Living collections: Biodiversity cultivated at public gardens has the power to connect ecological questions and evolutionary context

IF 2.4 2区 生物学 Q2 PLANT SCIENCES
Jean H. Burns, Katharine L. Stuble, Juliana S. Medeiros
{"title":"Living collections: Biodiversity cultivated at public gardens has the power to connect ecological questions and evolutionary context","authors":"Jean H. Burns,&nbsp;Katharine L. Stuble,&nbsp;Juliana S. Medeiros","doi":"10.1002/ajb2.16394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Combining ecological questions with evolutionary context generates novel insight into both ecology and evolution. However, our ability to draw broad inferences can be limited by the taxonomic diversity present within and across species at a site. Public gardens (including botanical gardens and arboreta) may focus solely on aesthetics in developing their gardens, but some public gardens include scientific inquiry and conservation at the core of their missions (Hohn, <span>2022</span>). These scientifically oriented public gardens follow community standards of excellence (Hohn, <span>2022</span>) to provide unique access to curated plant collections specifically designed to gather high levels of biodiversity, both among and within species, at a single geographic location. These research-grade collections include long-lived species cared for over many decades. Such public gardens have long histories of conducting and supporting research harnessing the power inherent in these diverse collections, including explorations of systematics, ecophysiology, and ecology. By bringing together species, as well as individuals within species, from across broad spatial ranges into a single site, these collections offer living repositories of diversity ripe for scientific exploration as de facto common gardens (Dosmann, <span>2006</span>; Dosmann and Groover, <span>2012</span>; Primack et al., <span>2021</span>).</p><p>The biodiversity curated by public gardens can offer a unique context for addressing questions at the intersection of ecology and evolution, such as <i>how does phylogenetic history shape plant trait evolution?</i> For example, Mason et al. (<span>2020</span>) explored seasonal trait shifts across 25 species of <i>Cornus</i> at the Arnold Arboretum (Boston, Massachusetts, USA) to ask whether there are tradeoffs among ecophysiological traits and how those traits correlate with home environment. They measured traits such as leaf chlorophyll content and leaf water content. By measuring plant traits across many species, they answered questions about ecophysiological trait evolution within a comparative phylogenetic framework. By doing so in a common garden, they controlled for much of the environmental variation that would otherwise confound a study across so many species, that occur in different habitats and locations in their native ranges. Their new analytical approaches simultaneously incorporated phylogenetic methods and within-species variation over time (Mason et al., <span>2020</span>). With this comparison, they demonstrated that traditional phylogenetic comparative approaches, which analyze a single trait mean per species, might come to erroneous conclusions about trait–trait correlations. For example, leaf nitrogen mostly declines through the growing season in <i>Cornus</i>, leading to changes in sign of correlations across the season (Mason et al., <span>2020</span>).</p><p>Plant–soil interactions are another growing area of research that stands to benefit from the diverse woody plant collections maintained by public gardens. The longevity of plants within public gardens gives them the time to drive changes in the soil microbial community within their rhizosphere. This creates an opportunity to use public gardens as a source for soils that have been influenced by plants (e.g., Liu et al., <span>2021</span>; Figure 1), in the vein of plant–soil feedback experiments (Bever et al., <span>2010</span>). Furthermore, the diversity of species within a single site uniquely allows for comparisons of microbiomes across plant species and phylogeny (Medeiros et al., <span>2022</span>), addressing the question of whether close relatives share similar microbiomes. Botanical gardens can allow researchers to ask <i>are close relatives similar in their interactions with soil pathogens?</i> Liu et al. (<span>2021</span>) used 14 species of <i>Rhododendron</i> from the Holden Arboretum (Kirtland, Ohio, USA) to ask whether soil microbial communities modify pathogen effects. They found that live soil biota collected from the Holden Arboretum suppress plant biomass, but enhance survival in the presence of a soil pathogen (Figure 1) in a factorial greenhouse experiment. Thus, ecological benefits of soil microbes occurred across multiple evolutionary lineages.</p><p>Natural selection acts on within-species trait variation, and understanding evolutionary dynamics has become increasingly important as climates shift. As such, data on within-species trait variation are critical for answering questions such as <i>how variable is the niche within species? And does local adaptation influence success in a novel range?</i> At public gardens that prioritize scientific and conservation use of collections, within-species variation has long been actively prioritized in collections planning for ex situ conservation (Griffith et al., <span>2015</span>). Scientifically minded public gardens also record plant provenance, or the origin of individuals within the collections, and intentionally house replicates for each species and/or population. Replicates are also often shared across public gardens, allowing researchers to take advantage of multiple representatives of the same species, or even the same genotype, growing under different climate conditions. While many research studies may acquire commercially procured plants and seed, which typically lack such detail on origin and dedicated access to within-species diversity, within-species diversity can be key to addressing pressing ecological questions. For example, studies of the niche are critical to predicting future ranges, but there can be considerable within-species variation in the niche. Climate models at the provenance (within-species) scale better-predicted plant survival than species-level climatic models, calculated from an average across the native range (Thomas et al., <span>2022</span>), for a data set from the Missouri Botanical Garden (St. Louis, Missouri, USA). In other words, taking species level averages can be inadequate to answer many research questions such as predicting future species ranges, because of within-species variation due to local adaptation.</p><p>Replication within species is key to understanding local adaptation and niche evolution but is especially difficult to achieve in long-lived woody species. This is where public gardens excel. Considerable genotypic replication, both within gardens and across gardens, is often in place, or might be added to experimental plantings within the garden. Working with public garden curators to obtain their collections policy and understand the strengths of their collections, as well as engaging in discussions to determine which species and/or collections will best align with research needs, is key because gardens have information about site-level variation within their gardens and can guide researchers toward species, plantings, or even other gardens that are most appropriate for the research question.</p><p>Planting location can be considered a complicating factor across public gardens, but as in other types of planting arrays, sampling design and statistical techniques can be used to control for variation because of environmental covariates, location, or individual. For example, for research on phenology, Panchen et al. (<span>2014</span>) used a mathematical approach to account for planting location by calculating an adjusted leaf-out date for each species, such that all sites had the same mean leaf-out date. They demonstrated that site influenced the average time of leaf out, but that the rank order among species was generally the same across sites (Panchen et al., <span>2014</span>). Some studies have also examined individual plants over time, replicated across species, or controlled for individual using the differences over time calculated on a per individual basis (Miller-Rushing et al., <span>2009</span>). This allowed them to address effects of shifting climate on plant physiology across 100 years, demonstrating that intrinsic water use efficiency did not change over time for individual trees, although stomatal density declined and guard cell length increased (Miller-Rushing et al., <span>2009</span>).</p><p>Employing random effects in statistical models is also valuable, if underutilized, in the context of public garden studies. For example, stratified random sampling can account for standing variation (Arnab, <span>2017</span>): garden beds and species can be defined as strata to structure allocation of species evenly across garden beds, followed by use of a random number generator to choose individual plants within beds for experimental replicates (Medeiros et al., <span>2022</span>). In another example, Hällfors et al. (<span>2020</span>) tested for local adaptation by planting within-species replicates at five botanical gardens and compared models with and without random plot effects within gardens (Figure 1). Their common garden approach across multiple gardens demonstrated maladaptation to current climate conditions, likely to be exacerbated by climate change (Hällfors et al., <span>2020</span>). Because public gardens often include plantings outside the natural range, they are critical in such situations, where climate change might lead to maladaptation to local climate.</p><p>Plant collections at public gardens are uniquely suited to exploring questions at the intersection of ecology and evolution, and calls to use botanical gardens more extensively for research date back decades (e.g., Dosmann, <span>2006</span>). The historical focus of public gardens on clade-based sampling provides unprecedented collections of biodiversity within related groups of species (e.g., Cycads at Montgomery Botanical Center, Coral Gables, Florida, USA [Griffith et al., <span>2015</span>]). More research is needed to address questions such as (1) how could <i>ex situ</i> conservation be more optimally designed to capture genetic diversity within species and ensure species persistence (Hoban et al., <span>2020</span>), and (2) how has evolutionary history (phylogeny) shaped among-species variation in conservation status? Additionally, collections with provenance information within species can be used to characterize local adaptation (Thomas et al., <span>2022</span>). Using materials such as seeds and cuttings from public garden collections can make use of provenance information in manipulative experiments. Collections housed within public gardens provide a valuable resource to help answer questions such as <i>how has evolution shaped species ability to respond to novel future climates, pathogens, or other factors?</i></p><p>The authors contributed equally to conceptualizing, writing, and editing the manuscript.</p>","PeriodicalId":7691,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Botany","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajb2.16394","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Botany","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajb2.16394","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PLANT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Combining ecological questions with evolutionary context generates novel insight into both ecology and evolution. However, our ability to draw broad inferences can be limited by the taxonomic diversity present within and across species at a site. Public gardens (including botanical gardens and arboreta) may focus solely on aesthetics in developing their gardens, but some public gardens include scientific inquiry and conservation at the core of their missions (Hohn, 2022). These scientifically oriented public gardens follow community standards of excellence (Hohn, 2022) to provide unique access to curated plant collections specifically designed to gather high levels of biodiversity, both among and within species, at a single geographic location. These research-grade collections include long-lived species cared for over many decades. Such public gardens have long histories of conducting and supporting research harnessing the power inherent in these diverse collections, including explorations of systematics, ecophysiology, and ecology. By bringing together species, as well as individuals within species, from across broad spatial ranges into a single site, these collections offer living repositories of diversity ripe for scientific exploration as de facto common gardens (Dosmann, 2006; Dosmann and Groover, 2012; Primack et al., 2021).

The biodiversity curated by public gardens can offer a unique context for addressing questions at the intersection of ecology and evolution, such as how does phylogenetic history shape plant trait evolution? For example, Mason et al. (2020) explored seasonal trait shifts across 25 species of Cornus at the Arnold Arboretum (Boston, Massachusetts, USA) to ask whether there are tradeoffs among ecophysiological traits and how those traits correlate with home environment. They measured traits such as leaf chlorophyll content and leaf water content. By measuring plant traits across many species, they answered questions about ecophysiological trait evolution within a comparative phylogenetic framework. By doing so in a common garden, they controlled for much of the environmental variation that would otherwise confound a study across so many species, that occur in different habitats and locations in their native ranges. Their new analytical approaches simultaneously incorporated phylogenetic methods and within-species variation over time (Mason et al., 2020). With this comparison, they demonstrated that traditional phylogenetic comparative approaches, which analyze a single trait mean per species, might come to erroneous conclusions about trait–trait correlations. For example, leaf nitrogen mostly declines through the growing season in Cornus, leading to changes in sign of correlations across the season (Mason et al., 2020).

Plant–soil interactions are another growing area of research that stands to benefit from the diverse woody plant collections maintained by public gardens. The longevity of plants within public gardens gives them the time to drive changes in the soil microbial community within their rhizosphere. This creates an opportunity to use public gardens as a source for soils that have been influenced by plants (e.g., Liu et al., 2021; Figure 1), in the vein of plant–soil feedback experiments (Bever et al., 2010). Furthermore, the diversity of species within a single site uniquely allows for comparisons of microbiomes across plant species and phylogeny (Medeiros et al., 2022), addressing the question of whether close relatives share similar microbiomes. Botanical gardens can allow researchers to ask are close relatives similar in their interactions with soil pathogens? Liu et al. (2021) used 14 species of Rhododendron from the Holden Arboretum (Kirtland, Ohio, USA) to ask whether soil microbial communities modify pathogen effects. They found that live soil biota collected from the Holden Arboretum suppress plant biomass, but enhance survival in the presence of a soil pathogen (Figure 1) in a factorial greenhouse experiment. Thus, ecological benefits of soil microbes occurred across multiple evolutionary lineages.

Natural selection acts on within-species trait variation, and understanding evolutionary dynamics has become increasingly important as climates shift. As such, data on within-species trait variation are critical for answering questions such as how variable is the niche within species? And does local adaptation influence success in a novel range? At public gardens that prioritize scientific and conservation use of collections, within-species variation has long been actively prioritized in collections planning for ex situ conservation (Griffith et al., 2015). Scientifically minded public gardens also record plant provenance, or the origin of individuals within the collections, and intentionally house replicates for each species and/or population. Replicates are also often shared across public gardens, allowing researchers to take advantage of multiple representatives of the same species, or even the same genotype, growing under different climate conditions. While many research studies may acquire commercially procured plants and seed, which typically lack such detail on origin and dedicated access to within-species diversity, within-species diversity can be key to addressing pressing ecological questions. For example, studies of the niche are critical to predicting future ranges, but there can be considerable within-species variation in the niche. Climate models at the provenance (within-species) scale better-predicted plant survival than species-level climatic models, calculated from an average across the native range (Thomas et al., 2022), for a data set from the Missouri Botanical Garden (St. Louis, Missouri, USA). In other words, taking species level averages can be inadequate to answer many research questions such as predicting future species ranges, because of within-species variation due to local adaptation.

Replication within species is key to understanding local adaptation and niche evolution but is especially difficult to achieve in long-lived woody species. This is where public gardens excel. Considerable genotypic replication, both within gardens and across gardens, is often in place, or might be added to experimental plantings within the garden. Working with public garden curators to obtain their collections policy and understand the strengths of their collections, as well as engaging in discussions to determine which species and/or collections will best align with research needs, is key because gardens have information about site-level variation within their gardens and can guide researchers toward species, plantings, or even other gardens that are most appropriate for the research question.

Planting location can be considered a complicating factor across public gardens, but as in other types of planting arrays, sampling design and statistical techniques can be used to control for variation because of environmental covariates, location, or individual. For example, for research on phenology, Panchen et al. (2014) used a mathematical approach to account for planting location by calculating an adjusted leaf-out date for each species, such that all sites had the same mean leaf-out date. They demonstrated that site influenced the average time of leaf out, but that the rank order among species was generally the same across sites (Panchen et al., 2014). Some studies have also examined individual plants over time, replicated across species, or controlled for individual using the differences over time calculated on a per individual basis (Miller-Rushing et al., 2009). This allowed them to address effects of shifting climate on plant physiology across 100 years, demonstrating that intrinsic water use efficiency did not change over time for individual trees, although stomatal density declined and guard cell length increased (Miller-Rushing et al., 2009).

Employing random effects in statistical models is also valuable, if underutilized, in the context of public garden studies. For example, stratified random sampling can account for standing variation (Arnab, 2017): garden beds and species can be defined as strata to structure allocation of species evenly across garden beds, followed by use of a random number generator to choose individual plants within beds for experimental replicates (Medeiros et al., 2022). In another example, Hällfors et al. (2020) tested for local adaptation by planting within-species replicates at five botanical gardens and compared models with and without random plot effects within gardens (Figure 1). Their common garden approach across multiple gardens demonstrated maladaptation to current climate conditions, likely to be exacerbated by climate change (Hällfors et al., 2020). Because public gardens often include plantings outside the natural range, they are critical in such situations, where climate change might lead to maladaptation to local climate.

Plant collections at public gardens are uniquely suited to exploring questions at the intersection of ecology and evolution, and calls to use botanical gardens more extensively for research date back decades (e.g., Dosmann, 2006). The historical focus of public gardens on clade-based sampling provides unprecedented collections of biodiversity within related groups of species (e.g., Cycads at Montgomery Botanical Center, Coral Gables, Florida, USA [Griffith et al., 2015]). More research is needed to address questions such as (1) how could ex situ conservation be more optimally designed to capture genetic diversity within species and ensure species persistence (Hoban et al., 2020), and (2) how has evolutionary history (phylogeny) shaped among-species variation in conservation status? Additionally, collections with provenance information within species can be used to characterize local adaptation (Thomas et al., 2022). Using materials such as seeds and cuttings from public garden collections can make use of provenance information in manipulative experiments. Collections housed within public gardens provide a valuable resource to help answer questions such as how has evolution shaped species ability to respond to novel future climates, pathogens, or other factors?

The authors contributed equally to conceptualizing, writing, and editing the manuscript.

Abstract Image

活的收藏品:公共花园培育的生物多样性能够将生态问题与进化背景联系起来。
复制品也经常在公共花园中共享,使研究人员能够利用同一物种的多个代表,甚至同一基因型,在不同的气候条件下生长。虽然许多研究可能会从市场上购买植物和种子,但这些植物和种子通常缺乏关于原产地的详细信息,也无法专门获取种内多样性,而种内多样性则是解决紧迫生态问题的关键。例如,生态位研究对于预测未来的分布范围至关重要,但生态位的种内差异可能相当大。在密苏里植物园(美国密苏里州圣路易斯市)的一组数据中,原产地(种内)尺度的气候模型比物种尺度的气候模型更能预测植物的存活率,而物种尺度的气候模型是根据整个原生地的平均值计算的(Thomas 等人,2022 年)。换句话说,采用物种水平的平均值可能不足以回答许多研究问题,如预测未来的物种分布范围,因为物种内的差异是由当地适应性造成的。物种内的复制是了解当地适应性和生态位演化的关键,但对于寿命较长的木本物种来说尤其难以实现。这正是公共花园的优势所在。园内和跨园的大量基因型复制通常都已到位,或可添加到园内的实验种植中。与公共园林馆长合作以获得他们的收藏政策并了解其收藏优势,以及参与讨论以确定哪些物种和/或收藏最符合研究需求,这些都是关键所在,因为园林馆长掌握着园林内地点级变异的信息,可以指导研究人员选择最适合研究问题的物种、植物,甚至是其他园林。例如,在物候学研究中,Panchen 等人(2014 年)使用了一种数学方法,通过计算每个物种的调整后落叶日期来考虑种植地点,从而使所有地点的平均落叶日期相同。他们的研究表明,种植地点会影响平均落叶时间,但不同地点物种之间的排名顺序基本相同(Panchen 等人,2014 年)。一些研究还考察了单株植物随时间变化的情况,在不同物种间进行了重复,或利用按单株计算的随时间变化的差异对单株进行了控制(Miller-Rushing 等人,2009 年)。这使他们能够解决 100 年间气候转变对植物生理学的影响问题,结果表明,虽然气孔密度下降、防护细胞长度增加,但单株树木的内在水分利用效率并未随时间推移而改变(Miller-Rushing 等人,2009 年)。在统计模型中采用随机效应也很有价值,但在公共花园研究中利用不足。例如,分层随机抽样可以解释常年变化(Arnab,2017 年):可以将园圃和物种定义为分层,以便在园圃中均匀分配物种,然后使用随机数发生器在园圃中选择单株植物进行实验重复(Medeiros 等人,2022 年)。在另一个例子中,Hällfors 等人(2020 年)通过在五个植物园中种植物种内重复来测试本地适应性,并比较了园内有随机地块效应和无随机地块效应的模型(图 1)。他们在多个园林中采用的共同园林方法显示出对当前气候条件的不适应,而气候变化可能会加剧这种不适应(Hällfors 等人,2020 年)。由于公共园林通常种植自然范围以外的植物,因此在气候变化可能导致对当地气候适应不良的情况下,公共园林就显得至关重要。公共园林的植物收藏非常适合探索生态学与进化交叉领域的问题,更广泛地利用植物园进行研究的呼声可追溯到几十年前(如 Dosmann,2006 年)。公共植物园历来注重基于支系的取样,这为相关物种组内的生物多样性提供了前所未有的收集(例如,美国佛罗里达州珊瑚盖布尔斯蒙哥马利植物中心的苏铁植物[Griffith 等人,2015])。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Botany
American Journal of Botany 生物-植物科学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
171
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Botany (AJB), the flagship journal of the Botanical Society of America (BSA), publishes peer-reviewed, innovative, significant research of interest to a wide audience of plant scientists in all areas of plant biology (structure, function, development, diversity, genetics, evolution, systematics), all levels of organization (molecular to ecosystem), and all plant groups and allied organisms (cyanobacteria, algae, fungi, and lichens). AJB requires authors to frame their research questions and discuss their results in terms of major questions of plant biology. In general, papers that are too narrowly focused, purely descriptive, natural history, broad surveys, or that contain only preliminary data will not be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信