Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Index/Abstracts
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
  • Alerts
  • Free Issue
  • Call for Papers
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
    • Ecological Restoration
    • Land Economics
    • Landscape Journal

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Native Plants Journal
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
    • Ecological Restoration
    • Land Economics
    • Landscape Journal
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Native Plants Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Index/Abstracts
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
  • Alerts
  • Free Issue
  • Call for Papers
  • Follow uwp on Twitter
  • Visit uwp on Facebook
Research ArticleRefereed Research
Open Access

Fine-scale trait variation of five native forbs along environmental gradients

Sasha Victor, Kyle Doherty, Mary Ellyn DuPre, Philip W Ramsey and Ylva Lekberg
Native Plants Journal, September 2023, 24 (3) 192-205; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/npj.24.3.192
Sasha Victor
MPG Ranch, , Missoula, MT 59801
Roles: Ecological Restoration Researcher
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: sashavictor{at}gmail.com
Kyle Doherty
MPG Ranch, , Missoula, MT 59801
Roles: Spatial Ecologist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: kdoherty{at}mpgranch.com
Mary Ellyn DuPre
MPG Ranch, , Missoula, MT 59801
Roles: Community Ecologist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: medupre{at}mpgranch.com
Philip W Ramsey
MPG Ranch, , Missoula, MT 59801
Roles: General Manager and Ecologist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: pramsey{at}mpgranch.com
Ylva Lekberg
Adjunct Professor, University of Montana
MPG Ranch, , Missoula, MT 59801
Roles: Ecologist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: ylekberg{at}mpgranch.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Photos taken in the beginning of May show the diversity of plant communities and environmental conditions among 3 sites.

  • Figure
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    View looking up at the general location of our sites to show the range of habitats.

  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Overview map of the 21 sites included in this study.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    Trait variation by species. Absolute values for each trait were relativized around the mean for each species (panel A). The median is represented by the line across the box and dots represent outliers. After relativizing values, we tested for homogeneity of variance across species (panel B) and trait (panel C). Groups with larger values on the x-axis had greater variance. Post hoc testing (letters left of boxes in B and C) showed blue-eyed Mary had greater trait variance than all other species except threadleaf phacelia, which was among the most widely distributed in our study. Flower count and shoot biomass appear to have the largest amount of variation among traits. We did not measure SLA on threadleaf phacelia.

  • Figure
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Cutleaf daisy (Erigeron compositus) at a high insolation and high-elevation site.

  • Figure
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Blanketflower (Gaillardia aristata) at a high insolation and low-elevation site.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Statistical results for linear regression of site / soil properties with elevation and insolation.

    Site / Soil propertyRange, mean, and variationElevationInsolationElevation * Insolation
    RangeMeansdFP+ / −FP+ / −FP
    Site productivity (g / 0.25m2)8.71–68.928.116.53.370.08423.89< 0.001−7.460.014
    pH6.00–6.806.450.2113.710.0710.9600.34111.720.003
    OM (log; %)3.00–19.70.0690.0370.4770.4997.550.014−0.0020.970
    Nitrate (log; ppm)0.500–4.901.951.270.7260.4060.0940.7633.040.099
    Potassium (ppm)163–43125770.31.260.27811.110.004−16.17< 0.001
    Sulfate (ppm)7.00–24.713.14.340.2700.6103.160.0939.770.006
    Zinc (log: ppm)1.37–5.352.881.210.5050.4870.2510.6230.2530.621
    Iron (ppm)21.2–61.00.59.183.250.08910.380.005−8.500.010
    Manganese (log; ppm)12.7–45.022.08.10.0530.8202.180.1580.5870.454
    Copper (ppm)0.460–93.86.4821.31.390.2562.620.1241.190.290
    Calcium (ppm)982–299518534720.0080.9319.340.007−5.890.027
    Magnesium (ppm)151–33021744.80.0500.8264.800.043−1.110.308
    Sodium (ppm)8.00–22.010.72.910.2670.6121.950.1810.4400.516
    Phosphorus (ppm)45.0–10268.015.81.870.1890.3580.5582.190.158
    June gravimetric water content (log; g/g)0.030–0.2600.0930.0640.7030.41335.32< 0.001−0.6730.424
    June soil temperature (°C)Maximum35.0–66.049.58.460.0210.88611.070.004+0.1060.749
    Minimum3.00–8.505.141.3113.420.002−0.0260.8730.4480.513
    Relative abundance (log)Mutualistic Fungi0.500–13.14.004.009.000.008−2.550.1280.0420.839
    Pathogenic Fungi4.10–42.916.010.00.0870.7720.3680.5520.2040.657

    Notes: We used the inverse of insolation due to an opposing effect of elevation and insolation found during preliminary data exploration. Data transformation noted. +/− denote the direction of relationship (positive or negative). Boldface indicates variables with significant results.

      • View popup
      TABLE 2

      Statistical results for linear regression of functional traits with elevation and insolation.

      SpeciesTraitRange, mean, and variationElevationInsolationElevation * Insolation
      RangeMeansdFP+ / −FP+ / −FP
      Blue-eyed MarySLA (log; cm2/g)15.4–61.028.010.62.080.1731.060.3221.510.241
      Seed Weight (mg)0.300–1.030.6290.1630.9110.3571.460.2480.8380.377
      Aboveground Biomass (g)0.013–0.1220.0540.0314.530.053+1.140.3051.600.228
      Flower Count2–3012.39.9044.6< 0.001+3.700.055+1.030.311
      Cutleaf daisySLA (cm2/g)8.84–13.110.51.150.6500.4391.130.3127.080.024
      Seed Weight (mg)0.072–0.3030.2070.07045.4< 0.001+0.3770.5536.300.031
      Aboveground Biomass (g)0.616–1.470.9100.2310.0790.7840.0170.8980.0160.903
      Flower Count2–63.431.400.0490.8250.1340.7140.5000.480
      BlanketflowerSLA (cm2/g)9.24–14.511.81.387.510.015+8.510.011−0.2170.648
      Seed Weight (mg)1.51–2.852.110.2860.2570.6202.260.1531.030.326
      Aboveground Biomass (g)0.658–2.421.460.5120.2580.6190.0810.7792.250.154
      Flower Count1–31.840.7650.0390.8430.0050.9420.7690.380
      Prairie smokeSLA (cm2/g)9.56–12.710.80.9883.660.0851.040.3310.0500.828
      Seed Weight (mg)0.609–1.340.9220.1882.130.1750.5000.4962.080.180
      Aboveground Biomass (g)0.680–2.181.270.4120.0400.8450.0500.8270.3140.588
      Flower Count0–31.591.020.9620.3271.590.2071.250.264
      Threadleaf phaceliaSLA (cm2/g)—————————
      Seed Weight (mg)0.179–0.3620.2960.0520.2980.6054.590.0763.140.127
      Aboveground Biomass (log; g)0.174–0.9840.3490.2490.0160.9030.1310.7301.020.351
      Flower Count18–8335.318.21.840.1750.0720.7883.480.062

      Notes: We used the inverse of insolation because of an opposing effect of elevation and insolation found during preliminary data exploration. Data transformation noted. +/− denote the direction of the relationship (positive or negative). Boldface indicates variables with significant results.

      PreviousNext
      Back to top

      In this issue

      Native Plants Journal: 24 (3)
      Native Plants Journal
      Vol. 24, Issue 3
      21 Sep 2023
      • Table of Contents
      • Table of Contents (PDF)
      • Index by author
      • Front Matter (PDF)
      Print
      Download PDF
      Article Alerts
      Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
      Email Article

      Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Native Plants Journal.

      NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

      Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
      Fine-scale trait variation of five native forbs along environmental gradients
      (Your Name) has sent you a message from Native Plants Journal
      (Your Name) thought you would like to see the Native Plants Journal web site.
      Citation Tools
      Fine-scale trait variation of five native forbs along environmental gradients
      Sasha Victor, Kyle Doherty, Mary Ellyn DuPre, Philip W Ramsey, Ylva Lekberg
      Native Plants Journal Sep 2023, 24 (3) 192-205; DOI: 10.3368/npj.24.3.192

      Citation Manager Formats

      • BibTeX
      • Bookends
      • EasyBib
      • EndNote (tagged)
      • EndNote 8 (xml)
      • Medlars
      • Mendeley
      • Papers
      • RefWorks Tagged
      • Ref Manager
      • RIS
      • Zotero
      Share
      Fine-scale trait variation of five native forbs along environmental gradients
      Sasha Victor, Kyle Doherty, Mary Ellyn DuPre, Philip W Ramsey, Ylva Lekberg
      Native Plants Journal Sep 2023, 24 (3) 192-205; DOI: 10.3368/npj.24.3.192
      Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
      • Tweet Widget
      • Facebook Like
      • Google Plus One
      Bookmark this article

      Jump to section

      • Article
        • Abstract
        • METHODS
        • RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
        • WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR RESTORATION AND SEED COLLECTION?
        • Footnotes
        • REFERENCES
      • Figures & Data
      • Info & Metrics
      • References
      • PDF

      Related Articles

      • No related articles found.
      • Google Scholar

      Cited By...

      • No citing articles found.
      • Google Scholar

      More in this TOC Section

      • Optimizing regeneration protocols for native Seeds of Success–collected milkvetch (Astragalus spp.) genetic resources
      • Evaluating native pre-variety germplasms for use in dryland restoration
      • Investigating seed dormancy and germination of important Wyoming forbs
      Show more Refereed Research

      Similar Articles

      Keywords

      • plant functional traits
      • specific leaf area
      • seed mass
      • seed-transfer zones
      • elevation
      • insolation
      • fungal communities
      UW Press logo

      © 2026 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

      Powered by HighWire