Variation and correlation in functional traits of main woody plants in the Cyclobalanopsis glauca community in the karst hills of Guilin, southwest China

, Abstract Aims Exploring the variation and the relationship between different functional traits of different growth forms and life forms woody species is helpful to understand the adaptation strategies of plants to the external environment, and is of great significance for understanding community assembly and biodiversity maintenance mechanisms. Methods We measured leaf chlorophyll content ( CHL ), leaf thickness ( LTH ), leaf area ( LA ), leaf dry mass ( LDM ), specific leaf area ( SLA ), leaf dry matter content ( LDMC ), leaf tissue density ( LTD ), twig dry matter content ( TDMC ) and twig tissue density ( TTD ) of 18 main woody species from the Cyclobalanopsis glauca community in karst hills of Guilin, southwest China. Traits variations among different plant functional types (growth form and life form) of woody species were analyzed by a series of methods, including the one-way analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA), and the linear mixed-effects model. In addition, the relationships between nine functional traits on individual and species levels were assessed by the Pearson’s correlation test and The results showed that: (1) The nine functional traits had different degrees of variation. Specifically, LA and LDM had the maximum coefficient of intraspecific and interspecific variation, while the intraspecific and interspecific variation coefficients of TDMC and TTD were the lowest. (2) For different growth forms, there were significant differences in most functional traits between trees, shrubs and woody lianas. (3) For different life forms, except that the deciduous species showed significantly higher LA and SLA values than evergreen species, and for the other seven functional traits, evergreen species showed significantly higher values than those of deciduous species. (4) There were differences in the intraspecific and interspecific variation of functional traits between different growth forms and life forms plants. Except for some plant functional traits showing the intraspecific variation higher than interspecific variation, most of the other functional traits showed the interspecific variation was higher than intraspecific variation. (5) The relationships between nine functional traits are roughly the same at the individual level and the species level, while the significant correlation ratio at the individual level is higher than the species level. In conclusion, the interspecific variation of plant functional traits is basically higher than the intraspecific variation, but the intraspecific variation cannot be ignored. In addition, species with different growth forms and life forms adopt different ecological strategies to adapt to the karst habitat. Future research should be based on sampling at the individual level, and in combination with environmental factors to explore the variation and correlation in functional traits of different plant functional types at different scales.

[1]  J. Ni,et al.  Variations of plant functional traits and adaptive strategy of woody species in a karst forest of central Guizhou Province, southwestern China , 2018 .

[2]  B. Enquist,et al.  Trait variation and integration across scales: is the leaf economic spectrum present at local scales? , 2017 .

[3]  W. Thuiller,et al.  Spatial scale and intraspecific trait variability mediate assembly rules in alpine grasslands , 2017 .

[4]  Yong Jiang,et al.  Interspecific and Intraspecific Variation in Functional Traits of Subtropical Evergreen and Deciduous Broadleaved Mixed Forests in Karst Topography, Guilin, Southwest China , 2016 .

[5]  G. Mohren,et al.  Towards a multidimensional root trait framework: a tree root review. , 2016, The New phytologist.

[6]  Marko J. Spasojevic,et al.  When does intraspecific trait variation contribute to functional beta‐diversity? , 2016 .

[7]  S. Wright,et al.  The global spectrum of plant form and function , 2015, Nature.

[8]  Nathan J B Kraft,et al.  A global meta-analysis of the relative extent of intraspecific trait variation in plant communities. , 2015, Ecology letters.

[9]  M. Cadotte,et al.  Predicting communities from functional traits. , 2015, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[10]  K. Ma,et al.  Plant functional traits—concepts, applications and future directions , 2015 .

[11]  W. Anderegg.  Spatial and temporal variation in plant hydraulic traits and their relevance for climate change impacts on vegetation. , 2015, The New phytologist.

[12]  F. Bongers,et al.  Relative growth rate variation of evergreen and deciduous savanna tree species is driven by different traits. , 2014, Annals of botany.

[13]  Xihua Wang,et al.  Trait variability differs between leaf and wood tissues across ecological scales in subtropical forests , 2014 .

[14]  D. Wardle,et al.  The within‐species leaf economic spectrum does not predict leaf litter decomposability at either the within‐species or whole community levels , 2013 .

[15]  P. Reich,et al.  New handbook for standardised measurement of plant functional traits worldwide , 2013 .

[16]  S. Pacala,et al.  Global Leaf Trait Relationships: Mass, Area, and the Leaf Economics Spectrum , 2013, Science.

[17]  Bill Shipley,et al.  Inter‐specific and intra‐specific trait variation along short environmental gradients in an old‐growth temperate forest , 2013 .

[18]  Julieta A. Rosell,et al.  Coordinated evolution of leaf and stem economics in tropical dry forest trees. , 2012, Ecology.

[19]  Cyrille Violle,et al.  The return of the variance: intraspecific variability in community ecology. , 2012, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[20]  Wilfried Thuiller,et al.  A multi‐trait approach reveals the structure and the relative importance of intra‐ vs. interspecific variability in plant traits , 2010 .

[21]  Christopher Baraloto,et al.  Decoupled leaf and stem economics in rain forest trees. , 2010, Ecology letters.

[22]  Lucien Hoffmann,et al.  Intraspecific variability and trait‐based community assembly , 2010 .

[23]  Brian J McGill,et al.  How do traits vary across ecological scales? A case for trait-based ecology. , 2010, Ecology letters.

[24]  Wilfried Thuiller,et al.  Intraspecific functional variability: extent, structure and sources of variation , 2010 .

[25]  J. Chave,et al.  Towards a worldwide wood economics spectrum. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[26]  Campbell O. Webb,et al.  Are functional traits good predictors of demographic rates? Evidence from five neotropical forests. , 2008, Ecology.

[27]  P. D. Cowan,et al.  Time – size tradeoffs: a phylogenetic comparative study of flowering time, plant height and seed mass in a north‐temperate flora , 2008 .

[28]  Campbell O. Webb,et al.  Relationships among ecologically important dimensions of plant trait variation in seven neotropical forests. , 2007, Annals of botany.

[29]  C. Violle,et al.  Let the concept of trait be functional , 2007 .

[30]  S. Wright,et al.  Leaf functional traits of tropical forest plants in relation to growth form , 2007 .

[31]  M. Westoby,et al.  Cross‐species patterns in the coordination between leaf and stem traits, and their implications for plant hydraulics , 2006 .

[32]  T. Speck,et al.  Plant growth forms: an ecological and evolutionary perspective. , 2005, The New phytologist.

[33]  Jonathan Silvertown,et al.  Plant coexistence and the niche , 2004 .

[34]  G. Goldstein,et al.  Functional convergence in hydraulic architecture and water relations of tropical savanna trees: from leaf to whole plant. , 2004, Tree physiology.

[35]  J. P. Grime,et al.  The plant traits that drive ecosystems: Evidence from three continents , 2004 .

[36]  J. Cornelissen,et al.  Trade-offs between phenology, relative growth rate, life form and seed mass among 22 Mediterranean woody species , 2003, Plant Ecology.

[37]  Eric Garnier,et al.  Consistency of species ranking based on functional leaf traits. , 2001, The New phytologist.

[38]  P. Reich,et al.  Convergence and correlations among leaf size and function in seed plants: a comparative test using independent contrasts. , 1999, American journal of botany.

[39]  Mark Westoby,et al.  A leaf-height-seed (LHS) plant ecology strategy scheme , 1998, Plant and Soil.

[40]  P. Reich,et al.  Leaf Life‐Span in Relation to Leaf, Plant, and Stand Characteristics among Diverse Ecosystems , 1992 .

[41]  J. P. Grime,et al.  Evidence for the Existence of Three Primary Strategies in Plants and Its Relevance to Ecological and Evolutionary Theory , 1977, The American Naturalist.

[42]  Li Guo,et al.  Growth-form regulates the altitudinal variation of interspecific seed mass of woody plants in Mt. Dalaoling, the Three Gorges Region, China , 2017 .

[43]  R. Standish,et al.  Plant functional traits of dominant native and invasive species in mediterranean-climate ecosystems. , 2016, Ecology.

[44]  N. Anten,et al.  A plant economics spectrum in Mediterranean forests along environmental gradients: is there coordination among leaf, stem and root traits? , 2016 .

[45]  Yi Ding,et al.  Interspecific and intraspecific variation in functional traits of subtropical evergreen and deciduous broad-leaved mixed forests , 2016 .

[46]  于贵瑞 Yu Guirui,et al.  Altitudinal variation in the covariation of stomatal traits with leaf functional traits on Changbai Mountain , 2016 .

[47]  Meng Ting.  PLANT FUNCTIONAL TRAITS, ENVIRONMENTS AND ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING , 2007 .

[48]  Ian J. Wright,et al.  World-wide leaf economics spectrum , 2004 .