ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2019
Rapid evolution of leaf physiology in an introduced beach daisy.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Weedy and seedy: the rapid evolution of life-history characteristics in an introduced daisy.AoB PLANTS · 2022Article
- Evolution of defense and herbivory in introduced plants-Testing enemy release using a known source population, herbivore trials, and time since introduction.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- Dung beetle species introductions: when an ecosystem service provider transforms into an invasive species.PeerJ · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Photosynthesis is a key biological process. However, we know little about whether plants change their photosynthetic strategy when introduced to a new range. We located the most likely source population for the South African beach daisy Arctotheca populifolia introduced to Australia in the 1930s, and ran a common-garden experiment measuring 10 physiological and morphological leaf traits associated with photosynthesis. Based on predictions from theory, and higher rainfall in the introduced range, we hypothesized that introduced plants would have a (i) higher photosynthetic rate, (ii) lower water-use efficiency (WUE) and (iii) higher nitrogen-use efficiency. However, we found that introduced A. populifolia had a lower photosynthetic rate, higher WUE and lower nitrogen-use efficiency than did plants from Arniston, South Africa. Subsequent site visits suggested that plants in Arniston may be able to access moisture on a rocky shelf, while introduced plants grow on sandy beaches where water can quickly dissipate. Our unexpected findings highlight that: (1) it is important to compare introduced species to their source population for an accurate assessment of evolutionary change; (2) rainfall is not always a suitable proxy for water availability and (3) introduced species often undergo evolutionary changes, but without detailed ecological information we may not be able to accurately predict the direction of these changes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.