Environmental context influences both the intensity of seed predation and plant demographic sensitivity to attack

Euler, Tove von; Ågren, Jon; Ehrlén, Johan

doi:10.1890/13-0528.1

Cited by 42 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 58 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our literature search, only 3 (2.2%) of studies examined both direct and indirect effects of environmental factors (Fig. ; Table S1, Kolb, Leimu & Ehrlén ; Adler, Dalgleish & Ellner ; von Euler, Ågren & Ehrlén ). Adler, Dalgleish & Ellner () examined both direct and indirect (via competitive interactions among plants) effects of climate change and found support for the hypothesis that indirect effects of climate change declined with the strength of stabilizing niche differences.…”

Section: Environmental Factors May Have Both Direct and Indirect Effementioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing environmentally explicit structured population models of plants

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The relationship between the performance of individuals and the surrounding environment is fundamental in ecology and evolutionary biology. Assessing how abiotic and biotic environmental factors influence demographic processes is necessary to understand and predict population dynamics, as well as species distributions and abundances. We searched the literature for studies that have linked abiotic and biotic environmental factors to vital rates and, using structured demographic models, population growth rates of plants. We found 136 studies that had examined the environmental drivers of plant demography. The number of studies has been increasing rapidly in recent years. Based on the reviewed studies, we identify and discuss several major gaps in our knowledge of environmentally driven demography of plants. We argue that some drivers may have been underexplored and that the full potential of spatially and temporally replicated studies may not have been realized. We also stress the need to employ relevant statistical methods and experiments to correctly identify drivers. Moreover, assessments of the relationship between drivers and vital rates need to consider interactive, nonlinear and indirect effects, as well as effects of intraspecific density dependence. Synthesis. Much progress has already been made by using structured population models to link the performance of individuals to the surrounding environment. However, by improving the design and analyses of future studies, we can substantially increase our ability to predict changes in plant population dynamics, abundances and distributions in response to changes in specific environmental drivers. Future environmentally explicit demographic models should also address how genetic changes prompted by selection imposed by environmental changes will alter population trajectories in the face of continued environmental change and investigate the reciprocal feedback between plants and their biotic drivers.

show abstract

Section: Environmental Factors May Have Both Direct and Indirect Effementioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing environmentally explicit structured population models of plants

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Effective compensation depends upon multiple interactions; response capacity, and the range of damage at which tolerance works, varies with ecological context. Plant resource condition, herbivore dynamics, phenological overlap with shared hosts and pollinators or competing predators, and timing of damage can influence the degree of plant tolerance (Kolb et al 2007;Wise and Abrahamson 2007;von Euler et al 2014;Lehndal and Ågren 2015;Krimmel and Pearse 2016;Stieha et al 2016;Kafle et al 2017). Co-occurring stressors may further interact with cumulative herbivory pressure to inhibit successful tolerance (Lay et al 2011;Nguyen et al 2016).…”

Section: Effect Of Cumulative Herbivory On Success Of Response Througmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such herbivory can dramatically and quantitatively reduce plant-reproductive success (Louda and Potvin 1995;McCall and Irwin 2006;LucasBarbosa 2016) and directly affect plant population growth rate (Rose et al 2005;Tenhumberg et al 2008;von Euler et al 2014) and population density (Louda 1983;Jongejans et al 2008;Lehndal et al 2016). Floral herbivore impacts should, therefore, favor plant growth and allocation strategies that can reduce losses, or even improve fitness, under herbivory pressure (Fornoni 2011;Agrawal et al 2012;Carmona and Fornoni 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cumulative herbivory outpaces compensation for early floral damage on a monocarpic perennial thistle

West

Louda

2017

Oecologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For plantanimal interactions, differences in selection on plant traits among populations or years have been shown to be associated with differences in both interaction intensities (Benkman 2013, Vanhoenacker et al 2013, and trait preferences (Rey et al 2006, Kolb et al 2007b. Interaction intensities and animal preferences for plant traits might, in turn, depend on abiotic conditions (Arvanitis et al 2007, Kolb & Ehrlén, 2010von Euler et al 2014) and the community context, in terms of natural enemies, competitors or alternative hosts (Strauss and Irwin 2004, Siepielski and Benkman 2007, Chamberlain et al 2014. Despite an increasing awareness of the importance and ubiquitous presence of spatial and temporal variation in selection, we know little in general about how biotic selective agents contribute to this variation as well as the environmental factors influencing the impact of a given selective agent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Caterpillar Seed Predators Mediate Shifts in Selection on Flowering Phenology in Their Host Plant

Valdés¹,

Ehrlén²

2017

Bulletin Ecologic Soc America

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variation in selection among populations and years has important implications for evolutionary trajectories of populations. Yet, the agents of selection causing this variation have rarely been identified. Selection on the time of reproduction within a season in plants might differ both among populations and among years, and selection can be mediated by both mutualists and antagonists. We investigated whether differences in the direction of phenotypic selection on flowering phenology among 20 populations of Gentiana pneumonanthe for two years were related to the presence of the butterfly seed predator Phengaris alcon , and whether butterfly incidence was associated with the abundance of the butterfly ' s second host, Myrmica ants. In plant populations without the butterfly, phenotypic selection favored earlier flowering. In populations where the butterfly was present, caterpillars preferentially attacked early-flowering individuals, shifting the direction of selection to favoring later flowering. Butterfly incidence in plant populations increased with ant abundance. Our results demonstrate that antagonistic interactions can shift the direction of selection on flowering phenology, and suggest that such shifts might be associated with differences in the community context.

show abstract

Environmental context influences both the intensity of seed predation and plant demographic sensitivity to attack

Cited by 42 publications

References 58 publications

Advancing environmentally explicit structured population models of plants

Advancing environmentally explicit structured population models of plants

Cumulative herbivory outpaces compensation for early floral damage on a monocarpic perennial thistle

Caterpillar Seed Predators Mediate Shifts in Selection on Flowering Phenology in Their Host Plant

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About