Plant Ecology

, Volume 196, Issue 2, pp 245–250 | Cite as

Like herbivores, parasitic plants are limited by host nitrogen content

Article

Abstract

Herbivores generally benefit from increased plant nitrogen content, because the nitrogen content of animals is much higher than that of plants. Consequently, high plant nitrogen alleviates the profound stoichiometric imbalance that herbivores face in their diets. Parasitic plants provide the opportunity to test this generalization for consumers across kingdoms. We fertilized two microhabitats in a California salt marsh that were dominated by Salicornia virginica or a mixture of S. virginica and Jaumea carnosa. The nitrogen content of both host plants and of the holoparasite Cuscuta salina (dodder) increased in fertilized plots in both microhabitats. Cuscuta preferred to attack Jaumea, although Jaumea had lower nitrogen content than Salicornia. When host nitrogen content was altered by fertilizing plots, however, the percent cover of the parasite doubled. Although parasitic plants and their hosts have similar tissue nitrogen contents, suggesting no stoichiometric imbalance between host and consumer, parasitic plants do not feed on host tissue, but on host xylem and phloem, which are very low in nitrogen. Consequently, parasitic plants face the same dietary stoichiometric constraints as do herbivores, and both herbivores and holoparasitic plants may respond positively to increases in host nitrogen status.

Keywords

Cuscuta Fertilization experiment Nitrogen Parasitic plant 

References

  1. Atsatt PR (1977) The insect herbivore as a predictive model in parasitic seed plant biology. Am Nat 111:579–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bickford CP, Kolb TE, Geils BW (2005) Host physiological condition regulates parasitic plant performance: Arceuthobium vaginatum subsp. cryptopodum on Pinus ponderosa. Oecologia 146:179–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Callaway RM, Jones S, Ferren WR Jr., Parikh A (1990) Ecology of a mediterranean-climate estuarine wetland at Carpinteria, California: plant distributions and soil salinity in the upper marsh. Can J Bot 68:1139–1146Google Scholar
  4. Callaway RM, Pennings SC (1998) Impact of a parasitic plant on the zonation of two salt marsh perennials. Oecologia 114:100–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ehleringer JR, Ullmann I, Lange OL, Farquhar GD, Cowan IR, Schulze E-D, Ziegler H (1986) Mistletoes: a hypothesis concerning morphological and chemical avoidance of herbivory. Oecologia 70:234–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Emery NC, Ewanchuk PJ, Bertness MD (2001) Competition and salt-marsh plant zonation: stress tolerators may be dominant competitors. Ecology 82:2471–2485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eplee RE, Norris R (1995) Control of parasitic weeds. In: Press MC, Graves JD (eds) Parasitic plants. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 256–277Google Scholar
  8. Govier RN, Harper JL (1965) Angiospermous hemiparasites. Nature 205:722–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hay ME, Renaud PE, Fenical W (1988) Large mobile versus small sedentary herbivores and their resistance to seaweed chemical defenses. Oecologia 75:246–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hay ME, Steinberg PD (1992) The chemical ecology of plant-herbivore interactions in marine versus terrestrial communities. In: Rosenthal GA, Berenbaum MR (eds) Herbivores: their interactions with secondary plant metabolites. Academic Press, pp 371–413Google Scholar
  11. Huberty AF, Denno RF (2004) Plant water stress and its consequences for herbivorous insects: a new synthesis. Ecology 85:1838–1398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jeschke WD, Hilpert A (1997) Sink-stimulated photosynthesis and sink-dependent increase in nitrate uptake: nitrogen and carbon relations of the parasitic association Cuscuta reflexa-Ricinus communis. Plant Cell Environ 20:47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kelly CK (1990) Plant foraging: a marginal value model and coiling response in Cuscuta subinclusa. Ecology 71:1916–1925CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kelly CK (1992) Resource choice in Cuscuta europaea. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:12194–12197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Koricheva J, Larsson S, Haukioja E (1998) Insect performance on experimentally stressed woody plants: a meta-analysis. Annu Rev Entomol 43:195–216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Marshall JD, Dawson TE, Ehleringer JR (1994) Integrated nitrogen, carbon, and water relations of a xylem-tapping mistletoe following nitrogen fertilization of the host. Oecologia 100:430–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Marvier MA (1996) Parasitic plant-host interactions: plant performance and indirect effects on parasite-feeding herbivores. Ecology 77:1398–1409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Matthies D (1995) Parasitic and competitive interactions between the hemiparasites Rhinanthus serotinus and Odontites rubra and their host Medicago sativa. J Ecol 83:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Matthies D (1996) Interactions between the root hemiparasite Melampyrum arvense and mixtures of host plants: heterotrophic benefit and parasite-mediated competition. Oikos 75:118–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mattson WJ Jr (1980) Herbivory in relation to plant nitrogen content. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11:119–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pennings SC, Callaway RM (1992) Salt marsh plant zonation: the relative importance of competition and physical factors. Ecology 73:681–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pennings SC, Callaway RM (1996) Impact of a parasitic plant on the structure and dynamics of salt marsh vegetation. Ecology 77:1410–1419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pennings SC, Callaway RM (2002) Parasitic plants: parallels and contrasts with herbivores. Oecologia 131:479–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pennings SC, Stanton LE, Brewer JS (2002) Nutrient effects on the composition of salt marsh plant communities along the southern Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United States. Estuaries 25:1164–1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Press MC, Graves JD (eds) (1995) Parasitic plants. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Seel WE, Cooper RE, Press MC (1993) Growth, gas exchange and water use efficiency of the facultative hemiparasite Rhinanthus minor associated with hosts differing in foliar nitrogen concentration. Physiol Plant 89:64–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smith D (2000) The population dynamics and community ecology of root hemiparasitic plants. Am Nat 155:13–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sterner RW, Elser JJ (2002) Ecological stoichiometry. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  29. Valiela I, Teal JM, Cogswell C, Hartman J, Allen S, Van Etten R, Goehringer D (1985) Some long-term consequences of sewage contamination in salt marsh ecosystems. In: Godfrey PJ, Kaynor ER, Pelczarski S, Benforado J (eds) Ecological considerations in wetland treatment of municipal wastewater. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp 301–316Google Scholar
  30. Van Hook RI, Nielsen MG, Shugart HH (1980) Energy and nitrogen relations for a Macrosiphum liriodendri (Homoptera: Aphididae) population in an East Tennessee Liriodendron tulipifera stand. Ecology 61:960–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo JM (1997) Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science 277:494–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Waring GL, Cobb NS (1992) The impact of plant stress on herbivore population dynamics. In: Bernays E (ed) Insect-plant interactions. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 167–226Google Scholar
  33. Watkinson AR, Gibson CC (1988) Plant parasitism: the population dynamics of parasitic plants and their effects upon plant community structure. In: Davy AJ, Hutchings MJ, Watkinson AR (eds) Plant population ecology. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp 393–411Google Scholar
  34. White TCR (1978) The importance of a relative shortage of food in animal ecology. Oecologia 33:71–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. White TCR (1984) The abundance of invertebrate herbivores in relation to the availability of nitrogen in stressed food plants. Oecologia 63:90–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology and BiochemistryUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations