内蒙古锡林河流域典型草原植物叶片与细根性状在种间及种内水平上的关联

doi:10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.01.006

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

植物的叶片与细根分别作为植物体地上和地下部分重要的营养器官, 很多功能性状在二者之间存在着一定的关联性。研究这种关联有助于理解植物各性状之间的相互作用、植物生长过程中对资源的利用和分配, 以及建立细根性状的估算模型。该研究对内蒙古锡林河流域65种植物叶片与细根的氮(N)含量、磷(P)含量、N:P以及比叶面积(SLA)和比根长(SRL)进行了比较研究, 结果表明: 在种间尺度上, 叶片与细根间的N、P和N:P存在显著的相关性, 而SLA与SRL之间相关性较弱; 在种内尺度上, 叶片和细根的N、P及SLA与SRL, 在不同的物种中呈现出不同的趋势。此外, 叶片与细根性状的关联, 在不同的植物功能群之间存在差异。例如, 双子叶植物叶片与细根间的N含量显著相关, P含量不相关; 而单子叶植物二者之间的P含量显著相关, N含量无关联。该研究的主要结论是, 在相对一致的生境中, 植物叶片与细根性状的关联主要发生在不同物种之间, 在种内尺度上这种关联不明显, 这可能与植物功能性状在种内存在较小的变异幅度有关。

关键词: 生态计量学, 功能性状, 比叶面积, 比根长, 温带草地

Abstract:

Aims Studies on the relationship between leaf and fine root traits provide insights into interactions among plant functional traits, plant strategy for resource acquisition and mass partitioning, and predictive models for fine root traits. Our main objectives were to test if leaf and fine root traits vary in a coordinated pattern in typical temperate grassland and to determine to what extent inter- and intra-specific leaf and fine root traits exhibit structural and functional convergence.

Methods During July and August 2006, we measured nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) concentrations, N:P ratios of leaves and fine roots (diameter < 2 mm), specific leaf area and specific root length of 65 grassland species in Xilin River Basin, Inner Mongolia. We statistically analyzed correlations between leaf and fine root traits among and within species.

Important findings At the inter-specific level, N concentrations, P concentrations and N:P ratios of leaves and fine roots were significantly correlated, while specific leaf area and specific root length showed a weak relationship. Species from different functional groups differ in the correlation pattern. In dicotyledons there was a strong correlation between leaf and fine root N concentrations, but not in P concentrations. In contrast, monocotyledons had a positive relationship between leaf and fine root P concentrations, but not N concentrations. Observed inter-specific correlations between above and belowground traits weakened or disappeared when examined at the intra-specific level. Thus, leaf and fine root traits were generally correlated among species, while correlations were weak within species.

Key words: ecological stoichiometry, functional traits, specific leaf area, specific root length, temperate grassland

徐冰, 程雨曦, 甘慧洁, 周文嘉, 贺金生. 内蒙古锡林河流域典型草原植物叶片与细根性状在种间及种内水平上的关联. 植物生态学报, 2010, 34(1): 29-38. DOI: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.01.006

XU Bing, CHENG Yu-Xi, GAN Hui-Jie, ZHOU Wen-Jia, HE Jin-Sheng. Correlations between leaf and fine root traits among and within species of typical temperate grassland in Xilin River Basin, Inner Mongolia, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2010, 34(1): 29-38. DOI: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.01.006

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2010.01.006

https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/Y2010/V34/I1/29

图/表 5

图1 不同尺度上植物叶片与细根功能性状潜在关系示意图。A, 物种之间表现出相关性(数据点示一个物种内的平均值)。B, 物种间正相关, 物种内正相关。C, 物种间正相关, 物种内不相关。D, 物种间正相关, 物种内负相关。

Fig. 1 The theoretical correlations between leaf and fine root traits at different scales. A, Correlations among species (date point represents mean value of each species). B, Positive correlation among species and within species. C, Positive correlation among species, but random within species. D, Positive correlation among species, but negative correlation within species.

图2 物种水平叶片与细根N含量(A)、P含量(B)、N:P比(C), 以及取对数比叶面积(SLA)与取对数比根长(SRL)(D)之间的关系。数据为平均值±标准误差。

Fig. 2 Correlations between leaf traits and fine root traits in N concentrations (A), P concentrations (B), N:P ratios (C) and log-transformed specific leaf area and specific root length (D). Values are mean ± SE.

表1 不同功能群植物叶片与细根性状的关系

Table 1 Correlations between leaf and fine root traits among different functional groups

植物功能群 Functional group	n	Leaf N-Root N		Leaf P-Root P		Leaf N:P-Root N:P		SLA-SRL
植物功能群 Functional group	n	b	R²	b	R²	b	R²	b	R²
禾草 Grass	13	0.083	0.138	1.052	0.590^**	0.177	0.146	0.970	0.346^*
杂类草 Forb	36-45	0.376	0.208^**	0.293	0.023	0.621	0.427^**	1.521	0.234^**
木本植物 Woody	5-6	0.767	0.701	1.524	0.599	0.886	0.732	-0.324	0.057
双子叶植物 Dicotyledon	35-44	0.458	0.251^**	0.273	0.017	0.673	0.379^**	1.205	0.156^*
单子叶植物 Monocotyledon	19-20	0.079	0.035	0.916	0.593^**	0.196	0.192	0.582	0.047
豆科植物 Legume	5	0.252	0.021	1.011	0.539	-0.249	0.027	-0.376	0.026
非豆科植物 Non-legume	49-59	0.265	0.129^**	0.712	0.142^**	0.290	0.186^**	0.744	0.088^*

图3 单子叶植物和双子叶植物叶片与细根性状关系的对比。叶片与细根性状之间显著的相关关系给出II类线性回归曲线。A, N含量的关系: 双子叶植物y = 0.92x - 1.20 (R2 = 0.251, p = 0.001)。B, P含量的关系: 单子叶植物y = 1.21x - 0.04 (R2 = 0.593, p < 0.001)。C, N/P比的关系: 双子叶植物y = 1.09x - 11.10 (R2 = 0.379, p < 0.001), 单子叶植物y = 0.45x - 1.31 (R2 = 0.192, p = 0.061)。D, SLA与SRL取对数后的关系: 双子叶植物y = 3.05x - 5.38 (R2 = 0.156, p = 0.011)。

Fig. 3 Comparison of correlations between leaf and fine root traits among monocotyledons and dicotyledons. The significant correlations between leaf and fine root traits are shown by type II regression lines. A, N concentration: y = 0.92x - 1.20 (R2 = 0.251, p = 0.001) for dicotyledons. B, P concentration: y = 1.21x - 0.04 (R2 = 0.593, p < 0.001) for monocotyledons. C, N:P ratio, y = 1.09x - 11.10 (R2 = 0.379, p < 0.001) for dicotyledons, and y = 0.45x - 1.31 (R2 = 0.192, p = 0.061) for monocotyledons. D, Log-transformed specific leaf area and specific root length: y = 3.05x - 5.38 (R2 = 0.156, p = 0.011) for dicotyledons.

表2 种内水平叶片与细根对应性状的关系

Table 2 Correlations between leaf and fine root traits within species

物种名 Species	Leaf N-Root N			Leaf P-Root P			SLA-SRL
物种名 Species	n	r	p	n	r	p	n	r	p
棉团铁线莲 Clematis hexapetala	8	0.464	0.247	4	-0.767	0.233	10	0.140	0.812
瓣蕊唐松草 Thalictrum petaloideum	10	0.231	0.522				10	-0.250	0.636
二裂委陵菜 Potentilla bifurca	8	0.226	0.591	7	0.132	0.778	10	0.645	0.113
菊叶委陵菜 Potentilla tanacetifolia	8	0.376	0.358	7	-0.571	0.181	10	0.374	0.467
地榆 Sanguisorba officinalis	5	-0.138	0.825				5	0.909	0.042
披针叶黄华 Thermopsis lanceolata	8	0.283	0.497	5	0.874	0.052	10	-0.330	0.488
歪头菜 Vicia unijuga	5	0.877	0.051	5	0.438	0.460	5	0.857	0.067
狭叶柴胡 Bupleurum scorzonerifolium	5	0.150	0.809	4	0.409	0.591	7	0.412	0.365
阿尔泰狗娃花 Heteropappus altaicus	8	0.555	0.153	4	0.640	0.360	10	-0.036	0.786
全缘橐吾 Ligularia mongolica	5	0.961	0.009	5	0.785	0.116	4	0.785	0.314
芨芨草 Achnatherum splendens	4	-0.604	0.396	5	0.138	0.825	5	0.938	0.115
雀麦 Bromus japonicus	10	0.798	0.006				10	-0.452	0.147
草 Koeleria cristata	9	-0.447	0.228	6	-0.341	0.509	10	0.087	0.883
黄囊薹草 Carex korshinskii	10	0.750	0.012	6	0.542	0.267	10	-0.773	0.005
日阴菅 Carex pediformis	4	-0.624	0.376	5	0.796	0.107	5	0.548	0.197
野韭 Allium ramosum	10	0.446	0.196	4	-0.357	0.643	10	0.260	0.357
山韮 Allium senescens	10	0.487	0.154	4	0.595	0.405	9	0.054	0.697
知母 Anemarrhena asphodeloides	8	-0.049	0.908				8	0.322	0.612
小黄花菜 Hemerocallis minor	5	0.242	0.695	4	0.258	0.742	5	-0.428	0.548
野鸢尾 Iris dichotoma	5	0.003	0.997	5	-0.318	0.602	4	0.579	0.373

参考文献 49

[1]	Aerts R, Chapin FS III (2000). The mineral nutrition of wild plants revisited: a re-evaluation of processes and patterns. Advances in Ecological Research, 30, 1-67.
[2]	Bai YF (白永飞), Li LH (李凌浩), Huang JH (黄建辉), Chen ZZ (陈佐忠) (2001). The influence of plant diversity and functional composition on ecosystem stability of four Stipa communities in the Inner Mongolia Plateau. Acta Botanica Sinica (植物学报), 43, 280-287. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	Bai YF, Han XG, Wu JG, Chen ZZ, Li LH (2004). Ecosystem stability and compensatory effects in the Inner Mongolia grassland. Nature, 431, 181-184. DOI URL PMID
[4]	Cannon WA (1949). A tentative classification of root systems. Ecology, 30, 542-548.
[5]	Chapin FS III (1980). The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 11, 233-260.
[6]	Comas LH, Eissenstat DM (2004). Linking fine root traits to maximum potential growth rate among 11 mature temperate tree species. Functional Ecology, 18, 388-397.
[7]	Craine JM, Lee WG (2003). Covariation in leaf and root traits for native and non-native grasses along an altitudinal gradient in New Zealand. Oecologia, 134, 471-478. URL PMID
[8]	Craine JM, Lee WG, Bond WJ, Williams RJ, Johnson LC (2005). Environmental constraints on a global relationship among leaf and root traits of grasses. Ecology, 86, 12-19.
[9]	Craine JM, Tilman D, Wedin D, Reich P, Tjoelker M, Knops J (2002). Functional traits, productivity and effects on nitrogen cycling of 33 grassland species. Functional Ecology, 16, 563-574.
[10]	Craine JM, Wedin DA, Chapin FS III, Reich PB (2003). Relationship between the structure of root systems and resource use for 11 North American grassland plants. Plant Ecology, 165, 85-100.
[11]	Eissenstat DM, Wells CE, Yanai RD, Whitbeck JL (2000). Building roots in a changing environment: implications for root longevity. New Phytologist, 147, 33-42.
[12]	Elser JJ, Bracken MES, Cleland EE, Gruner DS, Harpole WS, Hillebrand H, Ngai JT, Seabloom EW, Shurin JB, Smith JE (2007). Global analysis of nitrogen and phosphorus limitation of primary producers in freshwater, marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Ecology Letters, 10, 1135-1142. DOI URL PMID
[13]	Eviner VT, Chapin FS III (2003). Functional matrix: a conceptual framework for predicting multiple plant effects on ecosystem processes. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 34, 455-485.
[14]	Feng QH (冯秋红), Shi ZM (史作民), Dong LL (董莉莉) (2008). Response of plant functional traits to environment and its application. Scientia Silvae Sinicae (林业科学), 44, 125-131. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	Guo DL, Li H, Mitchell RJ, Han WX, Hendricks JJ, Fahey TJ, Hendrick RL (2008). Fine root heterogeneity by branch order: exploring the discrepancy in root turnover estimates between minirhizotron and carbon isotopic methods. New Phytologist, 177, 443-456.
[16]	Guo DL, Mitchell RJ, Hendricks JJ (2004). Fine root branch orders respond differentially to carbon source-sink manipulations in a longleaf pine forest. Oecologia, 140, 450-457. DOI URL
[17]	Hattenschwiler S, Aeschlimann B, Couteaux MM, Roy J, Bonal D (2008). High variation in foliage and leaf litter chemistry among 45 tree species of a neotropical rainforest community. New Phytologist, 179, 165-175.
[18]	He JS, Fang JY, Wang ZH, Guo DL, Flynn DFB, Geng Z (2006a). Stoichiometry and large-scale patterns of leaf carbon and nitrogen in the grassland biomes of China. Oecologia, 149, 115-122. DOI URL PMID
[19]	He JS, Wang L, Flynn DFB, Wang XP, Ma WH, Fang JY (2008). Leaf nitrogen: phosphorus stoichiometry across Chinese grassland biomes. Oecologia, 155, 301-310. URL PMID
[20]	He JS, Wang ZH, Wang XP, Schmid B, Zuo WY, Zhou M, Zheng CY, Wang MF, Fang JY (2006b). A test of the generality of leaf trait relationships on the Tibetan Plateau. New Phytologist, 170, 835-848.
[21]	Hendricks JJ, Aber JD, Nadelhoffer KJ, Hallett RD (2000). Nitrogen controls on fine root substrate quality in temperate forest ecosystems. Ecosystems, 3, 57-69. DOI URL
[22]	Hooper DU, Vitousek PM (1998). Effects of plant composition and diversity on nutrient cycling. Ecological Monographs, 68, 121-149.
[23]	Hu N (胡楠), Fan YL (范玉龙), Ding SY (丁圣彦), Liao BH (廖秉华) (2008). Progress in researches on plant functional groups of terrestrial ecosystems. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 24, 3302-3311. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	Jackson RB, Mooney HA, Schulze ED (1997). A global budget for fine root biomass, surface area, and nutrient contents. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 94, 7362-7366. URL PMID
[25]	Kay AD, Ashton IW, Gorokhova E, Kerkhoff AJ, Liess A, Litchman E (2005). Toward a stoichiometric framework for evolutionary biology. Oikos, 109, 6-17.
[26]	Kerkhoff AJ, Enquist BJ, Elser JJ, Fagan WF (2005). Plant allometry, stoichiometry and the temperature-dependence of primary productivity. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 14, 585-598.
[27]	Kerkhoff AJ, Fagan WF, Elser JJ, Enquist BJ (2006). Phylogenetic and growth form variation in the scaling of nitrogen and phosphorus in the seed plants. The American Naturalist, 168, E103-E122. DOI URL PMID
[28]	Koide RT (1991). Nutrient supply, nutrient demand and plant-response to mycorrhizal infection. New Phytologist, 117, 365-386.
[29]	Kuo S (1996). Phosphorus. In: Bigham JM ed. Method of Soil Analysis. Part 3. Chemical Method. Soil Science Society of American/American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, USA. 869-919.
[30]	Luscher A, Nosberger J (1997). Interspecific and intraspecific variability in the response of grasses and legumes to free air CO₂ enrichment. Acta Oecologica-International Journal of Ecology, 18, 269-275.
[31]	McCarthy MC, Enquist BJ (2007). Consistency between an allometric approach and optimal partitioning theory in global patterns of plant biomass allocation. Functional Ecology, 21, 713-720.
[32]	Meng TT (孟婷婷), Ni J (倪健), Wang GH (王国宏) (2007). Plant functional traits, enviroments and ecosystem functioning. Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version) (植物生态学报), 31, 150-160. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[33]	Norby RJ, Jackson RB (2000). Root dynamics and global change: seeking an ecosystem perspective. New Phytologist, 147, 3-12.
[34]	Novotny AM, Schade JD, Hobbie SE, Kay AD, Kyle M, Reich PB, Elser JJ (2007). Stoichiometric response of nitrogen- fixing and non-fixing dicots to manipulations of CO₂, nitrogen, and diversity. Oecologia, 151, 687-696. DOI URL PMID
[35]	Reich PB, Walters MB, Ellsworth DS (1997). From tropics to tundra: global convergence in plant functioning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 94, 13730-13734. DOI URL PMID
[36]	Reich PB, Tilman D, Craine J, Ellsworth D, Tjoelker MG, Knops J, Wedin D, Naeem S, Bahauddin D, Goth J, Bengtson W, Lee TD (2001). Do species and functional groups differ in acquisition and use of C, N and water under varying atmospheric CO₂ and N availability regimes? A field test with 16 grassland species. New Phytologist, 150, 435-448.
[37]	Reich PB, Wright IJ, Cavender-Bares J, Craine JM, Oleksyn J, Westoby M, Walters MB (2003). The evolution of plant functional variation: traits, spectra, and strategies. International Journal of Plant Sciences, 164, S143-S164.
[38]	Reich PB, Oleksyn J (2004). Global patterns of plant leaf N and P in relation to temperature and latitude. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 11001-11006. DOI URL PMID
[39]	Ryser P, Lambers H (1995). Root and leaf attributes accounting for the performance of fast-growing and slow-growing grasses at different nutrient supply. Plant and Soil, 170, 251-265.
[40]	Shipley B, Almeida-Cortez J (2003). Interspecific consistency and intraspecific variability of specific leaf area with respect to irradiance and nutrient availability. EcoScience, 10, 74-79.
[41]	Sun GJ (孙国钧), Zhang R (张荣), Zhou L (周立) (2003). Trends and advances in researches on plant functional diversity and functional groups. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 23, 1430-1435. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[42]	Tilman D, Knops J, Wedin D, Reich P, Ritchie M, Siemann E (1997). The influence of functional diversity and composition on ecosystem processes. Science, 277, 1300-1302. DOI URL
[43]	Tjoelker MG, Craine JM, Wedin D, Reich PB, Tilman D (2005). Linking leaf and root trait syndromes among 39 grassland and savannah species. New Phytologist, 167, 493-508.
[44]	Vandenkoornhuyse P, Ridgway KP, Watson IJ, Fitter AH, Young JPW (2003). Co-existing grass species have distinctive arbuscular mycorrhizal communities. Molecular Ecology, 12, 3085-3095. DOI URL PMID
[45]	Weaver JE (1958). Classification of root systems of forbs of grassland and a consideration of their significance. Ecology, 39, 393-401.
[46]	Withington JM, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Eissenstat DM (2006). Comparison of structure and life span in roots and leaves among temperate trees. Ecological Monographs, 76, 381-397.
[47]	Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M, Ackerly DD, Baruch Z, Bongers F, Cavender-Bares J, Chapin T, Cornelissen JHC, Diemer M, Flexas J, Garnier E, Groom PK, Gulias J, Hikosaka K, Lamont BB, Lee T, Lee W, Lusk C, Midgley JJ, Navas ML, Niinemets U, Oleksyn J, Osada N, Poorter H, Poot P, Prior L, Pyankov VI, Roumet C, Thomas SC, Tjoelker MG, Veneklaas EJ, Villar R (2004). The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature, 428, 821-827. DOI URL PMID
[48]	Zeng DH (曾德慧), Chen GS (陈广生) (2005). Ecological stoichiometry: a science to explore the complexity of living systems. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 29, 1007-1019. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[49]	Zhang L (张林), Luo TX (罗天祥) (2004). Advances in ecological studies on leaf lifespan and associated leaf traits. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 28, 844-852. (in Chinese with English abstract)