Disturbance and the Formation and Colonization of New Habitats in a Hydrological System in the Cuatro Ciénegas Basin

Estimation of demographic parameters of some plant species accounting for imperfect detection probabilities

“…Underestimation of survival probabilities due to imperfect detection of individuals during field surveys could lead to wrong conclusions about the population status (Alexander et al, 2009; Kéry & Gregg, 2003; Shefferson et al, 2001) or evolutionary trends of plant species (e.g., in studies that aim to quantify the strength of natural selection; Waller & Svensson, 2016). The consequences can be serious, especially if the research is focused on rare or endangered species (such as M. hernandezii , N. macrocephala , and G. lagenophora ; Esparza‐Olguín et al, 2005; Ureta & Martorell, 2009), species that act as indicators of environmental change (such as F. chlorifolia ; Pisanty et al, 2020; Rodríguez‐Sánchez et al, 2020), or species that support biotic interactions (such as C. tenuiflora which is a hemiparasitic plant; Granados‐Hernández et al, 2021).…”

“…Based on previous knowledge about the life cycle and reproductive phenology of each species (Esparza‐Olguín et al, 2005; Granados‐Hernández et al, 2021; Pisanty et al, 2020; Rodríguez‐Sánchez et al, 2020; Ureta & Martorell, 2009), as well as on field observations, we constructed life cycle graphs for the five species (a general life cycle graph is depicted in Figure 1a and species‐specific life cycle graphs for all five species are shown in Figures S1–S5). From one sampling occasion to the next, individuals can survive with state‐specific probability S , and if they survive, they can make a transition to a different state or size class (i.e., transitions in strict sense: ψ AB , ψ BA , ψ BC , ψ CB , ψ CA , and ψ AC in Figure 1a) or, alternatively, they can remain in the same state or size class (i.e., stasis: ψ AA , ψ BB , and ψ CC in Figure 1a).…”

The limiting factors and regulatory processes that control the environmental responses of C3, C3–C4 intermediate, and C4 photosynthesis

“…F. chloraefolia is a Type I C 3 –C 4 species that has been grown and studied under controlled conditions for decades (e.g., Powell 1978 ; Holaday et al 1984 ; Holaday and Chollet 1984 ; Reed and Chollet 1985 ; Bauwe and Chollet 1986 ; Edwards and Ku 1987 ; Chastain and Chollet 1989 ; Ku et al 1991 ; Dai et al 1996 ; Kopriva et al 1996 ; Pfündel and Pfeffer 1997 ; Leonardos and Grodzinski 2000 , 2003 ; Engelmann et al 2003 ; Huxman and Monson 2003 ; Westhoff and Gowik 2004 ; McKown et al 2005 ; McKown and Dengler 2007 ; Kocacinar et al 2008 ; Vogan and Sage 2011 ; Schulze et al 2013 ; Aldous et al 2014 ; Mallmann et al 2014 ; Way et al 2014 ; Stata et al 2016 ; Lyu et al 2021 ). However, there are very few studies of this species under field conditions (e.g., Van Auken et al 2007 ; Peralta-García et al 2016 ; Ochoterena et al 2020 ; Peralta-García et al 2020 ; Pisanty et al 2020 ; Rodríguez-Sánchez et al 2020 ). We compared the photosynthetic performance of a greenhouse-grown research population at the Carnegie Institution in Stanford, CA to that of naturally-occurring populations at the Blue Hole Ciénega in Guadalupe County, NM (34° 56ʹ 8ʺ N, 104° 40ʹ 30ʺ W), and the Diamond Y Spring Preserve in Pecos County, TX (31° 0ʹ 36ʺ N, 102° 55ʹ 5ʺ W).…”

“…Since Flaveria chloraefolia co-exists with C 3 and C 4 competitors at the Diamond Y Spring and the Blue Hole Ciénega, further study of these communities may provide insight into the mechanisms of competitive coexistence and whether the ecological conditions here allow the Type I C 3 –C 4 pathway to represent an evolutionarily stable strategy. In a global change context, such understanding may have particularly important applications to conservation of rare, threatened, and endangered species (e.g., Pisanty et al 2020 ) and engineering of the C 4 pathway into C 3 crops (e.g., Ermakova et al 2020 ).…”