Monocot leaves are eaten less than dicot leaves in tropical lowland rain forests: correlations with toughness and leaf presentation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS In tropical lowland rain forest (TLRF) the leaves of most monocots differ from those of most dicots in two ways that may reduce attack by herbivores. Firstly, they are tougher. Secondly, the immature leaves are tightly folded or rolled until 50-100 % of their final length. It was hypothesized that (a) losses of leaf area to herbivorous invertebrates are generally greatest during leaf expansion and smaller for monocots than for dicots, and (b) where losses after expansion are appreciable any difference between monocots and dicots then is smaller than that found during expansion. METHODS At six sites on four continents, estimates were made of lamina area loss from the four most recently mature leaves of focal monocots and of the nearest dicot shoot. Measurements of leaf mass per unit area, and the concentrations of water and nitrogen were made for many of the species. In Panama, the losses from monocots (palms) and dicots were also measured after placing fully expanded palm leaflets and whole dicot leaves on trails of leaf-cutter ants. KEY RESULTS At five of six sites monocots experienced significantly smaller leaf area loss than dicots. The results were not explicable in terms of leaf mass per unit area, or concentrations of water or nitrogen. At only one site was the increase in loss from first to fourth mature leaf significant (also large and the same in monocots and dicots), but the losses sustained during expansion were much smaller in the monocots. In the leaf-cutter ant experiment, losses were much smaller for palms than for dicots. CONCLUSIONS The relationship between toughness and herbivory is complex; despite the negative findings of some recent authors for dicots we hypothesize that either greater toughness or late folding can protect monocot leaves against herbivorous insects in tropical lowland rain forest, and that the relative importance varies widely with species. The difficulties of establishing unequivocally the roles of leaf toughness and leaf folding or rolling in a given case are discussed.

[1]  N. Dominy,et al.  In tropical lowland rain forests monocots have tougher leaves than dicots, and include a new kind of tough leaf. , 2008, Annals of botany.

[2]  P. Grubb,et al.  The adaptive value of young leaves being tightly folded or rolled on monocotyledons in tropical lowland rain forest: an hypothesis in two parts , 2007, Plant Ecology.

[3]  J. Read,et al.  The paradoxical effects of nutrient ratios and supply rates on an outbreaking insect herbivore, the Australian plague locust. , 2006, The Journal of animal ecology.

[4]  D. Metcalfe,et al.  The ecology of very small-seeded shade-tolerant trees and shrubs in lowland rain forest in Singapore , 1998, Plant Ecology.

[5]  N. Dominy,et al.  Mechanical Defences to Herbivory , 2000 .

[6]  N. Aranwela,et al.  Relationships between sclerophylly, leaf biomechanical properties and leaf anatomy in some Australian heath and forest species , 2000 .

[7]  J. Kollmann,et al.  Insect herbivory on European tall-shrub species : the need to distinguish leaves before and after unfolding or unrolling, and the advantage of longitudinal sampling , 1999 .

[8]  J. A. Barone,et al.  HERBIVORY AND PLANT DEFENSES IN TROPICAL FORESTS , 1996 .

[9]  J. Vincent,et al.  Curling and folding of leaves of monocotyledons — a strategy for structural stiffness , 1996 .

[10]  P. Coley,et al.  Anti-Herbivore Defenses of Young Tropical Leaves: Physiological Constraints and Ecological Trade-offs , 1996 .

[11]  Prof. Robert Hegnauer.  Chemotaxonomie der Pflanzen , 1996, Lehrbücher und Monographien aus dem Gebiete der Exakten Wissenschaften.

[12]  B. Darvell,et al.  The Toughness of Plant Cell Walls , 1995 .

[13]  D. Burslem,et al.  Mineral nutrient status of coastal hill dipterocarp forest and adinandra belukar in Singapore: analysis of soil, leaves and litter , 1994, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[14]  R. Chazdon,et al.  Ecological, behavioural and nutritional factors influencing use of palms as host plants by a Neotropical forest grasshopper , 1993, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[15]  E. Braker.  Natural history of a Neotropical gap-inhabiting grasshopper , 1991 .

[16]  H. Godfray,et al.  Slug and nettle caterpillars. The biology, taxonomy and control of the Limacodidae of economic importance on palms in South-east Asia. , 1987 .

[17]  M. Lowman.  Temporal and spatial variability in insect grazing of the canopies of five Australian rainforest tree species. , 1985 .

[18]  P. Coley,et al.  HERBIVORY AND DEFENSIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF TREE SPECIES IN A LOWLAND TROPICAL FOREST , 1983 .

[19]  D. Strong.  Rolled-Leaf Hispine Beetles (Chrysomelidae) and their Zingiberales Host Plants in Middle America , 1977 .

[20]  D. Mueller‐Dombois,et al.  Ecology of Tropical and Subtropical Vegetation. , 1972 .