Phylogenetic evidence for a flower size and number trade‐off

Sargent, Risa D.; Goodwillie, Carol; Kalisz, Susan; Ree, Richard H.

doi:10.3732/ajb.94.12.2059

Cited by 78 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These relationships suggest that the trade-off between flower size and potential flower production was consistent across all species, but subject to allometric constraints. These observations are robust to phylogenetic comparison These results are consistent with other studies that suggest that a flower size vs number trade-off is common in angiosperms [7], . Maximum fruit production per tree, in contrast to flower production, did not scale negatively with flower size.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…The attractiveness of these different floral displays is closely coupled to mating system, the type and breadth of pollinators and individual fecundity [1], [2]. Studies across plant species show that species tend to produce fewer flowers per individual as the size of the flower increases [3], [4], [5], [6], [7],[8],[9]. The causal agents of this trade-off have been investigated empirically in a number of plant species, indicating that hierarchical resource allocation [10], [11], pollen discounting via geitonogamy in obligate out-crossing species [1], [4], [11] and pollen limitation [12] are all important drivers in this trade-off.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ecological Implications of a Flower Size/Number Trade-Off in Tropical Forest Trees

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn angiosperms, flower size commonly scales negatively with number. The ecological consequences of this trade-off for tropical trees remain poorly resolved, despite their potential importance for tropical forest conservation. We investigated the flower size number trade-off and its implications for fecundity in a sample of tree species from the Dipterocarpaceae on Borneo.Methodology/Principal FindingsWe combined experimental exclusion of pollinators in 11 species, with direct and indirect estimates of contemporary pollen dispersal in two study species and published estimates of pollen dispersal in a further three species to explore the relationship between flower size, pollinator size and mean pollen dispersal distance. Maximum flower production was two orders of magnitude greater in small-flowered than large-flowered species of Dipterocarpaceae. In contrast, fruit production was unrelated to flower size and did not differ significantly among species. Small-flowered species had both smaller-sized pollinators and lower mean pollination success than large-flowered species. Average pollen dispersal distances were lower and frequency of mating between related individuals was higher in a smaller-flowered species than a larger-flowered confamilial. Our synthesis of pollen dispersal estimates across five species of dipterocarp suggests that pollen dispersal scales positively with flower size.Conclusions and Their SignificanceTrade-offs embedded in the relationship between flower size and pollination success contribute to a reduction in the variance of fecundity among species. It is therefore plausible that these processes could delay competitive exclusion and contribute to maintenance of species coexistence in this ecologically and economically important family of tropical trees. These results have practical implications for tree species conservation and restoration. Seed collection from small-flowered species may be especially vulnerable to cryptic genetic erosion. Our findings also highlight the potential for differential vulnerability of tropical tree species to the deleterious consequences of forest fragmentation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological Implications of a Flower Size/Number Trade-Off in Tropical Forest Trees

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2010). For example, Sargent et al. (2007) found a significant negative correlation between flower size and daily flower number in an independent contrasts analysis involving 251 species, but did not detect such trade‐offs within the genera Collinsia and Narcissus .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Life history trade‐offs and evidence for hierarchical resource allocation in two monocarpic perennials

Cao

Worley

2012

Plant Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolution of floral display is thought to be constrained by trade-offs between the size and number of flowers; however, empirical evidence for the trade-off is inconsistent. We examined evidence for trade-offs and hierarchical allocation of resources within and between two populations each of the monocarpic perennials, Cardiocrinum cordatum and C. giganteum. Within all populations, flower size-number trade-offs were evident after accounting for variation in plant size. In addition, variation in flower size explained much variation in flower-level allocation to attraction, and female and male function, a pattern consistent with hierarchical allocation. However, between population differences in flower size (C. cordatum) and number (C. giganteum) were not consistent with size-number trade-offs or hierarchical allocation. The population-level difference in C. cordatum likely reflects the combined influence of a time lag between initiation and maturation of flowers, and higher light levels in one population. Thus, our study highlights one mechanism that may account for the apparent independence of flower size and number in many studies. A prediction of sex allocation theory was also supported. In C. giganteum: plants from one population invested more mass in pistils and less in stamens than did plants from the other population. Detection of floral trade-offs in Cardiocrinum may be facilitated by monocarpic reproduction, production of a single inflorescence and ease of measuring plant size.

show abstract

“…Beetle horns draw resources from neighboring organs (Emlen 2001) This appears to be quite general across scales, but horn placement has evolved, apparently to differentially impact where the tradeoff is experienced Trade-off between flower size and number (Sargent et al 2007) Life-history traits such as these sometimes trade off within and between species, but trade-offs can be obscured by resource availability and population-level adaptation Body size, metabolic rate, and ecological consequences (Tilman et al 2004) Dictated by physiological relationships, especially when considering body-size variation of several orders of magnitude. However, strong variation exists in these relationships, especially among close relatives of similar body size living in different niches Skeletal parameters typically connected by allometry (McGlothlin et al 2018) Body plans are often conserved, and thus relationships may hold within and between closely related species; however, relationships are expected to decay at higher taxonomic scales February 2020 MACARTHUR AWARD LECTURE Article e02924; page 5 Box 1.…”

Section: Deep History and Darwinmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scale‐dependent framework for trade‐offs, syndromes, and specialization in organismal biology

Agrawal

2020

Ecology

200

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation: Agrawal, A. A. 2020. A scale-dependent framework for trade-offs, syndromes, and specialization in organismal biology. Ecology 101(2):Abstract. Biodiversity is defined by trait differences between organisms, and biologists have long sought to predict associations among ecologically important traits. Why do some traits trade off but others are coexpressed? Why might some trait associations hold across levels of organization, from individuals and genotypes to populations and species, whereas others only occur at one level? Understanding such scaling is a core biological problem, bearing on the evolution of ecological strategies as well as forecasting responses to environmental change. Explicitly considering the hierarchy of biodiversity and expectations at each scale (individual change, evolution within and among populations, and species turnover) is necessary as we work toward a predictive framework in evolutionary ecology. Within species, a trait may have an association with another trait because of phenotypic plasticity, genetic correlation, or population-level local adaptation. Plastic responses are often adaptive and yet individuals have a fixed pool of resources; thus, positive and negative trait associations can be generated by immediate environmental needs and energetic demands. Genetic variation and covariation for traits within a population are typically shaped by varying natural selection in space and time. Although genetic correlations are infrequently long-term constraints, they may indicate competing organismal demands. Traits are often quantitatively differentiated among populations (local Manuscript adaptation), although selection rarely favors qualitatively different strategies until populations become reproductively isolated. Across species, niche specialization to particular habitats or biotic interactions may determine trait correlations, a subset of which are termed "strategic trade-offs" because they are a consequence of adaptive specialization. Across scales, constraints within species often do not apply as new species evolve, and conversely, trait correlations observed across populations or species may not be reflected within populations. I give examples of such scale-dependent trait associations and their causes across taxonomic groups and ecosystems, and in the final section of the paper, I specifically evaluate leaf economics spectrum traits and their associations with plant defense against herbivory. Scale-dependent predictions emerge for understanding plant ecology holistically, and this approach can be fruitfully applied more generally in evolutionary ecology. Adaptive specialization and community context are two of the primary drivers of trade-offs and syndromes across biological scales.

show abstract

Phylogenetic evidence for a flower size and number trade‐off

Cited by 78 publications

References 53 publications

Ecological Implications of a Flower Size/Number Trade-Off in Tropical Forest Trees

Ecological Implications of a Flower Size/Number Trade-Off in Tropical Forest Trees

Life history trade‐offs and evidence for hierarchical resource allocation in two monocarpic perennials

A scale‐dependent framework for trade‐offs, syndromes, and specialization in organismal biology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About