Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-jqctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-02-25T15:15:03.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exploitation of Nutrient-Rich Soil Patches by Invasive Annual and Native Perennial Grasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jeremy J. James*
Affiliation:
USDA–Agricultural Research Service, Burns, OR 97720 USA
L. Ziegenhagen
Affiliation:
USDA–Agricultural Research Service, Burns, OR 97720 USA
Z. T. Aanderud
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jeremy.james@oregonstate.edu

Abstract

Invasion of nutrient-poor habitats might be related to the ability of a species to exploit nutrient-rich microsites. Recent research suggests fast-growing species might have a greater ability to allocate root biomass to nutrient-rich microsites (root foraging precision) than slow-growing species. We examined if differences in relative growth rate (RGR) between invasive and native species were related to differences in foraging precision. We hypothesized that invasive species would: (1) have greater foraging precision than native species but (2) greater foraging precision would come at a cost in terms of root nutrient uptake rate. Foraging precision was evaluated on plants growing in soils with uniform or patchy nutrient distribution. Plants were harvested at a common time and a common developmental stage to separate indirect effects of RGR on foraging. Nutrient uptake rate was examined by exposing plants to a low or high nitrogen pulse. Invasives foraged more precisely than natives but had lower nitrogen uptake rate. Although these results support the idea of a positive relationship between RGR and foraging precision, biomass production in heterogeneous soils showed no relationship to foraging precision. Instead, species with greater RGR produced more biomass and root length across all treatments, allowing greater nutrient capture in heterogeneous soils. Although these results do not exclude a role for proliferation in influencing invasion of nutrient-poor systems or the potential for heterogeneity to influence population processes, these results suggest other traits may have an overriding importance in determining invader success in these systems.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Aanderud, Z. T., Bledsoe, C. S., and Richards, J. H. 2003. Contribution of relative growth rate to root foraging by annual and perennial grasses from California Oak Woodlands. Oecologia 136:424430.Google Scholar
Baker, H. G. 1974. The evolution of weeds. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst 5:124.Google Scholar
Barber, S. A. 1995. Soil Nutrient Bioavailability: A Mechanistic Approach. New York John Wiley. 414.Google Scholar
Berendse, F. 1994. Competition between plant populations at low and high nutrient supplies. Oikos 71:253260.Google Scholar
Bilbrough, C. J. and Caldwell, M. M. 1995. The effects of shading and N-status on root proliferation in nutrient patches by the perennial grass Agropyron desertorum in the field. Oecologia 103:1016.Google Scholar
Bilbrough, C. J. and Caldwell, M. M. 1997. Exploitation of springtime ephemeral N pulses by six Great Basin plant species. Ecology 78:231243.Google Scholar
Blumenthal, D. M. 2006. Interactions between resource availability and enemy release in plant invasion. Ecol. Lett 9:887895.Google Scholar
Bouma, T. J., Nielsen, K. L., and Koustaal, B. 2000. Sample preparation and scanning protocol for computerized analysis of root length and diameter. Plant Soil 218:185196.Google Scholar
Burns, J. H. 2004. A comparison of invasive and non-invasive dayflowers (Commelinaceae) across experimental nutrient and water gradients. Divers. Distrib 10:387397.Google Scholar
Campbell, B. D. and Grime, J. P. 1989. A comparative study of plant responsiveness to the duration of episodes of mineral nutrient enrichment. New Phytol 112:261267.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. S., McConnaughay, K. D. M., and Ackerly, D. D. 1994. Interpreting phenotypic variation in plants. Trends Ecol. Evol 9:187191.Google Scholar
Coley, P. D. 1988. Effects of plant growth rate and leaf lifetime on the amount and type of anti-herbivore defense. Oecologia 74:531536.Google Scholar
Crick, J. C. and Grime, J. P. 1987. Morphological plasticity and mineral nutrient capture in two herbaceous species of contrasted ecology. New Phytol 107:403414.Google Scholar
Day, K. J., Hutchings, M. J., and John, E. A. 2003. The effects of spatial pattern of nutrient supply on yield, structure and mortality in plant populations. J. Ecol 91:541553.Google Scholar
Diaz, S., Hodgson, J. G., Thompson, K., et al. 2004. The plant traits that drive ecosystems: evidence from three continents. J. Veg. Sci 15:295304.Google Scholar
DiVittorio, C. T., Corbin, J. D., and D'Antonio, C. M. 2007. Spatial and temporal patterns of seed dispersal: an important determinant of grassland invasion. Ecol. Appl 17:311316.Google Scholar
Dyer, A. R. and Rice, K. J. 1999. Effects of competition on resource availability and growth of a California bunchgrass. Ecology 80:26972710.Google Scholar
Einsmann, J. C., Jones, R. H., Pu, M., and Mitchell, R. J. 1999. Nutrient foraging traits in 10 co-occurring plant species of contrasting life forms. J. Ecol 87:609619.Google Scholar
Eissenstat, D. M. and Yanai, R. D. 1997. The ecology of root lifespan. Pages 160. in Begon, M. and Fitter, A. H. eds. Advances in Ecological Research. Vol 27. London Academic Press.Google Scholar
Farley, R. A. and Fitter, A. H. 1999. Temporal and spatial variation in soil resources in a deciduous woodland. J. Ecol 87:688694.Google Scholar
Fransen, B., de Kroon, H., and Berendse, F. 1998. Root morphological plasticity and nutrient acquisition of perennial grass species from habitats of different nutrient availability. Oecologia 115:351358.Google Scholar
Fransen, B., de Kroon, H., and Berendse, F. 2001. Soil nutrient heterogeneity alters competition between two perennial grass species. Ecology 82:25342546.Google Scholar
Fransen, B., De Kroon, H., De Kovel, C. G. F., and Van den Bosch, F. 1999. Disentangling the effects of root foraging and inherent growth rate on plant biomass accumulation in heterogeneous environments: a modeling study. Ann. Bot 84:305311.Google Scholar
Funk, J. L. 2008. Differences in plasticity between invasive and native plants from a low resource environment. J. Ecol 96:11621173.Google Scholar
Funk, J. L. and Vitousek, P. M. 2007. Resource-use efficiency and plant invasion in low-resource systems. Nature 446:10791081.Google Scholar
Grime, J. P. 1994. The role of plasticity in exploiting environmental heterogeneity. Pages 219. in Caldwell, M. M. and Pearcy, R. W. eds. Exploitation of Environmental Heterogeneity by Plants. San Diego, CA Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gross, K. L., Pregitzer, K. S., and Burton, A. J. 1995. Spatial variation in nitrogen availability in three successional plant communities. J. Ecol 83:357367.Google Scholar
Grotkopp, E. and Rejmanek, M. 2007. High seedling relative growth rate and specific leaf area are traits of invasive species: phylogenetically independent contrasts of woody angiosperms. Am. J. Bot 94:526532.Google Scholar
Grotkopp, E., Rejmanek, M., and Rost, T. L. 2002. Toward a causal explanation of plant invasiveness: seedling growth and life-history strategies of 29 pine (Pinus) species. Am. Nat 159:396419.Google Scholar
Hamilton, M. A., Murray, B. R., Cadotte, M. W., Hose, G. C., Baker, A. C., Harris, C. J., and Licari, D. 2005. Life history correlates of plant invasiveness at regional and continental scales. Ecol. Lett 8:10661074.Google Scholar
Harris, G. A. 1967. Some competitive relationships between Agropyron spicatum and Bromus tectorum . Ecol. Monogr 37:89111.Google Scholar
Hedges, L. V., Gurevitch, J., and Curtis, P. S. 1999. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80:11501156.Google Scholar
Hodge, A. 2004. The plastic plant: root responses to heterogeneous supplies of nutrients. New Phytol 162:924.Google Scholar
Hodge, A., Stewart, J., Robinson, D., Griffiths, B. S., and Fitter, A. H. 1998. Root proliferation, soil fauna and plant nitrogen capture from nutrient-rich patches in soil. New Phytol 139:479494.Google Scholar
Hutchings, M. J. and Dekroon, H. 1994. Foraging in plants: the role of morphological plasticity in resource acquisition. Pages 159238. in Begon, M. and Fitter (s), A. H. eds. Advances in Ecological Research. London, UK Academic Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, R. B. and Caldwell, M. M. 1993. The scale of nutrient heterogeneity around individual plants and its quantification with geostatistics. Ecology 74:612614.Google Scholar
Jackson, R. B. and Caldwell, M. M. 1996. Integrating resource heterogeneity and plant plasticity: modeling nitrate and phosphate uptake in a patchy soil environment. J. Ecol 84:891903.Google Scholar
Jackson, R. B., Manwaring, J. H., and Caldwell, M. M. 1990. Rapid physiological adjustment of roots to localized soil enrichment. Nature 344:5860.Google Scholar
James, J. J., Caird, M. A., Drenovsky, R. E., and Sheley, R. L. 2006. Influence of resource pulses and perennial neighbors on the establishment of an invasive annual grass in the Mojave Desert. J. Arid Environ 67:528534.Google Scholar
James, J. J., Davies, K. W., Sheley, R. L., and Aanderud, Z. T. 2008. Linking nitrogen partitioning and species abundance to invasion resistance in the Great Basin. Oecologia 156:637648.Google Scholar
James, J. J. and Drenovsky, R. E. 2007. A basis for relative growth rate differences between native and invasive forb seedlings. Range Ecol. Manag 60:395400.Google Scholar
Kembel, S. W. and Cahill, J. F. 2005. Plant phenotypic plasticity belowground: a phylogenetic perspective on root foraging trade-offs. Am. Nat 166:216230.Google Scholar
Kembel, S. W., De Kroon, H., Cahill, J. F., and Mommer, L. 2008. Improving the scale and precision of hypotheses to explain root foraging ability. Ann. Bot 101:12951301.Google Scholar
Larigauderie, A. and Richards, J. H. 1994. Root proliferation characteristics of seven perennial arid-land grasses in nutrient-enriched microsites. Oecologia 99:102111.Google Scholar
Leishman, M. R., Haslehurst, T., Ares, A., and Baruch, Z. 2007. Leaf trait relationships of native and invasive plants: community- and global-scale comparisons. New Phytol 176:635643.Google Scholar
Lentz, D. R. and Simonson, G. H. 1986. A Detailed Soils Inventory and Associated Vegetation of the Squaw Butte Range Experiment Station. Special report 760. Corvallis, OR Agricultural Experiment Station.: Oregon State University. 135.Google Scholar
Levine, J. M., Vila, M., D'Antonio, C. M., Dukes, J. S., Grigulis, K., and Lavorel, S. 2003. Mechanisms underlying the impacts of exotic plant invasions. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Biol. Sci. Ser B 270:775781.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, W. M. 1999. Global patterns of plant invasions and the concept of invasibility. Ecology 80:15221536.Google Scholar
Mack, R. N., Simberloff, D., Lonsdale, W. M., Evans, H., Clout, M., and Bazzaz, F. A. 2000. Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol. Appl 10:689710.Google Scholar
Moyle, P. B. and Light, T. 1996. Biological invasions of fresh water: empirical rules and assembly theory. Biol. Conserve 78:149161.Google Scholar
Neter, J., Wasserman, W., and Kutner, M. H. 1990. Applied Linear Statistical Models: Regression, Analysis of Variance and Experimental Design. 3rd ed. Boston, MA McGraw-Hillr. 1408.Google Scholar
Newsome, A. E. and Nobel, I. R. 1986. Ecological and physiological characteristics of invading species. Pages 120. in Groves, R. H. and Burdon, J. J. eds. Ecology of Biological Invasions: An Australian Perspective. Cambridge, State or UK Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Noble, I. R. and Slatyer, R. O. 1980. The use of vital attributes to predict successional changes in plant communities subject to recurrent disturbances. Vegetatio 43:521.Google Scholar
O'Dell, R. E. and Claassen, V. P. 2006. Relative performance of native and exotic grass species in response to amendment of drastically disturbed serpentine substrates. J. Appl. Ecol 43:898908.Google Scholar
Perrins, J., Williamson, M., and Fitter, A. 1992. Do annual weeds have predictable characters. Acta Oecol 13:517533.Google Scholar
Rajaniemi, T. K. and Reynolds, H. L. 2004. Root foraging for patchy resources in eight herbaceous species. Oecologia 141:519525.Google Scholar
Rejmanek, M. and Richardson, D. M. 1996. What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology 77:16551661.Google Scholar
Rice, W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223225.Google Scholar
Robinson, D. 1994. The responses of plants to nonuniform supplies of nutrients. New Phytol 127:635674.Google Scholar
Robinson, D., Hodge, A., Griffiths, B. S., and Fitter, A. H. 1999. Plant root proliferation in nitrogen-rich patches confers competitive advantage. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Biol. Sci. Ser. B 266:431435.Google Scholar
Ryel, R. J., Caldwell, M. M., and Manwaring, J. H. 1996. Temporal dynamics of soil spatial heterogeneity in sagebrush–wheatgrass steppe during a growing season. Plant Soil 184:299309.Google Scholar
Ryser, P. 1996. The importance of tissue density for growth and life span of leaves and roots: a comparison of five ecologically contrasting grasses. Funct. Ecol 10:717723.Google Scholar
SAS 2001. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 8. Vol. 1–3. Cary, NC SAS Institute. 805.Google Scholar
Stark, J. M. 1994. Causes of soil nutrient heterogeneity at different scales. Pages 225284. in Pearcy, R. W. and Caldwell, M. M. eds. Exploitation of Environmental Heterogeneity by Plants. New York Academic Press.Google Scholar
Svejcar, T. and Tausch, R. 1991. Anaho Island, Nevada: a relict area dominated by annual invader species. Rangelands 13:233236.Google Scholar
Westoby, M., Falster, D. S., Moles, A. T., Vesk, P. A., and Wright, I. J. 2002. Plant ecological strategies: some leading dimensions of variation between species. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst 33:125159.Google Scholar
Wijesinghe, D. K., John, E. A., Beurskens, S., and Hutchings, M. J. 2001. Root system size and precision in nutrient foraging: responses to spatial pattern of nutrient supply in six herbaceous species. J. Ecol 89:972983.Google Scholar
Wijesinghe, D. K., John, E. A., and Hutchings, M. J. 2005. Does pattern of soil resource heterogeneity determine plant community structure? An experimental investigation. J. Ecol 93:99112.Google Scholar
Wright, I. J., Reich, P. B., Westoby, M., et al. 2004. The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature 428:821827.Google Scholar