Ecological correlates of secondary sexual dimorphism in Salix glauca (Salicaceae)

American Journal of Botany

Volumn 93, Issue 12, 2006, Pages 1775-1783

  Dudley, Leah S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Colorado Rocky Mountains; Dioecy; Ecological causation hypothesis; Salicaceae; Salix; Secondary sexual dimorphism; Water relations; Willows

Indexed keywords

ANGIOSPERM; DIOECY; DROUGHT STRESS; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; RESOURCE AVAILABILITY; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SHRUB;

COLORADO; NORTH AMERICA; ROCKY MOUNTAINS; UNITED STATES;

SALICACEAE; SALIX; SALIX GLAUCA;

EID: 34250744807     PISSN: 00029122     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.93.12.1775     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. ÅGREN, J. 1988. Sexual differences in biomass and nutrient allocation in the dioecious Rubus chamaemorus. Ecology 69: 962-973.
2. ALSTROM-RAPAPORT, C., M. LASCOUX, AND U. GULLBERG. 1997. Sex determination and sex ratio in the dioecious shrub Salix viminalis L. Theoretical Applied Genetics 94: 493-497.
3. ARGUS, G. W. 1973. The genus Salix in Alaska and the Yukon. National Museum of Natural Sciences, Ottawa, Canada.
4. ASHMAN, T.-L. 1992. Indirect costs of seed production within and between seasons in a gynodioecious species. Oecologia 92: 266-272.
5. ASHMAN, T.-L. 1994a. A dynamic perspective on the physiological cost of reproduction in plants. American Naturalist 144: 300-316.
6. ASHMAN, T.-L. 1994b. Reproductive allocation in hermaphrodite and female plants of Sidalcea oregana ssp. spicata (Malvaceae) using four currencies. American Journal of Botany 81: 433-438.
7. ASHMAN, T. L. 2003. Constraints on the evolution of males and sexual dimorphism: field estimates of genetic architecture of reproductive traits in three populations of gynodioecious Fragaria virginiana. Evolution 57: 2012-2025.
8. ASHMAN, T.-L., AND I. BAKER. 1992. Variation in floral sex allocation with time of season and currency. Ecology 73: 1237-1243.
9. BANUELOS, M.-J., AND J.-R. OBESO. 2004. Resource allocation in the dioecious shrub Rhamnus alpinus: the hidden costs of reproduction. Evolutionary Ecology Research 6: 397-413.
10. BAWA, K. S. 1980. Evolution of dioecy in flowering plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11: 15-40.
11. BIERZYCHUDEK, P., AND V. ECKHART. 1988. Spatial segregation of the sexes of dioecious plants. American Naturalist 132: 34-43.
12. BOECKLEN, W. J., AND M. T. HOFFMAN. 1993. Sex-biased herbivory in Ephedra trifurca: the importance of sex-by-environment interactions. Oecologia 96: 49-55.
13. BULLOCK, S. H., AND K. S. BAWA. 1981. Sexual dimorphism and the annual flowering pattern in Jacaratia dolichaula (D. Smith) Woodson (Caricaceae) in a Costa Rican rain forest. Ecology 62: 1494-1504.
14. CHARLESWORTH, B., AND D. CHARLESWORTH. 1978. A model for the evolution of dioecy and gynodioecy. American Naturalist 112: 975-997.
15. CHARLESWORTH, D. 1999. Theories of the evolution of dioecy. In M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph [eds.], Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants, 33-60. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA.
16. CHARLESWORTH, D., AND B. CHARLESWORTH. 1987. The effect of investment in attractive structures on allocation to male and female functions in plants. Evolution 41: 948-968.
17. CHARNOV, E. L. 1982. The theory of sex allocation. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
18. COX, P. A. 1981. Niche partitioning between sexes of dioecious plants. American Naturalist 117: 295-307.
19. DANELL, K., J. HJÄLTÉN, L. ERICSON, AND T. ELMQVIST. 1991. Vole feeding on male and female willow shoots along a gradient of plant productivity. Oikos 62: 145-152.
20. DARWIN, C. 1871. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. John Murray, London, UK.
21. DARWIN, C. 1874. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Murray, London, UK.
22. DAWSON, T. E., AND L. C. BLISS. 1989a. Intraspecific variation in the water relations of Salix arctica, an arctic-alpine dwarf willow. Oecologia 79: 322-331.
23. DAWSON, T. E., AND L. C. BLISS. 1989b. Patterns of water use and the tissue water relations in the dioecious shrub Salix arctica: the physiological basis for habitat partitioning between the sexes. Oecologia, Berlin 79: 332-343.
24. DAWSON, T. E., AND L. C. BLISS. 1993. Plants as mosaics: leaf-, ramet-, and gender-level variation in the physiology of the dwarf willow, Salix arctica. Functional Ecology 7: 293-304.
25. DAWSON, T. E., AND J. R. EHLERINGER. 1993. Gender-specific physiology, carbon isotope discrimination, and habitat distribution in box elder, Acer negundo. Ecology 74: 798-814.
26. DAWSON, T. E., AND M. A. GEBER. 1999. Sexual dimorphism in physiology and morphology. In M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph [eds.], Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants, 175-215. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA.
27. DE SOYZA, A., A. C. FRANCO, R. A. VIRGINIA, J. F. REYNOLDS, AND W. G. WHITFORD. 1996. Effects of plant size on photosynthesis and water relations in the desert shrub Prosopis glandulosa (Fabaceae). American Journal of Botany 83: 99-105.
28. DELPH, L. F. 1990. Sex-differential resource allocation patterns in the subdioecous shrub Hebe subalpina. Ecology 71: 1342-1351.
29. DELPH, L. F. 1999. Sexual dimorphism in life history. In M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph [eds.], Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants, 149-173. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
30. DELPH, L. F., J. L. GEHRING, A. M. ARNTZ, M. LEVRI, AND F. M. FREY. 2005. Genetic correlations with floral display lead to sexual dimorphism in the cost of reproduction. American Naturalist 166: S31-S41.
31. DELPH, L. F., J. L. GEHRING, F. M. FREY, A. M. ARNTZ, AND M. LEVRI. 2004. Genetic constraints on floral evolution in a sexually dimorphic plant revealed by artificial selection. Evolution 58: 1936-1946.
32. DIGGLE, P. K. 1997. Ontogenetic contingency and floral morphology: The effects of architecture and resource limitation. International Journal of Plant Sciences 158: S99-S107.
33. DIXON, P. M. 1994. Testing spatial segregation using a nearest-neighbor contingency table. Ecology 75: 1940-1948.
34. DLWC. 2005. Willows in the hunter: a guide to identification and management. New South Wales Department of Land and Water Conservation, Newcastle, Australia.
35. DONOVAN, L. A., AND J. R. EHLERINGER. 1991. Ecophysiological differences among juvenile and reproductive plants of several woody species. Oecologia 86: 594-597.
36. DORN, R. D. 1997. Rocky Mountain region willow identification guide. Renewable Resources: R2-RR-97-01.
37. DOUHOVNIKOFF, V., J. R. MCBRIDE, AND R. S. DODDA. 2004. Salix exigua clonal growth and population dynamics in relation to disturbance regime variation. Ecology 86: 446-452.
38. DUDLEY, L. S. 2006. Ecological conditions of secondary sexual dimorphism in Salix glauca: fundamental and realized dimorphic niche. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
39. EPPLEY, S. M. 2006. Females make tough neighbors: sex-specific competitive effects in seedlings of a dioecious grass. Oecologia 146: 549-554.
40. ESPIRITO-SANTO, M. M., B. G. MADEIRA, F. S. NEVES, M. L. FARIA, M. FAGUNDES, AND G. W. FERNANDES. 2003. Sexual differences in reproductive phenology and their consequences for the demography of Baccharis dracunculifolia (Asteraceae), a dioecious tropical shrub. Annals of Botany (London) 91: 13-19.
41. FOX, J. F., AND A. T. HARRISON. 1981. Habitat assortment of sexes and water balance in a dioecious grass. Oecologia 49: 233-235.
42. FOX, J. F., AND G. C. STEVENS. 1991. Costs of reproduction in a willow: experimental responses vs. natural variation. Ecology 72: 1013-1023.
43. FREEMAN, D. C., L. G. KLIKOFF, AND K. T. HARPER. 1976. Differential resource utilization by the sexes of dioecious plants. Science 193: 597-599.
44. GEBER, M. A. 1999. Theories of the evolution of sexual dimorphism. In M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph [eds.], Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants, 95-122. Springer, New York, New York, USA.
45. GEBER, M. A., AND L. R. GRIFFEN. 2003. Inheritance and natural selection on functional traits. International Journal of Plant Sciences 164: S21-S42.
46. GEHRING, J. L., AND R. K. MONSON. 1994. Sexual differences in gas exchange and response to environmental stress in dioecious Silene latifolia (Caryophyllaceae). American Journal of Botany 81: 166-174.
47. HEDRICK, A. V., AND E. J. TEMELES. 1989. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in animals: hypotheses and tests. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 4: 136-138.
48. HEILBUTH, J. C., K. L. ILVES, AND S. P. OTTO. 2001. The consequences of dioecy for seed dispersal: modeling the seed-shadow handicap. Evolution 55: 880-888.
49. KEOLEIAN, G. A., AND T. A. VOLK. 2005. Renewable energy from willow biomass crops: life cycle energy, environmental, and economic performance. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 24: 385-406.
50. KÖRNER, C. 1999. Alpine plant life: functional plant ecology of high mountain ecosystems. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA.
51. LAPORTE, M. M., AND L. F. DELPH. 1996. Sex-specific physiology and source-sink relations in the dioecious plant Silene latifolia. Oecologia 106: 63-72.
52. LITTELL, R. C., G. A. MILLIKEN, W. W. STROUP, AND R. D. WOLFINGER. 1996. SAS system for mixed models. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA.
53. MEDIAVILLA, S., AND A. ESCUDERO. 2004. Stomatal responses to drought of mature trees and seedlings of two co-occurring Mediterranean oaks. Forest Ecology and Management 187: 281-294.
54. NICOTRA, A. B. 1999. Reproductive allocation and the long-term costs of reproduction in Siparuna grandiflora, a dioecious neotropical shrub. Journal of Ecology 87: 138-149.
55. OBESO, J. R. 2002. The costs of reproduction in plants. New Phytologist 155: 321-348.
56. POORTER, H. 1989. Interspecific variation in relative growth rate on ecological causes and physiological consequences. In H. Lambers, M. L. Cambridge, H. Konings, and T. L. Pons [eds.], Causes and consequences of variation in growth rate and productivity of higher plants. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, Netherlands.
57. RALLS, K. 1976. Mammals in which females are larger than males. Quarterly Review of Biology 51: 245-276.
58. RAUSHER, M. D. 1992. The measurement of selection on quantitative traits biases due to environmental covariances between traits and fitness. Evolution 46: 616-626.
59. RENNER, S. S., AND R. E. RICKLEFS. 1995. Dioecy and its correlates in the flowering plants. American Journal of Botany 82: 596-606.
60. ROOD, S. B., C. R. GOURLEY, E.M. AMMON, L. G. HEKI, J. R. KLOTZ, M. L. MORRISON, D. MOSLEY, G. G. SCOPPETTONE, S. SWANSON, AND P. L. WAGNER. 2003. Flows for floodplain forests: a successful riparian restoration. Bioscience 53: 647-656.
61. SHINE, R. 1989. Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual dimorphism: a review of the evidence. Quarterly Review of Biology 64: 419-461.
62. SILVERTOWN, J. 2004. Plant coexistence and the niche. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19: 605-611.
63. SLATKIN, M. 1984. Ecological causes of sexual dimorphism. Evolution 38: 622-630.
64. STANTON, M. L., AND L. F. GALLOWAY. 1990. Natural selection and allocation to reproduction in flowering plants. In M. Mangel [ed.], Sex allocation and sex change: experiments and models, 1-50. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
65. STEHLIK, I., AND S. C. H. BARRETT. 2005. Mechanisms governing sex-ratio variation in dioecious Rumex nivalis. Evolution 59: 814-825.
66. USDA. 2004. Hoosier Pass SNOTEL water year. Natural Resources Conservation Service National Water and Climate Center. Website www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/cgibin/wygraph-multi.pl? [accessed 8 December 2005].
67. VOLK, T. A., T. VERWIJST, P. J. THARAKAN, L. P. ABRAHAMSON, AND E. H. WHITE. 2004. Growing fuel: a sustainability assessment of willow biomass crops. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 2: 411-418.
68. WASER, N. M. 1984. Sex ratio variation in populations of a dioecious desert perennial, Simmondsia chinensis. Oikos 42: 343-348.
69. WHEELWRIGHT, N. T., AND B. A. LOGAN. 2004. Previous-year reproduction reduces photosynthetic capacity and slows lifetime growth in females of a neotropical tree. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 101: 8051-8055.
70. WILLSON, M. F. 1990. Sexual selection in plants and animals. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 5: 210-214.