Phenotypic plasticity and genetic differentiation of quantitative traits in genotypes of Leymus chinensis

doi:10.17521/cjpe.2015.0257

Abstract

Abstract:

Aims Adaptation mechanisms of plants to environment can be classified as genetic differentiation and phenotypic plasticity (environmental modification). The strategy and mechanism of plant adaptation is a hot topic in the field of evolutionary ecology. Leymus chinensis is one of constructive species in the Nei Mongol grassland. Particularly, Leymus chinensis is a rhizomatous and clonally reproductive grass, a genotype that can play an important role in the community. In this study, we aimed to (1) investigate the phenotypic plasticity of L. chinensis under different conditions, and (2) test the genetic differentiation and reaction norms (the relationship between the environment and the phenotype of an individual or a group of individuals) under four environmental conditions among different genotypes of L. chinensis. Methods Ten genotypes of L. chinensis were randomly selected. Under the control condition, we studied the effects of genotype, defoliation, drought and their interactions on 11 quantitative traits of growth (8 traits including photochemical efficiency of photosystem II, maximum net photosynthetic rate, transpiration rate, specific leaf area, relative growth rate, the number of tillers increased, aboveground and underground biomass growth), defense (total phenol concentration of leaf) and tolerance (non-structural carbohydrate content of root, root/shoot ratio) of L. chinensis. We studied the phenotypic plasticity, genetic differentiation and reaction norms mainly through tested the effect of environment and genotype on these traits. Important findings First, all 11 traits showed obvious phenotypic plasticity (i.e., significant effect of drought, defoliation and their interactions). The expression of 10 genotypes of L. chinensis was divergent under different environmental conditions. Interactions of genotype and environment significantly affected the maximum net photosynthetic rate, transpiration rate, specific leaf area, relative growth rate, total phenolic concentration of leaf, and total non-structural carbohydrate content of root. This indicated that the phenotypic plasticity of these five traits exhibited genetic differentiation. Second, the increase of number of tillers, belowground biomass and non-structural carbohydrate content of root did not show genetic differentiation under the same condition. The other eight traits showed significantly genetic differentiation, and the heritabilities (H²) of six traits related to growth were higher than 0.5. The leaf total phenol concentration and root/shoot ratio showed genetically differentiation only under the drought and defoliation condition, with the heritabilities being 0.145 and 0.201, respectively. These results explained why L. chinensis widely distributed in the Nei Mongol grassland, and provided genetic and environmental basis for related application and species conservation in this grassland ecosystem.

http://jtp.cnki.net/bilingual/detail/html/ZWSB201703008

Key words: Leymus chinensis, genotype, adaptation, genetic differentiation, phenotypic plasticity, reaction norm

Xue YANG, Jun-Fang SHEN, Nian-Xi ZHAO, Yu-Bao GAO. Phenotypic plasticity and genetic differentiation of quantitative traits in genotypes of Leymus chinensis[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2017, 41(3): 359-368.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/10.17521/cjpe.2015.0257

https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/Y2017/V41/I3/359

Figures/Tables 5

References 45

[1]	Ackerly DD, Dudley SA, Sultan SE, Schmitt J, Coleman JS, Linder CR, Sandquist DR, Geber MA, Evans AS, Dawson TE (2000). The evolution of plant ecophysiological traits: Recent advances and future directions new research addresses natural selection, genetic constraints, and the adaptive evolution of plant ecophysiological traits. Bioscience, 50, 979-995.
[2]	Aslam M, KhanIA, Saleem M, Ali Z (2006). Assessment of water stress tolerance in different maize accessions at germination and early growth stage. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 38, 1571-1579.
[3]	Bolnick DI, Amarasekare P, Araújo MS, Bürger R, Levine JM, Novak M, Rudolf VH, Schreiber SJ, Urban MC, Vasseur DA (2011). Why intraspecific trait variation matters in community ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 26, 183-192.
[4]	Chang CC, Smith MD (2014). Direct and indirect relationships between genetic diversity of a dominant grass, community diversity and above-ground productivity in tallgrass prairie. Journal of Vegetation Science, 25, 470-480.
[5]	Cook-Patton SC, McArt SH, Parachnowitsch AL, Thaler JS, Agrawal AA (2011). A direct comparison of the consequences of plant genotypic and species diversity on communities and ecosystem function. Ecology, 92, 915-923.
[6]	Crutsinger GM, Sanders NJ, Classen AT (2009). Comparing intra-and inter-specific effects on litter decomposition in an old-field ecosystem. Basic and Applied Ecology, 10, 535-543.
[7]	Da Silveira AJ, Feitosa Teles F, Stull JW (1978). A rapid technique for total nonstructural carbohydrate determination of plant tissue. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 26, 770-772.
[8]	Draghi JA, Whitlock MC (2012). Phenotypic plasticity facilitates mutational variance, genetic variance, and evolvability along the major axis of environmental variation. Evolution, 66, 2891-2902.
[9]	Eid MH (2009). Estimation of heritability and genetic advance of yield traits in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under drought condition. International Journal of Genetics and Molecular Biology, 1, 115-120.
[10]	Fernandez-Orozco R, Li L, Harflett C, Shewry PR, Ward JL (2010). Effects of environment and genotype on phenolic acids in wheat in the health grain diversity screen. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 58, 9341-9352.
[11]	Gao Y, Wang D, Ba L, Bai Y, Liu B (2008). Interactions between herbivory and resource availability on grazing tolerance of Leymus chinensis. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 63, 113-122.
[12]	Gu WC (2004). Statistical Genetic. Science Press, Beijing. (in Chinese)[顾万春 (2004). 统计遗传学. 科学出版社, 北京.]
[13]	Gutbrodt B, Dorn S, Mody K (2012). Drought stress affects constitutive but not induced herbivore resistance in apple plants. Arthropod-Plant Interactions, 6, 171-179.
[14]	Haugen R, Steffes L, Wolf J, Brown P, Matzner S, Siemens DH (2008). Evolution of drought tolerance and defense: Dependence of tradeoffs on mechanism, environment and defense switching. Oikos, 117, 231-244.
[15]	Hedrick PW (2005). A standardized genetic differentiation measure. Evolution, 59, 1633-1638.
[16]	Hu BZ, Liu D, Hu GF, Jiang SJ, Zhang AY (2001). Morphological variation and genetic diversity in Aneurolepidium chinensis. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 25, 83-89. (in Chinese with English abstract)[胡宝忠, 刘娣, 胡国富, 姜述君, 张阿英 (2001). 羊草遗传多样性的研究. 植物生态学报, 25, 83-89.]
[17]	Hughes AR, Stachowicz JJ, Williams SL (2009). Morphological and physiological variation among seagrass (Zostera marina) genotypes. Oecologia, 159, 725-733.
[18]	Johnson MT, Agrawal AA (2005). Plant genotype and environment interact to shape a diverse arthropod community on evening primrose (Oenothera biennis). Ecology, 86, 874-885.
[19]	Joshi J, Stoll P, Rusterholz HP, Schmid B, Dolt C, Baur B (2006). Small-scale experimental habitat fragmentation reduces colonization rates in species-rich grasslands. Oecologia, 148, 144-152.
[20]	Kanaga MK, Ryel RJ, Mock KE, Pfrender ME (2008). Quantitative-genetic variation in morphological and physiological traits within a quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) population. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 38, 1690-1694.
[21]	Kotowska AM, Cahill JJ, Keddie BA (2010). Plant genetic diversity yields increased plant productivity and herbivore performance. Journal of Ecology, 98, 237-245.
[22]	Lande R (2009). Adaptation to an extraordinary environment by evolution of phenotypic plasticity and genetic assimilation. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 22, 1435-1446.
[23]	Le Corre V, Kremer A (2012). The genetic differentiation at quantitative trait loci under local adaptation. Molecular Ecology, 21, 1548-1566.
[24]	Li H, Yang YF, Lu XS (2004). Quantitative analysis of reproductive tiller characteristics of Leymus chinensis populations on the Songnen Plain of China. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 13(4), 50-56. (in Chinese with English abstract)[李红, 杨允菲, 卢欣石 (2004). 松嫩平原羊草种群生殖分蘖株的数量特征及其定量分析. 草业学报, 13(4), 50-56.]
[25]	Li HY, Li JD, Xu ZG, Zhou JY, Zhang JF (2011). Vegetative reproduction characteristics of Leymus chinensis populations in Tumuji National Nature Reserve, Inner Mongolia. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 20(5), 19-25. (in Chinese with English abstract)[李海燕, 李建东, 徐振国, 周景英, 张建峰 (2011). 内蒙古图牧吉自然保护区羊草种群营养繁殖特性的比较. 草业学报 20(5), 19-25.]
[26]	Liefting M, Hoffmann AA, Ellers J (2009). Plasticity versus environmental canalization: Population differences in thermal responses along a latitudinal gradient in Drosophila serrata. Evolution, 63, 1954-1963.
[27]	Liu HF, Gao YB, Ruan WB, Chen L, Li CL, Zhao NX, Wang D (2004a). Genetic differentiation within and between Leymus chinensis populations from different zones of mid-eastern Inner Mongolia steppe. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 24, 2157-2164. (in Chinese with English abstract)[刘惠芬, 高玉葆, 阮维斌, 陈磊, 李长林, 赵念席, 王丹 (2004a). 内蒙古中东部不同草原地带羊草种群遗传分化. 生态学报, 24, 2157-2164.]
[28]	Liu HF, Gao YB, Wang D, Ren AZ, Ruan WB, Chen L, Zhao NX (2004b). Genetic differentiation in eight populations of Leymus chinensis in Inner Mongolia steppe. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 24, 423-431. (in Chinese with English abstract)[刘惠芬, 高玉葆, 王丹, 任安芝, 阮维斌, 陈磊, 赵念席 (2004b). 内蒙古典型草原羊草种群遗传分化的RAPD分析. 生态学报, 24, 423-431.]
[29]	Malinowski DP, Alloush GA, Belesky DP (1998). Evidence for chemical changes on the root surface of tall fescue in response to infection with the fungal endophyte Neotyphodium coenophialum. Plant and Soil, 205, 1-12.
[30]	Mallitt KL, Bonser SP, Hunt J (2010). The plasticity of phenotypic integration in response to light and water availability in the pepper grass, Lepidium bonariense. Evolutionary Ecology, 24, 1321-1337.
[31]	Manaa A, Ahmed HB, Valot B, Bouchet JP, Aschi-Smiti S, Causse M, Faurobert M (2011). Salt and genotype impact on plant physiology and root proteome variations in tomato. Journal of Experimental Botany, 17, 1-17.
[32]	Miner BG, Sultan SE, Morgan SG, Padilla DK, Relyea RA (2005). Ecological consequences of phenotypic plasticity. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 20, 685-692.
[33]	Nicotra AB, Atkin OK, Bonser SP, Davidson AM, Finnegan E, Mathesius U, Poot P, Purugganan MD, Richards C, Valladares F (2010). Plant phenotypic plasticity in a changing climate. Trends in Plant Science, 15, 684-692.
[34]	Pigliucci M, Schlichting C, Whitton J (1995). Reaction norms of Arabidopsis. II. Response to stress and unordered environmental variation. Functional Ecology, 9, 537-547.
[35]	Richards JH (1993). Physiology of Plants Recovering from Defoliation. SIR Publishing, Wellington, New Zealand. 85-94.
[36]	Seliskar DM, Gallagher JL, Burdick DM, Mutz LA (2002). The regulation of ecosystem functions by ecotypic variation in the dominant plant: A Spartina alterniflora salt-marsh case study. Journal of Ecology, 90, 1-11.
[37]	Shen JF, Ren HQ, Xin XJ, Xu B, Gao YB, Zhao NX (2015). Leymus chinensis genotypic diversity increases the response of population to disturbance. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35, 7682-7689. (in Chinese with English abstract)[申俊芳, 任慧琴, 辛晓静, 徐冰, 高玉葆, 赵念席 (2015). 羊草基因型多样性能增强种群对干扰的响应. 生态学报, 35, 7682-7689.]
[38]	Stevens MT, Waller DM, Lindroth RL (2007). Resistance and tolerance in Populus tremuloides: Genetic variation, costs, and environmental dependency. Evolutionary Ecology, 21, 829-847.
[39]	Strasburg JL, Sherman NA, Wright KM, Moyle LC, Willis JH, Rieseberg LH (2012). What can patterns of differentiation across plant genomes tell us about adaptation and speciation? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 367, 364-373.
[40]	Sultan SE (1995). Phenotypic plasticity and plant adaptation. Acta Botanica Neerlandica, 44, 363-383.
[41]	Sultan SE (2000). Phenotypic plasticity for plant development, function and life history. Trends in Plant Science, 5, 537-542.
[42]	Toker C (2004). Estimates of broad-sense heritability for seed yield and yield criteria in faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Hereditas, 140, 222-225.
[43]	Wang D (2004). The Variance and Differentiation of Leymus chinensis in Mid-Eastern Inner Mongolia Grassland. Master degree dissertation, Nankai University, Tianjin. 35-45. (in Chinese with English abstract)[王丹 (2004). 内蒙古中东部草原羊草种内变异与分化研究. 硕士学位论文, 南开大学, 天津. 35-45.]
[44]	Wang R, Gao Q (2001). Photosynthesis, transpiration, and water use efficiency in two divergent Leymus chinensis populations from Northeast China. Photosynthetica, 39, 123-126.
[45]	Yang Y, Fang J, Ji C, Han W (2009). Above- and belowground biomass allocation in Tibetan grasslands. Journal of Vegetation Science, 20, 177-184.

性状 Traits	基因型 Genotype (G)		刈割 Defoliation (De)		干旱 Drought (Dr)		De × Dr		基因型×刈割 G × De		基因型×干旱 G × Dr		基因型× 刈割×干旱 G × De × Dr
性状 Traits	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p
光系统II光化学效率 Photochemical efficiency of photosystem II	19.47	<0.001	2.649	0.105	17.19	<0.001	0.476	0.491	1.064	0.391	0.912	0.516	1.824	0.066
最大净光合速率 Maximum net photosynthetic rate	41.08	<0.001	315.7	<0.001	7.305	0.007	0.023	0.879	9.143	<0.001	1.385	0.197	1.353	0.212
蒸腾速率 Transpiration rate	4.878	<0.001	4.979	0.027	2.226	0.137	1.764	0.186	3.817	<0.001	2.805	0.004	0.881	0.543
比叶面积 Specific leaf area	3.781	<0.001	34.3	<0.001	2.916	0.089	11.62	0.001	1.231	0.278	2.207	0.023	1.843	0.063
相对生长速率 Relative growth rate	2.829	0.006	1 765	<0.001	212.8	<0.001	115.1	<0.001	6.55	<0.001	3.071	0.003	4.847	<0.001
分蘖增长数 The number of tillers increased	1.842	0.073	4.488	0.037	30.15	<0.001	24.72	<0.001	1.061	0.401	1.5	0.162	0.848	0.574
地上生物量 Aboveground biomass	1.454	0.167	0.007	0.933	69.06	<0.001	28.66	0.001	1.116	0.353	1.848	0.062	0.635	0.767
地下生物量 Belowground biomass	2.249	0.021	1.221	0.27	21.93	<0.001	11.07	0.001	0.527	0.854	1.644	0.105	0.664	0.741
叶总酚浓度 Total phenolic concentration of leaf	1.624	0.111	30.62	<0.001	0.002	0.962	48.21	<0.001	1.978	0.044	2.321	0.017	0.957	0.477
根非结构性碳水化合物总量 Total non-structural carbohydrates content of root	1.480	0.157	11.09	0.001	47.13	<0.001	16.21	<0.001	1.938	0.049	2.462	0.011	1.76	0.078
根冠比 Root/shoot ratio	0.976	0.461	0.099	0.753	6.005	0.015	0.479	0.49	1.099	0.365	0.855	0.567	1.093	0.369

性状 Traits	基因型 Genotype (G)		刈割 Defoliation (De)		干旱 Drought (Dr)		De × Dr		基因型×刈割 G × De		基因型×干旱 G × Dr		基因型× 刈割×干旱 G × De × Dr
性状 Traits	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p
光系统II光化学效率 Photochemical efficiency of photosystem II	19.47	<0.001	2.649	0.105	17.19	<0.001	0.476	0.491	1.064	0.391	0.912	0.516	1.824	0.066
最大净光合速率 Maximum net photosynthetic rate	41.08	<0.001	315.7	<0.001	7.305	0.007	0.023	0.879	9.143	<0.001	1.385	0.197	1.353	0.212
蒸腾速率 Transpiration rate	4.878	<0.001	4.979	0.027	2.226	0.137	1.764	0.186	3.817	<0.001	2.805	0.004	0.881	0.543
比叶面积 Specific leaf area	3.781	<0.001	34.3	<0.001	2.916	0.089	11.62	0.001	1.231	0.278	2.207	0.023	1.843	0.063
相对生长速率 Relative growth rate	2.829	0.006	1 765	<0.001	212.8	<0.001	115.1	<0.001	6.55	<0.001	3.071	0.003	4.847	<0.001
分蘖增长数 The number of tillers increased	1.842	0.073	4.488	0.037	30.15	<0.001	24.72	<0.001	1.061	0.401	1.5	0.162	0.848	0.574
地上生物量 Aboveground biomass	1.454	0.167	0.007	0.933	69.06	<0.001	28.66	0.001	1.116	0.353	1.848	0.062	0.635	0.767
地下生物量 Belowground biomass	2.249	0.021	1.221	0.27	21.93	<0.001	11.07	0.001	0.527	0.854	1.644	0.105	0.664	0.741
叶总酚浓度 Total phenolic concentration of leaf	1.624	0.111	30.62	<0.001	0.002	0.962	48.21	<0.001	1.978	0.044	2.321	0.017	0.957	0.477
根非结构性碳水化合物总量 Total non-structural carbohydrates content of root	1.480	0.157	11.09	0.001	47.13	<0.001	16.21	<0.001	1.938	0.049	2.462	0.011	1.76	0.078
根冠比 Root/shoot ratio	0.976	0.461	0.099	0.753	6.005	0.015	0.479	0.49	1.099	0.365	0.855	0.567	1.093	0.369

性状 Trait	对照 Control		刈割 Defoliation		干旱 Drought		刈割干旱 Defoliation and drought
性状 Trait	H²	p	H²	p	H²	p	H²	p
光系统II光化学效率 Photochemical efficiency of photosystem II	0.000	<0.001	0.000	<0.001	1.000	<0.001	1.000	<0.001
最大净光合速率 Maximum net photosynthetic rate	0.847	<0.001	0.679	<0.001	0.585	<0.001	0.660	<0.001
蒸腾速率 Transpiration rate	0.538	<0.001	-	0.948	0.380	<0.001	0.168	0.029
比叶面积 Specific leaf area	0.221	0.022	-	0.127	0.171	0.022	-	0.061
相对生长速率 Relative growth rate	0.400	0.002	0.727	<0.001	0.625	0.001	0.515	0.006
分蘖增长数 The number of tillers increased	-	0.314	-	0.286	-	0.410	-	0.056
地上生物量 Aboveground biomass	0.269	0.007	-	0.787	-	0.752	-	0.075
地下生物量 Belowground biomass	-	0.151	-	0.145	-	0.523	-	0.553
叶总酚浓度 Total phenolic concentration of leaf	-	0.170	-	0.201	-	0.616	0.145	0.004
根非结构性碳水化合物总量 Total non-structural carbohydrates content of root	-	0.201	-	0.062	-	0.550	-	0.951
根冠比 Root/shoot ratio	-	0.936	-	0.061	-	0.068	0.202	0.017

性状 Trait	对照 Control		刈割 Defoliation		干旱 Drought		刈割干旱 Defoliation and drought
性状 Trait	H²	p	H²	p	H²	p	H²	p
光系统II光化学效率 Photochemical efficiency of photosystem II	0.000	<0.001	0.000	<0.001	1.000	<0.001	1.000	<0.001
最大净光合速率 Maximum net photosynthetic rate	0.847	<0.001	0.679	<0.001	0.585	<0.001	0.660	<0.001
蒸腾速率 Transpiration rate	0.538	<0.001	-	0.948	0.380	<0.001	0.168	0.029
比叶面积 Specific leaf area	0.221	0.022	-	0.127	0.171	0.022	-	0.061
相对生长速率 Relative growth rate	0.400	0.002	0.727	<0.001	0.625	0.001	0.515	0.006
分蘖增长数 The number of tillers increased	-	0.314	-	0.286	-	0.410	-	0.056
地上生物量 Aboveground biomass	0.269	0.007	-	0.787	-	0.752	-	0.075
地下生物量 Belowground biomass	-	0.151	-	0.145	-	0.523	-	0.553
叶总酚浓度 Total phenolic concentration of leaf	-	0.170	-	0.201	-	0.616	0.145	0.004
根非结构性碳水化合物总量 Total non-structural carbohydrates content of root	-	0.201	-	0.062	-	0.550	-	0.951
根冠比 Root/shoot ratio	-	0.936	-	0.061	-	0.068	0.202	0.017

性状 Traits	对照 Control		刈割 Defoliation		干旱 Drought		刈割干旱 Defoliation and drought
性状 Traits	函数1 Function 1	函数2 Function 2	函数1 Function 1	函数2 Function 2	函数1 Function 1	函数2 Function 2	函数1 Function 1	函数2 Function 2
光系统II光化学效率 Photochemical efficiency of photosystem II	0.891	0.966	-0.510	-0.191	1.585	0.717	-0.193	0.312
最大净光合速率 Maximum net photosynthetic rate	1.285	-0.462	-0.905	0.865	1.231	-1.609	0.783	-0.672
蒸腾速率 Transpiration rate	-0.561	0.125	0.491	-0.213	0.576	-0.827	1.319	0.098
比叶面积 Specific leaf area	-0.692	-0.533	0.542	0.219	1.341	-0.835	-0.042	1.452
相对生长速率 Relative growth rate	-0.588	0.815	0.962	0.953	1.235	0.236	1.101	0.267
分蘖增长数 The number of tillers increased	-0.416	0.347	-0.424	-1.030	-1.365	0.603	-0.079	0.521
地上生物量 Aboveground biomass	1.114	0.571	1.919	2.834	-0.579	3.541	1.323	2.44
地下生物量 Belowground biomass	-1.81	0.104	-1.614	-2.049	1.594	-3.385	0.055	-2.852
叶总酚浓度 Total phenolic concentration of leaf	0.126	0.905	-0.714	-0.021	-0.115	0.486	-1.226	-1.07
根非结构性碳水化合物总量 Total non-structural carbohydrates content of root	0.598	-1.076	-0.010	-0.446	-1.058	0.564	-0.129	-0.498
根冠比 Root/shoot ratio	1.174	0.781	1.201	1.319	-0.141	1.039	0.838	2.452
解释的方差 Explained variance (%)	49.8	31.9	44.5	30.2	59.2	20.4	37.3	22.0