Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

Testing the plant growth-defense hypothesis belowground : do faster-growing herbaceous plant species suffer more negative effects from soil biota than slower-growing ones?

Lemmermeyer, S. and Lörcher, L. and van Kleunen, M. and Dawson, W. (2015) 'Testing the plant growth-defense hypothesis belowground : do faster-growing herbaceous plant species suffer more negative effects from soil biota than slower-growing ones?', The American naturalist., 186 (2). pp. 264-271.

Abstract

According to the growth-defense hypothesis in ecology, faster-growing plant species should suffer more from herbivores and pathogens than slower-growing species. Tests of this hypothesis have focused on aboveground plant tissues, herbivores, and pathogens; however, it should also apply to root defense. To test whether faster-growing species suffer more negatively from soil biota than slower-growing species, we estimated first-season growth rates of 34 herbaceous plant species and used weighted linear regressions to assess the relationship between growth rates and responses to being grown in sterilized versus unsterilized soil (biotic soil effects) and to growing in soil previously occupied by conspecifics versus a mixture of species (conspecific soil effects). We found a negative relationship between relative growth rate and biotic soil effects, with slower-growing species tending to suffer less or even benefit from the presence of soil biota, while faster-growing species were more negatively affected. Biotic soil effects were also negatively related to size-corrected growth rates. These relationships remained negative after accounting for influential species, but a large amount of variation remained unexplained. Moreover, there was no clear relationship between growth rates and conspecific soil effects. A simple relationship between growth and defense aboveground may not be so clearly reflected belowground because of the many interacting antagonistic and mutualistic organisms likely involved.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
Download PDF
(1337Kb)
Full text:(VoR) Version of Record
Download PDF
(601Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/682005
Publisher statement:© 2015 by The University of Chicago Press.
Record Created:26 Feb 2016 16:05
Last Modified:22 May 2016 00:33

Social bookmarking: del.icio.usConnoteaBibSonomyCiteULikeFacebookTwitterExport: EndNote, Zotero | BibTex
Look up in GoogleScholar | Find in a UK Library