Back

Crops under continuous cultivation exhibit less plasticity than those under interrupted cultivation

Alagarasan, G.; Varshney, R. K.; Ramireddy, E.

2024-12-11 plant biology
10.1101/2024.12.10.625649 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Evolutionary studies indicate that species in stable environments often evolve with reduced plasticity, whereas those in variable environments tend to maintain higher plasticity to adapt to changing conditions. Our study explores whether this evolutionary principle extends to cultivated crops. In crop science, phenotypic plasticity is generally understood as a short-term response to environmental factors. Yet, the long-term evolutionary changes in both plastic and non-plastic traits under different cultivation regimes remain largely unexamined. Herein, we developed a novel mechanistic crop growth model, collectively termed the Trait-Environment Fitness Interaction (TEFI) Model, to study if and how trait plasticity varies among crops under different cultivation regimes. Our results, based on the TEFI Model, show higher trade-offs between fitness and plasticity. Specifically, we observed the evolution of higher plasticity in crops subjected to intermittent cultivation, which experienced more variable environments. However, this higher plasticity does not compensate for fitness losses due to the high rate of environmental unpredictability. Conversely, species under relatively stable conditions tend to evolve with reduced plasticity. Using real-world crop datasets, we validated the theoretical predictions of the TEFI Model, which suggest that the longer the interruption, the higher the plasticity. Our results highlight the evolutionary impact of cultivation patterns on trait plasticity and its importance in crop fitness. Ultimately, our findings illustrate how evolutionary principles of plasticity, as captured by the TEFI Model, can inform sustainable crop improvement strategies.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
in silico Plants
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
28.5%
2
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
15.2%
3
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
10.4%
50% of probability mass above
4
Plant Physiology
217 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
7.0%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.8%
6
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 19%
3.7%
7
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 41%
3.4%
8
Ecological Modelling
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
9
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.7%
10
Journal of Experimental Botany
195 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
11
Theoretical and Applied Genetics
46 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
12
Quantitative Plant Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
13
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.8%
14
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 60%
0.8%
15
Plant Direct
81 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
16
AoB PLANTS
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
17
The Plant Journal
197 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
18
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
19
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
20
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
21
Plant Pathology
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
22
Functional Ecology
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
G3
33 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
24
The Plant Genome
53 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%