Cargando…
Linking hard and soft traits: Physiology, morphology and anatomy interact to determine habitat affinities to soil water availability in herbaceous dicots
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Species’ habitat affinities along environmental gradients should be determined by a combination of physiological (hard) and morpho-anatomical (soft) traits. Using a gradient of soil water availability, we address three questions: How well can we predict habitat affinities from h...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5873933/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29590137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193130 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Species’ habitat affinities along environmental gradients should be determined by a combination of physiological (hard) and morpho-anatomical (soft) traits. Using a gradient of soil water availability, we address three questions: How well can we predict habitat affinities from hard traits, from soft traits, and from a combination of the two? How well can we predict species' physiological responses to drought (hard traits) from their soft traits? Can we model a causal sequence as soft traits → hard traits → species distributions? METHODS: We chose 25 species of herbaceous dicots whose affinities for soil moisture have already been linked to 5 physiological traits (stomatal conductance and net photosynthesis measured at soil field capacity, water use efficiency, stomatal conductance and soil water potential measured when leaves begin to wilt). Under controlled conditions in soils at field capacity, we measured five soft traits (leaf dry matter content, specific leaf area, leaf nitrogen content, stomatal area, specific root length). KEY RESULTS: Soft traits alone were poor predictors (R(2) = 0.129) while hard traits explained 48% of species habitat affinities. Moreover, hard traits were significantly related to combinations of soft traits. From a priori biological knowledge and hypothesized ecological links we built a path model showing a sequential pattern soft traits → hard traits → species distributions and accounting for 59.6% (p = 0.782) of habitat wetness. CONCLUSIONS: Both direct and indirect causal relationships existed between soft traits, hard traits and species’ habitat preferences. The poor predictive abilities of soft traits alone were due to the existence of antagonistic and synergistic direct and indirect effects of soft traits on habitat preferences mediated by the hard traits. To obtain a more realistic model applicable to a population level, it has to be tested in an experiment including species competition for water supply. |
---|