title: Differences in competitive ability between plants from nonnative and native populations of a tropical invader relates to adaptive responses in abiotic and biotic environments.
abstract: The evolution of competitive ability of invasive plant species is generally studied in the context of adaptive responses to novel biotic environments (enemy release) in introduced ranges. However, invasive plants may also respond to novel abiotic environments. Here we studied differences in competitive ability between Chromolaena odorata plants of populations from nonnative versus native ranges, considering biogeographical differences in both biotic and abiotic environments. An intraspecific competition experiment was conducted at two nutrient levels in a common garden. In both low and high nutrient treatments, C. odorata plants from nonnative ranges showed consistently lower root to shoot ratios than did plants from native ranges grown in both monoculture and competition. In the low nutrient treatment, C. odorata plants from nonnative ranges showed significantly lower competitive ability (competition-driven decreases in plant height and biomass were more), which was associated with their lower root to shoot ratios and higher total leaf phenolic content (defense trait). In the high nutrient treatment, C. odorata plants from nonnative ranges showed lower leaf toughness and cellulosic contents (defense traits) but similar competitive ability compared with plants from native ranges, which was also associated with their lower root to shoot ratios. Our results indicate that genetically based shifts in biomass allocation (responses to abiotic environments) also influence competitive abilities of invasive plants, and provide a first potential mechanism for the interaction between range and environment (environment-dependent difference between ranges).
authors: Key Laboratory of Tropical Forest Ecology, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming, Yunnan Province, China ; University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
authors: Zhi-Yong
authors: ZY
authors: Liao
authors: Ru
authors: R
authors: Zhang
authors: Gregor F
authors: GF
authors: Barclay
authors: Yu-Long
authors: YL
authors: Feng
mesh_terms: D000222:Adaptation, Physiological; D018533:Biomass; D002482:Cellulose / Q000378:metabolism; D002681:China; D036604:Chromolaena / Q000254:growth & development / Q000502:physiology*; D058865:Introduced Species; D010636:Phenols / Q000378:metabolism; D018515:Plant Leaves / Q000502:physiology*; D018517:Plant Roots / Q000254:growth & development / Q000502:physiology; D018520:Plant Shoots / Q000254:growth & development / Q000502:physiology; D057685:Plant Weeds / Q000254:growth & development / Q000502:physiology*; D011134:Polysaccharides / Q000378:metabolism; D014329:Tropical Climate
chemical_list: D010636:Phenols; D011134:Polysaccharides; C007916:hemicellulose; D002482:Cellulose
references: Oecologia. 2005 Jun;144(1):1-11
references: 15891837
references: New Phytol. 2012 Jan;193(1):30-50
references: 22085245
references: New Phytol. 2010 Apr;186(2):484-95
references: 20100208
references: New Phytol. 2013 Feb;197(3):979-988
references: 23252450
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Feb 10;106(6):1853-6
references: 19171910
references: Evol Appl. 2009 May;2(2):187-99
references: 25567860
references: Am Nat. 2002 Dec;160(6):705-11
references: 18707459
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2004 Aug;19(8):417-22
references: 16701299
references: Ecology. 2011 Dec;92(12):2248-57
references: 22352164
references: Science. 2000 Oct 20;290(5491):521-3
references: 11039934
references: Oecologia. 2009 Feb;159(1):95-106
references: 18941785
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e48951
references: 23155433
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 May 8;98(10):5446-51
references: 11344292
references: Oecologia. 2005 Jun;144(2):299-307
references: 15868161