Journals / Akademik Ziraat Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2

Phenotypic plasticity of ecotypes across habitats

Ekotiplerin farklı habitatlardaki fenotipik plastisitesi

Pages
253–258
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The overall resultindicated that it was failed to find an effect of habitatorigin on phenotypic plasticity expression of ecotypes.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Phenotypic plasticity is the ability of a genotype toproduce multiple phenotypes depending on the environmental conditions and it can allow persistenceof populations in heterogeneous habitats or underclimate change.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Trade-offs in plant performance invarious habitats can give rise to the evolution ofspecialized ecotypes which are locally adapted (specialized) populations of the same species in distinctenvironments.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The overall resultindicated that it was failed to find an effect of habitatorigin on phenotypic plasticity expression of ecotypes.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Phenotypic plasticity is the ability of a genotype toproduce multiple phenotypes depending on the environmental conditions and it can allow persistenceof populations in heterogeneous habitats or underclimate change. Therefore, phenotypic plasticity canplay a major role in the divergence of populationsacross habitats. Trade-offs in plant performance invarious habitats can give rise to the evolution ofspecialized ecotypes which are locally adapted (specialized) populations of the same species in distinctenvironments. According to the specialization hypothesis, specialization of ecotypes to either relatively favorable or unfavorable habitats results in increased or decreased phenotypic plasticity, respectively. The presence of phenotypic plasticity differences among ecotypes can be easily detected byexamining their performances at home (native) versus foreign (alien) environments in reciprocal fieldexperiments. In this meta-analysis, I compared phenotypic plasticity of ecotypes specialized in favorableand unfavorable habitats to test the specializationhypothesis by extracting data from 47 empiricalstudies. Log response ratio (LRR) and plasticity index (PIv) were used as effect sizes to detect andquantify significant differences in phenotypic plasticity of ecotypes across habitats. The overall resultindicated that it was failed to find an effect of habitatorigin on phenotypic plasticity expression of ecotypes. Specialization to either favorable or unfavorable habitats may not alter phenotypic plasticity expression in ecotypes. The interplay between phenotypic plasticity and specialization is quite complexand results of this study may shed light into thesetwo important evolutionary mechanisms in plantecology which have implications for biodiversityconservation, environmental management, agricultural industry, and ecosystem services.

Özet

Fenotipik plastisite, bir genotipin çevresel koşullara bağlı olarak birden fazla fenotip üretebilme yeteneğidir ve popülasyonların heterojen habitatlarda ya da iklimsel değişiklik altında sürekliliğini sağlayabilir. Bu nedenle, fenotipik plastisite habitatlar boyunca popülasyonlar arasındaki ayrımında önemli bir rol oynayabilir. Çeşitli habitatlarda bitkilerin performanslarındaki ödünleşim, özelleşmiş ekotiplerin evrimleşmesine neden olabilir. Ekotipler, aynı türün farklı ortamlarda yerel olarak özelleşmiş popülasyonlarıdır. Özelleşme (specialization) hipotezine göre, ekotiplerin nispeten elverişli ya da elverişsiz habitatlara özelleştirilmesi, fenotipik plastisitenin sırasıyla artmış veya azalmış olmasına neden olur. Ekotipler arasındaki fenotipik plastisite farklılıklar, arazilerde karşılıklı deneylerde evdeki (yerli) ve yabancı (yabancı) ortamlardaki performanslarını inceleyerek kolayca tespit edilebilir. Bu meta-analiz çalışmasında, elverişli ve elverişsiz habitatlarda özelleşmiş ekotiplerin fenotipik plastisitesini, 50 ampirik çalışmadan elde edilen verileri çıkararak özelleşme (specialization) hipotezini test etmek için karşılaştırdım. Ekotiplerin habitatlar boyunca fenotipik plastisitesindeki önemli farklılıkları tespit etmek ve ölçmek için logaritmik yanıt oranı (LRR) ve plastisite indeksi (PIV) etki büyüklükleri olarak kullanılmıştır. Genel sonuç, ekotiplerin fenotipik plastisite ekspres yonu üzerinde habitat kökenli bir etki olmadığını göstermiştir. Elverişli ya da elverişsiz habitatlara yönelik özelleşmeler ekotiplerde fenotipik plastisite ekspresyonunu değiştirmedi. Fenotipik plastisite ile özelleşme arasındaki karşılıklı etkileşim oldukça karmaşıktır ve bu çalışmanın sonuçları, bitki ekolojisinde biyoçeşitliliğin korunması, çevre yönetimi, tarımsal sanayi ve ekosistem hizmetlerine etkilleri olan bu iki önemli evrim mekanizmasına ışık tutabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

FAZLIOĞLU, F. (2022). Phenotypic plasticity of ecotypes across habitats. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2, 253–258. https://ajindex.com/articles/433030

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Avramov, S., Tucic, B., 2006. Plasticity to an irradiance gradient in foliage attributes of a perennial monocot Iris pumila (L.): Comparison of populations from habitats of contrasting light conditions. Polish Journal of Ecology, 54(3): 403-416.
  2. Balaguer, L., Martínez-Ferri, E., Valladares, F., Pérez-Corona, M. E., Baquedano, F. J., Castillo, F. J., Manrique, E., 2001. Population divergence in the plasticity of the response of Quercus coccifera to the light environment. Functional Ecology, 15(1):124- 135. Bennington, C. C., McGraw, J. B., 1995. Natural selection and ecotypic differentiation in Impatiens pallida. Ecological Monographs, 65(3): 303-323.
  3. Bennington, C. C., Fetcher, N., Vavrek, M. C., Shaver, G. R., Cummings, K. J., McGraw, J. B., 2012. Home site advantage in two long-lived arctic plant species: Results from two 30-year reciprocal transplant studies. Journal of Ecology, 100(4): 841-851.
  4. Berg, H., Becker, U., Matthies, D., 2005. Phenotypic plasticity in Carlina vulgaris: effects of geographical origin, population size, and population isolation. Oecologia, 143(2): 220-231.
  5. Chevin, L. M., Hoffmann, A. A., 2017. Evolution of phenotypic plasticity in extreme environments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 372(1723): 20160138. Conover, D. O., Schultz, E. T., 1995. Phenotypic similarity and the evolutionary significance of countergradient variation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 10(6): 248-252. de Jong, G., 2005. Evolution of phenotypic plasticity: patterns of plasticity and the emergence of ecotypes. New Phytologist, 166(1): 101-117.
  6. Dewitt, T. J., Sih, A., Wilson, D. S., 1998. Costs and limits of phenotypic plasticity. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 13(2): 77-81.
  7. Fazlioglu, F., Bonser, S. P., 2016. Phenotypic plasticity and specialization in clonal versus non-clonal plants: A data synthesis. Acta Oecologica, 77: 193-200.
  8. Fazlioglu, F., Wan, J. S. H., Bonser, S. P., 2017. Testing specialization hypothesis on a stress gradient. Austral Ecology, 42(1): 40-47.
  9. Forsman, A., 2015. Rethinking phenotypic plasticity and its consequences for individuals, populations and species. Heredity, 115(4): 276-284.
  10. Frei, E. R., Ghazoul, J., Pluess, A. R., 2014. Plastic responses to elevated temperature in low and high elevation populations of three grassland species. PLoS ONE, 9(6): e98677. Futuyma, D. J., Moreno, G., 1988. The evolution of ecological specialization. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 19(1): 207