Sexual dimorphism in a dioecious population of the wind-pollinated herb Mercurialis annua: The interactive effects of resource availability and competition

Annals of Botany

Volumn 107, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 1039-1045

  Hesse, Elze ^a,b   Pannell, John R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

competition; Life history trade offs; Mercurialis annua; reproductive allocation; resource availability; separate sexes; sex allocation; sexual size dimorphism; wind pollination

Indexed keywords

DIOECY; HERB; HERMAPHRODITE; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; NUTRIENT AVAILABILITY; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; RESOURCE AVAILABILITY; SEX ALLOCATION; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SOIL NUTRIENT; TRADE-OFF;

ARTICLE; BIOMASS; EUPHORBIA; HISTOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; POLLINATION; POPULATION DYNAMICS; REPRODUCTION; WIND;

BIOMASS; EUPHORBIACEAE; POLLINATION; POPULATION DYNAMICS; REPRODUCTION; WIND;

MERCURIALIS ANNUA;

EID: 79955444038     PISSN: 03057364     EISSN: 10958290     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcr046     Document Type: Article

References (88)

1. Ackerly DD, Jasienski M. 1990. Size-dependent variation of gender in high-density stands of the monoecious annual, Ambrosia artimisiifolia. Oecologia 82: 474-477.
2. Agren J, Danell K, Elmqvist T, Ericson L, Hjältén J. 1999. Sexual dimorph-ism and biotic interactions. In: Geber MA, Dawson TE, Delph LF, eds. Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. Heidelberg: Springer, 217-246.
3. Aizen MA, Kenigsten A. 1990. Floral sex ratios in the shrub oak (Quercus ilicifolia) vary with microtopography and stem height. Canadian Journal of Botany 68: 1364-1368.
4. Allen GA, Antos JA. 1988. Relative reproductive effort in males and females of the dioecious shrub Oemleria cerasiformis. Oecologia 76: 111-118. (Pubitemid 20419635)
5. Antos JA, Allen GA. 1990. A comparison of reproductive effort in the dioe-cious shrub Oemleria cerasiformis using nitrogen, energy and biomass as currencies. American Midland Naturalist 124: 254-262.
6. Ashman TL, Baker I. 1992. Variation in floral sex allocation with time of season and currency. Ecology 73: 1237-1243.
7. Ashman TL, Knight TM, Steets JA, et al. 2004. Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: ecological and evolutionary causes and consequences. Ecology 85: 2408.
8. Barrett SCH, Pannell J. 1999. Metapopulation dynamics and mating-system evolution in plants. In: Hollingsworth P, Bateman R, Gornall R, eds. Molecular systematics and plant evolution. London: Chapman & Hall, 74-100.
9. Bell G. 1980. The costs of reproduction and their consequences. American Naturalist 116: 45-76.
10. Bierzychudek P, Eckhart V. 1988. Spatial segregation of the sexes of dioecious plants. American Naturalist 132: 34-43. (Pubitemid 19323898)
11. Brunet J. 1992. Sex allocation in hermaphroditic plants. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 7: 79-84.
12. Buggs RJA, Pannell JR. 2006. Rapid displacement of a monoecious plant lineage is due to pollen swamping by a dioecious relative. Current Biology 16: 996-1000. (Pubitemid 43728228)
13. Bullock SH, Bawa KS. 1981. Sexual dimorphism and the annual flowering pattern in Jacaratia dolichaula (D. Smith) Woodson (Caricaceae) in a Costa Rican rain forest. Ecology 62: 1491-1504.
14. Burd M, Allen TFH. 1988. Sexual strategies in wind-pollinated plants. Evolution 42: 403-407.
15. Campbell DR. 2000. Experimental tests of sex-allocation theory in plants. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15: 227-232. (Pubitemid 30326878)
16. Cepeda-Cornejo V, Dirzo R. 2010. Sex-related differences in reproductive allocation, growth, defense and herbivory in three dioecious neotropical palms. Plos One 5: e9824. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009824.
17. Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B. 1981. Allocation of resources to male and female functions in hermaphrodites. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 15: 57-74.
18. Charlesworth D, Morgan MT. 1991. Allocation of resources to sex functions in flowering plants. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 332: 91-102.
19. Charnov EL. 1982. The theory of sex allocation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
20. Conn JS, Blum U. 1981. Differentiation between the sexes of Rumex hastala-tus in net energy allocation, flowering and height. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 108: 446-455.
21. Cox PA. 1981. Niche partitioning between sexes of dioecious plants. American Naturalist 117: 295-307.
22. Culley TM, Weller SG, Sakai AK. 2002. The evolution of wind pollination in angiosperms. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 361-369. (Pubitemid 34775257)
23. Dawson TE, Bliss LC. 1989. 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 79: 332-343.
24. Dawson TE, Geber MA. 1999. Sexual dimorphism in physiology and mor-phology. In: Geber MA, Dawson TE, Delph LF, eds. Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. Heidelberg: Springer, 175-215.
25. De Jong TJ, Klinkhamer PGL. 1994. Plant size and reproductive success through female and male function. Journal of Ecology 82: 399-402. (Pubitemid 2101832)
26. Delph LF. 1990. Sex-differential resource-allocation patterns in the subdioecious shrub Hebe subalpina. Ecology 71: 1342-1351.
27. Delph LF. 1999. Sexual dimorphism in life history. In: Geber MA, Dawson TE, Delph LF, eds. Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. Heidelberg: Springer, 149-173.
28. Delph LF, Meagher TR. 1995. Sexual dimorphism masks life history trade-offs in the dioecious plant Silene latifolia. Ecology 76: 775-785.
29. Dorken ME, Barrett SCH. 2004. Phenotypic plasticity of vegetative and reproductive traits in monoecious and dioecious populations of Sagittaria latifolia (Alismataceae): a clonal aquatic plant. Journal of Ecology 92: 32-44. (Pubitemid 38143411)
30. Dorken ME, Pannell J. 2008. Density-dependent regulation of the sex ratio in an annual plant. American Naturalist 171: 824-830. (Pubitemid 351706509)
31. Durand B. 1963. Le complexe Mercurialis annua. S. L.: une étude biosyste-matique. Annales des Sciences Naturelles Botanique Paris 12: 579-736.
32. Eckhart VM, Chapin FS. 1997. Nutrient sensitivity of the cost of male func-tion in gynodioecious Phacelia linearis (Hydrophyllaceae). American Journal of Botany 84: 1092-1098. (Pubitemid 28117772)
33. Eppley SM. 2006. Females make tough neighbors: sex-specific competitive effects in seedlings of a dioecious grass. Oecologia 146: 549-554. (Pubitemid 41817787)
34. Eppley SM, Pannell JR. 2007. Density-dependent self-fertilization and male versus hermaphrodite siring success in an androdioecious plant. Evolution 61: 2349-2359. (Pubitemid 47512226)
35. Fox JF. 1993. Size and sex allocation in monoecious woody plants. Oecologia 94: 110-113. (Pubitemid 24406543)
36. Freeman DC, Klikoff LG, Harper KT. 1976. Differential resource utilization by sexes of dioecious plants. Science 193: 597-599.
37. Freeman DC, Lovett Doust J, El-Keblawy A, Miglia KJ, McArthur ED. 1997. Sexual specialization and inbreeding avoidance in the evolution of dioecy. Botanical Review 63: 65-92.
38. Friedman J, Barrett SCH. 2009. Wind of change: new insights on the ecology and evolution of pollination and mating in wind-pollinated plants. Annals of Botany 103: 1515-1527.
39. Geber MA, Dawson TE, Delph LF. 1999. Gender and sexual dimorphism in floweringt plants. Heidelberg: Springer.
40. Gedroc JJ, McConnaughay KDM, Coleman JS. 1996. Plasticity in root/shoot partitioning: optimal, ontogenetic, or both? Functional Ecology 10: 44-50.
41. Gehring JL, Linhart YB. 1993. Sexual dimorphism and response to low resources in the dioecious plants Silene latifolia (Caryophyllaceae). International Journal of Plant Sciences 154: 152-162. (Pubitemid 24411676)
42. Golonka AM, Sakai AK, Weller SG. 2005. Wind pollination, sexual dimorphism, and changes in floral traits of Schieda (Caryophyllaceae). American Journal of Botany 92: 1492-1502. (Pubitemid 41209487)
43. Grace JB, Tilman D. 1990. Perspectives in plant competition. San Diego: Academic Groom MJ. 1998. Allee effects limit population viability of an annual plant. American Naturalist 151: 487-496.
44. Harder LD, Thomson JD. 1989. Evolutionary options for maximizing pollen dispersal of animal-pollinated plants. American Naturalist 133: 323-344. (Pubitemid 20417434)
45. Harper JL. 1977. Population biology of Plants. London: Academic Press.
46. Harris MS, Pannell JR. 2008. Roots, shoots and reproduction: sexual dimorphism in size and costs of reproductive allocation in an annual herb. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 275: 2595-2602.
47. Hawkins TS, Schiff NM, Leininger TD, et al. 2009. Growth and intraspecific competitive abilities of the dioecious Lindera melissifolia (Lauraceae) in varied flooding regimes. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 136: 91-101.
48. Hesse E, Pannell JR. 2011. Sexual dimorphism in androdioecious Mercurialis annua, a wind-pollinated herb. International Journal of Plant Sciences 172: 49-59.
49. Klinkhamer PGL, de Jong TJ, Metz H. 1997. Sex and size in cosexual plants. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12: 260-265.
50. Klinkhamer PGL, Meelis E, Dejong TJ, Weiner J. 1992. On the analysis of size-dependent reproductive output in plants. Functional Ecology 6: 308-316. (Pubitemid 23396586)
51. Knight TM, Steets JA, Ashman TL. 2006. A quantitative synthesis of pollen supplementation experiments highlights the contribution of resource real-location to estimates of pollen limitation. American Journal of Botany 93: 271-277. (Pubitemid 43234793)
52. Leigh A, Cosgrove MJ, Nicotra AB. 2006. Reproductive allocation in a gender dimorphic shrub: anomalous female investment in Gynatrix pul-chella? Journal of Ecology 11: 1261-1271. (Pubitemid 44511013)
53. Lloyd DG. 1984. Gender allocation in outcrossing cosexual plants. In: Dirzo R, Sarukhan J, eds. Perspectives on plant population ecology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer, 277-300.
54. Lloyd DG, Bawa KS. 1984. Modification of gender of seed plants in varying conditions. Evolutionary Biology 17: 255-338.
55. Lloyd DG, Webb CJ. 1977. Secondary sex characters in plants. Botanical Review 43: 177-216.
56. Lovett Doust J, O'Brien G, Lovett Doust L. 1987. Effect of density on sec-ondary sex characteristics and sex ratio in Silene alba (Caryophyllaceae). American Journal of Botany 74: 40-46.
57. Lundholm JT, Aarssen LW. 1994. Neighbor effects on gender variation in Ambrosia artemisiifolia. Canadian Journal of Botany 72: 794-800. (Pubitemid 2122690)
58. McKone MJ, Lund CP, O'Brien JM. 1998. Reproductive biology of two dominant prairie grasses (Andropogon gerardii and Sorghastrum nutans, Poaceae): male-biased sex allocation in wind-pollinated plants? American Journal of Botany 85: 776-783.
59. McKone MJ, Tonkyn DW. 1986. Intrapopulation gender variation in common ragweed (Asteraceae, Ambrosia artemisiifolia L), a monoecious, annual herb. Oecologia 70: 63-67.
60. Meagher TR. 1984. Sexual dimorphism and ecological differentiation of male and female plants. Annals Missouri Botanical Garden 71: 254-264.
61. Miller J, Lovett Doust J. 1987. The effects of plant density and snail grazing on female and male spinach plants. New Phytologist 107: 613-621. (Pubitemid 19319744)
62. Nicotra AB. 1998. Sex ratio variation and spatial distribution of Siparuna grandiflora, atropical dioecious shrub. Oecologia 115: 102-113. (Pubitemid 28295184)
63. Niesenbaum RA. 1992. Sex ratio, components of reproduction, and pollen deposition in Lindera benzoin. American Journal of Botany 79: 495-500.
64. Obeso JR. 2002. The costs of reproduction in plants. New Phytologist 155: 321-348. (Pubitemid 34923128)
65. Onyekwelu SS, Harper JL. 1979. Sex ratio and niche differentiation in spinach (Spinacea oleracea L.). Nature 282: 609-611.
66. Pannell J. 1997b. Variation in sex ratios and sex allocation in androdioecious Mercurialis annua. Journal of Ecology 85: 57-69.
67. Pannell J. 1997a. Widespread functional androdieocy in Mercurialis annua L. (Euphorbiaceae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 61: 95-116. (Pubitemid 27274766)
68. Paquin V, Aarssen LW. 2004. Allometric gender allocation in Ambrosia arte-misiifolia (Asteraceae) has adaptive plasticity. American Journal of Botany 91: 430-438. (Pubitemid 38370888)
69. Popp JW, Reinartz JA. 1988. Sexual dimorphism in biomass allocation and clonal growth of Xanthoxylum americanum. American Journal of Botany 75: 1732-1741.
70. Pujol B, Pannell JR. 2008. Reduced responses to selection following range expansion. Science 321: 96. (Pubitemid 351956238)
71. Putwain PD, Harper JL. 1972. Studies in the dynamics of plant populations. V. Mechanisms governing the sex ratio in Rumex acetosa and R. acetosella. Journal of Ecology 60: 113-129.
72. Ramadan AA, El-Keblawy A, Shaltout KH, Lovett-Doust J. 1994. Sexual polymorphism, growth and reproductive effort in Egyptian Thymelaea hirsuta (Thymelaeaceae). American Journal of Botany 81: 847-857. (Pubitemid 2113670)
73. Sakai A, Sakai S. 2003. Size-dependent ESS sex allocation in wind-pollinated cosexual plants: fecundity vs. stature effects. Journal of Theoretical Biology 222: 283-295. (Pubitemid 36542821)
74. Sakai A, Sasa A, Sakai S. 2006. Do sexual dimorphisms in reproductive allo-cation and new shoot biomass increase with an increase in altitude? A case of the shrub willow Salix reinii (Salicaceae). American Journal of Botany 93: 988-992. (Pubitemid 44065653)
75. Samson DA, Werk KS. 1986. Size-dependent effects in the analysis ofrepro-ductive effort in plants. American Naturalist 127: 667-680. (Pubitemid 17251297)
76. Sanchez-Vilas J, Pannell JR. 2010. Differential niche modification by males and females of a dioecious herb: extending the Jack Sprat effect. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 23: 2262-2266.
77. Schoen DJ, Stewart SC. 1986. Variation in male reproductive investment and male reproductive success in white spruces. Evolution 6: 1109-1120.
78. Solomon BP. 1989. Size-dependent sex ratios in the monoecious, wind-pollinated annual Xanthium strumarium. American Midland Naturalist 121: 209-218. (Pubitemid 20417622)
79. Stearns SC. 1992. The evolution oflife histories. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
80. Tilman D. 1994. Competition and biodiversity in spatially strcutured habitats. Ecology 75: 2-16.
81. Traveset A. 1992. Sex expression in a natural population of the monoecious annual, Ambrosia artemisiifolia (Asteraceae). American Midland Naturalist 127: 309-315.
82. Vasillauskas SA, Aarssen LW. 1992. Sex ratio and neighbor effects in mono-specific stands of Juniperus virginiana. Ecology 73: 622-632.
83. Venables WN, Ripley BD. 2002. Modern applied statistics with S. New York: Springer-Verlag.
84. Vitale JJ, Freeman DC, Merlotti LA, Dalessandro M. 1987. Patterns of biomass allocation in Spinacia oleracea (Chenopodiaceae) across a salinity gradient: evidence for a niche separation. American Journal of Botany 74: 1049-1054.
85. Wallace CS, Rundel PW. 1979. Sexual dimorphism and resource allocation in male and female shrubs of Simmondsia chinensis. Oecologia 44: 34-39.
86. Zhang CY, Zhao XH, Gao LS, Gadow KV. 2009. Gender, neighboring com-petition and habitat effects on the stem growth in dioecious Fraxinus mandshurica trees in a northern temperate forest. Annals of Forest Science 66(8): 812. doi:10.1051/forest/2009068.
87. Zhang DY, Jiang XH. 2002. Size-dependent resource allocation and sex allo-cation in herbaceous perennial plants. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 15: 74-83.
88. Zimmerman JK. 1991. Ecological correlates of labile sex expression in the orchid Catasetum viridiflavum. Ecology 72: 597-608.