Phenotypic plasticity masks range‐wide genetic differentiation for vegetative but not reproductive traits in a short‐lived plant

Abstract

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creat ive Commo ns Attri bution-NonCo mmercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

Active and adaptive plasticity in a changing climate

“…For response traits, it may be preferable to study physiological processes such as nitrogen, light, or water use efficiency rather than alteration of physical features (e.g., aboveground biomass) that may be proxies for such changes [58]. It is also unlikely that active adaptive plasticity involves variation in a single trait, and, indeed, evidence indicates differential plasticity between types of traits (see, e.g., [59]) and some plastic responses involving complex suites of traits (e.g., [60]).…”

Impact of roadside burning on genetic diversity in a high‐biomass invasive grass

“…Traits related to reproduction are likely to be under stronger selection pressure than vegetative traits because of their direct contribution to survival and fecundity, particularly in short‐lived species (Lloret & Vilá, 2003; Villellas et al, 2021). Reproductive mode is a key trait related to fire regimes, and there are obligate and facultative forms of seeding and resprouting among postfire regeneration strategies (Pausas et al, 2004).…”

Relative roles of genetic variation and phenotypic plasticity in the invasion of monkeyflower Erythranthre gutatta in New Zealand

“…Invasive alien plants often show considerable phenotypic variation in their introduced range, explained by local adaptation, phenotypic plasticity (whereby plants are able to adjust their phenotype according to the local environment (Pigliucci et al 1995; Geng et al 2007; Pitchancourt and Van Klinken 2012) or a combination of both (Moroney et al 2013; Si et al 2014). However, despite a plethora of studies ( Geng et al 2016; Hiatt and Flory, 2020; Fakhr et al 2022;), the relative contribution of genes and the environment to such variation remains poorly understood (Vanwallendael et al, 2018; Villellas et al 2021; Yuan et al 2022). While the success of clonally reproducing invasive species is often attributed to plasticity (Loomis and Fishman 2009; Riis et al 2010; Keser et al 2014), quantitative links between plasticity and fitness are rare (Liu et al 2016; Bufford and Hulme 2021a).…”

“…As with local adaptation, plasticity may evolve post introduction (Lande 2015). Demonstrating the relative contribution of each evolutionary strategy is difficult for a number of reasons (Noble et al 2019; Villellas et al 2021) and findings have to date been equivocal (Bossdorf et al 2005; Richards 2006; Hulme 2007; Bock et al 2015).…”

“…One approach to untangle the different components (genetic versus plastic) of intra-specific phenotypic variation is to use common garden experiments, where clones from a number of environmentally different populations are grown together under as near -identical conditions as possible (Allan and Pennell 2009; Cheplick 2015; Villellas et al 2021). If, under the same environmental conditions clones maintain their home site phenotypes, this variation is deemed genetic (Turesson 1922; Nunez-Farfan and Schlichting 2001).…”