± 0.41) | − 0.2 | 1.9 | 4.26* | − 1.8 (± 0.2) | − 2.4 | − 1.3 | 77.0*** | 1.4 (0.2) | 0.9 | 1.9 | 47.8*** |
| Time | 1 | − 3.55 (± 0.03) | − 3.6 | − 3.5 | 19,107.6*** | − 0.52 (± 0.01) | − 0.54 | − 0.51 | 3656.0*** | – | – | – | – |
| PD | 1 | − 0.68 (± 0.57) | − 2.1 | 0.8 | 1.42ns | − 0.32 (± 0.3) | − 1.1 | 0.4 | 1.1ns | 0.08 (± 0.29) | − 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.07ns |
| W | 1 | − 0.97 (± 0.07) | − 1.1 | − 0.8 | 206.5*** | − 0.37 (± 0.05) | − 0.5 | − 0.26 | 44.9*** | − 1.4 (± 0.14) | − 1.7 | − 1.1 | 109.0 |
| PD × W | 1 | − 0.53 (± 0.1) | − 0.7 | − 0.3 | 27.9*** | − 0.44 (± 0.08) | − 0.6 | − 0.3 | 28.5 | − 0.6 (± 0.2) | − 1.0 | − 0.2 | 8.8 |
Dependent variables were modelled using binomial error distributions and logit link functions. Pot identity (n = 110) and taxonomic composition (n = 4) were included in the model as random factors. Sampling moment (time) was considered as the number of days since the beginning of the experiment and used as a covariate (n = 10 for surviving plants and n = 19 for flowering plants). We did not consider the sampling moment to model the proportion of fruiting plants, because this variable was just the percentage of the total cumulative number of fruiting plants per species in each pot. Phylogenetic diversity (PD) and water availability (W) were used as fixed factors. Type III Wald Chi-square tests were performed to estimate significance. Number of observations are shown for each dependent variable.
Coef. Coefficient, Df degrees of freedom, SE standard error, CI confidence interval, ns not significant.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) for the proportion of surviving species and proportion of total plants per pot.
| Fixed effects | Df | Proportion of surviving species per pot (n = 1100) | Proportion of surviving plants per pot (n = 1100) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef (± SE) | CI | CI | Wald Chisq | Coef (± SE) | CI | CI | Wald Chisq | ||
| Intercept | 1 | 1.6 (± 0.2) | 1.0 | 2.1 | 50.4*** | 0.76 (± 0.4) | − 0.3 | 1.8 | 3.4ns |
| Time | 1 | − 4.1 (± 0.1) | − 4.3 | − 3.9 | 1717.7*** | − 3.4 (± 0.02) | − 3.4 | − 3.3 | 19,778.4*** |
| PD | 1 | − 0.6 (± 0.3) | − 1.4 | 0.2 | 3.7p=0.055 | − 0.7 (± 0.6) | − 2.1 | 0.8 | 1.3ns |
| W | 1 | − 0.9 (± 0.1) | − 1.1 | − 0.7 | 58.3*** | − 0.9 (± 0.07) | − 1.1 | − 0.8 | 173.8*** |
| PD × W | 1 | − 0.6 (± 0.2) | − 0.9 | 0.3 | 12.4*** | − 0.5 (± 0.1) | − 0.7 | − 0.3 | 25.2*** |
Dependent variables were modelled using binomial error distributions and logit link functions. Pot identity (n = 110) and taxonomic composition (n = 4) were included in the model as random factors. Sampling moment (time) was considered as the number of days since the beginning of the experiment and used as a covariate (n = 10) to statistically control for the effect of time. Phylogenetic diversity (PD) and water availability (W) were used as fixed factors. Type III Wald Chi-square tests were performed to estimate significance. Number of observations are shown for each dependent variable.
Df degrees of freedom, Coef. Coefficient, SE standard error, CI confidence interval, ns not significant.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
Figure 3(a) Percent of surviving plants and (b) percent of flowering plants per species and per pot on each sampling date (see Table 1). Black lines represent high phylogenetic diversity (PD) scenarios and grey lines denote low phylogenetic diversity scenarios. Solid lines represent the average precipitation treatments based on natural precipitation for 30 years, and spotted lines denote drought treatments (33% of the average precipitation). Vertical bars represent the standard error.
Figure 4(a) Percent of surviving species per pot and (b) percent of surviving plants per pot on each sampling date (see Table 2). Black lines represent high phylogenetic diversity (PD) scenarios and grey lines denote low phylogenetic diversity scenarios. Solid lines represent the average precipitation treatments based on natural precipitation for 30 years, and spotted lines denote drought treatments (33% of the average precipitation). Vertical bars represent the standard error.
Figure 5Percent of fruiting plants per species and pot (see Table 1). Black bars represent high phylogenetic diversity scenarios and grey bars low phylogenetic diversity scenarios. Average precipitation treatments are based on natural precipitation for 30 years in the field and drought treatments represent 33% of the average precipitation. Vertical bars represent the standard error.