|Table of Contents|

Kin selection in Lolium multiflorum L.(PDF)

Chinese Journal of Applied & Environmental Biology[ISSN:1006-687X/CN:51-1482/Q]

2016 06
Research Field:
Publishing date:


Kin selection in Lolium multiflorum L.
LI Jie1 2 3 SUN Geng 1** WU Ning1 WANG Jing4 & HU Xia5
1Key Laboratory of Mountain Ecological Restoration and Bioresource, Utilization & Ecological Restoration and Biodiversity Conservation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu Institute of Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China 2Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Nature Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China 3University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China 4Northwest Institute of Forest Inventory, Planning and Design, State Forestry Administration, Xi’an 710048, China 5Leshan Normal University, Leshan 614000, China
kin selection phenotypic characteristics biomass root distribution Lolium multiflorum L.

Related organisms living together could cooperate with each other according to kin selection theory of Hamilton, even at a cost of individual fitness, which is contrary to the niche partition theory. Previous studies proved the kin selection responses in some plant species. For example, plants show reduction of root distribution and other phenotypic changes to kin neighbors than strangers, in order to deduce competition among kin neighbors. However, since only a few species have been tested, kin responses of many other species remain unknown. In this research, we designed a pair-wise interaction model of each two individuals from 8 families to test whether and how species of Lolium multiflorum L. responded to kin selection. After the plants lifecycle, we measured for individual analysis the trait indexes of each plant including plant height, seed number, length and number of clusters, number and area of leaf, branching number, leaf, stem and reproduction biomass. On the group level we measured group leaf, stem, reproduction and root biomass. Our study showed less roots distribution in kin groups than stranger groups (P = 0.007), but no significant difference in leaf, stem and reproduction biomass on the group level. However, on individual level no significant difference was found between kin and stranger groups in either the measured traits (plant height, seed number, length and number of clusters, leaf number, leaf area, branching number) or biomass (leaf, stem and reproduction biomass). The results indicated that L. multiflorum L. responded positively to kin selection by reducing root competition in kin conditions to increase group fitness, and that root response could be a useful and available indicator to kin selection.


1 Young JPW. Sib competition can favour sex in two ways [J]. Theor Biol, 1981, 88: 755-756 2 Hamilton WD. The genetical evolution of social behavior, I &II [J]. Theor Biol, 1964, 7: 1-52 3 Ellstrand NC, Antonovics J. Experimental studies of the evolutionary significance of sexual reproduction. II. A test of the density-dependent selection hypothesis [J]. Evolution, 1985, 39: 657-666 4 Schmitt J, Antonovics J. Experimental studies of the evolutionary significance of sexual reproduction. IV. Effect of neighbor relatedness and aphid infestation on seedling performance [J]. Evolution, 1986, 40: 830-836 5 Kelley SE. Experimental studies of the evolutionary significance of sexual reproduction. V. A field-test of the sib competition lottery hypothesis [J]. Evolution, 1989, 43: 1054-1065 6 Masclaux F, Hammond RL, Meunier J, Gouhier-Darimont C, Keller L, Reymond P. Competitive ability not kinship affects growth of Arabidopsis thaliana accessions [J]. New Phytol, 2010, 185: 322-331 7 File AL, Murphy GP, Dudley SA. Fitness consequences of plants growing with siblings: reconciling kin selection, niche partitioning and competitive ability [J]. Proc R Soc Biol Sci, 2012, 279: 209-218 8 Milla R, Forero DM, Escudero A, Iriondo JM. Growing with siblings: a common ground for cooperation or for fiercer competition among plants? [J]. Proc R Soc, 2009, B276: 2531-2540 9 Hess L, De Kroon H. Effects of rooting volume and nutrient availability as an alternative explanation for root self/non-self discrimination [J]. J Ecol, 2007, 95: 241-251 10 Mohana GS, Shaanker RU, Ganeshaiah KN, Dayanandan S. Genetic relatedness among developing seeds and intra fruit seed abortion in Dalbergia sissoo (Fabaceae) [J]. Am J Bot, 2001, 88: 1181-1188 11 Bhatt MV, Khandelwal A, Dudley SA. Kin recognition, not competitive interactions, predicts root allocation in young Cakile edentula seedling pairs [J]. New Phytol, 2010, 189: 1135-1142 12 Biedrzycki ML, Bais HP. Kin recognition in plants: a mysterious behaviour unsolved [J]. J Exp Bot, 2010, 61: 4123-4128 13 Milla R, Velez Del Burgo A, Escudero A, Iriondo JM. Kinship rivalry does not trigger specific allocation strategies in Lupinus angustifolius [J]. Ann Bot, 2012, 110: 165-175 14 Lepik A, Abakumova M, Zobel K, Semchenko M. Kin recognition is density-dependent and uncommon among temperate grassland plants [J]. Funct Ecol, 2012, 26:1214-1220 15 Dudley SA, File A. Kin recognition and competition in plants [J]. Funct Ecol, 2009, 27: 898-906 16 Fang S, Clark RT, Zheng Y, Iyer-Pascuzzi AS, Weitz JS, Kochian LV, Edelsbrunner H, Liao H, Benfey PN. Genotypic recognition and spatial responses by rice roots [J]. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA, 2013, 110: 2670-2675 17 Maestre FT, Callaway RM, Valladares F, Lortie CJ. Refining the stress-gradient hypothesis for competition and facilitation in plant communities [J]. J Ecol, 2009, 97:199-205 18 Semchenko M, Saar S, Lepik A. Plant root exudates mediate neighbour recognition and trigger complex behavioural changes [J]. New Phytol, 2014, 204: 631-637 19 Willson MF, Hoppes WG, Goldman DA, Thomas PA, Katusic-Malmborg PL, Bothwell JL. Sibling competition in plants: an experimental study [J]. Am Nat, 1987, 129: 304-311 20 Escarre J, Houssard C, Thompson JD. An experimental study of the role of seedling density and neighbor relatedness in the persistence of Rumex acetosella in an old-field succession [J]. Can J Bot, 1994, 72: 1273-1281 21 Tonsor SJ. Relatedness and intraspecific competition in Plantago lanceolata [J]. Am Nat, 1989, 134: 897-906 22 Collins A, Hart EM, Molofsky J. Differential response to frequency-dependent interactions: an experimental test using genotypes of an invasive grass [J]. Oecologia, 2010, 164: 959-969 23 Dudley SA, File AL. Kin recognition in an annual plant [J]. Biol Lett, 2007, 3: 435-438 24 Murphy GP, Dudley SA. Kin recognition: competition and cooperation in Impatiens (Balsaminaceae) [J]. Am J Bot, 2009, 96: 1990-1996 25 File AL, Murphy GP, Dudley SA. Fitness consequences of plants growing with siblings: reconciling kin selection, niche partitioning and competitive ability [J]. Proc R Soc B, 2012, 279: 209-218 26 Bertness MD, Callaway RM. Positive interactions in communities [J]. Trends Ecol Evol, 1994, 9: 191-193 27 Schmitt J, Dudley SA, Pigliucci M. Manipulative approaches to testing adaptive plasticity: phytochrome-mediated shade-avoidance responses in plants [J]. Am Nat, 1999, 154: S43-S54 28 Klemens J. Kin recognition in plants [J]? Biol Lett, 2008, 4: 67-68 29 Cipollini DF, Schultz JC. Exploring cost constraints on stem elongation using phenotypic manipulation [J]. Am Nat, 1999, 153: 236-242 30 Maliakal SK, McDonnell K, Dudley SA, Schmitt J. Effects of red to far-red ratio and plant density on biomass allocation and gas exchange in Impatiens capensis [J]. Intern J Plant Sci, 1999, 160: 723-733 31 Crepy MA, Casal JJ. Photoreceptor mediated kin recognition in plants [J]. New Phytol, 2015, 205: 329-338 32 Novoplansky A. Picking battles wisely: plant behavior under competition. Plant Cell Environ, 2009, 32 (6): 726-741 33 Andalo C, Goldringer I, Godelle B. Inter- and intragenotypic competition under elevated carbon dioxidein Arabidopsis thaliana [J]. Ecology, 2001, 82: 157-164 34 Cheplick GP, Kane KH. Genetic relatedness and competition in Triplasis purpurea (Poaceae): resource partitioning or kin selection [J]? Intern J Plant Sci, 2004, 165: 623-630 35 Taylor PD. Inclusive fitness in a homogeneous environment [J]. Proc R Soc London. Ser B Biol Sc, 1992, 249 (1326): 299-302 36 Murphy GP, File AL, Dudley SA. Differentiating the effects of pot size and nutrient availability on plant biomass and allocation [J]. Botany, 2013, 91: 799-803 37 Mercer CA, Eppley SM. Kin and sex recognition in a dioecious grass [J]. Plant Ecol, 2014, 215: 845-852


Last Update: 2016-12-30