Direct and legacy effects of herbivory on growth and physiology of a clonal plant

Dong, Bi‐Cheng; Wang, Mo‐Zhu; Liu, Ruihua; Luo, Fang‐Li; Li, Hongli; Yu, Fei‐Hai

doi:10.1007/s10530-018-1801-5

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Aboveground herbivory reduces photosynthetic capacity (Mooney and Gulmon 1983, Holland et al 2017), which some plants may compensate for by consequently increasing or decreasing their foliar nutrient concentrations (Millard et al 2001). Assuming there are no significant changes to foliar nutrient concentrations due to herbivory (Perkovich and Ward 2021a), we hypothesized that there should be a greater investment in fine‐root production to increase nutrient uptake (Johnson et al 2008, McCormack et al 2015, Dong et al 2018). We expected a greater investment in fine‐root biomass than coarse‐root biomass because fine roots have a greater nutrient absorption capacity than coarse roots (Wells and Eissenstat 2003, Johnson et al 2008, McCormack et al 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aboveground herbivory causes belowground changes in twelve oak Quercus species: a phylogenetic analysis of root biomass and non‐structural carbohydrate storage

Perkovich

Ward

2021

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant ecosystem structure is understood to be a result of complex multitrophic interactions. Most multitrophic studies focus on plant aboveground adaptations to aboveground herbivore pressures, neglecting belowground adaptations in response to aboveground damage. Differential investment in root structures may allow plants to compensate for tissue loss or damage due to herbivores. Furthermore, phylogeny may constrain a plant's ability to adapt belowground. We examined the belowground responses of 12 species of oak Quercus to varying locations and intensities of simulated herbivore damage. We first established that oak belowground traits responded to aboveground herbivory by measuring patterns of investment in coarse versus fine root structures and re-allocation of non-structural carbohydrates (NSC) to root storage. We then tested whether phylogeny could explain variations in investment patterns using phylogenetic independent contrasts. Plant adaptations to aboveground herbivory included allocating biomass and carbon reserves to root structures, depending on the location and intensity of herbivore damage. NSC re-allocation to root storage was observed when oak species experienced any type of damage, but damage to lateral tissues caused a greater re-allocation than apical damage or control treatments. We found that most belowground responses to aboveground herbivory are species-specific and may be adapted for environmental conditions or type of herbivory. Some responses to herbivore damage, such as changes in fine-root mass and root sugar concentrations, were phylogenetically constrained. Phylogenetic constraints generally occur when there is severe damage at the apical meristem. Plants may adapt to aboveground tissue loss due to varying herbivore pressures (i.e. varying location and intensity of damage) by differentially investing in root types and NSC re-allocation to root storage. Understanding linkages between and phylogenetic constraints of plant belowground responses to aboveground herbivory will improve our understanding of the ecological processes involved in multitrophic interactions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aboveground herbivory causes belowground changes in twelve oak Quercus species: a phylogenetic analysis of root biomass and non‐structural carbohydrate storage

Perkovich

Ward

2021

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the predictable scenarios, parental effects are assumed to be caused by two types of parental environments, i.e., favorable and unfavorable environments. First, parental effects are independent of offspring environments (Figure 1A; Schwaegerle et al, 2000; Dong et al, 2017, 2018), i.e., offspring of parent plants grown in favorable environments always perform better than offspring of parents grown in unfavorable environments (Uller et al, 2013; Engqvist and Reinhold, 2016). Second, parental effects are context-dependent and adaptive (Figure 1B).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Context-Dependent Parental Effects on Clonal Offspring Performance

Dong

Kleunen

2018

Front. Plant Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parental environments may potentially affect offspring fitness, and the expression of such parental effects may depend on offspring environments and on whether one considers an individual offspring or all offspring of a parent. Using a well-studied clonal herb, Alternanthera philoxeroides, we first grew parent plants in high and low soil-nutrient conditions and obtained 1st generation clonal offspring from these two environments. Then we grew offspring of these two types of 1st generation clonal offspring also in high and low nutrient conditions. We measured and analyzed mean performance and summed performance of the four types of 2nd generation clonal offspring. High nutrient availability of parental environments markedly increased both mean performance (i.e., the average fitness measure across all individual offspring produced by a parent) and summed performance (i.e., the sum of the fitness measure of all offspring produced by a parent) of the 2nd generation clonal offspring. The positive parental effects on summed performance of the 2nd generation clonal offspring were stronger when the 1st generation clonal offspring grew in the high instead of the low nutrient conditions, but the positive parental effects on their mean performance did not depend on the nutrient environments of the 1st generation clonal offspring. The results provide novel evidence that parental environmental effects persist across vegetative generations and strongly depend on offspring environments and levels of plants.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the connection between predator communities across years may include effects by predator interactions such as intraguild predation or non-consumptive interactions (Frago & Godfray, 2014). Nevertheless, our data hint that legacy processes known from other study fields such as plant-soil feedback (Heinen et al, 2018;Kostenko et al, 2012;Mudrák & Frouz, 2018), herbivore-plant community interactions (Dong et al, 2018) or legacies of land use (Cusser, Neff, & Jha, 2018;Hahn & Orrock, 2015), may also contribute to cross-seasonal community assembly on perennial plants.…”

Section: Plant Phenotypic Plasticity To Herbivorymentioning

confidence: 77%

Cross‐seasonal legacy effects of arthropod community on plant fitness in perennial plants

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In perennial plants, interactions with other community members during the vegetative growth phase may influence community assembly during subsequent reproductive years and may influence plant fitness. It is well‐known that plant responses to herbivory affect community assembly within a growing season, but whether plant–herbivore interactions result in legacy effects on community assembly across seasons has received little attention. Moreover, whether plant–herbivore interactions during the vegetative growing season are important in predicting plant fitness directly or indirectly through legacy effects is poorly understood. Here, we tested whether plant–arthropod interactions in the vegetative growing season of perennial wild cabbage plants, Brassica oleracea, result in legacy effects in arthropod community assembly in the subsequent reproductive season and whether legacy effects have plant fitness consequences. We monitored the arthropod community on plants that had been induced with either aphids, caterpillars or no herbivores in a full‐factorial design across 2 years. We quantified the plant traits ‘height’, ‘number of leaves’ and ‘number of flowers’ to understand mechanisms that may mediate legacy effects. We measured seed production in the second year to evaluate plant fitness consequences of legacy effects. Although we did not find community responses to the herbivory treatments, our data show that community composition in the first year leaves a legacy on community composition in a second year: predator community composition co‐varied across years. Structural equation modelling analyses indicated that herbivore communities in the vegetative year correlated with plant performance traits that may have caused a legacy effect on especially predator community assembly in the subsequent reproductive year. Interestingly, the legacy of the herbivore community in the vegetative year predicted plant fitness better than the herbivore community that directly interacted with plants in the reproductive year. Synthesis. Thus, legacy effects of plant–herbivore interactions affect community assembly on perennial plants across growth seasons and these processes may affect plant reproductive success. We argue that plant–herbivore interactions in the vegetative phase as well as in the cross‐seasonal legacy effects caused by plant responses to arthropod herbivory may be important in perennial plant trait evolution such as ontogenetic variation in growth and defence strategies.

show abstract

Direct and legacy effects of herbivory on growth and physiology of a clonal plant

Cited by 26 publications

References 58 publications

Aboveground herbivory causes belowground changes in twelve oak Quercus species: a phylogenetic analysis of root biomass and non‐structural carbohydrate storage

Aboveground herbivory causes belowground changes in twelve oak Quercus species: a phylogenetic analysis of root biomass and non‐structural carbohydrate storage

Context-Dependent Parental Effects on Clonal Offspring Performance

Cross‐seasonal legacy effects of arthropod community on plant fitness in perennial plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About