Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Physiological and fitness differences between cytotypes vary with stress in a grassland perennial herb

Z. Pavlíková, D. Holá, B. Vlasáková, T. Procházka, Z. Münzbergová,

. 2017 ; 12 (11) : e0188795. [pub] 20171130

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Understanding the consequences of polyploidization is a major step towards assessing the importance of this mode of speciation. Most previous studies comparing different cytotypes, however, did so only within a single environment and considered only one group of traits. To take a step further, we need to explore multiple environments and a wide range of traits. The aim of this study was to assess response of diploid and autotetraploid individuals of Knautia arvensis (Dipsacaceae) to two stress conditions, shade or drought. METHODS: We studied eleven photosynthetic, morphological and fitness parameters of the plants over three years in a common garden under ambient conditions and two types of stress. KEY RESULTS: The results indicate strong differences in performance and physiology between cytotypes in ambient conditions. Interestingly, higher fitness in diploids contrasted with more efficient photosynthesis in tetraploids in ambient conditions. However, stress, especially drought, strongly reduced fitness and disrupted function of the photosystems in both cytotypes reducing the between cytotype differences. The results indicate that drought stress reduced function of the photosynthetic processes in both cytotypes but particularly in tetraploids, while fitness reduction was stronger in diploids. CONCLUSIONS: The photosynthesis related traits show higher plasticity in polyploids as theoretically expected, while the fitness related traits show higher plasticity in diploids especially in response to drought. This suggests that between cytotype comparisons need to consider multiple traits and multiple environments to understand the breath of possible responses of different cytotypes to stress. They also show that integrating results based on different traits is not straightforward and call for better mechanistic understanding of the relationships between species photosynthetic activity and fitness. Still, considering multiple environments and multiple species traits is crucial for understanding the drivers of niche differentiation between cytotypes in future studies.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc18016215
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20180515104017.0
007      
ta
008      
180515s2017 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1371/journal.pone.0188795 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)29190749
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Pavlíková, Zuzana $u Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
245    10
$a Physiological and fitness differences between cytotypes vary with stress in a grassland perennial herb / $c Z. Pavlíková, D. Holá, B. Vlasáková, T. Procházka, Z. Münzbergová,
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Understanding the consequences of polyploidization is a major step towards assessing the importance of this mode of speciation. Most previous studies comparing different cytotypes, however, did so only within a single environment and considered only one group of traits. To take a step further, we need to explore multiple environments and a wide range of traits. The aim of this study was to assess response of diploid and autotetraploid individuals of Knautia arvensis (Dipsacaceae) to two stress conditions, shade or drought. METHODS: We studied eleven photosynthetic, morphological and fitness parameters of the plants over three years in a common garden under ambient conditions and two types of stress. KEY RESULTS: The results indicate strong differences in performance and physiology between cytotypes in ambient conditions. Interestingly, higher fitness in diploids contrasted with more efficient photosynthesis in tetraploids in ambient conditions. However, stress, especially drought, strongly reduced fitness and disrupted function of the photosystems in both cytotypes reducing the between cytotype differences. The results indicate that drought stress reduced function of the photosynthetic processes in both cytotypes but particularly in tetraploids, while fitness reduction was stronger in diploids. CONCLUSIONS: The photosynthesis related traits show higher plasticity in polyploids as theoretically expected, while the fitness related traits show higher plasticity in diploids especially in response to drought. This suggests that between cytotype comparisons need to consider multiple traits and multiple environments to understand the breath of possible responses of different cytotypes to stress. They also show that integrating results based on different traits is not straightforward and call for better mechanistic understanding of the relationships between species photosynthetic activity and fitness. Still, considering multiple environments and multiple species traits is crucial for understanding the drivers of niche differentiation between cytotypes in future studies.
650    12
$a pastviny $7 D065948
650    12
$a fyziologie rostlin $7 D018521
650    12
$a fyziologický stres $7 D013312
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Holá, Dana $u Department of Genetics and Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Vlasáková, Blanka $u Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. Department of Population Ecology, Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Průhonice, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Procházka, Tomáš $u Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Münzbergová, Zuzana $u Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. Department of Population Ecology, Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Průhonice, Czech Republic.
773    0_
$w MED00180950 $t PloS one $x 1932-6203 $g Roč. 12, č. 11 (2017), s. e0188795
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29190749 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20180515 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20180515104151 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1299839 $s 1013055
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2017 $b 12 $c 11 $d e0188795 $e 20171130 $i 1932-6203 $m PLoS One $n PLoS One $x MED00180950
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20180515

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...