Phylogeny Explains Variation in The Root Chemistry of Eucalyptus Species
- 294 Downloads
Plants are dependent on their root systems for survival, and thus are defended from belowground enemies by a range of strategies, including plant secondary metabolites (PSMs). These compounds vary among species, and an understanding of this variation may provide generality in predicting the susceptibility of forest trees to belowground enemies and the quality of their organic matter input to soil. Here, we investigated phylogenetic patterns in the root chemistry of species within the genus Eucalyptus. Given the known diversity of PSMs in eucalypt foliage, we hypothesized that (i) the range and concentrations of PSMs and carbohydrates in roots vary among Eucalyptus species, and (ii) that phylogenetic relationships explain a significant component of this variation. To test for interspecific variation in root chemistry and the influence of tree phylogeny, we grew 24 Eucalyptus species representing two subgenera (Eucalyptus and Symphyomyrtus) in a common garden for two years. Fine root samples were collected from each species and analyzed for total phenolics, condensed tannins, carbohydrates, terpenes, and formylated phloroglucinol compounds. Compounds displaying significant interspecific variation were mapped onto a molecular phylogeny and tested for phylogenetic signal. Although all targeted groups of compounds were present, we found that phenolics dominated root defenses and that all phenolic traits displayed significant interspecific variation. Further, these compounds displayed a significant phylogenetic signal. Overall, our results suggest that within these representatives of genus Eucalyptus, more closely related species have more similar root chemistry, which may influence their susceptibility to belowground enemies and soil organic matter accrual.
KeywordsEucalyptus Phenolics Phylogenetic signal Roots Terpenes
We thank Hugh Fitzgerald for assistance in the sampling of root material and assistance with laboratory work. This research was funded by an Australian Research Council Discovery Grant (number: DP120102889) and further supported by an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant (number: LP120200380).
- Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1:1–10Google Scholar
- Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff P, Christensen R (2015) lmerTest: tests in linear mixed effects models. R Package Version 2:0–29Google Scholar
- McKiernan AB, O’Reilly-Wapstra JM, Price C, Davies NW, Potts BM, Hovenden MJ (2012) Stability of plant defensive traits among populations in two Eucalyptus species under elevated carbon dioxide. J Chem Ecol 38:204–212Google Scholar
- Paradis E, Blomberg S, Bolker B, Claude J, Cuong HS, Desper R, Didier G, Durand B, Dutheil J, Gascuel O (2012) Package ‘ape’: Analyses of phylogenetics and evolution. R package Version 3.4 4Google Scholar
- Podger F, Batini F (1971) Susceptibility to Phytophthora cinnamomi root-rot of thirty six species of Eucalyptus. Aust Forest Res 5:9–20Google Scholar
- R Development Core Team (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL:http://www.R-project.org/.
- Ripley B, Venables B, Bates DM, Hornik K, Gebhardt A, Firth D, Ripley MB (2015) Package ‘MASS’. R Package Version 7:3–45Google Scholar
- Sayad E, Hosseini S, Hosseini V, Salehe-Shooshtari M (2012) Soil macrofauna in relation to soil and leaf litter properties in tree plantations. J For Sci 58:170–180Google Scholar
- Steane DA, Nicolle D, Sansaloni CP, Petroli CD, Carling J, Kilian A, Myburg AA, Grattapaglia D, Vaillancourt RE (2011) Population genetic analysis and phylogeny reconstruction in Eucalyptus (Myrtaceae) using high-throughput, genome-wide genotyping. Mol Phylogenet Evol 59:206–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wilcken CF, Raetano CG, Forti LC (2002) Termite pests in Eucalyptus forests of Brazil. Sociobiology 40:179–190Google Scholar
- Wingfield M, Slippers B, Hurley B, Coutinho T, Wingfield B, Roux J (2008) Eucalypt pests and diseases: growing threats to plantation productivity. South For 70:139–144Google Scholar