4.3 Article

Does the spatial variation in selective pressures explain among-site differences in seed mass? A test with Buxus balearica

期刊

EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY
卷 23, 期 6, 页码 847-865

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10682-008-9275-z

关键词

Balearic Islands; Iberian Peninsula; Local adaptation; Seed rain; Seed predation; Germination; Seedling establishment; Seed size; Seedling size; Phenotypic selection

资金

  1. FPU
  2. Spanish Ministry of Education [CGL2004-04884-C02-01/BOS]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Education and Science

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Positive effects of seed size on germination and survival can be offset by a greater probability of predation or a poorer dispersal of larger seeds. We hypothesized that spatial variation in local selective pressures acting on seed mass may lead to differences in both optimal and observed seed mass among discrete populations. We first examined the variation in seed mass across a total of 14 populations of Buxus balearica; in six of such populations, we further examined the temporal variation by measuring seed mass during three consecutive years. Second, we evaluated seed mass effects on different recruitment phases (seed rain to seedling establishment) in three populations. Lastly, for these three populations, we estimated the resulting overall phenotypic selection on seed mass during recruitment and compared the observed and the predicted optimal seed masses. Most variation (c. 70%) in seed mass occurred among populations, and although we found inter-annual variation in seed mass, the differences in seed mass among populations were consistent over time. Conflicting selective pressures on seed mass appeared during recruitment, and their direction and strength varied among populations, depending on the relative local importance of seed predation vs. germination and establishment. Observed seed mass matched predicted optimal seed mass in two of the three examined populations, suggesting local adaptative responses to the spatial mosaic of selective pressures.

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

4.3
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