Functionally distinct assembly of vascular plants colonizing alpine cushions suggests their vulnerability to climate change.
Abiotic stress
Himalaya
Ladakh
alpine
arid
competition
facilitation
global warming
plant–plant interactions
subnival plant communities
Journal
Annals of botany
ISSN: 1095-8290
Titre abrégé: Ann Bot
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0372347
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 03 2019
14 03 2019
Historique:
received:
27
12
2017
accepted:
20
10
2018
pubmed:
13
12
2018
medline:
25
1
2020
entrez:
13
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Alpine cushion plants can initially facilitate other species during ecological succession, but later on can be negatively affected by their development, especially when beneficiaries possess traits allowing them to overrun their host. This can be reinforced by accelerated warming favouring competitively strong species over cold-adapted cushion specialists. However, little empirical research has addressed the trait-based mechanisms of these interactions. The ecological strategies of plants colonizing the cushion plant Thylacospermum caespitosum (Caryophyllaceae), a dominant pioneer of subnival zones, were studied in the Western Himalayas. To assess whether the cushion colonizers are phylogenetically and functionally distinct, 1668 vegetation samples were collected, both in open ground outside the cushions and inside their live and dead canopies, in two mountain ranges, Karakoram and Little Tibet. More than 50 plant traits related to growth, biomass allocation and resource acquisition were measured for target species, and the phylogenetic relationships of these species were studied [or determined]. Species-based trait-environment analysis with phylogenetic correction showed that in both mountain ranges Thylacospermum colonizers are phylogenetically diverse but functionally similar and are functionally different from species preferring bare soil outside cushions. Successful colonizers are fast-growing, clonal graminoids and forbs, penetrating the cushion by rhizomes and stolons. They have higher root-to-shoot ratios, leaf nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations, and soil moisture and nutrient demands, sharing the syndrome of competitive species with broad elevation ranges typical of the late stages of primary succession. In contrast, the species from open ground have traits typical of stress-tolerant specialists from high and dry environments. Species colonizing tight cushions of T. caespitosum are competitively strong graminoids and herbaceous perennials from alpine grasslands. Since climate change in the Himalayas favours these species, highly specialized subnival cushion plants may face intense competition and a greater risk of decline in the future.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Alpine cushion plants can initially facilitate other species during ecological succession, but later on can be negatively affected by their development, especially when beneficiaries possess traits allowing them to overrun their host. This can be reinforced by accelerated warming favouring competitively strong species over cold-adapted cushion specialists. However, little empirical research has addressed the trait-based mechanisms of these interactions. The ecological strategies of plants colonizing the cushion plant Thylacospermum caespitosum (Caryophyllaceae), a dominant pioneer of subnival zones, were studied in the Western Himalayas.
METHODS
To assess whether the cushion colonizers are phylogenetically and functionally distinct, 1668 vegetation samples were collected, both in open ground outside the cushions and inside their live and dead canopies, in two mountain ranges, Karakoram and Little Tibet. More than 50 plant traits related to growth, biomass allocation and resource acquisition were measured for target species, and the phylogenetic relationships of these species were studied [or determined].
KEY RESULTS
Species-based trait-environment analysis with phylogenetic correction showed that in both mountain ranges Thylacospermum colonizers are phylogenetically diverse but functionally similar and are functionally different from species preferring bare soil outside cushions. Successful colonizers are fast-growing, clonal graminoids and forbs, penetrating the cushion by rhizomes and stolons. They have higher root-to-shoot ratios, leaf nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations, and soil moisture and nutrient demands, sharing the syndrome of competitive species with broad elevation ranges typical of the late stages of primary succession. In contrast, the species from open ground have traits typical of stress-tolerant specialists from high and dry environments.
CONCLUSION
Species colonizing tight cushions of T. caespitosum are competitively strong graminoids and herbaceous perennials from alpine grasslands. Since climate change in the Himalayas favours these species, highly specialized subnival cushion plants may face intense competition and a greater risk of decline in the future.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30541052
pii: 5239867
doi: 10.1093/aob/mcy207
pmc: PMC6417476
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
569-578Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Annals of Botany Company. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
Front Microbiol. 2013 Dec 03;4:359
pubmed: 24348469
New Phytol. 2014 Apr;202(1):95-105
pubmed: 24329871
Perspect Plant Ecol Syst. 2014 Aug 20;16(4):164-173
pubmed: 25914604
Microb Ecol. 2016 Aug;72(2):394-406
pubmed: 27245598
Sci Rep. 2016 May 04;6:24881
pubmed: 27143226
Ecol Lett. 2011 May;14(5):433-43
pubmed: 21366815
Ann Bot. 2011 Sep;108(3):567-73
pubmed: 21813564
J Exp Bot. 2008;59(11):2905-16
pubmed: 18603617
Front Plant Sci. 2014 Aug 12;5:387
pubmed: 25161660
Ecol Lett. 2013 Apr;16(4):478-86
pubmed: 23346919
Front Microbiol. 2015 Apr 16;6:304
pubmed: 25932023
Bioinformatics. 2003 Aug 12;19(12):1572-4
pubmed: 12912839
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2015 Feb;90(1):297-313
pubmed: 24774563
Evolution. 1998 Oct;52(5):1247-1262
pubmed: 28565378
Science. 2011 Aug 19;333(6045):1024-6
pubmed: 21852500
Evolution. 2003 Nov;57(11):2647-52
pubmed: 14686540
Sci Rep. 2016 Apr 13;6:24440
pubmed: 27071305
New Phytol. 2012 Nov;196(3):824-34
pubmed: 22978646
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e53514
pubmed: 23326446
New Phytol. 2006;169(1):59-69
pubmed: 16390419
Ann Bot. 2017 Jul 1;120(1):29-38
pubmed: 28444363
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e36741
pubmed: 22615804