Refine
Year of publication
Language
- English (45) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (45)
Keywords
- biodiversity (5)
- Plant-soil feedback (3)
- biological invasions (3)
- local adaptation (3)
- novel ecosystems (3)
- zebularine (3)
- Biodiversity (2)
- Botanic gardens (2)
- Bryophyte (2)
- Global change (2)
Institute
Under natural conditions, aboveground herbivory and plant-soil feedbacks (PSFs) are omnipresent interactions strongly affecting individual plant performance. While recent research revealed that aboveground insect herbivory generally impacts the outcome of PSFs, no study tested to what extent the intensity of herbivory affects the outcome. This, however, is essential to estimate the contribution of PSFs to plant performance under natural conditions in the field. Here, we tested PSF effects both with and without exposure to aboveground herbivory for four common grass species in nine grasslands that formed a gradient of aboveground invertebrate herbivory. Without aboveground herbivores, PSFs for each of the four grass species were similar in each of the nine grasslands-both in direction and in magnitude. In the presence of herbivores, however, the PSFs differed from those measured under herbivory exclusion, and depended on the intensity of herbivory. At low levels of herbivory, PSFs were similar in the presence and absence of herbivores, but differed at high herbivory levels. While PSFs without herbivores remained similar along the gradient of herbivory intensity, increasing herbivory intensity mostly resulted in neutral PSFs in the presence of herbivores. This suggests that the relative importance of PSFs for plant-species performance in grassland communities decreases with increasing intensity of herbivory. Hence, PSFs might be more important for plant performance in ecosystems with low herbivore pressure than in ecosystems with large impacts of insect herbivores.
Global change has complex eco-evolutionary consequences for organisms and ecosystems, but related concepts (e.g., novel ecosystems) do not cover their full range. Here we propose an umbrella concept of "ecological novelty" comprising (1) a site-specific and (2) an organism-centered, eco-evolutionary perspective. Under this umbrella, complementary options for studying and communicating effects of global change on organisms, ecosystems, and landscapes can be included in a toolbox. This allows researchers to address ecological novelty from different perspectives, e.g., by defining it based on (a) categorical or continuous measures, (b) reference conditions related to sites or organisms, and (c) types of human activities. We suggest striving for a descriptive, non-normative usage of the term "ecological novelty" in science. Normative evaluations and decisions about conservation policies or management are important, but require additional societal processes and engagement with multiple stakeholders.
Biological invasions may result from multiple introductions, which might compensate for reduced gene pools caused by bottleneck events, but could also dilute adaptive processes. A previous common-garden experiment showed heritable latitudinal clines in fitness-related traits in the invasive goldenrod Solidago canadensis in Central Europe. These latitudinal clines remained stable even in plants chemically treated with zebularine to reduce epigenetic variation. However, despite the heritability of traits investigated, genetic isolation-by-distance was non-significant. Utilizing the same specimens, we applied a molecular analysis of (epi)genetic differentiation with standard and methylation-sensitive (MSAP) AFLPs. We tested whether this variation was spatially structured among populations and whether zebularine had altered epigenetic variation. Additionally, we used genome scans to mine for putative outlier loci susceptible to selection processes in the invaded range. Despite the absence of isolation-by-distance, we found spatial genetic neighborhoods among populations and two AFLP clusters differentiating northern and southern Solidago populations. Genetic and epigenetic diversity were significantly correlated, but not linked to phenotypic variation. Hence, no spatial epigenetic patterns were detected along the latitudinal gradient sampled. Applying genome-scan approaches (BAYESCAN, BAYESCENV, RDA, and LFMM), we found 51 genetic and epigenetic loci putatively responding to selection. One of these genetic loci was significantly more frequent in populations at the northern range. Also, one epigenetic locus was more frequent in populations in the southern range, but this pattern was lost under zebularine treatment. Our results point to some genetic, but not epigenetic adaptation processes along a large-scale latitudinal gradient of S. canadensis in its invasive range.
Semi-natural habitats (SNHs) are becoming increasingly scarce in modern agricultural landscapes. This may reduce natural ecosystem services such as pest control with its putatively positive effect on crop production. In agreement with other studies, we recently reported wheat yield reductions at field borders which were linked to the type of SNH and the distance to the border. In this experimental landscape-wide study, we asked whether these yield losses have a biotic origin while analyzing fungal seed and fungal leaf pathogens, herbivory of cereal leaf beetles, and weed cover as hypothesized mediators between SNHs and yield. We established experimental winter wheat plots of a single variety within conventionally managed wheat fields at fixed distances either to a hedgerow or to an in-field kettle hole. For each plot, we recorded the fungal infection rate on seeds, fungal infection and herbivory rates on leaves, and weed cover. Using several generalized linear mixed-effects models as well as a structural equation model, we tested the effects of SNHs at a field scale (SNH type and distance to SNH) and at a landscape scale (percentage and diversity of SNHs within a 1000-m radius). In the dry year of 2016, we detected one putative biotic culprit: Weed cover was negatively associated with yield values at a 1-m and 5-m distance from the field border with a SNH. None of the fungal and insect pests, however, significantly affected yield, neither solely nor depending on type of or distance to a SNH. However, the pest groups themselves responded differently to SNH at the field scale and at the landscape scale. Our findings highlight that crop losses at field borders may be caused by biotic culprits; however, their negative impact seems weak and is putatively reduced by conventional farming practices.
Semi-natural habitats (SNHs) are becoming increasingly scarce in modern agricultural landscapes. This may reduce natural ecosystem services such as pest control with its putatively positive effect on crop production. In agreement with other studies, we recently reported wheat yield reductions at field borders which were linked to the type of SNH and the distance to the border. In this experimental landscape-wide study, we asked whether these yield losses have a biotic origin while analyzing fungal seed and fungal leaf pathogens, herbivory of cereal leaf beetles, and weed cover as hypothesized mediators between SNHs and yield. We established experimental winter wheat plots of a single variety within conventionally managed wheat fields at fixed distances either to a hedgerow or to an in-field kettle hole. For each plot, we recorded the fungal infection rate on seeds, fungal infection and herbivory rates on leaves, and weed cover. Using several generalized linear mixed-effects models as well as a structural equation model, we tested the effects of SNHs at a field scale (SNH type and distance to SNH) and at a landscape scale (percentage and diversity of SNHs within a 1000-m radius). In the dry year of 2016, we detected one putative biotic culprit: Weed cover was negatively associated with yield values at a 1-m and 5-m distance from the field border with a SNH. None of the fungal and insect pests, however, significantly affected yield, neither solely nor depending on type of or distance to a SNH. However, the pest groups themselves responded differently to SNH at the field scale and at the landscape scale. Our findings highlight that crop losses at field borders may be caused by biotic culprits; however, their negative impact seems weak and is putatively reduced by conventional farming practices.