Rapid transgenerational adaptation in response to intercropping reduces competition
- Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
- Plant Production Systems, Agroscope, Switzerland
- Área de Biodiversidad y Conservación, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Spain
Figures
Figure 1 with 1 supplement
Experimental design.
(a) Six crop species were used to sow single plant individuals (Loreau and Hector, 2001), monocultures (Loreau and Hector, 2001), 2-species mixtures (Schöb et al., 2018) and 4-species mixtures (Brook…
Figure 1—figure supplement 1
Pictures of the experimental plots.
Bottom-left: a plot is outlined in red, showing a 2-species mixtures, with flax alternated with coriander.
Figure 2 with 1 supplement
Relative Interaction Index in response to coexistence history and fertilization.
Net relative interaction index of monocultures, 2- and 4-species mixtures in response to coexistence history, for fertilized and unfertilized conditions. n=276. Dots represent the mean values across …
Figure 2—figure supplement 1
Effects of coexistence history and crop species number on net Relative Interaction Index (RII), for fertilized and unfertilized conditions.
“Same coexistence history” indicates that crops were grown in the community their seeds were collected from. ‘Different coexistence history’ refers to crops grown in a community different to the one …
Figure 3 with 4 supplements
Effects of coexistence history on net biodiversity effects (a) and total yield per plot (b).
Effects of coexistence history and crop species number on (a) net biodiversity effect – reflecting the yield advantage of mixtures compared to monocultures – and (b) total yield per plot in …
Figure 3—figure supplement 1
Effects of coexistence history and crop species number on net biodiversity effect.
(a), complementarity effect (b) and selection effect (c) in fertilized and unfertilized plots. Horizontal lines represent the median of the data, boxes represent the lower and upper quartiles (25% …
Figure 3—figure supplement 2
Effects of coexistence history and crop species number on complementarity effect (a) and selection effect (b) in fertilized and unfertilized plots.
Dots represent the mean values across plots; lines represent the standard error.
Figure 3—figure supplement 3
Effects of coexistence history and crop species number on total yield per plot.
Horizontal lines represent the median of the data, boxes represent the lower and upper quartiles (25% and 75%), with vertical lines extending from the hinge of the box to the smallest and largest …
Figure 3—figure supplement 4
Effects of coexistence history of total yield per plot, per species combination.
‘Same coexistence history’ indicates that crops were grown in the community their seeds were collected from. ‘Different coexistence history’ refers to crops grown in a community different to the one …
Figure 4 with 2 supplements
Community-level trait responses to coexistence history.
Effects of coexistence history and crop species number on community-weighted mean (CWM) of height (in cm) (a), Leaf Dry Matter Content (LDMC) (b), and mass per seed (in g) (c), and on coefficient of …
Figure 4—figure supplement 1
Effects of coexistence history and crop species number on mean height (in cm) (a) and LDMC (b) Dots represent the averaged values across species and plots; lines represent the standard error.
n=1726.
Figure 4—figure supplement 2
Mean height (cm) (a) and LDMC (b) according to their coexistence history, for the six species considered in our study.
Dots represent the averaged values across species and plots; lines represent the standard error. n=1726.
Figure 5 with 2 supplements
Correlation plot between Net RII index and complementarity effect across all plots.
There is a significant positive correlation (F=4.62, p-value = 0.033, n=204).
Figure 5—figure supplement 1
Relative effect of coexistence history on single plant growth, with the single plant history as the reference value.
RII coexistence history for single plants is calculated as: Yield(community history)-Yield(single history)/ Yield(community history)+Yield(single history). This additional index allows to see that …
Figure 5—figure supplement 2
Relative effect of coexistence history on monoculture plant growth, with the monoculture plant history as the reference value.
RII coexistence history for monoculture plants is calculated as: Yield(mixture or single history)-Yield(monoculture history)/ Yield(mixture or single history)+Yield(monoculture history). When …
Figure 6 with 1 supplement
Response of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation to coexistence history.
n=271. Fraction of PAR absorbed (in %) according to the day of year, for plants with the same or different coexistence history. The lines represent local polynomial regression fittings, with the …
Figure 6—figure supplement 1
Functional richness in response to crop species diversity, in fertilized and unfertilized plots.
n=271.
Author response image 1
Complementarity effects.
Tables
Table 1
List of crop species ecotypes and their suppliers.
Avena sativa (oat) is mainly self-pollinating, with outcrossing rates of around 1% (Shorter et al., 1978). The variety Canyon was acquired in 2014 through conventional selection processes.
| Species | Switzerland | |
|---|---|---|
| Ecotype | Supplier | |
| Avena sativa | Canyon | Sativa Rheinau |
| Triticum aestivum | Fiorina | DSP, Delley |
| Coriandrum sativum | Indian | Zollinger Samen, Les Evouettes |
| Lens culinaris | Anicia | Agroscope, Reckenholz |
| Camelina sativa | n.a. | Zollinger Samen, Les Evouettes |
| Linum usitatissimum | Lirina | Sativa Rheinau |
Author response table 1
Anova table for RII_monoculture.
| NumDF | DenDF | F value | Pr(>F) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fertilizer | 1 | 7.883 | 1.306 | 0.286645 |
| History | 1 | 180.459 | 0.9898 | 0.321121 |
| Diversity | 1 | 15.098 | 0.1488 | 0.705034 |
| Fertilizer x history | 1 | 180.367 | 7.8531 | 0.005628 ** |
| Fertilizer x diversity | 1 | 175.703 | 0.217 | 0.641907 |
| History x diversity | 1 | 175.84 | 0.9712 | 0.325747 |
| Fertilizer x history x diversity | 1 | 175.641 | 0.2465 | 0.620166 |
Author response table 2
Posthoc test for the significant interaction on fertilizer x history.
| estimate | SE | df | t.ratio | p.value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no diff – yes diff | 0.129 | 0.0651 | 13.2 | 1.981 | 0.2436 |
| no diff – no same | 0.0964 | 0.0562 | 180.7 | 1.715 | 0.3187 |
| no diff – yes same | 0.059 | 0.0724 | 19.6 | 0.815 | 0.8466 |
| yes diff – no same | -0.0327 | 0.0728 | 19.7 | -0.449 | 0.9691 |
| yes diff – yes same | -0.07 | 0.0546 | 177 | -1.284 | 0.5745 |
| no same – yes same | -0.0374 | 0.0794 | 27.1 | -0.471 | 0.9649 |
Author response table 3
Author response table.
| Sum Sq Mean Sq NumDF | DenDF F | value | Pr(>F) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| history | 2801.42 2801.42 1 | 81.814 | 5.3175 | 0.02364 | * |
| diversity | 580.76 580.76 1 | 14.804 | 1.1024 | 0.31059 | |
| history:diversity | 41.19 41.19 1 | 80.246 | 0.0782 | 0.78048 |
Author response table 4
Author response table.
| Sum Sq Mean Sq NumDF | DenDF F | value | Pr(>F) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| history | 2801.42 2801.42 1 | 81.814 | 5.3175 | 0.02364 | * |
| diversity | 580.76 580.76 1 | 14.804 | 1.1024 | 0.31059 | |
| history:diversity | 41.19 41.19 1 | 80.246 | 0.0782 | 0.78048 |
Additional files
-
Transparent reporting form
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/77577/elife-77577-transrepform1-v2.docx
-
Supplementary file 1
Supplementary statistical analyses.
(a) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on net, competition and facilitation indexes (RII), in year 3 (2020).
(b) Pairwise comparisons of the effect on net interaction index (RII) between fertilizer (yes, no), coexistence history (diff [different], same), and monoculture vs mixture (mix [mixture], mono [monoculture]).
(c) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on net, complementarity, and selection effects in year 3 (2020).
(d) Pairwise comparisons of the effect on net biodiversity effects between fertilizer (yes, no) and coexistence history (diff [different], same).
(e) Pairwise comparisons of the effect on selection effects between fertilizer (yes, no), coexistence history (diff [different], same), and planted diversity (2 vs 4).
(f) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on total crop yield per plot (square-root transformed).
(g) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on mean and coefficient of variation of height, per species per plot (species level) in year 3 (2020).
(h) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on mean and coefficient of variation of width, per species per plot (species level) in year 3 (2020).
(i) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on mean and coefficient of variation of SLA, per species per plot (species level) in year 3 (2020).
(j) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on mean and coefficient of variation of LDMC, per species per plot (species level) in year 3 (2020).
(k) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on mean and coefficient of variation of mass per seed, per species per plot (species level) in year 3 (2020).
(l) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on community-weighted mean and coefficient of variation of height, per plot (community level) in year 3 (2020).
(m) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on community-weighted mean and coefficient of variation of width, per plot (community level) in year 3 (2020).
(n) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on community-weighted mean and coefficient of variation of SLA, per plot (community level) in year 3 (2020).
(o) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on community-weighted mean and coefficient of variation of LDMC, per plot (community level) in year 3 (2020).
(p) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on community-weighted mean and coefficient of variation of mass per seed, per plot (community level) in year 3 (2020).
(q) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on functional richness in year 3 (2020).
(r) Type-I Analysis of Variance Table of the experimental treatment effects on FPAR in year 3 (2020).
(s) List of species mixture combinations.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/77577/elife-77577-supp1-v2.docx
