English   español  
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/34889
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPalacio, Sara-
dc.contributor.authorEscudero, Adrián-
dc.contributor.authorMontserrat-Martí, Gabriel-
dc.contributor.authorMaestro Martínez, Melchor-
dc.contributor.authorMilla, Rubén-
dc.contributor.authorAlbert, María J.-
dc.identifier.citationAnnals of botany 99(2): 333-343 (2007)es_ES
dc.description11 páginas, 3 figuras, 5 tablas.es_ES
dc.description.abstract[Background and Aims]: Plants from gypsum habitats are classified as gypsophiles and gypsovags. The former include both narrow endemics limited to small gypsum areas and regionally dominant gypsophiles growing in gypsum areas of large regions, whereas gypsovags are plants that can grow both in gypsum and non-gypsum soils. Factors controlling the distribution of gypsum plants are still not fully understood. [Methods]: To assess how the different types of gypsum plants deal with the stressful conditions of gypsum substrates, comparisons were made of the leaf chemical composition of four gypsovags, five regionally dominant gypsophiles and four narrow gypsum endemics growing in two massive gypsum areas of the Iberian Peninsula. [Key Results]: The chemical composition of gypsovags was clearly different from regionally dominant gypsophiles, while the chemical composition of narrow-gypsophile endemics was more similar to the chemical composition of gypsovags than to that of regionally dominant gypsophiles. Regionally dominant gypsophiles showed higher concentrations of ash, Ca, S, N, Mg P and Na, whereas gypsovags and local gypsophile endemics displayed higher concentrations of C and greater C : N ratios. [Conclusions]: Such differences suggest that the three groups of gypsum plants follow diverse ecological strategies. It is suggested that regionally dominant gypsophiles might fit the ‘specialist’ model, being species specifically adapted to gypsum, whereas both gypsovags and narrow-gypsophile endemics might fit the ‘refuge’ model, being stress-tolerant species that find refuge on gypsum soils from competition. The analysis of the leaf chemical composition could be a good predictor of the degree of plants specialization to gypsum soils.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipR.M. and S.P. were funded by a Post-doctoral and a FPU fellowship, respectively (SEUI – MEC, Spain). This study was supported by the MEC (Spanish Government; research project RTA 2005–00100), the MCT (Spanish Government; research projects CGL2006–11619/HID, CGL2004– 04919-C02-01/HID, REN2003–08678/HID) and by REMEDINAL, a research network financed by the Autonomous Government of Madrid.es_ES
dc.publisherOxford University Presses_ES
dc.subjectGypsum-rich soilses_ES
dc.subjectLeaf chemical compositiones_ES
dc.subjectNarrow-endemic gypsophyteses_ES
dc.subjectMediterranean semi-arid environmentses_ES
dc.subjectPlant conservationes_ES
dc.subjectEdaphic endemismes_ES
dc.titlePlants Living on Gypsum: Beyond the Specialist Modeles_ES
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer reviewedes_ES
Appears in Collections:(IPE) Artículos
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
333.full.pdf249,42 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
Show simple item record

Related articles:

WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.