Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 28, Issue 6, pp 1155–1167 | Cite as

Responses of macrophytes to dewatering: effects of phylogeny and phenotypic plasticity on species performance

  • Mélissa De Wilde
  • Nadia Sebei
  • Sara Puijalon
  • Gudrun Bornette
Original Paper


Temporary dewatering constitutes a drastic change in conditions for aquatic vegetation. Species’ sustained performance under these conditions relies partly on their ability to produce a terrestrial phenotype. Such adaptations may include the development of self-supporting aboveground organs with higher dry matter content enabling plants to withstand gravity and smaller leaves with thicker cuticle to reduce evapotranspiration, leading to lower specific leaf area, higher leaf-construction costs and consequently higher leaf life span. The ability of aquatic plant species to produce a terrestrial-adapted phenotype may differ according to growth form and evolutionary history. The objectives of this study were to (1) measure the effects of dewatering on aquatic plant performance, (2) determine how growth form and phylogenetic position affect performance, and (3) relate plant performance to plasticity. To meet these objectives, we experimentally studied aquatic plant responses to dewatering by measuring survival, growth, and a set of traits describing the morphology and leaf-resource economy of eight aquatic plant species with contrasting phylogeny and growth forms. The ability of aquatic plants to withstand dewatering differed according to phylogeny but not to growth form. The eudicots presented high survival and similar growth rates under terrestrial compared to aquatic conditions, while monocots generally did not survive dewatering. These species produced phenotypic adjustments, such as denser aboveground organs and leaf plasticity, which can explain the maintenance of similar growth rates under terrestrial conditions. The relatively strong plasticity and performance of eudicots in terrestrial habitats suggests that their optimal niche is the interface between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.


Aquatic plants Dewatering Plasticity Growth form Phylogeny Plant traits 



M.R. Viricel is gratefully acknowledged for technical assistance. This research was performed under the aegis of the LTER “Zone Atelier Bassin du Rhône” and was funded by the Wetchange Program (ANR-09-CEP-006-01) of the French National Research Agency (Agence Nationale de la Recherche-ANR).


  1. Angiosperm Phylogeny Group III (2009) An update of the angiosperm phylogeny group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III. Bot J Linn Soc 161:105–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthaud F, Vallod D, Robin J et al (2012) Eutrophication and drought disturbance shape functional diversity and life-history traits of aquatic plants in shallow lakes. Aquat Sci 74:471–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldwin DS, Mitchell AM (2000) The effects of drying and re-flooding on the sediment and soil nutrient dynamics of lowland river-floodplain systems. River Res Appl 16:457–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barrat-Segretain MH (2001) Biomass allocation in three macrophyte species in relation to the disturbance level of their habitat. Freshw Biol 46:935–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradshaw AD (1965) Evolutionary significance of phenotypic plasticity in plants. Adv Genet 13:115–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Casanova MT, Brock MA (2000) How do depth, duration and frequency of flooding influence the establishment of wetland plant communities? Plant Ecol 147:237–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chambers PA, Lacoul P, Murphy KJ et al (2008) Global diversity of aquatic macrophytes in freshwater. Hydrobiologia 595:9–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coleman JS, McConnaughay KDM, Ackerly DD (1994) Interpreting phenotypic variation in plants. Trends Ecol Evol 9:187–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cook CDK (1990) Aquatic plant book. SPB Academic Publishing, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  10. Cook CDK (1999) The number and kinds of embryo-bearing plants which have become aquatic: a survey. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 2:79–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Witt TJ, Sih A, Wilson DS (1998) Costs and limits of phenotypic plasticity. Trends Ecol Evol 13:77–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans GC (1972) The quantitative analysis of plant growth. University of California Press, OaklandGoogle Scholar
  13. Geber MA, Griffen LR (2003) Inheritance and natural section on functional traits. Int J Plant Sci 164:21–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Germ M, Gaberščik A (2003) Comparison of aerial and submerged leaves in two amphibious species, Myosotis scorpioides and Ranunculus trichophyllus. Photosynthetica 41:91–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grime JP, Mackey JML (2002) The role of plasticity in resource capture by plants. Evol Ecol 16:299–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hamann E, Puijalon S (2013) Biomechanical responses of aquatic plants to aerial conditions. Ann Bot 112:1869–1878Google Scholar
  17. Jackson MB, Colmer TD (2005) Response and adaptation by plants to flooding stress. Ann Bot 96:501–505PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Janiensky M, Bazzaz FA (1999) The fallacy of ratios and the testability of models in biology. Oikos 84:321–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kautsky L (1988) Life strategies of aquatic soft bottom macrophytes. Oikos 53:126–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keeley JE (1998) C4 photosynthetic modifications in the evolutionary transition from land to water in aquatic grasses. Oecologia 116:85–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Les DH, Sheridan DJ (1990) Biochemical heterophylly and flavonoid evolution in North America Potamogeton (Potamogetonaceae). Am J Bot 77:453–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Li Z, Yu D, Xu J (2011) Adaptation to water level variation: responses of a floating-leaved macrophyte Nymphoides peltata to terrestrial habitat. Ann Limnol Int J Lim 47:97–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Luo WB, Song FB, Xie YH (2008) Trade-off between tolerance to drought and tolerance to flooding in three wetland plants. Wetlands 28:866–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Maberly SC, Spence DHN (1989) Photosynthesis and photorespiration in freshwater organisms: amphibious plants. Aquat Bot 34:267–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Madsen TV, Sand-Jensen K (1991) Photosynthetic carbon assimilation in aquatic macrophytes. Aquat Bot 41:5–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McConnaughay KDM, Coleman JS (1998) Can plants track changes in nutrient availability via changes in biomass partitioning? Plant Soil 202:201–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McGill BJ, Enquist BJ, Weiher E et al (2006) Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. Trends Ecol Evol 21:178–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mommer L, Visser EJW (2005) Underwater photosynthesis in flooded terrestrial plants: a matter of leaf plasticity. Ann Bot 96:581–589PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Navas ML, Ducout B, Roumet C et al (2003) Leaf life span, dynamics and construction cost of species from Mediterranean old-field differing in successional status. New Phytol 159:213–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nielsen SL, Sand-Jensen K (1989) Regulation of photosynthetic rates of submerged rooted macrophytes. Oecologia 81:364–368Google Scholar
  31. Nielsen SL, Sand-Jensen K (1997) Growth rates and morphological adaptations of aquatic and terrestrial forms of amphibious Littorella uniflora (L.) Aschers. Plant Ecol 129:135–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Niklas KJ (1998) The influence of gravity and wind on land plant evolution. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 102:1–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pedersen O, Sand-Jensen K (1993) Water transport in submerged macrophytes. Aquat Bot 44:385–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Poorter H, Garnier E (1996) Plant growth analysis: an evaluation of experimental design and computational methods. J Exp Bot 47:1343–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Puijalon S, Piola F, Bornette G (2008) Abiotic stresses increase plant regeneration ability. Evol Ecol 22:493–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rascio N (2002) The underwater life of secondarily aquatic plants: some problems and solutions. Crit Rev Plant Sci 21:401–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rattray MR, Howard-Williams C, Brown JMA (1991) Sediment and water as sources of nitrogen and phosphorus for submerged rooted aquatic macrophytes. Aquat Bot 40:225–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. R-Development-Core-Team (2009) R: a language and environment for statistical computing, from http://www.r-project.org.In
  39. Robe WE, Griffiths H (1998) Adaptations for an amphibious life: changes in leaf morphology, growth rate, C and N investment, and reproduction during adjustment to emersion by the freshwater macrophyte Littorella uniflora. New Phytol 140:9–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ryser P, Urbas P (2000) Ecological significance of leaf life span among Central European grass species. Oikos 91:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sand-Jensen K, Frost-Christensen H (1999) Plant growth and photosynthesis in the transition zone between land and stream. Aquat Bot 63:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sand-Jensen K, Pedersen MF, Nielsen SL (1992) Photosynthetic use of inorganic carbon among primary and secondary water plants in stream. Freshw Biol 27:283–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sculthorpe CD (1967) The biology of aquatic vascular plants. Edward Arnold Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Shimizu-Sato S, Mori H (2001) Control of outgrowth and dormancy in axillary buds. Plant Physiol 127:1405–1413PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Sultan SE (2007) Development in context: the timely emergence of eco-devo. Trends Ecol Evol 22:575–582PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Touchette BW, Iannacone LR, Turner GE et al (2007) Drought tolerance versus drought avoidance: a comparison of plant-water relations in herbaceous wetland plants subjected to water withdrawal and repletion. Wetlands 27:656–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Touchette BW, Frank AR, Iannacone LR et al (2008) Drought susceptibility in emergent wetland angiosperms: a comparison of water deficit growth in five herbaceous perennials. Wetl Ecol Manag 16:485–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vasellati V, Oesterheld M, Loreti J (2001) Effects of flooding and drought on the anatomy of Paspalum dilatatum. Ann Bot 88:355–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Volder A, Bonis A, Grillas P (1997) Effects of drought and flooding on the reproduction of an amphibious plant, Ranunculus peltatus. Aquat Bot 58:13–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wells CL, Pigliucci M (2000) Adaptative phenotypic plasticity: the case of heterophylly in aquatic plants. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 3:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wright SSD and McConnaughay KDM (2002) Interpreting phenotypic plasticity: the importance of ontogeny. Plant Species Biol 17:119–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M et al (2004) The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature 428:821–827PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mélissa De Wilde
    • 1
  • Nadia Sebei
    • 1
  • Sara Puijalon
    • 1
  • Gudrun Bornette
    • 1
  1. 1.UMR CNRS 5023 «Laboratoire d’Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés», Université Lyon 1, ENTPEUniversité de LyonVilleurbanne CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations