4.5 Article

Two sympatric root hemiparasitic Pedicularis species differ in host dependency and selectivity under phosphorus limitation

期刊

FUNCTIONAL PLANT BIOLOGY
卷 39, 期 9, 页码 784-794

出版社

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/FP12159

关键词

host-parasite association; lousewort; plant parasitism

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [30970288]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Yunnan Province [2009CD114]
  3. Youth Innovation Promotion Association of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS)
  4. Overseas Training Program from CAS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Parasitic biology of Pedicularis L. (Orobanchaceae) has been underinvestigated despite its wide distribution and potential ecological significance. To better understand the parasitic aspects of the root hemiparasites, host-parasite interactions were investigated with two sympatric Pedicularis species, Pedicularis rex C. B. Clarke and Pedicularis tricolor Hand.-Mazz., at two developmental stages. Plant DW, shoot phosphorus (P) content, root : shoot ratio and number of haustoria were measured in Pedicularis grown with either a host plant or a plant of its own species in pot experiments. In addition, effects of parasitism and intraspecific competition on growth and biomass allocation in four host species belonging to three major functional groups (grasses, legumes and forbs) were investigated. The two Pedicularis species showed obvious host preference, but preferred different host species. Interactions between Pedicularis and their hosts depended on both species identity and developmental stages of the partners. Overall, P. rex showed much weaker host dependency and less damage to hosts than P. tricolor. Interspecific variations were observed among different host species in their responses to intraspecific competition and parasitism. We concluded that different Pedicularis-host pairs showed different interaction patterns. Sympatric Pedicularis may have differential influence on plant community structure and productivity.

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

4.5
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