4.7 Article

Plant-herbivore interactions: silicon concentration in tussock sedges and population dynamics of root voles

期刊

FUNCTIONAL ECOLOGY
卷 29, 期 2, 页码 187-194

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1365-2435.12327

关键词

density; flood; freeze-thaw; plant defence; tussock sedges; voles; winter survival

类别

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MNiSW) [N N304 374 639]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has been hypothesized that the induction of silicon (Si)-based plant defence in response to herbivore damage may engender rodent population cycles. Many studies have also considered accumulation of Si as a process controlled by geo-hydrological factors. To test these ideas, we investigated the relationship between concentration of Si in fibrous tussock sedge (Carex appropinquata) and the population density of a major sedge consumer, the root vole (Microtus oeconomus), in field enclosures in natural habitat under a variety of natural water regimes and weather conditions. We found that a high density of voles at the end of summer resulted in the immediate accumulation of Si by rhizomes, followed by accumulation of Si in leaves with a 1-year lag time. The level of river flooding in the same year had an additional impact on Si concentration in rhizomes but did not affect silicification of leaves. Overwinter changes in concentration of Si in sedges were influenced by fluctuations in ambient temperature and the depth of snow cover (multiple freeze-thaw cycles), thus affecting the quality of winter food available for voles. Smaller voles had lower mortality during early winter than large voles, which seemed to be connected with changes in the quality of the autumn rather than the winter food base. Winter survival of voles was not associated with Si concentration in their faeces, however. Our results suggest that changes in Si concentration in fibrous tussock sedge can be induced by changes in vole population density and are also additionally affected by the amount of flooding and weather conditions.

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