{"title":"这是一个偶然的附生植物案例,支持附生植物从生活在开放环境中的祖先进化而来的观点。","authors":"Fabiola Mena-Jiménez , Susana Valencia-Díaz , Angélica María Corona-López , Alejandro Flores-Palacios","doi":"10.1016/j.flora.2024.152553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Approximately 10 % of vascular plants can grow as epiphytes, but the impact of epiphytism is more remarkable because there is an unknown percentage of re-terrestrialized taxa that evolved from epiphytic ancestors. Two main hypotheses have been proposed to explain the evolution of epiphytes: one suggests that they evolved from humid, umbrophilous environments (i.e., forest understory; Schimper hypothesis), and the other that they came from an open-infertile environment (Tietze-Pittendrigh hypothesis). The core evidence supporting these hypotheses is the frequency of terrestrial plants that accidentally grow as epiphytes (i.e., accidental epiphytes), because these plants should be abundant in the habitats that promote the colonization of the canopy by the terrestrial plants (i.e., the early state of epiphyte evolution). In a landscape with both environments (humid and umbrophilous vs. open and infertile), we tested the affinity of the flora to the epiphytic habitat and the association of the accidental epiphytes with each environment. We found 71 plant species. Forty-one percent were terrestrial; among the rest, 39 %, 3 %, and 17 % were accidental, facultative (growing equally as terrestrial or arboreal), and true epiphytes (preferentially living as arboreal), respectively. Discounting plants that exclusively grow terrestrially in the sample, in this landscape, a large proportion of the species living in tree crowns are accidental epiphytes (28), and 16 species belong to Asteranae and Rosanae, superorders where epiphytism is infrequent. Nine accidental epiphytes were associated with the open environment and none with the forest, supporting only the Tietze-Pittendrigh hypothesis. Our results support the idea that species from open environments could be preadapted to grow as epiphytes, and landscapes combining forested areas with open environments (e.g., xerophytic scrub, savanna) could promote the colonization of the canopies from terrestrial plants.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55156,"journal":{"name":"Flora","volume":"317 ","pages":"Article 152553"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A case of accidental epiphytes that supports the notion of the evolution of epiphytes from ancestors living in open environments.\",\"authors\":\"Fabiola Mena-Jiménez , Susana Valencia-Díaz , Angélica María Corona-López , Alejandro Flores-Palacios\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.flora.2024.152553\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Approximately 10 % of vascular plants can grow as epiphytes, but the impact of epiphytism is more remarkable because there is an unknown percentage of re-terrestrialized taxa that evolved from epiphytic ancestors. Two main hypotheses have been proposed to explain the evolution of epiphytes: one suggests that they evolved from humid, umbrophilous environments (i.e., forest understory; Schimper hypothesis), and the other that they came from an open-infertile environment (Tietze-Pittendrigh hypothesis). The core evidence supporting these hypotheses is the frequency of terrestrial plants that accidentally grow as epiphytes (i.e., accidental epiphytes), because these plants should be abundant in the habitats that promote the colonization of the canopy by the terrestrial plants (i.e., the early state of epiphyte evolution). In a landscape with both environments (humid and umbrophilous vs. open and infertile), we tested the affinity of the flora to the epiphytic habitat and the association of the accidental epiphytes with each environment. We found 71 plant species. Forty-one percent were terrestrial; among the rest, 39 %, 3 %, and 17 % were accidental, facultative (growing equally as terrestrial or arboreal), and true epiphytes (preferentially living as arboreal), respectively. Discounting plants that exclusively grow terrestrially in the sample, in this landscape, a large proportion of the species living in tree crowns are accidental epiphytes (28), and 16 species belong to Asteranae and Rosanae, superorders where epiphytism is infrequent. Nine accidental epiphytes were associated with the open environment and none with the forest, supporting only the Tietze-Pittendrigh hypothesis. Our results support the idea that species from open environments could be preadapted to grow as epiphytes, and landscapes combining forested areas with open environments (e.g., xerophytic scrub, savanna) could promote the colonization of the canopies from terrestrial plants.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55156,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Flora\",\"volume\":\"317 \",\"pages\":\"Article 152553\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Flora\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0367253024001063\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Flora","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0367253024001063","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A case of accidental epiphytes that supports the notion of the evolution of epiphytes from ancestors living in open environments.
Approximately 10 % of vascular plants can grow as epiphytes, but the impact of epiphytism is more remarkable because there is an unknown percentage of re-terrestrialized taxa that evolved from epiphytic ancestors. Two main hypotheses have been proposed to explain the evolution of epiphytes: one suggests that they evolved from humid, umbrophilous environments (i.e., forest understory; Schimper hypothesis), and the other that they came from an open-infertile environment (Tietze-Pittendrigh hypothesis). The core evidence supporting these hypotheses is the frequency of terrestrial plants that accidentally grow as epiphytes (i.e., accidental epiphytes), because these plants should be abundant in the habitats that promote the colonization of the canopy by the terrestrial plants (i.e., the early state of epiphyte evolution). In a landscape with both environments (humid and umbrophilous vs. open and infertile), we tested the affinity of the flora to the epiphytic habitat and the association of the accidental epiphytes with each environment. We found 71 plant species. Forty-one percent were terrestrial; among the rest, 39 %, 3 %, and 17 % were accidental, facultative (growing equally as terrestrial or arboreal), and true epiphytes (preferentially living as arboreal), respectively. Discounting plants that exclusively grow terrestrially in the sample, in this landscape, a large proportion of the species living in tree crowns are accidental epiphytes (28), and 16 species belong to Asteranae and Rosanae, superorders where epiphytism is infrequent. Nine accidental epiphytes were associated with the open environment and none with the forest, supporting only the Tietze-Pittendrigh hypothesis. Our results support the idea that species from open environments could be preadapted to grow as epiphytes, and landscapes combining forested areas with open environments (e.g., xerophytic scrub, savanna) could promote the colonization of the canopies from terrestrial plants.
期刊介绍:
FLORA publishes original contributions and review articles on plant structure (morphology and anatomy), plant distribution (incl. phylogeography) and plant functional ecology (ecophysiology, population ecology and population genetics, organismic interactions, community ecology, ecosystem ecology). Manuscripts (both original and review articles) on a single topic can be compiled in Special Issues, for which suggestions are welcome.
FLORA, the scientific botanical journal with the longest uninterrupted publication sequence (since 1818), considers manuscripts in the above areas which appeal a broad scientific and international readership. Manuscripts focused on floristics and vegetation science will only be considered if they exceed the pure descriptive approach and have relevance for interpreting plant morphology, distribution or ecology. Manuscripts whose content is restricted to purely systematic and nomenclature matters, to geobotanical aspects of only local interest, to pure applications in agri-, horti- or silviculture and pharmacology, and experimental studies dealing exclusively with investigations at the cellular and subcellular level will not be accepted. Manuscripts dealing with comparative and evolutionary aspects of morphology, anatomy and development are welcome.