Abstract
Balancing the biomass requirements of different functions for the purpose of population reproduction and persistence can be challenging for alpine plants due to extreme environmental stresses from both above- and below-ground sources. The presence of ecosystem engineers in alpine ecosystems effectively alleviates microenvironmental stresses, hence promoting the survival and growth of other less stress-tolerant species. However, the influence of ecosystem engineers on plant resource allocation strategies remains highly unexplored. In this study, we compared resource allocation strategies, including biomass accumulation, reproductive effort (RE), root fraction (RF), as well as relationships between different functions, among four alpine plant species belonging to Gentianaceae across bare ground, tussock grass-, cushion-, and shrub-engineered microhabitats. Shrub-engineered microhabitats exerted the strongest effects on regulating plant resource allocation patterns, followed by tussock grass- and cushion-engineered microhabitats. Additionally, apart from microhabitats, population background and plant life history also significantly influenced resource allocation strategies. Generally, plants established within engineered microhabitats exhibited higher biomass accumulation, as well as increased flower, leaf and stem production. Furthermore, individuals within engineered microhabitats commonly displayed lower RF, indicating a greater allocation of resources to above-ground functions while reducing allocation to root development. RE of annual plants was significantly higher than that of perennial plants. However, individuals of annual plants within engineered microhabitats showed lower RE compared to their counterparts in bare ground habitats; whereas perennial species demonstrated similar RE between microhabitat types. Moreover, RE was generally independent of plant size in bare-ground habitats but exhibited size-dependency in certain populations for some species within specific engineered microhabitat types. However, size-dependency did exist for absolute reproductive and root biomass allocation in most of the cases examined here. No trade-offs were observed between flower mass and flower number, nor between leaf mass and leaf number. The capacity of ecosystem engineers to regulate resource allocation strategies in associated plants was confirmed. However, the resource allocation patterns resulted synergistically from the ecosystem engineering effects, population environmental backgrounds, and plant life history strategies. In general, such regulations can improve individual survival and reproductive potential, potentially promoting population persistence in challenging alpine environments.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 11
Claim · model-written summary
Alpine plants in engineered microhabitats had higher biomass accumulation.
- Taxon
- plantsViridiplantaee0
- Outcome
- biomass accumulatione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Setting
- engineered microhabitatse0
Verbatim
e0“Generally, plants established within engineered microhabitats exhibited higher biomass accumulation, as well as increased flower, leaf and stem production.”
Claim · model-written summary
Alpine plants in engineered microhabitats increased flower, leaf and stem production.
- Taxon
- plantsViridiplantaee0
- Outcome
- flower, leaf and stem productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Setting
- engineered microhabitatse0
Verbatim
e0“Generally, plants established within engineered microhabitats exhibited higher biomass accumulation, as well as increased flower, leaf and stem production.”
Claim · model-written summary
plant resource allocation patterns showed strongest as reported.
Not reportedTaxonOrgan / stage
Verbatim
e0“Shrub-engineered microhabitats exerted the strongest effects on regulating plant resource allocation patterns, followed by tussock grass- and cushion-engineered microhabitats.”
Claim · model-written summary
RF showed lower as reported.
Not reportedTaxonOrgan / stage
Verbatim
e0“Furthermore, individuals within engineered microhabitats commonly displayed lower RF, indicating a greater allocation of resources to above-ground functions while reducing allocation to root development.”
Claim · model-written summary
RE showed higher as reported.
- Taxon
- plantsViridiplantaee0
- Organ / stage
- annual plantse0
- Outcome
- REe0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedSetting
Verbatim
e0“RE of annual plants was significantly higher than that of perennial plants.”
Claim · model-written summary
RE showed lower as reported.
Verbatim
e0“However, individuals of annual plants within engineered microhabitats showed lower RE compared to their counterparts in bare ground habitats; whereas perennial species demonstrated similar RE between microhabitat types.”
Claim · model-written summary
RE showed similar as reported.
Verbatim
e0“However, individuals of annual plants within engineered microhabitats showed lower RE compared to their counterparts in bare ground habitats; whereas perennial species demonstrated similar RE between microhabitat types.”
Claim · model-written summary
RE showed independent as reported.
Not reportedTaxonOrgan / stageSetting
Verbatim
e0“Moreover, RE was generally independent of plant size in bare-ground habitats but exhibited size-dependency in certain populations for some species within specific engineered microhabitat types.”
Claim · model-written summary
absolute reproductive and root biomass allocation showed size-dependency as reported.
Not reportedTaxonOrgan / stageSetting
Verbatim
e0“However, size-dependency did exist for absolute reproductive and root biomass allocation in most of the cases examined here.”
Claim · model-written summary
Flower mass and flower number showed no trade-off.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“No trade-offs were observed between flower mass and flower number, nor between leaf mass and leaf number.”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf mass and leaf number showed no trade-off.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“No trade-offs were observed between flower mass and flower number, nor between leaf mass and leaf number.”