Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Oct 29;4(10):e7653.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007653.

Phenotypic plasticity of leaf shape along a temperature gradient in Acer rubrum

Dana L Royer  1 , Laura A Meyerson, Kevin M Robertson, Jonathan M Adams
Affiliations

Phenotypic plasticity of leaf shape along a temperature gradient in Acer rubrum

Dana L Royer et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Both phenotypic plasticity and genetic determination can be important for understanding how plants respond to environmental change. However, little is known about the plastic response of leaf teeth and leaf dissection to temperature. This gap is critical because these leaf traits are commonly used to reconstruct paleoclimate from fossils, and such studies tacitly assume that traits measured from fossils reflect the environment at the time of their deposition, even during periods of rapid climate change. We measured leaf size and shape in Acer rubrum derived from four seed sources with a broad temperature range and grown for two years in two gardens with contrasting climates (Rhode Island and Florida). Leaves in the Rhode Island garden have more teeth and are more highly dissected than leaves in Florida from the same seed source. Plasticity in these variables accounts for at least 6-19% of the total variance, while genetic differences among ecotypes probably account for at most 69-87%. This study highlights the role of phenotypic plasticity in leaf-climate relationships. We suggest that variables related to tooth count and leaf dissection in A. rubrum can respond quickly to climate change, which increases confidence in paleoclimate methods that use these variables.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Map of seed collection sites (circles) and common gardens (large squares).
ON = Burlington, Ontario; PA = Erie, Pennsylvania; RI = University of Rhode Island; SC = Savannah River, South Carolina; FL = Tall Timbers Research Station, Florida. Maps generated using GMT software (http://www.aquarius.ifm-geomar.de; Lambert azimuthal equal-area projection). Bar = 100 km.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Representative leaves of Acer rubrum used in study.
Leaf derived from Ontario seed stock grown in (A) Rhode Island and (B) Florida; leaf derived from Florida seed stock grown in (C) Rhode Island and (D) Florida. For all leaves, petioles have been removed and minor damage along the margin has been corrected with white lines. Bar (for all leaves) = 1 cm.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Leaf size and shape of Acer rubrum.
Plants come from four different seed stocks and were grown in two gardens with contrasting climates. Variables are clustered into three groups: (A–C) leaf dissection; (D–F) tooth number, and (G–K) leaf and tooth size. ON, Ontario; PA, Pennsylvania; SC, South Carolina; FL, Florida; RI, Rhode Island; peri, perimeter. See Table 1, Figs. 1, and Materials and Methods for details about seed collection sites and gardens. Differences between gardens reflect phenotypic plasticity, while differences among seed stock probably mostly reflect genetic differences among ecotypes. Standard errors are plotted.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Sensitivity of number of teeth/leaf perimeter to mean annual temperature in Acer rubrum.
RI = Rhode Island; FL = Florida. See Fig. 1 and Materials and Methods for details about gardens. Differences within a single seed source reflects plasticity within a genotype; differences within a single garden, and within the Royer et al. data set, probably mostly reflect genetic differences among ecotypes. Garden data are identical to Fig. 3E.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Cordell S, Goldstein G, Mueller-Dombois D, Webb D, Vitousek PM. Physiological and morphological variation in Metrosideros polymorpha, a dominant Hawaiian tree species, along an altitudinal gradient: the role of phenotypic plasticity. Oecologia. 1998;113:188–196. - PubMed
    1. Flann C, Ladiges PY, Walsh NG. Morphological variation in Leptorhynchos squamatus (Gnaphalieae: Asteraceae). Australian Systematic Botany. 2002;15:205–219.
    1. Hovenden MJ, Vander Schoor JK. Nature vs nurture in the leaf morphology of Southern beech, Nothofagus cunninghamii (Nothofagaceae). New Phytologist. 2003;161:585–594. - PubMed
    1. Morecraft MD, Woodward FI. Experiments on the causes of altitudinal differences in the leaf nutrient contents, size and δ13C of Alchemilla alpina. New Phytologist. 1996;134:471–479.
    1. Oleksyn J, Modrzyński J, Tjoelker MG, Żytkowiak R, Reich PB, et al. Growth and physiology of Picea abies populations from elevation transects: common garden evidence for altitudinal ecotypes and cold adaptation. Functional Ecology. 1998;12:573–590.

Publication types