Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Effects of apical damage on plant growth and male and female reproductive investments in Ambrosia artemisiifolia, a wind-pollinated plant

Abstract

In wind-pollinated plants, apical damage may decrease male fitness by reducing height-dependent pollen dispersal distance, but may not affect female fitness because plant height is not always correlated with female fitness. We hypothesized that Ambrosia artemisiifolia responds to apical damage by (1) restoring plant height through compensatory growth from lateral buds, and/or (2) increasing the sex allocation to female function to compensate for the loss of male fitness. We tested these hypotheses by comparing a group of experimental removal of the apical meristem with three control groups and by field surveys on apically damaged plants. Experimental apical damage suppressed main stem growth, but promoted vertical secondary growth from lateral buds. These responses resulted in compensation of stem height in the apically damaged plants to the same height as one of three control groups. The numbers of male and female flowers and male racemes did not differ between damaged and undamaged plants, indicating that apically damaged plants did not change their sex allocation. Therefore, our results support our first hypothesis. The results of a field survey of naturalized populations also supported the first hypothesis in that plant height and the number of male racemes did not change in plants with apical damage. Consequently, our results suggest that A. artemisiifolia has a high ability of fitness compensation after apical damage by restoring height and male function. This ability may contribute to its invasiveness in disturbed habitats.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Abul-Fatih HA, Bazzaz FA, Hunt R (1979) The biology of Ambrosia trifida L. III. Growth and biomass allocation. New Phytol 83:829–838

  2. Ackerly DD, Jasieński M (1990) Size-dependent variation of gender in high density stands of the monoecious annual, Ambrosia artemisiifolia (Asteraceae). Oecologia 82:474–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00319788

  3. Adhikari S, Russell FL (2014) Effects of apical meristem mining on plant fitness, architecture, and flowering phenology in Cirsium altissimum (Asteraceae). Am J Bot 101:2079–2087. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1400210

  4. Animut G et al (2005) Performance and forage selectivity of sheep and goats co-grazing grass/forb pastures at three stocking rates. Small Rumin Res 59:203–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2005.05.015

  5. Bassett IJ, Crompton CW (1975) The biology of Canadian weeds: 11. Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. and A. psilostachya DC Can J. Plant Sci 55:463–476. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjps75-072

  6. Boalt E, Lehtilä K (2007) Tolerance to apical and foliar damage: costs and mechanisms in Raphanus raphanistrum. Oikos 116:2071–2081. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2007.0030-1299.16056.x

  7. Bullock JM et al (2012) Assessing and controlling the spread and the effects of common ragweed in Europe. Natural Environment Research Council, UK

  8. Burd M, Allen TFH (1988) Sexual allocation strategy in wind-pollinated plants. Evolution 42:403–407. https://doi.org/10.2307/2409245

  9. Cline MG (1991) Apical dominance. Bot Rev 57:318–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02858771

  10. De Cauwer I, Arnaud JF, Klein EK, Dufay M (2012) Disentangling the causes of heterogeneity in male fecundity in gynodioecious Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima. New Phytol 195:676–687. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04191.x

  11. Dhileepan K, McFadyen REC (2001) Effects of gall damage by the introduced biocontrol agent Epiblema strenuana (Lep., Tortricidae) on the weed Parthenium hysterophorus (Asteraceae). J Appl Entomol 125:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0418.2001.00494.x

  12. Domagalska MA, Leyser O (2011) Signal integration in the control of shoot branching. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 12:211–221. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm3088

  13. Friedman J, Barrett SCH (2009) Wind of change: new insights on the ecology and evolution of pollination and mating in wind-pollinated plants. Ann Bot 103:1515–1527. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcp035

  14. Friedman J, Barrett SCH (2011) Genetic and environmental control of temporal and size-dependent sex allocation in a wind-pollinated plant. Evolution 65:2061–2074. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01284.x

  15. Gard B, Bretagnolle F, Dessaint F, Laitung B (2013) Invasive and native populations of common ragweed exhibit strong tolerance to foliar damage. Basic Appl Ecol 14:28–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2012.10.007

  16. Gronemeyer PA, Dilger BJ, Bouzat JL, Paige KN (1997) The effects of herbivory on paternal fitness in scarlet gilia: better moms also make better pops. Am Nat 150:592–602. https://doi.org/10.1086/286083

  17. Huhta A-P, Hellström K, Rautio P, Tuomi J (2003) Grazing tolerance of Gentianella amarella and other monocarpic herbs: why is tolerance highest at low damage levels? Plant Ecol 166:49–61. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1023278502972

  18. Irwin DL, Aarssen LW (1996) Testing for cost of apical dominance in vegetation: a field study of three species. Ann Bot Fenn 33:123–128

  19. Kazinczi G, Béres I, Pathy Z, Novák R (2008) Common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.): a review with special regards to the results in Hungary: II. Importance and harmful effect, allergy, habitat, allelopathy and beneficial characteristics. Herbologia 9:119–144

  20. Kimball S, Schiffman PM (2003) Differing effects of cattle grazing on native and alien plants. Conserv Biol 17:1681–1693. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2003.00205.x

  21. Klinkhamer PGL, de Jong TJ, Metz H (1997) Sex and size in cosexual plants. Trends Ecol Evol 12:260–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(97)01078-1

  22. Leduc N, Roman H, Barbier F, Péron T, Huché-Thélier L, Lothier J, Demotes-Mainard S, Sakr S (2014) Light signaling in bud outgrowth and branching in plants. Plants 3:223–250. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants3020223

  23. Lennartsson T, Tuomi J, Nilsson P (1997) Evidence for an evolutionary history of overcompensation in the grassland biennial Gentianella campestris (Gentianaceae). Am Nat 149:1147–1155. https://doi.org/10.1086/286043

  24. Lloyd DG (1984) Variation strategies of plants in heterogeneous environments. Biol J Linn Soc 21:357–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1984.tb01600.x

  25. Lundholm JT, Aarssen LW (1994) Neighbour effects on gender variation in Ambrosia artemisiifolia. Can J Bot 72:794–800. https://doi.org/10.1139/b94-101

  26. MacDonald AAM, Kotanen PM (2010) Leaf damage has weak effects on growth and fecundity of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia). Botany 88:158–164. https://doi.org/10.1139/b09-110

  27. McKone MJ, Tonkyn DW (1986) Intrapopulation gender variation in common ragweed (Asteraceae: Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.), a monoecious, annual herb. Oecologia 70:63–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00377111

  28. McNaughton SJ (1983) Compensatory plant growth as a response to herbivory. Oikos 40:329–336. https://doi.org/10.2307/3544305

  29. Murray BR, Phillips ML (2010) Investment in seed dispersal structures is linked to invasiveness in exotic plant species of south-eastern Australia. Biol Invasions 12:2265–2275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9637-7

  30. Nakahara T, Fukano Y, Hirota SK, Yahara T (2018) Size advantage for male function and size-dependent sex allocation in Ambrosia artemisiifolia, a wind-pollinated plant. Ecol Evol 8:1159–1170. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3722

  31. Nasu Y, Hirowatari T, Kishida Y (2013) The standard of moths in Japan IV. Gakken Education Press, Tokyo, Japan

  32. Núñez-Farfán J, Fornoni J, Valverde PL (2007) The evolution of resistance and tolerance to herbivores. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 38:541–566. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.38.091206.095822

  33. Okubo A, Levin SA (1989) A theoretical framework for data analysis of wind dispersal of seeds and pollen. Ecology 70:329–338. https://doi.org/10.2307/1937537

  34. Paquin V, Aarssen LW (2004) Allometric gender allocation in Ambrosia Artemisiifolia (Asteraceae) has adaptive plasticity. Am J Bot 91:430–438. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.91.3.430

  35. Payne WW (1963) The morphology of the inflorescence of ragweeds (Ambrosia-Franseria: compositae). Am J Bot 50:872–880. https://doi.org/10.2307/2439774

  36. Rautio P, Huhta AP, Piippo S, Tuomi J, Juenger T, Saari M, Aspi J (2005) Overcompensation and adaptive plasticity of apical dominance in Erysimum strictum (Brassicaceae) in response to simulated browsing and resource availability. Oikos 111:179–191. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2005.14045.x

  37. Sakai A, Sakai S (2003) Size-dependent ESS sex allocation in wind-pollinated cosexual plants: fecundity vs. stature effects. J Theor Biol 222:283–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(03)00024-9

  38. Sakai AK et al (2001) The population biology of invasive species. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 32:305–332. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.32.081501.114037

  39. Sánchez Vilas J, Pannell JR (2014) Plasticity in sex allocation in the plant Mercurialis annua is greater for hermaphrodites sampled from dimorphic than from monomorphic populations. J Evol Biol 27:1939–1947. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeb.12447

  40. Shimizu T (2003) Naturalized plants of Japan, vol 204. Heibonsha, Tokyo

  41. Simard M-J, Benoit DL (2011) Effect of repetitive mowing on common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) pollen and seed production. Ann Agric Environ Med 18:55–62

  42. Strauss SY, Agrawal AA (1999) The ecology and evolution of plant tolerance to herbivory. Trends Ecol Evol 14:179–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01576-6

  43. Traveset A (1992) Sex expression in a natural population of the monoecious annual, Ambrosia artemisiifolia (Asteraceae). Am Midl Nat 127:309–315. https://doi.org/10.2307/2426537

  44. Wang B, Smith SM, Li J (2018) Genetic regulation of shoot architecture. Annu Rev Plant Biol. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-arplant-042817-040422

  45. Zhang D-Y (2006) Evolutionarily stable reproductive investment and sex allocation in plants. In: Harder LD, Barrett SCH (eds) Ecology and evolution of flowers. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 41–60

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Kazuki Tagawa, Ryosuke Imasaka, Ai Kawakubo, Shohei Zaitsu, Junnosuke Horita, and Shuzo Iwanishi for their assistance with field survey and experiments, and to Hiroyuki Tagawa for his provision of information. Dr. Takahiro Fujiwara, and members of the Laboratory of Ecological Science, Kyushu University, kindly provided helpful comments. This study was supported in part by Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows (14J05730) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

Author information

Correspondence to Toru Nakahara.

Additional information

Communicated by Siegy Krauss.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 75 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nakahara, T., Fukano, Y. & Yahara, T. Effects of apical damage on plant growth and male and female reproductive investments in Ambrosia artemisiifolia, a wind-pollinated plant. Plant Ecol 219, 853–862 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-018-0839-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Anemophilous plants
  • Female reproductive investment
  • Male reproductive investment
  • Plant stature
  • Shoot apex