View Item 

Show simple item record

The Costs And Benefits Of Tolerance To Competition In Ipomoea Purpurea , The Common Morning Glory

dc.contributor.authorChaney, Lindsayen_US
dc.contributor.authorBaucom, Regina S.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-07-03T14:41:38Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_12_MONTHSen_US
dc.date.available2014-07-03T14:41:38Z
dc.date.issued2014-06en_US
dc.identifier.citationChaney, Lindsay; Baucom, Regina S. (2014). "The Costs And Benefits Of Tolerance To Competition In Ipomoea Purpurea , The Common Morning Glory." Evolution 68(6): 1698-1709.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0014-3820en_US
dc.identifier.issn1558-5646en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/107575
dc.publisherPrinceton Univ. Pressen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otherTrade‐Offsen_US
dc.subject.otherAdaptationen_US
dc.subject.otherCompetitionen_US
dc.subject.otherFitnessen_US
dc.subject.otherGenetic Variationen_US
dc.subject.otherSelection—Naturalen_US
dc.titleThe Costs And Benefits Of Tolerance To Competition In Ipomoea Purpurea , The Common Morning Gloryen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEcology and Evolutionary Biologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/107575/1/evo12383-sup-0001-SupMat.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/107575/2/evo12383.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/evo.12383en_US
dc.identifier.sourceEvolutionen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMojonnier, L. E., and M. D. Rausher. 1997. Selection on a floral color polymorphism in the common morning glory ( Ipomoea purpurea ): the effects of overdominance in seed size. Evolution 51: 608 – 614.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSimms, E. L., and M. D. Rausher. 1989. The evolution of resistance to herbivory in Ipomoea purpurea. II. Natural selection by insects and costs of resistance. Evolution 43: 573 – 585.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSimonsen, A. K., and J. R. Stinchcombe. 2010. Quantifying evolutionary genetic constraints in the ivyleaf morning glory, Ipomoea hederacea. Int. J. Plant Sci. 171: 972 – 986.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStinchcombe, J. R. 2002. Environmental dependency in the expression of costs of tolerance to deer herbivory. Evolution 56: 1063 – 1067.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePierik, R., L. Mommer, and L. A. Voesenek. 2012. Molecular mechanisms of plant competition: neighbour detection and response strategies. Funct. Ecol. 27: 841 – 853.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePilson, D. 2000. The evolution of plant response to herbivory: simultaneously considering resistance and tolerance in Brassica rapa. Evol. Ecol. 14: 457 – 489.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRadosevich, S. R., and M. L. Roush. 1990. The role of competition in agriculture. Pp. 341 – 363 in D. Tilman and J. B Grace, eds. Perspectives on plant competition. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRausher, M. D. 1992. The measurement of selection on quantitative traits: biases due to environmental covariances between traits and fitness. Evolution 46: 616 – 626.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceReichenberger, G., and D. A. Pyke. 1990. Impact of early root competition on fitness components of four semiarid species. Oecologia 85: 159 – 166.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRoach, D. A., and R. D. Wulff. 1987. Maternal effects in plants. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18: 209 – 235.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchmitt, J., and R. D. Wulff. 1993. Light spectral quality, phytochrome and plant competition. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8: 47 – 51.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSiemens, D. H., H. Lischke, N. Maggiulli, S. Schürch, and B. A. Roy. 2003. Cost of resistance and tolerance under competition: the defense‐stress benefit hypothesis. Evol. Ecol. 17: 247 – 263.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO'Neal, M. E., D. A. Landis, and R. Isaacs. 2002. An inexpensive, accurate method for measuring leaf area and defoliation through digital image analysis. J. Econ. Entomol. 95: 1190 – 1194.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStinchcombe, J. R., M. T. Rutter, D. S. Burdick, P. Tiffin, M. D. Rausher, and R. Mauricio. 2002. Testing for environmentally induced bias in phenotypic estimates of natural selection: theory and practice. Am. Nat. 160: 511 – 523.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStowe, K. A., R. J. Marquis, C. G. Hochwender, and E. L. Simms. 2000. The evolutionary ecology of tolerance to consumer damage. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31: 565 – 595.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStrauss, S. Y., and A. A. Agrawal. 1999. The ecology and evolution of plant tolerance to herbivory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14: 179 – 185.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaylor, D. R., and L. W. Aarssen. 1990. Complex competitive relationships among genotypes of three perennial grasses: implications for species coexistence. Am. Nat. 136: 305 – 327.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTiffin, P. 2000. Mechanisms of tolerance to herbivore damage: what do we know ? Evol. Ecol. 14: 523 – 536.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTiffin, P.. 2002. Competition and time of damage affect the pattern of selection acting on plant defense against herbivores. Ecology 83: 1981 – 1990.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTiffin, P., and M. D. Rausher. 1999. Genetic constraints and selection acting on tolerance to herbivory in the common morning glory Ipomoea purpurea. Am. Nat. 154: 700 – 716.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTilman, D. 1994. Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology 75: 2 – 16.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTurley, N. E., W. C. Odell, H. Schaefer, G. Everwand, M. J. Crawley, and M. T. Johnson. 2013. Contemporary evolution of plant growth rate following experimental removal of herbivores. Am. Nat. 181: S21 – S34.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUriarte, M., C. D. Canham, and R. B. Root. 2002. A model of simultaneous evolution of competitive ability and herbivore resistance in a perennial plant. Ecology 83: 2649 – 2663.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUva, R. H., J. C. Neal, and J. M. DiTomaso. 1997. Weeds of the northeast. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, NY.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVigueira, C. C., K. M. Olsen, and A. L. Caicedo. 2013. The red queen in the corn: agricultural weeds as models of rapid adaptive evolution. Heredity 110: 303 – 311.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWebster, T. M., and H. D. Coble. 1997. Changes in the weed species composition of the Southern United States: 1974 to 1951. Weed Technol. 11: 308 – 217.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWeinig, C., J. R. Stinchcombe, and J. Schmitt. 2003. Evolutionary genetics of resistance and tolerance to natural herbivory in Arabidopsis thaliana. Evolution 57: 1270 – 1280.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWeis, A. E., E. L. Simms, and M. E. Hochberg. 2000. Will plant vigor and tolerance be genetically correlated? Effects of intrinsic growth rate and self‐limitation on regrowth. Evol. Ecol. 14: 331 – 352.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilbur, H. M. 1972. Competition, predation, and the structure of the Ambystoma‐Rana sylvatica community. Ecology 53: 3 – 21.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWillis, C. G., M. T. Brock, and C. Weinig. 2010. Genetic variation in tolerance of competition and neighbour suppression in Arabidopsis thaliana. J. Evol. Biol. 23: 1412 – 1424.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWolf, J. B., E. D. Brodie III, J. M. Cheverud, A. J. Moore, and M. J. Wade. 1998. Evolutionary consequences of indirect genetic effects. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13: 64 – 69.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWulff, R. D. 1986. Seed size variation in Desmodium paniculatum: III. Effects on reproductive yield and competitive ability. J. Ecol. 74: 115 – 121.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAarssen, L. W. 1983. Ecological combining ability and competitive combining ability in plants: toward a general evolutionary theory of coexistence in systems of competition. Am. Nat. 122: 707 – 731.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAbrahamson, W. G., and A. E. Weis. 1997. Evolutionary ecology across three trophic levels: goldenrods, gallmakers, and natural enemies. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBates, D., M. Maechler, and B. Bolker. 2011. lme4: linear mixed‐effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999‐0.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBaucom, R. S., and J. C. de Roode. 2011. Ecological immunology and tolerance in plants and animals. Funct. Ecol. 25: 18 – 28.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBoege, K. 2010. Induced responses to competition and herbivory: natural selection on multi‐trait phenotypic plasticity. Ecology 91: 2628 – 2637.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrown, B. A., and M. T. Clegg. 1984. Influence of flower color polymorphism on genetic transmission in a natural population of the common morning glory, Ipomoea purpurea. Evolution 38: 796 – 803.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChaney, L., and R. S. Baucom. 2012. The evolutionary potential of Baker's weediness traits in the common morning glory, Ipomoea purpurea (Convolvulaceae). Am. J. Bot. 99: 1524 – 1530.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChaney, L., and R. S. Baucom. 2014. Data from: the costs and benefits of tolerance to competition in Ipomoea purpurea, the common morning glory. Dryad Digital Repository. doi: 10.5061/dryad.v2b8t.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChang, S., and M. D. Rausher. 1998. Frequency‐dependent pollen discounting contributes to maintenance of a mixed mating system in the common morning glory Ipomoea prpurea. Am. Nat. 152: 671 – 683.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCipollini, D. 2004. Stretching the limits of plasticity: can a plant defend against both competitors and herbivores? Ecology 85: 28 – 37.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceClements, D. R., A. DiTommaso, N. Jordan, B. D. Booth, J. Cardina, D. Doohan, C. L. Mohler, S. D. Murphy, and C. J. Swanton. 2004. Adaptability of plants invading North American cropland. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 104: 379 – 398.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCordes, R. C., and T. T. Bauman. 1984. Field competition between ivyleaf morningglory ( Ipomea hederacea ) and soybeans ( Glycine max ). Weed Sci. 32: 364 – 370.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDarwin, C. 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection. J. Murray, London.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDefelice, M. S. 2001. Tall morningglory, Ipomoea purpurea (L.) Roth—flower or foe? Weed Technol. 15: 601 – 606.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDorn, L. A., E. H. Pyle, and J. Schmitt. 2000. Plasticity to light cues and resources in Arabidopsis thaliana: testing for adaptive value and costs. Evolution 54: 1982 – 1994.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDudley, S. A., and J. Schmitt. 1996. Testing the adaptive plasticity hypothesis: density‐dependent selection on manipulated stem length in Impatiens capensis. Am. Nat. 147: 445 – 465.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEpperson, B. K., and M. T. Clegg. 1987. Frequency‐dependent variation for outcrossing rate among flower‐color morphs of Ipomoea purpurea. Evolution 41: 1302 – 1311.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFornoni, J., P. L. Valverde, and J. Nunez‐Farfan. 2004. Population variation in the cost and benefit of tolerance and resistance against herbivory in Datura stramonium. Evolution 58: 1696 – 1704.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFowler, N. 1986. The role of competition in plant communities in arid and semiarid regions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17: 89 – 110.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFridley, J. D., J. P. Grime, and M. Bilton. 2007. Genetic identity of interspecific neighbours mediates plant responses to competition and environmental variation in a species‐rich grassland. J. Ecol. 95: 908 – 915.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGalloway, L. F., J. R. Etterson, and J. W. McGlothlin. 2009. Contribution of direct and maternal genetic effects to life‐history evolution. New Phytol. 183: 826 – 838.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoldberg, D. E. 1990. Components of resource competition in plant communities. Pp. 27 – 49 in D. Tilman and J. B. Grace, eds. Perspectives on plant competition. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoldberg, D. E.. 1996. Competitive ability: definitions, contingency and correlated traits. Philos. Trans. Biol. Sci. 351: 1377 – 1385.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoldberg, D. E., and A. M. Barton. 1992. Patterns and consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants. Am. Nat. 139: 771 – 801.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoldberg, D. E., and K. Landa. 1991. Competitive effect and response: hierarchies and correlated traits in the early stages of competition. J. Ecol. 79: 1013 – 1030.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrace, J. B. 1990. On the relationship between plant traits and competitive ability. Pp. 51 – 65 in D. Tilman and J. B. Grace, eds. Perspectives on plant competition. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrime, J. P. 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. Am. Nat. 111: 1169 – 1194.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHadfield, J. D., A. J. Wilson, D. Garant, B. C. Sheldon, and L. E. B. Kruuk. 2010. The misuse of BLUP in ecology and evolution. Am. Nat. 175: 116 – 125.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHochwender, C. G., R. J. Marquis, and K. A. Stowe. 2000. The potential for and constraints on the evolution of compensatory ability in Asclepias syriaca. Oecologia 122: 361 – 370.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHolt, R. D. 1977. Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. Theor. Popul. Biol. 12: 197 – 229.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchmitt, J., J. R. Stinchcombe, M. S. Heschel, and H. Huber. 2003. The adaptive evolution of plasticity: phytochrome‐mediated shade avoidance responses. Integr. Comp. Biol. 43: 459 – 469.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJuenger, T., and J. Bergelson. 2000. The evolution of compensation to herbivory in scarlet gilia, Ipomopsis aggregata: herbivore‐imposed natural selection and the quantitative genetics of tolerance. Evolution 54: 764 – 777.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKeddy, P. A., L. Twolan‐Strutt, and I. C. Wisheu. 1994. Competitive effect and response rankings in 20 wetland plants: are they consistent across three environments? J. Ecol. 82: 635 – 643.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLande, R., and S. J. Arnold. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37: 1210 – 1226.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLankau, R. A., and S. Y. Strauss. 2007. Mutual feedbacks maintain both genetic and species diversity in a plant community. Science 317: 1561 – 1563.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMauricio, R., M. D. Rausher, and D. S. Burdick. 1997. Variation in the defense strategies of plants: are resistance and tolerance mutually exclusive? Ecology 78: 1301 – 1311.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcGlothlin, J. W., and L. F. Galloway. 2013. The contribution of maternal effects to selection response: an empirical test of competing models. Evolution 68: 549 – 558.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcGoey, B. V., and J. R. Stinchcombe. 2009. Interspecific competition alters natural selection on shade avoidance phenotypes in Impatiens capensis. New Phytol. 183: 880 – 891.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcNutt, D. W., S. L. Halpern, K. Barrows, and N. Underwood. 2012. Intraspecific competition facilitates the evolution of tolerance to insect damage in the perennial plant Solanum carolinense. Oecologia 170: 1033 – 1044.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
evo12383-sup-0001-SupMat.pdf
Size:
947.8KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
evo12383.pdf
Size:
293.2KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.