由于来自地上和地下来源的极端环境压力,平衡用于种群繁殖和持久性的不同功能的生物量需求对于高山植物来说可能是具有挑战性的。高山生态系统中生态系统工程师的存在有效缓解了微环境压力,从而促进其他胁迫耐受性较差的物种的生存和生长。然而,生态系统工程师对植物资源分配策略的影响仍未被探索。在这项研究中,我们比较了资源分配策略,包括生物量积累,生殖努力(RE),根分数(RF),以及不同函数之间的关系,在裸露的地面上属于龙胆科的四种高山植物中,tussock草-,坐垫-,和灌木工程的微栖息地。灌木工程微生境对调节植物资源分配模式产生了最强的影响,其次是草丛和垫工程微生境。此外,除了微栖息地,种群背景和植物生活史也显著影响资源分配策略。一般来说,在工程微生境内建立的植物表现出更高的生物量积累,以及增加的花朵,叶和茎生产。此外,工程微生境内的个体通常表现出较低的射频,表明更多的资源分配给地上功能,同时减少分配给根发展。一年生植物的RE显著高于多年生植物。然而,与裸露的地面栖息地相比,工程微生境中的一年生植物个体的RE较低;而多年生物种在微生境类型之间表现出相似的RE。此外,RE通常在裸露的栖息地中与植物的大小无关,但在特定的工程微生境类型中,某些物种在某些种群中表现出大小依赖性。然而,在此处检查的大多数情况下,绝对生殖和根生物量分配确实存在大小依赖性。在花质量和花数量之间没有观察到权衡,也不在叶片质量和叶片数量之间。证实了生态系统工程师在相关植物中调节资源分配策略的能力。然而,生态系统工程效应协同产生的资源配置模式,人口环境背景,和植物生活史策略。总的来说,这些法规可以提高个体的生存和生殖潜力,在具有挑战性的高山环境中可能会促进人口的持久性。
Balancing the biomass requirements of different functions for the purpose of population reproduction and persistence can be challenging for alpine plants due to extreme environmental stresses from both above- and below-ground sources. The presence of ecosystem engineers in alpine ecosystems effectively alleviates microenvironmental stresses, hence promoting the survival and growth of other less stress-tolerant species. However, the influence of ecosystem engineers on plant resource allocation strategies remains highly unexplored. In this study, we compared resource allocation strategies, including biomass accumulation, reproductive effort (RE), root fraction (RF), as well as relationships between different functions, among four alpine plant species belonging to Gentianaceae across bare ground, tussock grass-, cushion-, and shrub-engineered microhabitats. Shrub-engineered microhabitats exerted the strongest effects on regulating plant resource allocation patterns, followed by tussock grass- and cushion-engineered microhabitats. Additionally, apart from microhabitats, population background and plant life history also significantly influenced resource allocation strategies. Generally, plants established within engineered microhabitats exhibited higher biomass accumulation, as well as increased flower, leaf and stem production. Furthermore, individuals within engineered microhabitats commonly displayed lower RF, indicating a greater allocation of resources to above-ground functions while reducing allocation to root development. RE of annual plants was significantly higher than that of perennial plants. However, individuals of annual plants within engineered microhabitats showed lower RE compared to their counterparts in bare ground habitats; whereas perennial species demonstrated similar RE between microhabitat types. Moreover, RE was generally independent of plant size in bare-ground habitats but exhibited size-dependency in certain populations for some species within specific engineered microhabitat types. However, size-dependency did exist for absolute reproductive and root biomass allocation in most of the cases examined here. No trade-offs were observed between flower mass and flower number, nor between leaf mass and leaf number. The capacity of ecosystem engineers to regulate resource allocation strategies in associated plants was confirmed. However, the resource allocation patterns resulted synergistically from the ecosystem engineering effects, population environmental backgrounds, and plant life history strategies. In general, such regulations can improve individual survival and reproductive potential, potentially promoting population persistence in challenging alpine environments.