Advertisement

Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 417–428 | Cite as

Evolutionary consequences of habitat fragmentation: population size and density affect selection on inflorescence size in a perennial herb

  • Anne WeberEmail author
  • Annette Kolb
Research Article

Abstract

Habitat fragmentation is considered to be one of the major threats to biological diversity worldwide. To date, however, its consequences have mainly been studied in an ecological context, while little is known about its effects on evolutionary processes. In this study we examined whether habitat fragmentation affects selection on plant phenotypic traits via changes in plant-pollinator interactions, using the self-incompatible perennial herb Phyteuma spicatum. Specifically, we hypothesized that limited pollination service in small or low-density populations leads to increased selection for traits that attract pollinators. We recorded mean seed production per capsule and per plant as a measure of pollination intensity and assessed selection gradients (i.e., trait-fitness relationships) in 16 natural populations of varying size and density over 2 years. Mean seed production was not related to population size or density, except for a marginal significant effect of density on the mean number of seeds per capsule in 1 year. Linear selection for flowering time and synchrony was consistent across populations; relative fitness was higher in earlier flowering plants and in plants flowering synchronously with others. Selection on inflorescence size, however, varied among populations, and linear selection gradients for inflorescence size were negatively related to plant population size and density in 1 year. Selection for increased inflorescence size decreased with increasing population size and density. Contrary to our expectation this appeared not to be related to changes in pollination intensity (mean seed production was not related to population size or density in this year), but was rather likely linked to differences in some other component of the abiotic or biotic environment. In summary, our results show that habitat fragmentation may influence selection on plant phenotypic traits, thereby highlighting potential evolutionary consequences of human-induced environmental change.

Keywords

Floral display size Flowering phenology Phyteuma spicatum Phenotypic selection Pollination Seed production 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Katharina Barsch, Petra Molz, Stephan Wehling and Helen Wittler for their assistance in the field and/or lab, Dirk Enters and Helmut Weber for various help, Johan Ehrlén for discussion, and Martin Diekmann for comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. We also thank the land owners for access to their forests and the administrative district Stade for the permit to work in the nature reserve “Im Tadel”. This study was financially supported by the German Research Foundation “DFG” (KO 3577/3-1 to A.K.).

Supplementary material

10682_2010_9430_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (43 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 44 kb)

References

  1. Ågren J (1996) Population size, pollinator limitation, and seed set in the self-incompatible herb Lythrum salicaria. Ecology 77:1779–1790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguilar R, Galetto L (2004) Effects of forest fragmentation on male and female reproductive success in Cestrum parqui (Solanaceae). Oecologia 138:513–520CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Aguilar R, Ashworth L, Galetto L, Aizen MA (2006) Plant reproductive susceptibility to habitat fragmentation: review and synthesis through a meta-analysis. Ecol Lett 9:968–980CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Alarcón R, Waser NM, Ollerton J (2008) Year-to-year variation in the topology of a plant-pollinator interaction network. Oikos 117:1796–1807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alexandersson R, Johnson SD (2002) Pollinator-mediated selection on flower-tube length in a hawkmoth-pollinated Gladiolus (Iridaceae). Proc R Soc Lond B 269:631–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ashman T-L, Knight TM, Steets JA, Amarasekare P, Burd M, Campbell DR, Dudash MR, Johnston MO, Mazer SJ, Mitchell RJ, Morgan MT, Wilson WG (2004) Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: ecological and evolutionary causes and consequences. Ecology 85:2408–2421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Augspurger CK (1981) Reproductive synchrony of a tropical shrub: experimental studies on effects of pollinators and seed predators in Hybanthus prunifolius (Violaceae). Ecology 62:775–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Byers DL (1995) Pollen quantity and quality as explanations for low seed set in small populations exemplified by Eupatorium (Asteraceae). Am J Bot 82:1000–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caruso CM, Peterson SB, Ridley CE (2003) Natural selection on floral traits of Lobelia (Lobeliaceae): spatial and temporal variation. Am J Bot 90:1333–1340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Colling G, Matthies D (2004) The effects of plant population size on the interactions between the endangered plant Scorzonera humilis, a specialised herbivore, and a phytopathogenic fungus. Oikos 105:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dudley SA (1996) Differing selection on plant physiological traits in response to environmental water availability: a test of adaptive hypotheses. Evolution 50:92–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eckert CG (2002) The loss of sex in clonal plants. Evol Ecol 15:501–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eckert CG, Kalisz S, Geber MA, Sargent R, Elle E, Cheptou P-O, Goodwillie C, Johnston MO, Kelly JK, Moeller DA, Porcher E, Ree RH, Vallejo-Marín M, Winn AA (2009) Plant mating systems in a changing world. Trends Ecol Evol 25:35–43CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Elzinga JA, Atlan A, Biere A, Gigord L, Weis AE, Bernasconi G (2007) Time after time: flowering phenology and biotic interactions. Trends Ecol Evol 22:432–439CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Fenster CB, Armbruster WS, Wilson P, Dudash MR, Thomson JD (2004) Pollination syndromes and floral specialization. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 35:375–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Franks SJ, Sim S, Weis AE (2007) Rapid evolution of flowering time by an annual plant in response to a climate fluctuation. PNAS 104:1278–1282CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Ghazoul J (2005) Pollen and seed dispersal among dispersed plants. Biol Rev 80:413–443CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Gómez JM (2003) Herbivory reduces the strength of pollinator-mediated selection in the Mediterranean herb Erysimum mediohispanicum: consequences for plant specialization. Am Nat 162:242–256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gómez JM, Zamora R (2000) Spatial variation in the selective scenarios of Hormathophylla spinosa (Cruciferae). Am Nat 155:657–668CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. González-Varo JP, Arroyo J, Aparicio A (2009) Effects of fragmentation on pollinator assemblage, pollen limitation and seed production of Mediterranean myrtle (Myrtus communis). Biol Conserv 142:1058–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goulson D, Stout JC, Hawson SA, Allen JA (1998) Floral display size in comfrey, Symphytum officinale L. (Boraginaceae): relationships with visitation by three bumblebee species and subsequent seed set. Oecologia 113:502–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grindeland JM, Sletvold N, Ims RA (2005) Effects of floral display size and plant density on pollinator visitation rate in a natural population of Digitalis purpurea. Funct Ecol 19:383–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Groom MJ (2001) Consequences of subpopulation isolation for pollination, herbivory, and population growth in Clarkia concinna concinna (Onagraceae). Biol Conserv 100:55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haig D, Westoby M (1988) On limits to seed production. Am Nat 131:757–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Herrera CM (1988) Variation in mutualisms: the spatio-temporal mosaic of a pollinator assemblage. Biol J Linn Soc 35:95–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoffmeister TS, Vet LEM, Biere A, Holsinger K, Filser J (2005) Ecological and evolutionary consequences of biological invasion and habitat fragmentation. Ecosystems 8:657–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huber R (1988) Biosystematische Untersuchungen an Phyteuma spicatum und Phyteuma ovatum. Dissertation, University of ZurichGoogle Scholar
  28. Jennersten O (1988) Pollination in Dianthus deltoides (Caryophyllaceae): effects of habitat fragmentation on visitation and seed set. Conserv Biol 2:359–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnston MO (1991) Natural selection on floral traits in two species of Lobelia with different pollinators. Evolution 45:1468–1479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kennedy BF, Elle E (2008) The reproductive assurance benefit of selfing: importance of flower size and population size. Oecologia 155:469–477CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Knight TM, Steets JA, Vamosi JC, Mazer SJ, Burd M, Campbell DR, Dudash MR, Johnston MO, Mitchell RJ, Ashman T-L (2005) Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: pattern and process. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:467–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kolb A (2005) Reduced reproductive success and offspring survival in fragmented populations of the forest herb Phyteuma spicatum. J Ecol 93:1226–1237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kolb A (2008) Habitat fragmentation reduces plant fitness by disturbing pollination and modifying response to herbivory. Biol Conserv 141:2540–2549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kolb A, Dahlgren JP, Ehrlén J (in press) Population size affects vital rates but not population growth rate of a perennial plant. Ecology. doi: 10.1890/09-2207
  35. Kwak MM, van den Brand C, Kremer P, Boerrigter E (1991) Visitation, flight distances and seed set in populations of the rare species Phyteuma nigrum (Campanulaceae). Acta Hortic 288:303–307Google Scholar
  36. Lande R, Arnold SJ (1983) The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210–1226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lienert J (2004) Habitat fragmentation effects on fitness of plant populations—a review. J Nat Conserv 12:53–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lloyd DG (1992) Self- and cross-fertilization in plants. II. The selection of self-fertilization. Int J Plant Sci 153:370–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lundberg H (1980) Effects of weather on foraging-flights of bumblebees (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in a subalpine/alpine area. Holarctic Ecol 3:104–110Google Scholar
  40. Moeller DA, Geber MA (2005) Ecological context of the evolution of self-pollination in Clarkia xantiana: population size, plant communities, and reproductive assurance. Evolution 59:786–799PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Ohara M, Higashi S (1994) Effects of inflorescence size on visits from pollinators and seed set of Corydalis ambigua (Papaveraceae). Oecologia 98:25–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Olesen JM, Jain SK (1994) Fragmented plant populations and their lost interactions. In: Loeschke V, Tomiuk J, Jain SK (eds) Conservation genetics. Birkhäuser, Basel, pp 417–426Google Scholar
  43. Palumbi SR (2001) Humans as the world’s greatest evolutionary force. Science 293:1786–1790CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Parra-Tabla V, Vargas CF (2007) Flowering synchrony and floral display size affect pollination success in a deceit-pollinated tropical orchid. Acta Oecol 32:26–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Primack RB (2006) Essentials of conservation biology. Sinauer, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  46. R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available from http://www.R-project.org/
  47. Sandring S, Ågren J (2009) Pollinator-mediated selection on floral display and flowering time in the perennial herb Arabidopsis lyrata. Evolution 63:1292–1300CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Saunders DA, Hobbs RJ, Margules CR (1991) Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv Biol 5:18–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Settele J, Margules CR, Poschlod P, Henle K (eds) (1996) Species survival in fragmented landscapes. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  50. Sih A, Baltus M-S (1987) Patch size, pollinator behavior, and pollinator limitation in catnip. Ecology 68:1679–1690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sletvold N, Grindeland JM (2008) Floral herbivory increases with inflorescence size and local plant density in Digitalis purpurea. Acta Oecol 34:21–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (1999) Effects of habitat isolation on pollinator communities and seed set. Oecologia 121:432–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stockwell CA, Hendry AP, Kinnison MT (2003) Contemporary evolution meets conservation biology. Trends Ecol Evol 18:94–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thompson JN (2005) The geographic mosaic of coevolution. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  55. Totland Ø (1999) Effects of temperature on performance and phenotypic selection on plant traits in alpine Ranunculus acris. Oecologia 120:242–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wärner C (2009) Ökologie und Biologie gefährdeter Stromtalpflanzen. Dissertation, University of BremenGoogle Scholar
  57. Wheeler BR, Hutchings MJ (2002) Phyteuma spicatum L. J Ecol 90:581–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vegetation Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of EcologyUniversity of BremenBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations