4.5 Article

Together but different: co-occurring dune plant species differ in their water- and nitrogen-use strategies

期刊

OECOLOGIA
卷 174, 期 3, 页码 651-663

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00442-013-2820-7

关键词

Comparative physiology; Stable isotopes; Limiting similarity; Niche differentiation; Species coexistence

类别

资金

  1. MEC (FPU)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stress factors may severely constrain the range of plant physiological responses in harsh environments. Convergence of traits is expected in coastal dunes because of environmental filtering imposed by severe abiotic factors. However, the wide range of morphological and phenological traits exhibited by coexisting dune species suggests considerable variation in functional traits. We hypothesized that the constraints imposed by structural traits ought to translate into physiological differences. Five dominant species with different morphological traits, but coexisting in a homogeneous dune area in Northwest Spain, were selected for study. Soil characteristics and leaf functional traits were measured in April, June and November 2008. Integrated water-use efficiency (assessed by C isotope discrimination) and N acquisition and use strategies (estimated by N isotope composition) varied significantly among species and the differences changed over time. Species differences in specific leaf area, relative water content, leaf N and C:N ratio, also varied over time. The species differed in stomatal density but not in soil characteristics, with the exception of pH. Species differences in functional traits related to the use of resources suggest species niche segregation. Species-specific temporal effects on the use of these resources support temporal niche differentiation. Somewhat in contrast to the findings of previous studies on harsh environments, this study revealed a considerable level of functional diversity and complexity, suggesting that dune plant species have evolved species-specific strategies to survive by partitioning growth-limiting resources.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据