Advertisement

Community Ecology

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 55–63 | Cite as

Prediction of specific leaf area distribution in plant communities along a soil resource gradient using trait trade-offs in a pattern-oriented modelling approach

  • A. Bédécarrats
  • F. Isselin-NondedeuEmail author
Article

Abstract

The functional-trait approach to communities focuses on the distribution of traits and on their variations in communities along environmental gradients. We devised a pattern-oriented demarche to predict specific leaf area (SLA) distribution in three plant communities located along an environmental gradient governed by soil fertility and nutrient stress in subalpine gypsic dolines. An individual-based model incorporating physiological mechanisms simulated the growth of thirty functional groups varying in leaf traits (SLA and correlated leaf life-span) and nitrogen (N) stress tolerance which competed with their neighbours for access to light and nitrogen. The SLAs of these groups encompassed the range of SLAs measured in the sites. Leaf traits governed the daily temperature-dependent processes involved in capturing resources (N and light), biomass synthesis and loss, and the value of the parameter Nc governed the decrease in growth rate of organisms according to a decline in N supply. Biomass drove the competitive ability of each plant in its neighbourhood. A soil sub-model described the amount of available nitrogen in the soil. Simulations yielded performances of functional groups according to the availability of nitrogen in the soil. An integration function, which simulated the effects of the dominance process according to the performances of the groups, yielded the frequency distribution of the groups at the community scale. The SLAs patterns were deduced from this distribution. Comparison of simulated and measured distribution of SLA frequency (Kendall tests) showed the model’s ability to reproduce realistically SLA distributions along a nutrient gradient; measured SLA community patterns at lower, medium and higher fertility levels matched simulated SLA distribution with respectively 5 to 30, 82, and 154 kg N ha-1 year-1. These results demonstrate the efficacy of a strategy based on a pattern-oriented approach and the use of functional traits and trade-offs to predict the distributions of traits and their variations in communities along an environmental gradient.

Keywords

Alpine area Community assembly Competition Functional traits Individual-based model 

Abbreviations

SLA

Specific Leaf Area

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

42974_2012_13010055_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (112 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 115 KB.

References

  1. Ackerly, D.D. and Cornwell, W.K. 2007. A trait-based approach to community assembly: partitioning of species traits values into within- and among- community components. Ecol. Lett. 10: 135 –145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ansquer, P., Duru, M., Theau, J. P. and Cruz, P. 2009. Convergence in plant traits between species within grassland communities simplifies their monitoring. Ecol. Indic. 9: 1020–1029.Google Scholar
  3. Bertness, M. and Callaway, R.M.. 1994. Positive interactions in communities. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 191–193PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Bilton, M.C., Whitlock, R., Grime, J. Ph., Marion, G. and Pakeman, R.J.. 2010. Intraspecific trait variation in grassland plant species reveals fine-scale strategy trade-offs and size differentiation that underpins performance in ecological communities. Botany 88: 939–952.Google Scholar
  5. Bolnick, D. I., Amasekare, P., Araujo, M.S., Bürger, R., Levine, J. M., Novak, M., Rudolf, V. H. W., Schreiber, S.J., Urban, M. C. and Vasseur, D.A. 2011. Why intraspecific trait variation matters in community ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26:183–192.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowman, W.D., Gartner, J.R., Holland, K. and Wiedermann, M. 2006. Nitrogen critical loads for alpine vegetation and terrestrial ecosystem response: Are we there yet? Ecol. Appl. 16: 1183– 1193.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruno, J.F., Stachowicz, J.J. and Bertness, M.D. 2003. Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18: 119– 125.Google Scholar
  8. Chapin, F.S. 1980. The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11: 233–260.Google Scholar
  9. Chapin, F.S. 1991. Integrated response of plants to stress. Bioscience 41: 29–36.Google Scholar
  10. Choler, Ph., Michalet, R. and Callaway, R.M. 2001. Facilitation and competition on gradients in alpine plant communities. Ecology 82: 3295–3308.Google Scholar
  11. Choler, Ph. 2005. Consistent shifts in alpine plant traits along a mesotopographical gradient. Arctic, Antartic, and Alpine Res. 37: 444–453.Google Scholar
  12. Diaz, S., Hodgson, J.G., Thompson, K., Cabido, M., Cornelissen, J. H.C., Jalili, A., Montserrat-Marti, G., Grime, J.P., Zarrinkamar, F., Asri, Y., Bande, S.R., Basconcelo, S., Castro-Diez, P., Funes, G., Hamzehee, B., Khoshnevi, M., Pérez-Harguindegui, N., Pérez-Rontomé, M.C., Shirvany, F.A., Vendramini, F., Yasdani, S., Abbas-Azimi, R., Bogaared, A., Boustanin, S., Charles, M., Dehghan, M., de Torres-Espuny, L., Falczuk, V., Guerrero-Campo, J., Hynd, A., Jones, G., Kowsary, E., Kazemi-Saeed, F., Maestro-Martinez, M., Romo-Diez, A., Shaw, S., Siavash, B., Villar-Salvador, P. and Zak, M.R. 2009. The plant traits that drive ecosystems. Evidence from three continents. J. Veg. Sci. 15: 295–304.Google Scholar
  13. Ellenberg, H. 1977. Stickstoff als Standortsfaktor, insbesondere für Mitteleuropäische Pflanzengesllschaften. Oecol. Plant. 12: 1– 22.Google Scholar
  14. Field, Ch. and H.A. Mooney. 1986. The photosynthesis-nitrogen relationship in wild plants. In T. J. Givnish (ed.), On the Economy of Plant Form and Function. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 25–55.Google Scholar
  15. Garnier, E., Shipley, B., Roumet, C. and Laurent, G. 2001. A standardized protocol for the determination of specific leaf area and leaf dry matter content. Funct. Ecol. 15: 688–695.Google Scholar
  16. Gaucherand, S., Liancourt, P. and Lavorel, S. 2009. Importance and intensity of competition along a fertility gradient and across species. Ecol. Monogr. 79: 109–126.Google Scholar
  17. Gensac, P. 1968. La végétation des entonnoirs du gypse: cas de la Haute Tarentaise. Bull. Soc. Bot. France 115: 91–99.Google Scholar
  18. Grime, J.P. 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance for ecological and evolutionary processes. Amer. Nat. 111: 1169–1194.Google Scholar
  19. Grime, J. P., Thompson, K. and Hunt, R. 1997. Integrated screening validates primary axis of specialisation in plants. Oikos 79: 259– 281.Google Scholar
  20. Grime, J.P. 2001. Plant Strategies, Vegetation Process and Ecosystem Properties. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
  21. Grimm, V. 1999. Ten years of individual-based modelling in ecology: what have we learned and what could we learn in the future? Ecol. Model. 115: 129–148.Google Scholar
  22. Grimm, V. and Railsback, S.F. 2005. Individual-based Modelling and Ecology, Series in Theoretical and Computational Ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  23. Isselin-Nondedeu, F. and Bédécarrats, A. 2009. Assessing the dominance of Phleum pratense cv. Climax, a species commonly used for ski trail restoration. Appl. Veg. Sci. 12: 155–165Google Scholar
  24. Keddy, P.A. 1990. Competitive hierarchies and centrifugal organizations. In: J. B. Grace and D. Tilman (eds), Plant Communities. Perspectives on Plant Competition. Academic Press, San Diego. pp. 265–290.Google Scholar
  25. Keddy, P. A. and Shipley, B. 1989. Competitive hierarchies in herbaceous plant communities. Oikos 54: 234 – 341.Google Scholar
  26. Keddy, P.A., Twolan -Strutt, L. and Wisheu, I.C. 1994. Competitive ranking in 20 wetland plants: are they consistent across three environments? J. Ecol. 82: 635–643.Google Scholar
  27. Kikvidze, Z. and Brooker, R. 2010. Toward a more exact definition of the importance of competition-a reply to Freckleton and al. Ecology, 84. J. Ecol. 98: 719–724.Google Scholar
  28. Kühner, A. and Kleyer, M. 1988. A parsimonious combination of functional traits predicting plant response to disturbance and soil fertility. J. Veg. Sci. 19: 681–692.Google Scholar
  29. Lauber K. and Wagner, G. 2007. Flora Helvetica, (2nd ed.), Haupt, Bern-Stuttgart-Wien.Google Scholar
  30. Lavorel, S. and Garnier, E. 2002. Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits. Funct. Ecol. 16: 545–556.Google Scholar
  31. McGill, B.J., Enquist, B.J., Weiher, E. and Westoby, M. 2006. Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21: 178–185.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Messier, J., Mc Gill, B.J. and Lechowicz, M.J. 2010. How do traits vary accross ecological scales? A case for trait-based ecology. Ecol. Lett. 13: 838–848.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Mitchley, J. and Grubb, P.J. 1986. The control of relative abundance of perennials in chalk grasslands in southern England. I. Constancy of rank order and results of pot and field experiments on the role of interference. J. Ecol. 74: 1139–1166.Google Scholar
  34. Poorter, H. and Garnier, E. 1999. Ecological significance of inherent variation in relative growth rate and its components. In: F.I. Pugnaire and F. Valladares (eds.), Handbook of Functional Plant Ecology. Dekker, New York. pp. 81–120.Google Scholar
  35. Reich, P.B., Ellsworth, D.S., Walters, M.B., Vose, J.M., Gresham, C., Volin, J.C. and Bowman, W.D. 1999. Generality of leaf trait relationships: a test across six biomes. Ecology 80: 1955–1969.Google Scholar
  36. Reich, P.B., Walters, M.B. and Ellsworth, D.S. 1992. Leaf lifespan in relation to leaf, plant and stand characteristics among diverse ecosystems. Ecol. Monogr. 62: 356–392.Google Scholar
  37. Reich, P.B., Wright, I.J., Cavenders-Bares, J., Craine, J.M., Oleksyn, J., Westoby M. and Walters, M.B. 2003. The evolution of plant functional variations: traits, spectra, and strategies. International J. Plant Sci. 164: 14 – 164.Google Scholar
  38. Schippers, P. and Kroppf, M.J. 2001. Competition for light and nitrogen among grassland species: a simulation analysis. Funct. Ecol. 15: 155–164.Google Scholar
  39. Seligman, N.G. and Van Keulen, H. 1981. PAPRAN: a simulation model of annual pasture production limited by rain fall and nitrogen. In: M.J. Frissel and J.A. Van Veen (eds.), Simulation of Nitrogen Behaviour of Soil-plant Systems. Pudoc, Wageningen. pp. 192–220.Google Scholar
  40. Shipley, B. and Keddy, P.A. 1988. The relationship between relative growth rate and sensitivity to nutrient stress in twenty-eight species of emergent macrophytes. J. Ecol. 76: 1101–1110.Google Scholar
  41. Suding, K.N., Goldberg, D. B. and Hartman, K.M. 2003. Relationships among species traits: separating levels of response and identifying linkages to abundance. Ecology 84: 1–16.Google Scholar
  42. Sundriyal, R.C. and Joshi, A.P. 1992. Annual nutrient budget for an alpine grassland in the Garhwal Himalaya. J. Veg. Sci. 3: 21–26.Google Scholar
  43. Tilman, D. 1994. Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology 75: 2–16.Google Scholar
  44. Violle, C., Navas, M.L., Vile, D., Kazakou, E., Fortunel, C., Hummel, I. and Garnier, E. 2007. Let the concept of trait be functional! Oikos 116: 882–892.Google Scholar
  45. Wedin, D.A. and Tilman, D. 1996. Influence of nitrogen loading and species composition on the carbon balance of grasslands. Science 274: 1720–1723.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Westoby, M. 1998. A leaf -height-seeds (LHS) plant ecology strategy scheme. Plant and Soil 19: 213–227.Google Scholar
  47. Westoby, M. and Wright, I.J. 2006. Land-plant ecology on the basis of functional traits. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21: 261–268.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Westoby, M., Falster, D.S., Moles, A.T., Vesk, P.A. and Wright, I.J. 2002. Plant ecological strategies: some leading dimensions of variation between species. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33: 125–159.Google Scholar
  49. Wiegand, T., Jeltsch, F., Hanski, I. and Grimm, W. 2003. Using pattern-oriented modeling for revealing hidden information: a key for reconciling ecological theory and application. Oikos 100: 209–222.Google Scholar
  50. Wilson, S. D. and Keddy, P.A. 1986. Measuring diffuse competition along an environmental gradient; Results from a shoreline plant community. Am. Nat. 127: 862–869.Google Scholar
  51. Wu, J. and Marceau, D. 2002. Modelling complex ecological systems: an introduction. Ecol. Model. 153: 1–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2012

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cemagref, UR Ecosystèmes MontagnardsSaint Martin d’Hères CedexFrance
  2. 2.Ecole Polytechnique de l’Université François Rabelais, Département d’AménagementUMR 6173 CNRS CITERES, Equipe IPA-PE Paysages et EnvironnementToursFrance

Personalised recommendations