The relative advantages of plasticity and fixity in different environments: when is it good for a plant to adjust?

By P. Alpert, E. Simms. Evolutionary Ecology, 2002

371 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Insect Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/868b888cf3c893b06658cf9da73b9e10c44e13a2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Insect Science

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Stay or go – how topographic complexity influences alpine plant population and community responses to climate change (2017, background): “13 244 temporal and spatial scale of climatic variation (Alpert and Simms, 2002; Botero et al., 245 2015).”
The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in response to anthropogenic disturbance (2010, background): “One possibility is that the more sedentary nature of plants might increase their relative exposure to overall environmental degradation, which could in turn increase the potential for maladaptive plasticity and thereby promote the evolution of reduced plasticity (Alpert and Simms, 2002; van Kleunen ”
Home site advantage in two long‐lived arctic plant species: results from two 30‐year reciprocal transplant studies (2012, background): “…observed may not be positively related to fitness across sites if morphological variability is simply a passive response to resource avail- ability (Alpert & Simms 2002; van Kleunen & Fischer 2005; Ghalambor et al. 2007), or if costs of plasticity outweigh the benefits in at least some…”
Modelling the rhizosphere: a review of methods for ‘upscaling’ to the whole‐plant scale (2006, background): “However, plants show strong plastic responses to exogenous conditions (Hodge 2004), and the relation between root density and depth is likely to be effected by the nutrient gradient down the profile (Alpert & Simms, 2002).”
Resource pulses, species interactions, and diversity maintenance in arid and semi-arid environments (2004, background): “However, plasticity, or any generalist resource consumption behaviors, including those involving drought resistance, may come at a cost (Alpert and Simms 2002; Schwinning and Sala 2004).”
Ecological limits to plant phenotypic plasticity. (2007, background): “…of adaptive reaction norms mostly considered characteristics of the abiotic environment (e.g. the magnitude of environmental heterogeneity or the reliability of cues; Bradshaw & Hardwick, 1989; van Tienderen, 1991; Scheiner, 1993; Sultan, 1995; Alpert & Simms, 2002; van Kleunen & Fischer, 2005).”
Plant architecture: a dynamic, multilevel and comprehensive approach to plant form, structure and ontogeny. (2007, background): “…stand structure, functioning and production has been stressed by several authors (Givnish, 1984; King, 1998; Diggle, 1999, 2002; Huber et al., 1999; Alpert and Simms, 2002; Novoplansky, 2002; Wright et al., 2002; Oborny, 2004; Sachs, 2004; Damascos et al., 2005; de Kroon et al., 2005; Pearcy et…”
Greater capacity for division of labour in clones of Fragaria chiloensis from patchier habitats (2007, background): “Although connection between ramets within clones is known to mediate their plastic responses to light availability via leaf area (Alpert & Simms 2002), leaf area has apparently not been studied with regard to division of labour.”
Linking small-scale topography with microclimate, plant species diversity and intra-specific trait variation in an alpine landscape (2015, background): “In this case, genotype × environment correlations are unlikely to emerge and phenotypic plasticity is assumed to be an adaptive response to environmental variation (Alpert and Simms 2002).”
Higher plasticity in ecophysiological traits enhances the performance and invasion success of Taraxacum officinale (dandelion) in alpine environments (2011, result): “These results agree with earlier studies (van Kleunen and Fischer 2001; Gianoli 2004; Molina-Montenegro et al. 2010) and theoretical expectations (Bradshaw and Hardwick 1989; Alpert and Simms 2002 )o f a positive association between the magnitude of phenotypic plasticity and the degree of environm”
Environmental heterogeneity leads to higher plasticity in dry‐edge populations of a semi‐arid Chilean shrub: insights into climate change responses (2015, background): “Our results seem to support the theoretical prediction that higher environmental heterogeneity should select for greater phenotypic plasticity (Alpert & Simms 2002; Bradshaw & Holzapfel 2006; Matesanz, Gianoli & Valladares 2010).”
A developmental morphologist's perspective on plasticity (2002, background): “The timing of ontogenetic changes is subject to environmental influence (Allsopp, 1967; Lee and Richards, 1991; Jones 1995; and examples given by Alpert and Simms, 2002 ).”
Variation of xylem vessel diameters across a climate gradient: insight from a reciprocal transplant experiment with a widespread boreal tree (2015, background): “Depending on the trait, long- and short-term plastic responses can contribute to plant development and the ability to cope with diverse environments (Sultan et al. 1998; Alpert & Simms 2002; Hetherington & Woodward 2003; Sultan 2003).”
Environmental Heterogeneity and Population Differentiation in Plasticity to Drought in Convolvulus Chilensis (Convolvulaceae) (2005, background): “Some theory predicts that greater levels of environmental heterogeneity should select for higher magnitudes of phenotypic plasticity (Bradshaw and Hardwick, 1989; Alpert and Simms, 2002).”