4.7 Article

Morphological variability in tree root architecture indirectly affects coexistence among competitors in the understory

期刊

ECOLOGY
卷 95, 期 7, 页码 1731-1736

出版社

ECOLOGICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1890/13-1749.1

关键词

blue oak; community assembly; competition; facilitation; Quercus douglasii; Stipa pulchra; trait-mediated indirect interactions

类别

资金

  1. NSF EPSCoR Track-1 [BPS-1101342 (INSTEP 3)]
  2. Office Of The Director
  3. Office of Integrative Activities [1443108] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Interactions between plants can have strong effects on community structure and function. Variability in the morphological, developmental, physiological, and biochemical traits of plants can influence the outcome of plant interactions and thus have important ecological consequences. However, the ecological ramifications of trait variability in plants are poorly understood and have rarely been tested in the field. We experimentally tested the effects of morphological variation in root architecture of Quercus douglasii trees in the field on interactions between understory plants and community composition. Our results indicate that variability among Q. douglasii tree root systems initiates a striking reversal in the competitive effects of dominant understory grass species on a less common species. Trees with a deep-rooted morphology facilitated exotic annual grasses and these annual grasses, in turn, competitively excluded the native perennial bunchgrass, Stipa pulchra. In contrast, Q. douglasii trees with shallow-rooted morphologies directly suppressed the growth of exotic annual grasses and indirectly released S. pulchra individuals from competition with these annual grasses. Morphological variation in the root architecture of Q. douglasii created substantial conditionality in the outcomes of competition among species which enhanced the potential for indirect interactions to sustain coexistence and increase community diversity.

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

4.7
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