Allometric Relationships for Interspecific Plant Biomass Allocations and Morphological Characteristics

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-562536/v1

Download PDF

Research

Allometric Relationships for Interspecific Plant Biomass Allocations and Morphological Characteristics

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-562536/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background

The allometric relationships of plants and their changes assist with elucidating the adaptive responses of plants to the environment. However, it remains unclear whether different species of the life-form ‘shrubs’ have consistent or similar allometric relationships between modular characteristics (including morphological characteristics and biomass allocations). Here, we selected eight xerophytic shrubs as samples to investigate the morphological characteristics, biomass allocations and their allometric relationships.

Results

The results showed that there were common allometric scaling exponents (α_RMA) between modular characteristics with the exception of crown area (C)-belowground biomass (BGB) and C-plant height (H). Moreover, The BGB-total biomass (TGB) of the eight species accorded with the significant isometric relationships, and the isometric or allometric relationships of different species in aboveground biomass (AGB)-BGB and AGB-TGB were similar, which meant that the belowground biomass mainly determined the total biomass for xerophytic shrubs.

Conclusions

Our results suggested that there were similar trends of collaborative changes between modular characteristics of eight xerophytic shrubs with the exception of C-BGB and C-H, which reflected the convergent adaptation of different species in the life-form ‘shrubs’ to arid environments.

Agroecology

Forestry

Behavioral Ecology

xerophytic shrubs

allometric relationship

allometric scaling exponents

morphological characteristics

biomass allocation

arid environment.

Changes in the morphological characteristics and biomass allocations of plants are the result of the interaction between plant and environment, which reflects the ability of plants to adapt to the environment (Uri et al. 2007, Marfo and Dang 2009, Crane et al. 2017). Allometric relationships are inherent characteristics determined by the genetic attributes of species, which can reveal the internal principles of plant growth. At the same time, there is a power function relationship between certain biological characteristics and plant body size (West et al. 1997, Niklas and Enquist 2001, Niklas 2004). The theoretical predictions based on the metabolic theory and the fractal-like networks show that regardless of whether the plants have secondary tissues or no secondary tissues, the above- and below-ground biomass allocations are in an isometric relationship (i.e., the allometric scaling exponent is 1) (Niklas and Enquist 2001, Enquist and Niklas 2002). In terms of morphological characteristics (e.g. crown area, plant height, and stem diameter) and biomass allocations (e.g. aboveground biomass, belowground biomass, and total biomass), the number of leaves scales as the 3/4-power (i.e., 3/4 scaling exponent) of the total biomass; and the plant body length scales as the 1/4-power of the total biomass (Niklas and Enquist 2001). It can be seen that there are no consistent allometric relationships between different parameters of the same plant. So, what kind of allometric relationships are there between the modular characteristics (including morphological characteristics and biomass allocations) of xerophytic shrubs?

Shrubs comprise the dominant species of plant communities in arid and semi-arid regions (Gómez-Aparicio et al. 2004, Foronda et al. 2020). Due to shortages of water resources, xerophytic shrubs have developed super-drought resistance (Angert et al. 2007, Zhang et al. 2020). These species are not only an important and unique plant germplasm resource in drought areas, but also have certain edible and medicinal value for livestock (Tuttolomondo et al. 2014). However, the research on allometric relationships of these species has not been reported. Moreover, it remains unclear whether different species of the life-form ‘shrubs’ have a common or similar allometric relationship between modular characteristics. Considering that the lifestyle is same, we hypothesized that different xerophytic shrubs have convergent adaptation to arid environments.

For this study, eight xerophytic shrubs (Prunus mongolica Ricker, Nitraria tangutorum Bobr, Ammopiptanthus mongolicus Cheng f, Hedysarum scoparium Fisch. et Mey, Caragana korshinskii Kom, Zygophyllum xanthoxylum Bunge, Artemisia sphaerocephala Krasch, and Hedysarum mongolicum Turcz) were selected as samples. These species are typically employed for ecological restoration projects in the arid regions. With a focus on modular characteristics and their internal relations for xerophytic shrubs in adapting to arid environments, the allometric relationships for plant biomass allocations and morphological characteristics are reported. The allometric relationship is an effective method for estimating plant biomass. This method can not only estimate the above-ground biomass through the allometric relationship between aboveground morphological characteristics and aboveground biomass, but also estimate the belowground biomass non-destructively by using the allometric relationship between the above- and below-ground biomass. Therefore, analyzing the allometric relationships between modular characteristics is helpful toward elucidating the adaptive changes of plants and providing a theoretical basis for the plant protection and utilization.

Study area

Our experiment was conducted at the Ecological Experimental Station of Lanzhou University (104°09′N, 35°87′E, at an altitude of 1966 m), which is located in the interlaced zone of desert and the Loess Plateau (Li et al. 2014). According to climate data from 1971 to 2000, this area belongs to a typical temperate continental monsoon climate, with an annual mean air temperature and rainfall of 10.3°C and 350 mm, respectively. The rainy season is primarily concentrated from June to September, with approximately 2446 h of sunlight annually, a frost-free period of 180 days, with a Kastanozems soil type (Zhang et al. 2014). In aid and semiarid ecosystem, most of the land-forms are barren gully with a loose soil texture and the effective water resources are seriously insufficient. Planting xerophytic shrubs is benefit to the restoration of aid and semiarid ecosystem (Fig. 1).

Experimental procedure

For this experiment, we employed eight xerophytic shrubs, which included P. mongolica, N. tangutorum, A. mongolicus, H. scoparium, C. korshinskii, Z. xanthoxylum, A. sphaerocephala, and H. mongolicum (Table 1). All seeds for these species were obtained from the Psammophyte Garden in Gansu Province.

In May 2014, shrub seeds of uniform size were placed in a Petri dish containing moist filter paper and observed for germination in a growth cabinet for one week at 25°C with a 12 h photo-period. Following germination, the seedlings were planted in the botanical garden at the Ecological Experimental Station of Lanzhou University. In this experiment, there is a randomized block design (total of five blocks), and each block with four similarly sized plots that contained all eight species with 40 seedlings per plant species in each plot, and the plant-cluster spacing was 75 cm. Five harvests were carried out during the vegetative growth period, with intervals of three months. The timing for all the species was as follows: harvest 1 (initial) on September 2014; harvest 2 on the end of November 2014; harvest 3 on March 2015; harvest 4 on June 2015; harvest 5 on September 2015. That is, a total of five harvests lasting about one years.

Measurements

During the survey, three plants with uniform growth were selected for each species in each plot, after which the plant height (H), plant body length (L) and width (W) were measured. Subsequently, each plant was carefully excavated with a shovel at a depth of 60 cm, and the soil at the roots was washed away. The leaves, stems, and roots were collected, dried, and weighed. Data from the four plots of each block were pooled together (n = 12), recorded as one repetition (that is, the number of repetitions is the number of blocks, N = 5), and included in a statistical analysis.

Computation

The area formula of ellipse

was employed to calculate the crown area (C).

is the allometric equation, where Y is a biological characteristic or function, β is a standardized constant, and X is the plant body size. When α = 1, it is an isometric relationship, that is, the dependent variable and independent variable change uniformly or proportionally; when α ≠ 1, it is an allometric relationship, that is, the changes of dependent variable and independent variable are not uniform or proportional. When determining allometric parameters, the power function must be converted to the form of

,where α_RMA is the slope of linear regression following the logarithmization of the power function, and logβ is the intercept of the linear regression. The reduced major axis regression (RMA) method is used to calculate the parameters of regression model (e.g. logβ and α_RMA), 95% confidence interval (CI), and Pearson correlation coefficient (R²) (Niklas and Enquist 2001, Niklas 2004).

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were run using SPSS software (v. 22.0, Chicago, USA). The analysis of the allometric relationship was performed using the RMA (reduced major axis) regression method of the SMATR software package. All data were converted using a logarithm of base-10, and following conversion, linear fitting was performed to analyze the allometric relationships between modular characteristics of the eight xerophytic shrubs. The significance level was set at P < 0.05 for all tests, and all data were expressed by mean ± SE.

Allometric relationships between morphological characteristics

The biomass allocations or growth-related morphological characteristics of different xerophytic shrubs were different (Appendix S1) and had an interaction between time and species (Appendix S2). With the exception of the crown area (C)-plant height (H) of H. Mongolicum, H. scoparium and Z. xanthoxylum, and the stem diameter (D)-C of A. sphaerocephala, H. Mongolicum, H. scoparium and Z. xanthoxylum, there were significant allometric relationships between morphological characteristics for the other species (Table 2). The D-H of H. Mongolicum and H. scoparium accorded with the significant isometric relationships (95% CI included 1). The D-H of A. sphaerocephala showed an allometric relationship with allometric scaling exponents (α_RMA) significantly greater than 1 (95% CI > 1), while that of the other five species (A. mongolicus, C. korshinskii, N. tangutorum, P. mongolica, and Z. xanthoxylum) showed an allometric relationship with α_RMA significantly less than 1 (95% CI < 1) in which the D of A. mongolicus, C. korshinskii and Z. xanthoxylum scaled as the 3/4-power of the H (95% CI included 3/4). The C-H and D-C of A. mongolicus, C. korshinskii and N. tangutorum accorded with the significant isometric relationships, while those of the P. mongolica were allometric relationships with α_RMA significantly less than 1.

The α_RMA of D-H of different species ranged from 0.547 to 1.676 (Table 2, Fig. 2), with a common α_RMA being 0.818 (Y = D, X = H) (Fig. 2); the α_RMA of C-H of different species ranged from − 1.926 to 1.084, and there was no common α_RMA (Y = C, X = H); the α_RMA of D-C of different species ranged from − 0.341 to 1.011, with a common α_RMA being 0.868 (Y = D, X = C). Although the eight species had differences in isometric and allometric relationships, with the exception of C-H, the double logarithm fitting curve between morphological characteristics (i.e., D-H or D-C) was similar (Fig. 3), with a common α_RMA (Fig. 2) and Pearson correlation coefficient (Fig. 3).

Allometric relationships between between morphological characteristics and biomass allocations

With the exception of the C-aboveground biomass (AGB) and C-belowground biomass (BGB) of the H. Mongolicum, H. scoparium and Z. xanthoxylum, and C-BGB of the A. mongolicus, there were significant allometric relationships between morphological characteristics and biomass allocation for the other species (Table 3). The α_RMA of those allometric relationships was all less than 1, among which 10 pairs were 1/4 scaling exponent (95% CI included 1/4) and 4 pairs were 3/4 scaling exponent (i.e., C-AGB and C-BGB of N. tangutorum, D-BGB of H. Mongolicum, and H-BGB of P. mongolica). Moreover, with the exception of the individual parameters of individual species, there were significant allometric relationships between total biomass (TGB) or root/shoot ratio (R/S) and morphological characteristics for other species, and the α_RMA of those allometric relationships was all less than 1 (Appendix S3, S4). The double logarithm fitting curves between morphological characteristics and biomass allocations were similar with the exception of the C-BGB (Fig. 3), with a common α_RMA (Fig. 2) and Pearson correlation coefficient (Fig. 3).

The α_RMA of D-AGB of different species ranged from 0.224 to 0.420 (Table 3, Fig. 2), with a common α_RMA being 0.341 (Y = D, X = AGB) (Fig. 2); the α_RMA of H-AGB of different species ranged from 0.251 to 0.518, with a common α_RMA being 0.416 (Y = H, X = AGB); the α_RMA of C-AGB of different species ranged from − 0.901 to 0.561, with a common α_RMA being 0.453 (Y = C, X = AGB); the α_RMA of D-BGB of different species ranged from 0.312 to 0.586, with a common α_RMA being 0.430 (Y = D, X = BGB); the α_RMA of H-BGB of different species ranged from 0.254 to 0.674, with a common α_RMA being 0.526 (Y = H, X = BGB); the α_RMA of C-BGB of different species ranged from − 0.961 to 0.535, and there was no common α_RMA (Y = C, X = BGB).

Allometric relationships between between biomass allocations

There were significant allometric relationships between biomass allocations of the eight species (Table 4). The AGB-BGB and AGB-TGB of A. mongolicus, A. sphaerocephala and C. korshinskii accorded with the significant isometric relationships, while those of the other five species (H. Mongolicum, H. scoparium, N. tangutorum, P. mongolica, and Z. xanthoxylum) were allometric relationships with α_RMA significantly greater than 1. The BGB-TGB of the eight species accorded with the significant isometric relationships. Although the eight species had differences in isometric and allometric relationships, the double logarithm fitting curves between biomass allocations were similar (Fig. 3). For example, the α_RMA of AGB-BGB of the eight species all fluctuated near 1, with a common α_RMA (α_RMA = 1.264) (Fig. 2) and Pearson correlation coefficient (R² = 0.70) (Fig. 3, 4).

The α_RMA of AGB-BGB of different species ranged from 0.974 to 1.848, with a common α_RMA being 1.264 (Y = AGB, X = BGB) (Fig. 2); the α_RMA of AGB-TGB of different species ranged from 1.015 to 1.736, with a common α_RMA being 1.150 (Y = AGB, X = TGB); the α_RMA of BGB-TGB of different species ranged from 0.809 to 1.047, with a common α_RMA being 0.910 (Y = BGB, X = TGB).

The allometric relationships between the modular characteristics of plants were confirmed by a fractal-like network, metabolism theory and other methods (Enquist and Niklas 2002, Niklas 2004, Pretzsch and Dieler 2012), and verified by a large quantity of measured data. It is predicted that there are isometric relationships between the biomass allocations of plants, while the relationships between other modular characteristics are mainly allometric (Niklas 2004, 2005). In this study, with the exception of the individual parameters of individual species, there were significant allometric relationships between most of the morphological characteristics for eight xerophytic shrubs, and between the morphological characteristics and biomass allocations, which was consistent with the theoretical prediction. However, there were also allometric relationships between belowground biomass (BGB) or total biomass (TGB) and aboveground biomass (AGB) for H. Mongolicum, H. scoparium, N. tangutorum, P. mongolica and Z. xanthoxylum, which didn’t conform to the theoretical prediction. This difference might be caused by the ability of the above five shrubs to store additional resources in root organs to ensure that plants can germinate and grow again in the coming year. This study also found that the BGB-TGB of the eight species accorded with the significant isometric relationships, which conformed to the theoretical prediction and supported the above view.

There was no common α_RMA between plant height (H) or BGB and crown area (C), which was mainly caused by the differences in the activity of plant body length (L) and width (W) of different xerophytic shrubs in order to adapt to the drought environment. The results indicated that there was no consistent rule of synergetic change between H or BGB and C for xerophytic shrubs. Niklas (2004) analyzed the allometric relationships between the morphological characteristics and biomass allocations for two ferns and one dicotyledonous plant. The results revealed that although the growth rate was non-isometric, the morphological characteristics of the three species and the allocation of organic biomass had a consistent rule of synergetic change. The difference between the result of Niklas and our result might be caused by species, life forms, and even environmental factors.

This study showed that the α_RMA of C-H fluctuated most between morphological characteristics of different species, as well as the A. mongolicus and P. mongolica had the largest (α_RMA = 1.084) and smallest α_RMA (α_RMA = -1.926), respectively. The α_RMA of C-BGB fluctuated most between morphological characteristics and biomass allocations of different species, as well as the N. tangutorum and P. mongolica had the largest (α_RMA = 0.535) and smallest α_RMA (α_RMA = -0.961), respectively. From the above results, it could be seen that the species with the largest α_RMA was different for C-H and C-BGB, which might be caused by individual plant development. The allometric relationships between plant attributes are influenced by individual plant development, whereas the allometric relationships between modular characteristics of different species have variable trends with individual plant development, which are species-specific.

The allocation of biomass reflects the adaptation strategies of plants to align with the availability of resources (Liu et al. 2010, Gutiérrez-Girón and Gavilán 2012). The above- and below-ground growth of plants is a unified whole. The acquisition of water and nutrients is primarily contingent on strong roots, while the acquisition of light and the loss of water are more related to leaves (Poorter and Pothmann 1992, Andrade et al. 2014). During the process of plant growth, with changes in available resources, their various organs will develop harmoniously, and modify their existing resource utilization strategies to maintain their own growth and development requirements (Hara 1994). In this study, the double logarithm fitting curves between above- and belowground biomass were similar and the α_RMA of the eight species all fluctuated near 1. This result signified that although the eight species had differences in isometric and allometric relationships, there was a relatively consistent trend of collaborative change in the biomass allocation pattern of above- and below-ground (Li et al. 2017). Moreover, the common α_RMA and Pearson correlation coefficient (R²) between biomass allocations of different species in this study also confirmed the conclusion that the allometric relationship between biomass allocations has nothing to do with species. This result was similar to that of Enquist and Niklas (2002) regarding the patterns of biomass partitioning in seed plants.

α_RMA: Allometric scaling exponents

C: Crown area

D: Stem diameter

H: Plant height

L: Plant body length

W: Plant body width

AGB: Aboveground biomass

BGB: Belowground biomass

TGB: Total biomass

R/S: Root/shoot ratio

RMA: Reduced major axis regression

CI: 95% confidence interval

R²: Pearson correlation coefficient

Competing interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Acknowledgements

We thank Frank Boehm for improving the language. We also thank Yuntao Ren for the help with sample analysis.

Funding

This study was sponsored by the National Key R&D Program of China (2016YFC0500506), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31572458, 31770763, 41671106), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (lzujbky-2017-47), the Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University (IRT_17R50), and the 111 project (B12002).

Author contributions

CZ and DN conducted the experiments, data analysis and article writing; DN and HF provided valuable suggestions and made modifications; LZ and XL supervised development of this work. All authors contributed to the writing of this article.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Acknowledgements

We thank Frank Boehm for improving the language. We also thank Yuntao Ren for the help with sample analysis.

Funding

Author contributions

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Andrade BO, Overbeck GE, Pilger GE, Hermann JM, Conradi T, Boldrini II, Kollmannb J (2014) Intraspecific trait variation and allocation strategies of calcareous grassland species: results from a restoration experiment. Basic Appl Ecol 15:590–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2014.08.007
Angert AL, Huxman TE, Barron-Gafford GA, Gerst KL, Venable DL (2007) Linking growth strategies to long-term population dynamics in a guild of desert annuals. J Ecol 95:321–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2006.01203.x
Crane PR, Ge S, Hong DY, Huang HW, Jiao GL, Knapp S, Kress W, John M, Harold R, Peter H, Wen J, Wu WH, Yang HM, Zhu WH, Zhu YX (2017) The shenzhen declaration on plant sciences—uniting plant sciences and society to build a green, sustainable earth. Journal of Systematics Evolution 66:1261–1262. https://doi.org/10.1111/jse.12283
Enquist BJ, Niklas KJ (2002) Global allocation rules for patterns of biomass partitioning in seed plants. Science 295:1517–1520. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1066360
Foronda A, Pueyo Y, Reiné R, Arroyo AI, Giner M, lados CL (2020) The role of shrubs in spatially structuring the soil seed bank of perennial species in a semi-arid gypsum plant community. Plant Ecol 221:913–923. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-020-01050-z
Gómez-Aparicio L, Zamora R, Gómez JM, Hódar JA, Baraza CE (2004) Applying plan facilitation to forest restoration in mediterranean ecosystems: a meta-analysis of the shrubs as nurse plants. Ecol Appl 14:1128–1138. https://doi.org/10.2307/4493610
Gutiérrez-Girón A, Gavilán R (2012) Plant functional strategies and environmental constraints in Mediterranean high mountain grasslands in central Spain. New Phytol 6:435–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/17550874.2013.783641
Hara T (1994) Growth and competition in clonal plants-persistence of shoot populations and species diversity. Folia Geobotanica et Phytotaxonomica 29:181–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02803794
Li DS, Wang JY, Wang SG, Li ZC, Shang KZ, Bi JR (2014) Soil moisture characteristics and analysis on its moving mechanism in central gansu, a part of the semi-arid loess plateau. Journal of Desert Research 34:140–147. https://doi.org/10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2013.00292 (In Chinese)
Li M, Yuan Z, Fan RR, Zhong QL, Cheng DL (2017) Scaling relationships of twig biomass allocation in pinus hwangshanensis along an altitudinal gradient. PLoS ONE 12(5):e0178344. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178344
Liu G, Grégoire T, Freschet GT, Pan X, Cornelissen JHC, Li Y, Dong M (2010) Coordinated variation in leaf and root traits across multiple spatial scales in chinese semi-arid and arid ecosystems. New Phytol 188:543–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03388.x
Marfo J, Dang QL (2009) Interactive effects of carbon dioxide concentration and light on the morphological and biomass characteristics of black spruce and white spruce seedlings. Botany 87:67–77. https://doi.org/10.1039/b109188c
Niklas KJ (2004) Plant allometry: Is there a grand unifying theory? Biol Rev 79:871–889. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793104006499
Niklas KJ (2005) Modelling below- and above-ground biomass for non-woody and woody plants. Ann Bot 95:315–321. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci028
Niklas KJ, Enquist BJ (2001) Invariant scaling relationship for interspecific plant biomass production rates and body size. Pans 98:2922–2927. https://doi.org/10.1073ypnas.041590298
Poorter H, Pothmann P (1992) Growth and carbon economy of a fast- and slow- growing grass species as dependent on ontogeny. New Phytol 120:159–166. https://doi.org/10.2307/2557282
Pretzsch H, Dieler J (2012) Evidence of variant intra- and interspecific scaling of tree crown structure and relevance for allometric theory. Springer Open Choice 169:637–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-011-2240-5
Tuttolomondo T, Licata M, Leto C, Letizia GM, Venturella G, La BS (2014) Plant genetic resources and traditional knowledge on medicinal use of wild shrub and herbaceous plant species in the Etna Regional Park (Eastern Sicily, Italy). J Ethnopharmacol 155:1362–1381. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2014.07.043
Uri V, Lhmus K, Ostonen I, Tullus H, Lastik R, Vildo M (2007) Biomass production, foliar and root characteristics and nutrient accumulation in young silver birch (betula pendula roth.) stand growing on abandoned agricultural land. Eur J Forest Res 126:495–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-007-0171-9
West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1997) A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science 276:122–126. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.276.5309.122
Zhang CP, Niu DC, Hall SJ, Wen HY, Li XD, Fu H, Wan CG, Elser JJ (2014) Effects of simulated nitrogen deposition on soil respiration components and their temperature sensitivities in a semiarid grassland. Soil Biol Biochem 75:113–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.04.013
Zhang ZZ, Shan LS, Li Y, Wang Y (2020) Belowground interactions differ between sympatric desert shrubs under water stress. Ecology Evolution 10:1444–1453. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5999

Table 1. The family, leaf longevity, root system and species of eight xerophytic shrubs.

Family	Leaf longevity	Species
Compositae	deciduous	Artemisia sphaerocephala
Chenopodiaceae	deciduous	Zygophyllum xanthoxylum
	deciduous	Nitraria tangutorum
Leguminosae	deciduous	Caragana korshinskii
	deciduous	Hedysarum scoparium
	evergreen	Ammopiptanthus mongolicus
	deciduous	Hedysarum mongolicum
Rosaceae	deciduous	Prunus mongolica

Table 2. Allometric relationships between morphological characteristics for the eight xerophytic shrubs.

Family	Leaf longevity	Species
Compositae	deciduous	Artemisia sphaerocephala
Chenopodiaceae	deciduous	Zygophyllum xanthoxylum
	deciduous	Nitraria tangutorum
Leguminosae	deciduous	Caragana korshinskii
	deciduous	Hedysarum scoparium
	evergreen	Ammopiptanthus mongolicus
	deciduous	Hedysarum mongolicum
Rosaceae	deciduous	Prunus mongolica

Note: "-" represents no allometric relationship between the two parameters (Pα_RMA > 0.05), and P < 0.05 indicates that the isometric relationship is significant. The same below.

Table 3. Allometric relationships between morphological characteristics and biomass allocations for the eight xerophytic shrubs.

Family	Leaf longevity	Species
Compositae	deciduous	Artemisia sphaerocephala
Chenopodiaceae	deciduous	Zygophyllum xanthoxylum
	deciduous	Nitraria tangutorum
Leguminosae	deciduous	Caragana korshinskii
	deciduous	Hedysarum scoparium
	evergreen	Ammopiptanthus mongolicus
	deciduous	Hedysarum mongolicum
Rosaceae	deciduous	Prunus mongolica

Table 4. Allometric relationship between biomass allocations for the eight xerophytic shrubs.

Parameter		Species	R²	Pα_RMA	α_RMA	logβ	α_RMA95% CI	logβ 95% CI	F	P
Y = AGB		A. mon	0.826	0.000	0.974	0.346	0.814 ~ 1.165	0.252 ~ 0.441	0.094	0.000
X = BGB		A. sph	0.863	0.000	1.012	0.646	0.863 ~ 1.186	0.477 ~ 0.815	0.024	0.000
		C. kor	0.679	0.000	1.118	0.183	0.878 ~ 1.424	0.019 ~ 0.347	0.901	0.000
		H. mon	0.188	0.031	1.848	-0.544	1.264 ~ 2.701	-0.941 ~ -0.148	12.090	0.000
		H. sco	0.420	0.000	1.611	-0.189	1.167 ~ 2.225	-0.483 ~ 0.105	9.725	0.000
		N. tan	0.862	0.000	1.326	0.550	1.130 ~ 1.556	0.275 ~ 0.825	13.575	0.003
		P. mon	0.644	0.000	1.529	-0.032	1.185 ~ 1.973	-0.257 ~ 0.192	12.374	0.000
		Z. xan	0.797	0.000	1.310	0.308	1.080 ~ 1.589	0.171 ~ 0.445	8.460	0.000
Y = AGB		A. mon	0.983	0.000	1.020	-0.171	0.964 ~ 1.079	-0.197 ~ -0.145	0.511	0.000
X = TGB		A. sph	0.994	0.000	1.015	-0.121	0.982 ~ 1.049	-0.178 ~ -0.065	0.838	0.000
		C. kor	0.938	0.000	1.114	-0.313	1.000 ~ 1.240	-0.408 ~ -0.217	4.370	0.000
		H. mon	0.631	0.000	1.736	-0.989	1.339 ~ 2.249	-1.309 ~ -0.669	20.944	0.000
		H. sco	0.793	0.000	1.469	-0.636	1.209 ~ 1.784	-0.817 ~ -0.455	17.262	0.000
		N. tan	0.980	0.000	1.133	-0.153	1.066 ~ 1.204	-0.222 ~ -0.084	17.986	0.000
		P. mon	0.949	0.000	1.237	-0.459	1.123 ~ 1.363	-0.573 ~ -0.345	20.799	0.000
		Z. xan	0.979	0.000	1.122	-0.257	1.054 ~ 1.196	-0.309 ~ -0.206	14.367	0.000
Y = BGB	A. mon		0.912	0.000	1.047	-0.531	0.814 ~ 1.165	-0.592 ~ -0.470	0.561	0.000
X = TGB	A. sph		0.911	0.000	1.003	-0.758	0.882 ~ 1.140	-0.976 ~ -0.540	0.002	0.000
	C. kor		0.878	0.000	0.996	-0.443	0.858 ~ 1.157	-0.564 ~ -0.323	0.003	0.000
	H. mon		0.786	0.000	0.939	-0.240	0.770 ~ 1.145	-0.371 ~ -0.110	0.422	0.000
	H. sco		0.844	0.000	0.912	-0.278	0.769 ~ 1.080	-0.375 ~ -0.181	1.268	0.000
	N. tan		0.941	0.000	0.854	-0.530	0.770 ~ 1.004	-0.619 ~ -0.441	9.773	0.000
	P. mon		0.838	0.000	0.809	-0.279	0.681 ~ 1.062	-0.413 ~ -0.145	6.470	0.000
	Z. xan		0.896	0.000	0.857	-0.432	0.746 ~ 1.085	-0.519 ~ -0.345	5.281	0.000

SupportingInformation.docx

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Allometric Relationships for Interspecific Plant Biomass Allocations and Morphological Characteristics

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Material And Methods

Study area

Experimental procedure

Measurements

Computation

Statistical analysis

Results

Allometric relationships between morphological characteristics

Allometric relationships between between morphological characteristics and biomass allocations

Allometric relationships between between biomass allocations

Discussion

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Tables

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1