Back

Spatial context allows the evolution the control of nitrification by plants

Ardichvili, A. N.; Barot, S.; Lata, J.-C.; Loeuille, N.

2024-11-21 ecology
10.1101/2024.11.19.624244 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Some plant species inhibit or stimulate soil nitrification, the transformation of ammonium into nitrate by microorganisms. The control of nitrification may in turn alter ecosystem productivity and functioning. Given the potential positive impacts of nitrification control on plant fitness, we aim to determine the conditions under which nitrification control is likely to have been selected, and the consequences of that selection on ecosystem functioning. We investigate both the role of the abiotic context (nutrient availability and diffusion) and the role of other plant traits (mortality and dispersal). A first mean-field model shows that when nitrogen pools are shared among individuals within the plant population, the control of nitrification is counter-selected. A tragedy of the commons occurs because the costs of controlling nitrification (ie. of producing root exudates) only affect the controlling individuals while benefits are shared among all individuals. We then assume that the effects of the control of nitrification are spatially restricted to the rhizosphere, and we build a spatially explicit, individual-based model in which mutation of control of nitrification is possible. Plant capacity to control nitrification evolves when the plant environment is sufficiently private and generation time sufficiently long, leading to higher fitness benefits of the construction process. In such cases, plants evolve to inhibit nitrification when losses of nitrate are greater than losses of ammonium and evolve to stimulate nitrification when losses of ammonium are greater than losses of nitrate. Finally, biomass production tends to be maximal at the selected strategy when the diffusion of ammonium and nitrate is low. Our results help predict which strategies should be selected and likely to be found in different plants in different parts of the world.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Oikos
84 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
26.3%
2
Ecological Modelling
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.8%
3
The American Naturalist
125 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.7%
4
Ecology Letters
135 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.2%
5
Theoretical Ecology
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.4%
50% of probability mass above
6
Peer Community Journal
281 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
4.8%
7
Journal of Ecology
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.3%
8
Ecological Monographs
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
9
Ecology and Evolution
267 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
10
Journal of Theoretical Biology
162 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.8%
11
New Phytologist
346 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
12
Functional Ecology
61 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.9%
13
Ecology
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
14
Ecography
54 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
15
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.4%
16
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.3%
17
Ecosphere
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
18
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
19
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
176 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
20
Evolutionary Ecology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
21
AoB PLANTS
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
22
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
69 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
23
Journal of Mathematical Biology
40 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
24
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%