2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2015.07.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contrasting Mechanisms of Recovery from Defoliation in Two Intermountain-Native Bunchgrasses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, R. pseudoacacia could be more likely to quickly recover following defoliation by insects, making it more suitable for vegetation restoration. Previous studies also found that different species had different recovery mechanisms (Mukherjee et al 2015), and R. pseudoacacia recovered through more compensatory physiological mechanisms in our study. Our results indicated that these compensatory mechanisms include (1) modification of leaf traits, such as increased chlorophyll concentration; (2) increasing photosynthetic rates in the remaining leaves; and…”
Section: Different Recovery Strategies Of a Fruticosa And R Pseudoacacia Seedlingssupporting
confidence: 75%
“…Thus, R. pseudoacacia could be more likely to quickly recover following defoliation by insects, making it more suitable for vegetation restoration. Previous studies also found that different species had different recovery mechanisms (Mukherjee et al 2015), and R. pseudoacacia recovered through more compensatory physiological mechanisms in our study. Our results indicated that these compensatory mechanisms include (1) modification of leaf traits, such as increased chlorophyll concentration; (2) increasing photosynthetic rates in the remaining leaves; and…”
Section: Different Recovery Strategies Of a Fruticosa And R Pseudoacacia Seedlingssupporting
confidence: 75%
“…This damage can be inhibited by removal of competitors [ 96 ], but it is accentuated by drought [ 97 ]. Following defoliation, both crested wheatgrass [ 98 ] and Snake River wheatgrass ( Elymus wawawaiensis J. Carlson & Barkworth) [ 87 , 99 ] display superior regrowth relative to BBWG. Poor regrowth in response to defoliation is unrelated to carbohydrate reserves, as reserves in BBWG crowns were highest during the late boot stage [ 100 ], the same time when susceptibility to defoliation is greatest.…”
Section: Bluebunch Wheatgrass: Plant Traitsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, crested wheatgrass allocates more resources to shoots and curtails root growth following defoliation, while BBWG roots grow unabated without apparent benefit to the plant [ 89 ]. Regrowth biomass in BBWG was correlated with tiller number but not mass per tiller [ 87 ]. Mukherjee et al [ 103 ] reported that BBWG populations best able to compensate for defoliation were those with low undefoliated biomass, suggesting a trade-off between the above-ground productivity and defoliation tolerance.…”
Section: Bluebunch Wheatgrass: Plant Traitsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the tall species of native grasses invest in structural biomass which improves their light capturing ability [18] and overall biomass productivity. Native perennial grasses with greater shoot biomass have been linked as a valuable trait to defoliation tolerance [19]. There is a direct correlation between the inflorescence axis of plants and seed mass [20], thus increasing the plant’s ability to survive and compete with invading species [21].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%