4.1 Article

Intraspecific trait variation in grassland plant species reveals fine-scale strategy trade-offs and size differentiation that underpins performance in ecological communities

期刊

BOTANY
卷 88, 期 11, 页码 939-952

出版社

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING, NRC RESEARCH PRESS
DOI: 10.1139/B10-065

关键词

community ecology; genotypic diversity; perennial grasses; primary plant strategies; species coexistence trait trade offs

资金

  1. Macaulay Development Trust
  2. Natural Environment Research Council
  3. Scottish Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Traits have been widely used in plant ecology to understand the rules governing community assembly, and to characterize primary strategies that define community structure and ecosystem properties Relatively little is known as to whether the traits that are ecologically Important at macroecological scales are either variable, or of consequence at fine scales within species We measured trait variation within populations of the grassland plants Festuca ovina L and Koeleria macrantha (Ledeb) Schult, to test the hypothesis that fine-scale intraspecific trait variation drives local community structure Both species showed large genotypic variation for all traits Size related traits of genotypes of K macrantha observed under monoculture predicted their performance in model grassland communities that possessed both genetic and species diversity The same correspondence was much weaker for the experimental population of F ovina A trade-off in allocation between shoot mass and relative allocation to reproduction was evident in the experimental population of F tuna Furthermore both species showed evidence of a positive relationship between specific leaf area (SLA) and allocation to culm mass This trait covariation indicates the existence of intraspecific trade offs in life history and growth strategies similar to those used to define primary plant strategies which potentially buffers both species abundance and species coexistence against environmental challenges

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

4.1
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