BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Plant tissue nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) and genome traits, such as genome size and guanine-cytosine (GC) content, scale with growth or metabolic rates and are linked to plant ecological strategy spectra. Tissue NP stoichiometry and genome traits are reported to affect plant growth, metabolic rates or ecological strategies in contrasting ways, although the elemental costs for building and maintaining DNA are typically overlooked. METHODS: We formulated stoichiometry- and ecology-based predictions on the relationship between genome size and GC content to tissue N, P and N : P and tested them on a set of 130 herbaceous species from a temperate grassland using ordinary, phylogenetic and quantile regression. KEY RESULTS: Genome size was only negatively linked to plant N and N : P in species with very small genomes. We found no link between genome size and plant P. GC content was negatively linked to plant N and P but we found these significant links consistently in both GC-rich and GC-poor species. Finally, GC content correlated positively with plant N : P but only in species with GC-rich genomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide stronger support for the ecology-based predictions than the stoichiometry-based predictions, and for the links between GC content and plant N and P stoichiometry than for genome size. We argue that the theories of plant metabolic rates and ecological strategies (resource-acquisitive vs. conservative or ruderal vs. stress-tolerator spectra) better explain interspecific genome-NP stoichiometry relationships at the tissue level (although relatively weakly) than the stoichiometric theory based on the elemental costs for building and maintaining DNA.

Department of Botany Charles University Benátská Prague Czech Republic

Department of Botany Palacký University Šlechtitelů Olomouc Czech Republic

Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences Palacký University Šlechtitelů Olomouc Czech Republic

Institute of Botany of the Czech Academy of Sciences Dukelská Třeboň Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Acquisti C, Elser JJ, Kumar S.. 2009. Ecological nitrogen limitation shapes the DNA composition of plant genomes. Molecular Biology and Evolution 26: 953–956. doi:10.1093/molbev/msp038. PubMed DOI PMC

Beaulieu JM, Leitch IJ, Patel S, Pendharkar A, Knight CA.. 2008. Genome size is a strong predictor of cell size and stomatal density in angiosperms. New Phytologist 179: 975–986. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02528.x. PubMed DOI

de Bello F, Berg MP, Dias ATC, et al. . 2015. On the need for phylogenetic ‘corrections’ in functional trait-based approaches. Folia Geobotanica 50: 349–357. doi:10.1007/s12224-015-9228-6. DOI

Bennett MD. 1987. Variation in genome form in plants and its ecological implications. New Phytologist 196: 177–200.

[dataset] Bitomský M, Kobrlová L, Hroneš M, Klimešová J, Duchoslav M. 2022. Stoichiometry versus ecology: Data from the relationships between genome size and guanine-cytosine content, and tissue nitrogen and phosphorus in grassland herbs. Mendeley Data. https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/7zgm6bg9y9/1 PubMed PMC

Bragg JG, Hyder CL.. 2004. Nitrogen versus carbon use in prokaryotic genomes and proteomes. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 271: S374–S377. PubMed PMC

Cade BS, Noon BR.. 2003. A gentle introduction to quantile regression for ecologists. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1: 412–420. doi:10.1890/1540-9295(2003)001[0412:agitqr]2.0.co;2. DOI

Castillo AI, Almeida RPP.. 2021. Evidence of gene nucleotide composition favoring replication and growth in a fastidious plant pathogen. G3 11: jkab076. doi:10.1093/g3journal/jkab076. PubMed DOI PMC

Chapin FS. 1991. Integrated responses of plants to stress. BioScience 41: 29–36. doi:10.2307/1311538. DOI

Doležel J, Bartoš J.. 2005. Plant DNA flow cytometry and estimation of nuclear genome size. Annals of Botany 95: 99–110. PubMed PMC

Doležel J, Doležželová M, Novák FJ.. 1994. Flow cytometric estimation of nuclear DNA amount in diploid bananas (Musa acuminata and M. balbisiana). Biologia Plantarum 36: 351–357.

Doležel J, Greilhuber J, Lucreti S, et al. . 1998. Plant genome size estimation by flow cytometry: inter-laboratory comparison. Annals of Botany 82: 17–26.

Doležel J, Greilhuber J, Suda J.. 2007. Estimation of nuclear DNA content in plants using flow cytometry. Nature Protocols 2: 2233–2244. doi:10.1038/nprot.2007.310. PubMed DOI

Elser JJ, Acquisti C, Kumar S.. 2011. Stoichiogenomics: the evolutionary ecology of macromolecular elemental composition. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 26: 38–44. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2010.10.006. PubMed DOI PMC

Elser JJ, Fagan WF, Subramanian S, Kumar S.. 2006. Signatures of ecological resource availability in the animal and plant proteomes. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23: 1946–1951. doi:10.1093/molbev/msl068. PubMed DOI

Faizullah L, Morton JA, Hersch-Green EI, Walczyk AM, Leitch AR, Leitch IJ.. 2021. Exploring environmental selection on genome size in angiosperms. Trends in Plant Science 26: 1039–1049. PubMed

Grime PJ. 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. The American Naturalist 111: 1169–1194.

Guignard MS, Crawley MJ, Kovalenko D, et al. . 2019. Interactions between plant genome size, nutrients and herbivory by rabbits, molluscs and insects on a temperate grassland. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 286: 20182619. doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.2619. PubMed DOI PMC

Guignard MS, Leitch AR, Acquisti C, et al. . 2017. Impacts of nitrogen and phosphorus: from genomes to natural ecosystems and agriculture. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 5: 70.

Güsewell S. 2004. N:P ratios in terrestrial plants: variation and functional significance. New Phytologist 164: 243–266. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01192.x. PubMed DOI

Hessen DO, Jeyasingh PD, Neiman M, Weider LJ.. 2010. Genome streamlining and the elemental costs of growth. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25: 75–80. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.08.004. PubMed DOI

Ho LT, Ané C.. 2014. A linear-time algorithm for Gaussian and non-Gaussian trait evolution models. Systematic Biology 63: 397–408. PubMed

Jin Y, Qian H.. 2019. V.PhyloMaker: an R package that can generate very large phylogenies for vascular plants. Ecography 42: 1353–1359. doi:10.1111/ecog.04434. PubMed DOI PMC

Kang M, Wang J, Huang H.. 2015. Nitrogen limitation as a driver of genome size evolution in a group of karst plants. Scientific Reports 5: 11636. doi:10.1038/srep11636. PubMed DOI PMC

Kelly S. 2018. The amount of nitrogen used for photosynthesis modulates molecular evolution in plants. Molecular Biology and Evolution 35: 1616–1625. doi:10.1093/molbev/msy043. PubMed DOI PMC

Knight CA, Beaulieu JM.. 2008. Genome size scaling through phenotype space. Annals of Botany 101: 759–766. doi:10.1093/aob/mcm321. PubMed DOI PMC

Koenker R. 2019. quantreg: quantile regression. R package version 5.54. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=quantreg

Koenker R, Bassett G.. 1978. Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46: 33–50. doi:10.2307/1913643. DOI

Kozlowski J, Konarzewski M, Gawelczyk AT.. 2003. Cell size as a link between noncoding DNA and metabolic rate scaling. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 100: 14080–14085. PubMed PMC

Lambers H, Raven JA, Shaver GR, Smith SE.. 2008. Plant nutrient-acquisition strategies change with soil age. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23: 95–103. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2007.10.008. PubMed DOI

Leitch IJ, Chase MW, Bennett MD.. 1998. Phylogenetic analysis of DNA C-values provides evidence for a small ancestral genome size in flowering plants. Annals of Botany 82: 85–94.

Leitch IJ, Greilhuber J, Doležel J, Wendel JF.. 2013. Plant genome diversity, Volume 2. Vienna: Springer.

Meister A, Barow M.. 2007. DNA base composition of plant genomes. In: Doležel J, Greilhuber J, Suda J, eds. Flow cytometry with plant cells. Weinheim: John Wiley & Sons, 177–215.

Pagel M. 1999. Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 401: 877–884. doi:10.1038/44766. PubMed DOI

Pellicer J, Leitch IJ.. 2019. The Plant DNA C-values database (release 7.1): an updated online repository of plant genome size data for comparative studies. New Phytologist 226: 301–305. doi:10.1111/nph.16261. PubMed DOI

Pennell MW, Eastman JM, Slater GJ, et al. . 2014. geiger v2.0: an expanded suite of methods for fitting macroevolutionary models to phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 30: 2216–2218. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu181. PubMed DOI

R Core Team. 2019. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.Rproject.org/

Reich PB, Tjoelker MG, Machado JL, Oleksyn J.. 2006. Universal scaling of respiratory metabolism, size and nitrogen in plants. Nature 439: 457–461. doi:10.1038/nature04282. PubMed DOI

Rocha EPC, Danchin A.. 2002. Base composition bias might result from competition for metabolic resources. Trends in Genetics 18: 291–294. PubMed

Roddy AB, Théroux-Rancourt G, Abbo T, et al. . 2020. The scaling of genome size and cell size limits maximum rates of photosynthesis with implications for ecological strategies. International Journal of Plant Sciences 181: 75–87. doi:10.1086/706186. DOI

Sardans J, Janssens IA, Ciais P, Obersteiner M, Peñuelas J.. 2021. Recent advances and future research in ecological stoichiometry. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 50: 125611. doi:10.1016/j.ppees.2021.125611. DOI

Sterner RW, Elser JJ.. 2002. Ecological stoichiometry the biology of elements from molecules to the biosphere. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Šímová I, Herben T.. 2012. Geometrical constraints in the scaling relationships between genome size, cell size and cell cycle length in herbaceous plants. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 279: 867–875. PubMed PMC

Šmarda P, Bureš P, Horová L, Foggi B, Rossi G.. 2008. Genome size and GC content evolution of Festuca: ancestral expansion and subsequent reduction. Annals of Botany 101: 421–433. PubMed PMC

Šmarda P, Bureš P, Horová L, et al. . 2014. Ecological and evolutionary significance of genomic GC content diversity in monocots. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 111: E4096–E4102. PubMed PMC

Šmarda P, Knápek O, Březinová A, et al. . 2019. Genome sizes and genomic guanine+cytosine (GC) contents of the Czech vascular flora with new estimates for 1700 species. Preslia 91: 117–142. doi:10.23855/preslia.2019.117. DOI

Théroux-Rancourt G, Roddy AB, Earles JM, et al. . 2021. Maximum CO2 diffusion inside leaves is limited by the scaling of cell size and genome size. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Science 288: 20203145. PubMed PMC

Trávníček P, Čertner M, Ponert J, Chumová Z, Jersáková J, Suda J.. 2019. Diversity in genome size and GC content shows adaptive potential in orchids and is closely linked to partial endoreplication, plant life-history traits and climatic conditions. New Phytologist 224: 1642–1656. doi:10.1111/nph.15996. PubMed DOI

Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M, et al. . 2004. The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature 428: 821–827. doi:10.1038/nature02403. PubMed DOI

Zhang H, Wu H, Yu Q, et al. . 2013. Sampling date, leaf age and root size: implications for the study of plant C:N:P stoichiometry. PLoS One 8: e60360. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060360. PubMed DOI PMC

New estimates and synthesis of chromosome numbers, ploidy levels and genome size variation in Allium sect. Codonoprasum: advancing our understanding of the unresolved diversification and evolution of this section

Stoichiometry versus ecology: the relationships between genome size and guanine-cytosine content, and tissue nitrogen and phosphorus in grassland herbs