Cargando…

Biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest

In forested ecosystems, shrubs must succeed in persisting in low‐light environments, while simultaneously having the ability to rapidly expand and occupy newly created canopy openings, yet little is known about the traits that make this possible. We hypothesize that shrub species that are abundant i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Markgraf, Rudiger, Doyon, Frédérik, Delagrange, Sylvain, Kneeshaw, Daniel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10694385/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.10774
_version_ 1785153365185921024
author Markgraf, Rudiger
Doyon, Frédérik
Delagrange, Sylvain
Kneeshaw, Daniel
author_facet Markgraf, Rudiger
Doyon, Frédérik
Delagrange, Sylvain
Kneeshaw, Daniel
author_sort Markgraf, Rudiger
collection PubMed
description In forested ecosystems, shrubs must succeed in persisting in low‐light environments, while simultaneously having the ability to rapidly expand and occupy newly created canopy openings, yet little is known about the traits that make this possible. We hypothesize that shrub species that are abundant in the understory exhibit a specific set of functional traits that define their ability to persist during unfavorable periods and to rapidly exploit newly created habitats. We tested this by comparing field‐measured functional traits such as biomass allocation, leaf display, crown morphology, and leaf traits, across individual size classes and two gap‐forest environments of five shrub species. We observed significant differences in traits between species, size classes, and gap‐forest environments. These differences were primarily related to biomass allocation traits, followed by leaf display, crown morphology, and leaf traits. Abundant shrubs like mountain maple (Acer spicatum) and hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) invested significantly more biomass in roots, had a larger total leaf area, and displayed leaves in a more efficient manner to intercept light. The high investment in root biomass can be interpreted as shrubs exploiting the persistence and colonization strategy through resprouting. Permanent sub‐canopy status likely explains the importance of efficient leaf display, wherein abundant shrubs had a large leaf area with minimal support structures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10694385
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106943852023-12-05 Biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest Markgraf, Rudiger Doyon, Frédérik Delagrange, Sylvain Kneeshaw, Daniel Ecol Evol Research Articles In forested ecosystems, shrubs must succeed in persisting in low‐light environments, while simultaneously having the ability to rapidly expand and occupy newly created canopy openings, yet little is known about the traits that make this possible. We hypothesize that shrub species that are abundant in the understory exhibit a specific set of functional traits that define their ability to persist during unfavorable periods and to rapidly exploit newly created habitats. We tested this by comparing field‐measured functional traits such as biomass allocation, leaf display, crown morphology, and leaf traits, across individual size classes and two gap‐forest environments of five shrub species. We observed significant differences in traits between species, size classes, and gap‐forest environments. These differences were primarily related to biomass allocation traits, followed by leaf display, crown morphology, and leaf traits. Abundant shrubs like mountain maple (Acer spicatum) and hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) invested significantly more biomass in roots, had a larger total leaf area, and displayed leaves in a more efficient manner to intercept light. The high investment in root biomass can be interpreted as shrubs exploiting the persistence and colonization strategy through resprouting. Permanent sub‐canopy status likely explains the importance of efficient leaf display, wherein abundant shrubs had a large leaf area with minimal support structures. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10694385/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.10774 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Markgraf, Rudiger
Doyon, Frédérik
Delagrange, Sylvain
Kneeshaw, Daniel
Biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest
title Biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest
title_full Biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest
title_fullStr Biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest
title_full_unstemmed Biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest
title_short Biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest
title_sort biomass allocation and plant morphology explain the difference in shrub species abundance in a temperate forest
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10694385/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.10774
work_keys_str_mv AT markgrafrudiger biomassallocationandplantmorphologyexplainthedifferenceinshrubspeciesabundanceinatemperateforest
AT doyonfrederik biomassallocationandplantmorphologyexplainthedifferenceinshrubspeciesabundanceinatemperateforest
AT delagrangesylvain biomassallocationandplantmorphologyexplainthedifferenceinshrubspeciesabundanceinatemperateforest
AT kneeshawdaniel biomassallocationandplantmorphologyexplainthedifferenceinshrubspeciesabundanceinatemperateforest