Leaf Functional Traits of Lianas in Maolan Karst Forest

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lczyyj.2024.06.013

Abstract

Abstract:

Revealing the adaptation strategies of liana leaf in karst rocky desertification habitats could provide basic data and theoretical basis for vegetation restoration and reconstruction of rocky desertification areas.In this study,leaf samples of 8 common liana species in the Maolan Karst rocky desertification habitat were gathered to evaluate their morphological,anatomical,and elemental composition indices.The characteristics of the intraspecific and interspecific variations in leaf traits of lianas were analyzed,and the resource strategies adopted under the karst rocky desertification habitats were further explored.1)Various degrees of intraspecific and interspecific variations were present in leaf morphological,anatomical,and chemical element traits.The intraspecific variation ranged from 0.07% to 34.56%,whereas interspecific variation spanned from 4.30% to 70.05%.2)Leaf nitrogen content was significantly positively correlated with phosphorus content and potassium content,and phosphorus content was significantly positively correlated with potassium content.3)Principal component analysis showed that species with higher specific leaf area,nitrogen content,phosphorus content,and magnesium content,such as Rubus alceifolius,Parthenocissus semicordata,Berchemia floribunda and Callerya cinerea,were clustered on the negative correlation side of the first principal component,tending to adopt a resource acquisition strategy.While species with higher thickness of various leaf tissues,calcium content,carbon-to-nitrogen ratio,and nitrogen-to-phosphorus ratio,such as Rosa laevigata,Elaeagnus bockii,Smilax china and Bauhinia curtisii,were clustered on the positive correlation side of the first principal component,suggesting a resource conservation strategy.Overall,the study highlighted significant intraspecific and interspecific variability in leaf morphological,anatomical,and chemical traits within the karst rocky desertification context.Notable correlations among different traits were identified,with species exhibiting similar leaf trait syndromes adopting analogous resource strategies.

Key words: karst forest, lianas, leaf functional trait, variation, stoichiometry

CLC Number:

Q945.79

CHEN Chunwu, BAI Xiaolong, CHEN Hongyan, LI Wangjun. Leaf Functional Traits of Lianas in Maolan Karst Forest[J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2024, (6): 107-116.

Figures/Tables 5

Tab.1

Fig.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Fig.2

References 40

[1]	STEVENS G C. Lianas as structural parasites:The Bursera simaruba example[J]. Ecology, 1987, 68(1):77-81.
[2]	SCHNITZER S A, BONGERS F. The ecology of lianas and their role in forests[J]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2002, 17(5):223-230.
[3]	SCHNITZER S A, MANGAN S A, DALLING J W, et al. Liana abundance,diversity,and distribution on Barro Colorado Island,Panama[J]. Plos One, 2012, 7(12):e52114.
[4]	PUTZ F E. Liana biomass and leaf area of a “tierra firme” forest in the Rio Negro Basin,Venezuela[J]. Biotropica, 1983, 15(3):185-189.
[5]	HEGARTY E E. Leaf litter production by lianas and trees in a sub-tropical Australian rain forest[J]. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 1991, 7(2):201-214.
[6]	ICHIHASHI R, CHIU C W, KOMATSU H, et al. Contribution of lianas to community-level canopy transpiration in a warm-temperate forest[J]. Functional Ecology, 2017, 31(9):1690-1699.
[7]	ISCHNITZER S A, MICHEl N L, POWERS J S, et al. Lianas maintain insectivorous bird abundance and diversity in a neotropical forest[J]. Ecology, 2020, 101(12):e03176.
[8]	MEUNIER F, VERBEECK H, COWDERY B, et al. Unraveling the relative role of light and water competition between lianas and trees in tropical forests:A vegetation model analysis[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2020, 109(1):519-540.
[9]	SCHNITZER S A. Testing ecological theory with lianas[J]. New Phytologist, 2018, 220(2):366-380. doi: 10.1111/nph.15431 pmid: 30247750
[10]	VIOLLE C, NAVAS M L, VILE D, et al. Let the concept of trait be functional[J]. Oikos, 2007, 116(5):882-892.
[11]	PEREZ-HARGUINDEGUY N, DIAZ S, GARNIER E, et al. New handbook for standardised measurement of plant functional traits worldwide[J]. Australian Journal of Botany, 2013,61:167-234.
[12]	LIU Qi, STERCK F J, ZHANG JiaoLin, et al. Traits,strategies,and niches of liana species in a tropical seasonal rainforest[J]. Oecologia, 2021,196:499-514.
[13]	李芳兰, 包维楷. 植物叶片形态解剖结构对环境变化的响应与适应[J]. 植物学通报, 2005,22:118-127.
[14]	KOERSELMAN W, MEULEMAN A F M. The vegetation N∶P ratio:A new tool to detect the nature of nutrient limitation[J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 1996, 33(6):1441-1450.
[15]	王梦洁, 容丽, 李婷婷, 等. 黔中喀斯特9种木质藤本叶功能性状研究[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2021, 29(5):455-464.
[16]	BAI Xiaolong, YANG Da, SHER J, et al. Divergences in stem and leaf traits between lianas and co-existing trees in a subtropical montane forest[J]. Journal of Plant Ecology, 2023,17:rtad037.
[17]	王琪, 容丽, 王梦洁, 等. 黔中木本植物叶功能性状对退化喀斯特土壤特性的响应[J]. 地球与环境, 2022, 5(5):639-647.
[18]	吴迪, 龙秀琴, 张建利, 等. 喀斯特峰丛洼地石漠化区4种藤本植物的光合日变化特征[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2015, 43(8):254-256.
[19]	熊玲, 龙翠玲, 梁盛, 等. 喀斯特森林木本植物叶片功能性状对土壤特性的响应[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2024, 32(3):310-318.
[20]	罗丝琼, 张广奇, 郭其强, 等. 茂兰喀斯特常绿落叶阔叶混交林林窗下木本植物更新组成[J]. 生态学杂志, 2020, 39(7):2131-2139.
[21]	姜飘, 朱锦心, 翁殊斐, 等. 藤本植物表型可塑性研究综述[J]. 世界林业研究, 2023, 36(6):14-19.
[22]	翟偲涵, 王平, 盛连喜. 竞争条件下植物功能性状的表型可塑性研究进展[J]. 北华大学学报(自然科学版), 2017, 18(4):538-546.
[23]	PATTISON R R, GOLDSTEIN G, ARES A. Growth,biomass allocation and photosynthesis of invasive and native Hawaiian rainforest species[J]. Oecologia, 1998,117:449-459.
[24]	FUNK J L. Differences in plasticity between invasive and native plants from a low resource environment[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2008, 96(6):1162-1173.
[25]	钟巧连, 刘立斌, 许鑫, 等. 黔中喀斯特木本植物功能性状变异及其适应策略[J]. 植物生态学报, 2018, 42(5):562-572. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2017.0270
[26]	FEITOSA T S, DE CARVALHO E C, BARRETO R W, et al. Use of support influences height and above-ground allometry but not biomass allocation to different aerial organs of an invasive vine[J]. Trees, 2023, 37(2):373-383.
[27]	吴陶红, 龙翠玲, 熊玲, 等. 喀斯特森林不同生长型植物叶片功能性状变异及其适应特征[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2023, 29(5):1043-1049.
[28]	刘金环, 曾德慧, DON K L. 科尔沁沙地东南部地区主要植物叶片性状及其相互关系[J]. 生态学杂志, 2006, 25(8):921-925.
[29]	MCDOWELL N, POCKMAN W T, ALLEN C D, et al. Mechanisms of plant survival and mortality during drought:why do some plants survive while others succumb to drought[J]. New Phytologist, 2008, 178(4):719-739.
[30]	董雪, 海鹭, 韩春霞, 等. 干旱区降雨梯度对沙冬青根-茎-叶生态化学计量特征的影响[J]. 林业科学研究, 2023, 36(5):60-71.
[31]	POORTER H, PEPIN S, RIJKERS T, et al. Construction costs,chemical composition and payback time of high-and low-irradiance leaves[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2006, 57(2):355-371.
[32]	ELSER J J, FAGAN W F, DENNO R F, et al. Nutritional constraints in terrestrial and freshwater food webs[J]. Nature, 2000, 408(6812):578-580.
[33]	LAMBERS H, CHAPIN F S, PONS T L. Plant physiological ecology[M]. New York: Springer, 1998.
[34]	REICH P B, OLEKSYN J. Global patterns of plant leaf N and P in relation to temperature and latitude[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2004, 101(30):11001-11006.
[35]	AERTS R, CHAPIN F S. The mineral nutrition of wild plants revisited: A reevaluation of processes and patterns[J]. Advances in Ecological Research, 1999,30:1-67.
[36]	Kirkby E A. Marschner's mineral nutrition of plants[M]. New York: Academic Press, 2023.
[37]	杨勇, 许鑫, 徐玥, 等. 黔北优势植物对槽谷型喀斯特生境的适应策略:基于功能性状与生态化学计量相关联的证据[J]. 地球与环境, 2020, 48(4):413-423.
[38]	周汀. 小生境下典型喀斯特森林植物化学计量特征及其适应机制[D]. 贵州: 贵州大学, 2022.
[39]	WESTOBY M, FALSTER D S, MOLES A T, et al. Plant ecological strategies:Some leading dimensions of variation between species[J]. Annual Review of Ecology & Systematics, 2002, 33(1):125-159.
[40]	周卫, 汪洪. 植物钙吸收、转运及代谢的生理和分子机制[J]. 植物学报, 2007, 24(6):762-778.

种	科	分类
菝葜(Smilax china)	菝葜科(Smilacaceae)	常绿
多花勾儿茶(Berchemia floribunda)	鼠李科(Rhamnaceae)	常绿
灰毛鸡血藤子(Callerya cinerea)	豆科(Leguminosae)	常绿
箭羽龙须藤(Bauhinia curtisii)	豆科(Leguminosae)	常绿
金樱子(Rosa laevigata)	蔷薇科(Rosaceae)	常绿
长叶胡颓子(Elaeagnus bockii)	胡颓子科(Elaeagnaceae)	常绿
粗叶悬钩子(Rubus alceifolius)	蔷薇科(Rosaceae)	落叶
三叶地锦(Parthenocissus semicordata)	葡萄科(Vitaceae)	落叶

种名	LT/ μm	LA/ cm²	SLA/ (cm²/g)	LDMC/ (g/g)	Ada/ μm	Aba/ μm	PT/ μm	ST/ μm	C/ (mg/g)	N/ (mg/g)	P/ (mg/g)	K/ (mg/g)	Ca/ (mg/g)	Mg/ (mg/g)	C/N	N/P
拔葜	56.08	123.98	66.95	0.470	6.65	4.03	18.09	27.31	477.57	13.87	0.79	5.94	15.13	0.93	34.48	17.47
多花勾儿茶	21.51	83.50	139.12	0.331	4.41	3.69	16.07	31.19	468.65	29.92	1.45	12.11	22.71	2.13	15.76	20.61
灰毛鸡血藤	55.36	48.92	125.66	0.486	2.44	1.87	5.26	11.99	459.36	36.97	2.45	26.50	11.61	2.82	12.77	15.55
箭羽龙须藤	29.76	33.75	78.12	0.558	4.56	2.34	9.46	13.40	483.19	20.80	0.85	8.03	15.27	1.45	23.44	24.71
金樱子	43.85	25.207	75.03	0.477	5.75	4.19	12.39	21.53	448.02	15.23	1.14	8.66	18.42	3.23	29.41	13.67
粗叶悬钩子	29.50	77.833	230.97	0.341	4.02	2.37	11.69	11.43	438.42	24.16	1.36	16.43	22.84	4.66	18.15	18.20
三叶地锦	34.05	25.963	194.09	0.295	4.76	4.47	11.81	13.01	445.06	21.36	1.52	12.39	16.81	2.14	20.90	14.14
长叶胡颓子	64.77	13.347	46.69	0.395	7.69	5.59	25.20	26.29	427.39	21.38	1.33	11.62	37.35	1.58	20.13	16.10
平均值	41.86	54.06	119.58	0.42	5.03	3.57	13.74	19.52	455.96	22.96	1.36	12.71	20.02	2.37	21.88	17.56
变异系数/%	37.10	70.05	54.89	21.99	32.43	35.70	41.03	39.63	4.30	32.84	37.77	50.62	39.86	50.12	32.61	20.85

性状	LT	LA	SLA	LDMC	Ada	Aba	PT	ST	C	N	P	K	Ca	Mg	C/N	N/P
LT	1.00	-0.32	-0.62	0.41	0.27	0.24	0.11	0.13	-0.29	-0.27	0.06	-0.02	0.00	-0.31	0.24	-0.53
LA		1.00	0.38	-0.03	-0.29	-0.40	-0.13	0.08	0.57	0.06	-0.15	-0.07	-0.40	-0.06	0.02	0.36
SLA			1.00	-0.63	-0.63	-0.43	-0.45	-0.58	-0.10	0.48	0.47	0.55	-0.25	0.64	-0.50	-0.03
LDMC				1.00	-0.04	-0.37	-0.32	-0.03	0.51	-0.24	-0.35	-0.28	-0.44	-0.32	0.32	0.26
Ada					1.00	0.86^**	0.91^**	0.66	-0.21	-0.79^*	-0.69	-0.78^*	0.62	-0.52	0.74^*	-0.09
Aba						1.00	0.85^**	0.69	-0.38	-0.55	-0.30	-0.52	0.61	-0.38	0.49	-0.40
PT							1.00	0.76^*	-0.28	-0.52	-0.50	-0.58	0.79^*	-0.43	0.47	0.00
ST								1.00	0.10	-0.35	-0.35	-0.53	0.46	-0.51	0.35	0.02
C									1.00	-0.07	-0.42	-0.40	-0.65	-0.51	0.21	0.62
N										1.00	0.83^*	0.88^**	-0.09	0.42	-0.99^**	0.17
P											1.00	0.95^**	-0.09	0.57	-0.87^**	-0.42
K												1.00	-0.09	0.66	-0.91^**	-0.23
Ca													1.00	0.05	-0.01	-0.01
Mg														1.00	-0.49	-0.30
C/N															1.00	-0.08
N/P																1.00