Phylogenetic niche conservatism in C4 grasses
Photosynthetic pathway is used widely to discriminate plant functional types in studies of global change. However, independent evolutionary lineages of C4 grasses with different variants of C4 photosynthesis show different biogeographical relationships with mean annual precipitation, suggesting phylogenetic niche conservatism (PNC). To investigate how phylogeny and photosynthetic type differentiate C4 grasses, we compiled a dataset of morphological and habitat information of 185 genera belonging to two monophyletic subfamilies, Chloridoideae and Panicoideae, which together account for 90 % of the world’s C4 grass species. We evaluated evolutionary variance and covariance of morphological and habitat traits. Strong phylogenetic signals were found in both morphological and habitat traits, arising mainly from the divergence of the two subfamilies. Genera in Chloridoideae had significantly smaller culm heights, leaf widths, 1,000-seed weights and stomata; they also appeared more in dry, open or saline habitats than those of Panicoideae. Controlling for phylogenetic structure showed significant covariation among morphological traits, supporting the hypothesis of phylogenetically independent scaling effects. However, associations between morphological and habitat traits showed limited phylogenetic covariance. Subfamily was a better explanation than photosynthetic type for the variance in most morphological traits. Morphology, habitat water availability, shading, and productivity are therefore all involved in the PNC of C4 grass lineages. This study emphasized the importance of phylogenetic history in the ecology and biogeography of C4 grasses, suggesting that divergent lineages need to be considered to fully understand the impacts of global change on plant distributions.
KeywordsPhylogenetic niche conservatism C3/C4 photosynthesis Poaceae Morphology Habitat
We gratefully thank Samuel Taylor for discussion on statistics. This work was funded by a UK/China Excellence Scholarship from the China Scholarship Council and the UK Government Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (now Department for Business, Innovation and Skills).
- Clayton WD, Harman KT, Williamson H (2006 onwards) GrassBase—the online world grass flora. http://www.kew.org/data/grasses-db.html
- Ellis RP, Vogel JC, Fuls A (1980) Photosynthetic pathways and the geographical distribution of grasses in South West Africa/Namibia. S Afr J Sci 76:307–314Google Scholar
- Gibbs Russell GE (1988) Distribution of subfamilies and tribes of Poaceae in southern Africa. Monogr Syst Bot 25:555–566Google Scholar
- Harvey PH, Pagel MD (1991) The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (2009) Seed Information Database (SID). Version 7.1. http://data.kew.org/sid/. Accessed May 2009
- Sitch S, Huntingford C, Gedney N, Levy PE, Lomas M, Piao SL, Betts R, Ciais P, Cox P, Friedlingstein P, Jones CD, Prentice IC, Woodward FI (2008) Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography and climate-carbon cycle feedbacks using five dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs). Glob Change Biol 14:2015–2039. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01626.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Watson L, Dallwitz MJ (1992 onwards) The grass genera of the world: descriptions, illustrations, identification, and information retrieval; including synonyms, morphology, anatomy, physiology, phytochemistry, cytology, classification, pathogens, world and local distribution, and references. Version: 26th Nov 2008. Available online: http://delta-intkey.com. Accessed 11th Nov 2006
- Wiens JJ, Ackerly DD, Allen AP, Anacker BL, Buckley LB, Cornell HV, Damschen EI, Davies TJ, Grytnes JA, Harrison SP, Hawkins BA, Holt RD, McCain CM, Stephens PR (2010) Niche conservatism as an emerging principle in ecology and conservation biology. Ecol Lett 13:1310–1324. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01515.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar