4.4 Article

Fruiting Strategies of Perennial Plants: A Resource Budget Model to Couple Mast Seeding to Pollination Efficiency and Resource Allocation Strategies

期刊

AMERICAN NATURALIST
卷 188, 期 1, 页码 66-75

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/686684

关键词

masting; resource budget model; fruit set; fruit size; sex allocation; pollination efficiency

资金

  1. French National Research Agency (ANR) [JC09 470585]
  2. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  3. Potenchene program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Masting, a breeding strategy common in perennial plants, is defined by seed production that is highly variable over years and synchronized at the population level. Resource budget models (RBMs) proposed that masting relies on two processes: (i) the depletion of plant reserves following high fruiting levels, which leads to marked temporal fluctuations in fruiting; and (ii) outcross pollination that synchronizes seed crops among neighboring trees. We revisited the RBM approach to examine the extent to which masting could be impacted by the degree of pollination efficiency, by taking into account various logistic relationships between pollination success and pollen availability. To link masting to other reproductive traits, we split the reserve depletion coefficient into three biological parameters related to resource allocation strategies for flowering and fruiting. While outcross pollination is considered to be the key mechanism that synchronizes fruiting in RBMs, our model counterintuitively showed that intense masting should arise under low-efficiency pollination. When pollination is very efficient, medium-level masting may occur, provided that the costs of female flowering (relative to pollen production) and of fruiting (maximum fruit set and fruit size) are both very high. Our work highlights the powerful framework of RBMs, which include explicit biological parameters, to link fruiting dynamics to various reproductive traits and to provide new insights into the reproductive strategies of perennial plants.

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

4.4
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