非生物抗逆性可以解释温带木本植物的范围大小和灌浆

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Giacomo Puglielli , Enrico Tordoni , Lauri Laanisto , Jesse M. Kalwij , Michael J. Hutchings , Aelys M. Humphreys
{"title":"非生物抗逆性可以解释温带木本植物的范围大小和灌浆","authors":"Giacomo Puglielli ,&nbsp;Enrico Tordoni ,&nbsp;Lauri Laanisto ,&nbsp;Jesse M. Kalwij ,&nbsp;Michael J. Hutchings ,&nbsp;Aelys M. Humphreys","doi":"10.1016/j.ppees.2023.125734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>Efforts to understand the mechanisms explaining the relationship between abiotic stress tolerance and range size and filling have hitherto yielded contradictory results. Unlike previous studies that have focused on single stress factors, we here examine the extent to which range size and filling can be explained by tolerance of multiple abiotic stressors (cold, shade, drought and waterlogging). As range metrics, we used range size and filling (the ratio between actual and potential range) for 331 European and North American temperate </span>woody plant species. Stress tolerance strategies were expressed as a multivariate axis reflecting a cold/waterlogging-drought tolerance trade-off. We used mixed models to evaluate the relationship between range size/filling and this multivariate stress tolerance axis, using latitude as a covariate, and phylogeny and </span>plant functional type as random effects. Range size and stress tolerance were negatively correlated, mostly independently of latitude and continent. Thus, cold/wet-tolerant species had the largest range sizes and cold-sensitive/drought-tolerant species the smallest. In contrast, range filling mostly depended on latitude. Our results show that abiotic stress tolerance can explain interspecific differences in range size, and to a lesser extent range filling, which sets up predictions for range size variation in plants that go beyond latitude.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abiotic stress tolerance can explain range size and filling in temperate woody plants\",\"authors\":\"Giacomo Puglielli ,&nbsp;Enrico Tordoni ,&nbsp;Lauri Laanisto ,&nbsp;Jesse M. Kalwij ,&nbsp;Michael J. Hutchings ,&nbsp;Aelys M. Humphreys\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ppees.2023.125734\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span><span>Efforts to understand the mechanisms explaining the relationship between abiotic stress tolerance and range size and filling have hitherto yielded contradictory results. Unlike previous studies that have focused on single stress factors, we here examine the extent to which range size and filling can be explained by tolerance of multiple abiotic stressors (cold, shade, drought and waterlogging). As range metrics, we used range size and filling (the ratio between actual and potential range) for 331 European and North American temperate </span>woody plant species. Stress tolerance strategies were expressed as a multivariate axis reflecting a cold/waterlogging-drought tolerance trade-off. We used mixed models to evaluate the relationship between range size/filling and this multivariate stress tolerance axis, using latitude as a covariate, and phylogeny and </span>plant functional type as random effects. Range size and stress tolerance were negatively correlated, mostly independently of latitude and continent. Thus, cold/wet-tolerant species had the largest range sizes and cold-sensitive/drought-tolerant species the smallest. In contrast, range filling mostly depended on latitude. Our results show that abiotic stress tolerance can explain interspecific differences in range size, and to a lesser extent range filling, which sets up predictions for range size variation in plants that go beyond latitude.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1433831923000185\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1433831923000185","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

迄今为止,人们试图理解解释非生物胁迫耐受性与范围大小和灌浆之间关系的机制,却产生了相互矛盾的结果。与以前关注单一胁迫因素的研究不同,我们在这里考察了对多种非生物胁迫(寒冷、阴凉、干旱和内涝)的耐受性可以在多大程度上解释范围大小和灌浆。作为范围度量,我们使用了331种欧洲和北美温带木本植物的范围大小和填充(实际范围和潜在范围之间的比率)。应激耐受策略被表示为反映耐寒/耐涝抗旱性权衡的多变量轴。我们使用混合模型来评估范围大小/填充和这个多变量应力耐受轴之间的关系,使用纬度作为协变量,使用系统发育和植物功能类型作为随机效应。范围大小和应力耐受性呈负相关,大多与纬度和大陆无关。因此,耐寒/耐湿物种的范围大小最大,而耐寒/耐旱物种的范围最小。相比之下,范围填充主要取决于纬度。我们的研究结果表明,非生物胁迫耐受性可以解释范围大小的种间差异,并在较小程度上解释范围填充,这为超越纬度的植物的范围大小变化提供了预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Abiotic stress tolerance can explain range size and filling in temperate woody plants

Efforts to understand the mechanisms explaining the relationship between abiotic stress tolerance and range size and filling have hitherto yielded contradictory results. Unlike previous studies that have focused on single stress factors, we here examine the extent to which range size and filling can be explained by tolerance of multiple abiotic stressors (cold, shade, drought and waterlogging). As range metrics, we used range size and filling (the ratio between actual and potential range) for 331 European and North American temperate woody plant species. Stress tolerance strategies were expressed as a multivariate axis reflecting a cold/waterlogging-drought tolerance trade-off. We used mixed models to evaluate the relationship between range size/filling and this multivariate stress tolerance axis, using latitude as a covariate, and phylogeny and plant functional type as random effects. Range size and stress tolerance were negatively correlated, mostly independently of latitude and continent. Thus, cold/wet-tolerant species had the largest range sizes and cold-sensitive/drought-tolerant species the smallest. In contrast, range filling mostly depended on latitude. Our results show that abiotic stress tolerance can explain interspecific differences in range size, and to a lesser extent range filling, which sets up predictions for range size variation in plants that go beyond latitude.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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