Advertisement

Do Large Herbivores Influence Plant Allocation to Above- and Belowground Compartments?

  • Sumanta BagchiEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Ecological Studies book series (ECOLSTUD, volume 225)

Abstract

Plants allocate biomass to aboveground (shoot) and belowground (root) structures to capture light and nutrients, respectively. Plant allocation strategies are a key feature of ecosystem structure, and function, as they have broad influence over material and energy flow. Herbivores can exercise strong control over plant allocation, and thereby influence ecosystem structure and function. Theoretical models of plant allocation strategies predict that root:shoot ratio is related to leaf nitrogen (N) concentration; specifically root:shoot ratio declines monotonically over a broad range of N concentrations. Here, I assess whether grazing by large mammalian herbivores alters the inverse relationship between root:shoot ratio and leaf-N concentration. Data from an herbivore exclusion experiment in the arid Trans-Himalayan ecosystem were in general agreement with predictions of theoretical models. Herbivores did not affect the slope of the relationship, rather they lowered the intercept, and this change was independent of their influence over plant community composition. Reduction in root:shoot ratio with increasing leaf-N, and lowering biomass allocation to roots with grazing, are consistent with other studies on how herbivores influence plants.

Keywords

Ecosystem structure and function Grazer effects Leaf nitrogen Plant strategies Root:shoot ratio Trans-Himalayan 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The dataset used for this analysis was created with funding support from Syracuse University, US National Science Foundation (DDIG DEB-0608287), Rufford Foundation, and Wildlife Conservation Society. I am grateful to M.E. Ritchie, Y.V. Bhatnagar, and C. Mishra for numerous discussions on plant–herbivore interactions. I am also grateful to the Himachal Pradesh Department of Forest Farming and Conservation, and to all the assistants, interns, and volunteers who have worked very hard in helping me in the field. Initial drafts were greatly improved by critiques from anonymous referees and the editors.

References

  1. Agren GI (1985) Theory for growth of plants derived from the nitrogen productivity concept. Physiol Plant 64:17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agren GI, Ingestad T (1987) Root: shoot ratio as a balance between nitrogen productivity and photosynthesis. Plant, Cell Environ 10:579–586Google Scholar
  3. Bagchi S, Bhatnagar YV, Ritchie ME (2012) Comparing the effects of livestock and native herbivores on plant production and vegetation composition in the Trans-Himalayas. Pastoralism Res Policy Pract 2(21)Google Scholar
  4. Bagchi S, Ritchie ME (2011) Herbivory and plant tolerance: experimental tests of alternative hypotheses involving non-substitutable resources. Oikos 120:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bagchi S, Ritchie ME (2010a) Herbivore effects on above- and belowground plant production and soil nitrogen availability in the Trans-Himalayas. Oecologia 164:1075–1082CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bagchi S, Ritchie ME (2010b) Introduced grazers can restrict potential soil carbon sequestration through impacts on plant community composition. Ecol Lett 13:959–968PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bazzaz FA, Chiariello NR, Coley PD, Pitelka LF (1987) Allocating resources to reproduction and defense. Bioscience 37:58–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Derner JD, Boutton TW, Briske DD (2006) Grazing and ecosystem carbon storage in the North American Great Plains. Plant Soil 280:90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gadgil M, Gadgil S (1979) Adaptive significance of the relation between root and shoot growth. J Indian Inst Sci 61:25–40Google Scholar
  10. Hamilton EW, Giovannini MS, Moses A, Coleman JS, McNaughton SJ (1988) Biomass and mineral element responses of a Serengeti short-grass species to nitrogen supply and defoliation: compensation requires a critical [N]. Oecologia 116:407–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hilbert DW (1990) Optimization of plant root: shoot ratios and internal nitrogen concentration. Ann Bot 66:91Google Scholar
  12. Hilbert DW, Reynolds JF (1991) A model allocating growth among leaf proteins, shoot structure and root biomass to produce balanced activity. Ann Bot 68:417–425Google Scholar
  13. Hilbert DW, Swift DM, Detling JK, Dyer MI (1981) Relative growth rates and the grazing optimization hypothesis. Oecologia 51:14–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hobbs NT (1996) Modification of ecosystems by ungulates. J Wildlife Manage 60:695–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson IR, Thornley JHM (1987) A model of shoot:root partitioning with optimal growth. Ann Bot 60:133–142Google Scholar
  16. Levin SA, Mooney HA, Field C (1989) The dependence of plant root: shoot ratios on internal nitrogen concentration. Ann Bot 64:71Google Scholar
  17. McNaughton SJ (1976) Serengeti migratory wildebeest: facilitation of energy flow by grazing. Science 191:92–94CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. McNaughton SJ, Banyikwa FF, McNaughton MM (1997) Promotion of the cycling of diet-enhancing nutrients by African grazers. Science 278:1798–1800CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. R Development Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org
  20. Sugiura D, Tateno M (2011) Optimal leaf-to-root ratio and leaf nitrogen content determined by light and nitrogen availabilities. PLoS ONE 6:e22236CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Ecological SciencesIndian Institute of ScienceBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations