Abstract
Purpose of Review
The capacity of woody plants to cope with climate change depends on their adjustments to changing environmental conditions by phenotypic plasticity or by genotypic changes (i.e., local adaptation). To determine whether intraspecific trait variation (ITV) translates into resistance or tolerance to drought and eventually how it relates to performance when facing drought, we reviewed the recent literature on the intraspecific variation in woody plant functional traits along aridity gradients.
Recent Findings
At the intraspecific level, functional traits vary along aridity gradients, but this variation depends on the considered trait and species. While ITV is ubiquitous and of relevant magnitude, its relationship with tree performance in the case of growth or survival is unclear and very idiosyncratic.
Summary
ITV varies along aridity gradients and, for several traits, is of comparable magnitude as interspecific trait variation. However, the relationship between ITV and tree performance is not consistent among species. This makes the use of ITV challenging when quantifying its contribution to drought tolerance.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Forests occupy about 30% of the global land surface [1] and provide a diverse and vast number of ecosystem services for human well-being [2, 3]. Currently, climate change, along with interactions with other related global change drivers, is threatening the conservation and management of forests worldwide [4, 5]. Over the past decades, climate change has triggered the occurrence of more frequent and intense droughts and concurrent heat waves (i.e., “hotter droughts”, [6]), which have paralleled in time with substantial changes in land use practices and resulted in an increase in disturbance regimes [7]. It is becoming increasingly clear that forest mortality increases in magnitude and intensity in response to hotter droughts [8], and forests at the equatorward limit (dry rear edge) of their distribution range seem to be extremely vulnerable to such aridification trends [9, 10]. In fact, recent studies indicate that background mortality rates of European tree species have increased near their southern distribution limits [11, 12], where important die-off episodes have also been recorded [13]. These findings point to the need to better understand how tree species respond to drought within and across populations as a tool to anticipate climate change impacts on forests [14•, 15, 16•].
It is expected that climate change will alter the distribution of temperate tree species by inducing range contractions at drier climatic edges and at lower elevations of their distribution ranges [14•]. All species have spatially restricted distributions, but the size of their distribution ranges, and thus, the climate threats they face vary considerably [15]. Tree species with high genetic variation, as is generally the case for those widely distributed, are expected to be better able to persist in the face of environmental change than species with limited distribution ranges or relict populations [16•]. Adaptation is expected to occur at evolutionary time scales, and peripheral populations will present local adaptations to cope with drought, heat, and cold stress [17,18,19]. Gene flow between peripheral and core populations will prevent extinction risk, although excessive gene flow from central to peripheral populations will lead to genetic maladaptation, preventing adaptive capacity [20, 21]. The capacity of species to cope with environmental change can also depend on rapid changes due to phenotypic plasticity [22, 23], but plastic responses may depend on adaptive capacity and can also imply trade-offs between functions ultimately impacting fitness [24]. It is thus urgent to understand how tree species respond to changing environmental conditions, as this will in turn determine their capacity to thrive in a drier and warmer world [18, 25]. From a purely ecological perspective, understanding how individuals and populations of species vary in their response to drought is important in order to define tolerance limits due to phenotypic plasticity as well as detect potential genotypic differences between populations and their covariation [26]. From a perspective focused on the provision of ecosystem services, understanding such variations is important to delineate vulnerability scenarios for tree species as well as to assist conservation and management programs, which ultimately could require the translocation of tree populations (i.e., assisted migration) or even the management of novel ecosystems [15, 27, 28].
In the last two decades, plant functional traits have been heralded as a useful proxy to explain variation in plant form and functioning [29] and to predict plant responses to disturbances and climate change [30, 31]. Functional traits are measurable plant anatomical, morphological, and physiological attributes that are assumed to be directly linked with individual performance [29, 32] and that show variation along climatic gradients [33]. At the beginning, much emphasis was put on determining how traits varied between species and across environmental gradients to understand essential trade-offs in plant functioning and related strategies [19, 34,35,36,37]. Studies accounting for species replacement and changes in mean trait values along environmental gradients suggested the existence of essential trade-offs between functional traits in response to changes in limiting factors [33, 38, 39]. For example, when resources are limited due to stressful conditions, plants will tend to show trait values that maximize stress tolerance and resource conservation at the expense of reducing size or growth [19]. For instance, at a global scale, species inhabiting sites where water and light are not limiting tend to have low wood density (WD), high specific leaf area (SLA), and high growth rates, which make them better competitors, i.e., they follow a resource-acquisitive strategy [40]. Species from areas where water is a limiting resource invest more in traits conferring drought tolerance (high WD, low SLA, low growth rates), which make them better competitors in water-limited environments, i.e., they follow a more resource-conservative strategy [40, 41]. The spectrum of resource acquisitive-conservative trade-offs in life strategies is also related to the fast–slow leaf economics spectrum [36]. The fast–slow leaf economics spectrum has mainly been found to occur at the interspecific level, and few studies have found it to occur at the intraspecific level [42].
This preferential focus on species replacement along environmental gradients has resulted in a generalized lack of knowledge on how traits vary and covary along environmental gradients at the intraspecific level, reducing the ability to assess tree adaptive capacity in response to stress [15]. Both adaptation and phenotypic variation can induce changes in trait values between and within populations [43]. The variation in trait values between individuals and populations can be as extreme as that between species, so inducing similar changes in ecosystem functioning as species replacement could do [43]. Over the past decades, several studies have acknowledged that intraspecific trait variation (ITV) plays a fundamental role in determining species sorting along environmental gradients [44,45,46,47,48] and that it can influence species responses to environmental stress [49], particularly increased aridity [50•] and drought stress [51••]. Responses to drought tend to imply the coordination of different traits either due to rapid environmental changes (phenotypic plasticity) or in response to local conditions (phenotypic integration), both potentially implying trade-offs between functions and changes in fitness [24, 52, 53]. Thus, the ability to detect linkages between ITV and tree performance depends upon multiple factors, including the selection of functional traits [32], the length of the gradient considered [50•], and the effect of confounding factors. Hard traits (i.e., those directly linked to physiological processes [54]) are expected to outperform soft traits (morphological traits) in predicting tree performance [55], but this will depend on the capacity to control confounding factors and measure associated errors [32].
Assuming that the negative impacts on forests of longer and more frequent, severe, and hotter droughts are projected to increase [6, 8], understanding how tree species respond to drought within and across populations is relevant and important for the conservation and management of forests [14•, 15, 16•]. Thus, the more knowledge we gain about the intraspecific variation of species, the closer we will be to making knowledge-based decisions [18, 56••]. In this study, we first reviewed empirical studies published in the last 10 years or so regarding how tree traits vary along aridity gradients and how this variation translates into variations in performance in response to drought. Particularly, we focused on field studies that measured trait-performance relationships along aridity gradients to evaluate the extent to which ITV translates into growth or mortality differences. Here, we apply an ample definition of aridity gradient, referring to those studies that compare differences in precipitation or water balance. We synthesized general trends in ITV-performance associations across aridity gradients to determine which are the most important traits driving tree responses to drought. We hypothesized that both growth and trait variations at the intraspecific level along aridity gradients are ubiquitous but that their relationship is species and gradient-specific. That is, the selection of the trait, the strength of the aridity gradient, and other confounding factors such as forest structure and composition will affect the capacity to determine if there exists a variation in growth at the expense of the variation in certain traits and to quantify how ITV contributes to drought tolerance.
Literature Search and Analysis
We performed a literature survey in August 2022 in the Web of Science databases for all types of documents that were related to ITV and water scarcity in trees or forests. We searched for all types of documents containing the words “forest*” OR “tree*” AND “intraspecific” AND “trait*” AND “drought” OR “aridity” OR “precipitation” in the title, abstract, or key words. We evaluated a total of 322 articles.
Given that we are interested in studies evaluating the variation of ITV in trees along aridity gradients and how it relates to tree performance (e.g., growth or mortality) in response to drought, we performed a refined selection by reading the abstracts of the studies and selecting only those that fully satisfied our criteria. First, we searched for studies that accounted for the variation of functional traits within species across gradients of 1) precipitation, 2) drought intensity, and 3) aridity (i.e., the ratio between precipitation and potential evapotranspiration). A total of 151 articles in which intraspecific trait variation was either studied or reviewed were selected. This first list of studies included, among others, 68 field studies, 66 provenance trials, and 6 reviews.
A further refined search was done to select those field studies that accounted for the relationship between ITV and growth or mortality. We considered studies that reviewed intraspecific responses of tree species along climatic gradients or those that used altitudinal or latitudinal gradients as surrogates of changes in water availability, temperature, or aridity. Finally, we retained a list of 12 studies that dealt with the relationships between intraspecific trait variation and any measures of performance (e.g., growth or mortality) along aridity gradients under natural conditions. For those studies, we extracted the relationship between individual traits and performance to quantify the extent to which ITV affects performance. It should be noted that tree growth was quantified in several ways depending on the study, ranging from stem size increments to whole tree growth responses to drought. Thus, how traits affect performance depends on such estimations. We also tentatively estimated whether the aridity gradient studied covers the aridity the species experience along their distribution ranges. This was done based on the extent of the study area and also considering what was written in the articles. We then determined whether the gradients studied were large (i.e., covering the distribution of the species) or regional (i.e., only including some particular sites).
Results
We found 12 case studies in which the relationship between trait variation and performance (either growth or mortality) was implicitly tested along aridity gradients (Table 1). Collectively, these studies covered 14 tree species (6 conifers and 8 broadleaf species) and 35 functional measures (including functional traits, measures of functional richness, and ordination axes), accounting for 320 traits per species or site combination. Most studies were performed in Europe (9), and Pinus sylvestris was the most studied species among them. The environmental (aridity) gradients studied also varied between studies, with some of them encompassing variations along wide altitudinal and latitudinal gradients [57, 58], while others focused on differences between trees of different vigor classes within the same forest [59]. Despite the wide variation in the traits studied, leaf traits, wood density, and plant height were common in several studies (Fig. 1; Table 2). Given that the studies were done under field conditions, most of them accounted for the variation in climate conditions, soil parameters, and forest structure and composition between sites. According to these studies, significant relationships between traits and performance were trait and species dependent (see below for a detailed description of the results). It is important to note here that measures of performance vary between studies (Table 1), and they go from the growth of the stem, from which traits are measured [45], to measures of basal area increment derived from national forest inventories [60•]. In some cases, performance was explicitly measured as a growth response to drought [51••, 61] or drought-induced mortality [59, 62••].
A first subset of studies comprises the evaluation of ITV and its relationship with growth at the stem level [45, 57, 58]. Strong relationships between ITV in hydraulic traits and growth have been found along wide environmental gradients in P. sylvestris [45, 57]. These studies covered most of the distribution range of the species in Europe and included rear-edge populations. The authors found negative impacts of leaf-specific conductivity and tracheid density [45] and positive impacts of HV (defined as the ratio between leaf area and sapwood area) and tracheid diameter on stem growth. Besides, Sterck et al. [57] found a negative relationship between WD and growth. Fajardo et al. [58] studied the variation in WD and its covariation with xylem traits and growth along aridity and temperature gradients for three species with ample niche breadth in southern South America. They found that WD was related to xylem traits in a species-specific way, but no relationship between WD and growth was found in any of the three species studied. This was confirmed in another study in the same area at the community level, where although WD and leaf size did predict tree growth at the interspecific level, non-significant relationships were found at the intraspecific level (Fajardo et al. under review).
Another set of studies evaluated the variation in ITV and its relationship to growth (and mortality [59, 62••], along regional aridity gradients while considering whole tree growth. In this case, performance estimates were repeated measures of diameter increments [60•, 63], radial growth [64, 65], or radial growth responses to drought [59, 61]. Non-significant relationships between performance and WD were found in most studies (Fig. 1), except for negative relationships in the cases of growth resistance and recovery after drought in F. sylvatica [50•], growth in P. uncinata [64], and mortality in Abies alba [59]. Higher leaf mass per area (LMA, the inverse of SLA) enhanced growth efficiency (basal area increment per unit of total leaf area) in three pine species (P. sylvestris, P. nigra, and Pinus halepensis Mill.) and three Fagaceae species (F. sylvatica, Quercus humilis Mill., and Q. ilex) along a precipitation gradient in NE Spain [60•], but higher LMA resulted in higher cumulative growth reductions after drought in F. sylvatica in the same region [51••]. Along this line, A. alba trees with high SLA presented higher cumulative growth reductions in response to successive drought than trees with low SLA in the western Pyrenees [61], while P. sylvestris and A. alba trees with low SLA grew more when moisture was available, i.e., in wet years [61]. In other studies, no significant relationships between LMA and SLA with growth were found, but a greater mortality of Populus tremuloides Michx. after drought was found in trees with leaves showing higher SLA values [62••].
Positive associations between HV and growth have been found at the whole tree level in P. sylvestris [64] and also with growth efficiency in temperate tree species [60•], while no significant impacts have been found on growth resilience to drought [51••]. Tree height has been found to positively affect growth [60•, 62••, 64] and responses to drought in some species [51••], while reducing growth resilience after drought in A. alba [59].
Leaf- and sapwood-specific hydraulic conductivity have been found to be only weakly related (positive effect) to growth efficiency [60•], while resistance to xylem embolism increased the growth resistance and resilience of F. sylvatica and Q. pubescens and reduced their recovery time after drought [51••]. Along with this, negative leaf water potential at the turgor loss point was associated with greater growth losses after drought. Leaf C isotopic composition and water use efficiency have been found to affect the growth [60•] and growth recovery after drought [51••] of several temperate tree species, but with limited and inconsistent impacts on mortality [59]. Leaf N content increased P. sylvestris radial growth [64] and the recovery after drought of Q. pubescens and F. sylvatica [51••], and A. alba trees with higher foliar concentrations of several micronutrients (P, K, and Cu) performed better in response to drought [59]. Linkages between leaf nutrient concentrations and growth were less clear in other studies [63, 66].
Discussion
During the past decades, functional traits have emerged as powerful tools to explain variation in plant responses to climate change at the intraspecific level. Latitudinal and altitudinal gradients are often used to study how ITV varies in space because this allows understanding the potential of species to acclimate or adapt to increasing temperatures or drought stress [23, 33, 57, 58, 60•, 62••, 68, 69••, 70•] and can help refine model forecasts [15, 71]. However, it is also important to link trait variations along environmental gradients with measures of tree performance [45, 51••, 60•]. Unfortunately, in most field studies, the covariation between trait and performance is assumed rather than tested. To our knowledge, this is the first review summarizing the studies testing for the relationship between ITV and tree performance in response to drought under natural circumstances. Our results indicate that relationships between ITV and measures of performance (either growth or mortality) vary depending on the trait considered, the gradient, and the species. Overall, the relationships between growth responses to drought and single traits at the intraspecific level are scarce and species-specific. Along this line, mortality in response to drought is weakly related to ITV [62••]. It is in general hard to find a strong relationship because traits vary at the intraspecific level and along environmental gradients in complex ways [67, 72], and linkages between individual functional traits and tree growth are difficult to address without considering trait covariations [51••, 60•,73]. This suggests that the relationship between trait variation and performance in response to drought is not universal.
First, it is important to assume that gradients can be complex (e.g., non-linear relationships) and depend on the covariation of different environmental variables [50•, 66], which might partially explain why responses are species-specific [70•]. Thus, to draw robust conclusions, it is important to account for potential effects across the different ends of the gradient [23], confounding factors [71, 74], and trait coordination varying along the gradient. For instance, Anderegg et al. [50•] argued that coordination between traits belonging to different tissues only emerges when there are strong differences in aridity between sites and gradients that are not confounded with variations in other stress factors such as coldness. Thus, how different functional traits covary between them and how the environment modulates this covariation emerges as an important question that has received little attention [73]. Most studies included in this review account for the potential influence of stand characteristics and tree intrinsic features on performance. However, aridity gradients varied considerably, and they rarely included whole species distribution ranges. In fact, the studies with the widest gradients have often considered performance at the branch level, suggesting that studies accounting for the relationship between ITV and performance at the tree level and along wide gradients are rare [72]. Moreover, there is a lack of knowledge on which traits are linked to drought response at the species’ rear edge [72]. However, this type of information is important for improving our understanding on how species will respond to drought in a warmer and drier future.
Collectively, the reviewed studies indicate the importance of considering wide gradients and, if possible, including rear-edge, climatically marginal tree populations. However, small-scale variations in environmental conditions can be of great value. Endemic species with a narrow range of genetic variability or relict populations are likely the most threatened by environmental changes [16•]. Given that geographic distance affects genetic diversity [75], these populations tend to present intraspecific differences from those populations located in the core of the distribution range [65, 76]. Distinguishing between phenotypic plasticity (including acclimation) and local adaptation (i.e., genetic differences) requires the use of provenance trials or common garden experiments [73]; however, combining genetics and measures of ITV may help to understand if variations in ITV between populations correlate with different gene expressions [48, 77]. Ideally, these measures should be accompanied with estimations of growth responses to drought performed over the same individuals as a tool to better understand linkages between ITV and performance at the whole tree level [73].
With the idea that drought will be one of the main limiting factors for forests in the future [8], it is important to consider traits that determine how trees cope with drought stress [62••, 68] (Table 2). Plant height is an important trait, which in turn is correlated with other traits such as WD or SLA [64]. Relying solely on tree height, larger trees have longer hydraulic path lengths, and because of this, they have wider hydraulic conduits, which can make them more vulnerable to hydraulic failure when water is scarce [78, 79]. However, larger size is often correlated with a greater capacity to obtain water from different sources (provided that there is water), which might mitigate drought-induced stress [59, 80, 81], as well as with adjustments in conduit size and density, potentially implying that what holds at the interspecific level (i.e., greater vulnerability of taller trees) shifts at the intraspecific level [79]. There is a hydric continuum from the roots to the leaves, and drought impairs the transport of water, which may cause xylem embolism in some species [60•]. Hydraulic conductivity is thus a process that depends on the coordination of different traits that vary independently along aridity gradients [70•, 81].
Leaf area, thickness, and density, and related morphological traits such as SLA, have also been suggested as important traits determining the alignment of species to aridity [36], and so SLA has been widely studied at the intraspecific level [58, 61, 62••,63, 82, 83]. Higher SLA will reduce growth efficiency [60•], lead to higher drought-induced growth reductions [61], and enhance mortality [62••]. Sapwood to leaf area ratio, that is, HV [84], is also a prominent trait as it informs on variations in hydraulic efficiency [57]. Overall, higher HV enhances growth and growth efficiency, but its role in growth resilience to drought and mortality is unclear, and studies along wide aridity gradients are required in this respect. The leaf water potential at the turgor loss point relates to stomatal closure and is expected to decrease in response to aridity (i.e., more negative values in arid sites [85]). Along this line, the intrinsic water-use efficiency (iWUE), which is defined as the ratio between photosynthesis and stomatal conductance rates, is related to drought tolerance [60•]. These traits have been found to vary along regional aridity gradients in temperate tree species [67], but their relationship with growth [60•] and growth resilience remains unclear [51••].
At the interspecific level, trees with denser wood grow more slowly, have longer lifespans, and are less prone to drought-induced mortality [37, 86, 87]. Low growth rates have been associated with higher resistance to xylem embolism [88, 89]. Therefore, WD is a good proxy for drought tolerance when comparing species [90], while the relationships between WD, growth, and drought tolerance at the intraspecific level are unclear [58, 61]. In fact, the role played by WD at the intraspecific level is not evident, with some studies reporting lower WD in dry sites [91], a lack of differences between populations [71], or higher WD as aridity increases (e.g., [50•, 58, 68]. Thus, results are species- and site-specific, as different species will respond differently depending on the type of gradient and most likely the plant species strategy (i.e., the combination of traits). Clough et al. [92] used a large database of intraspecific variation in WD combined with species inventories to show that for five gymnosperms, WD decreased with the increase in aridity, whereas in the case of angiosperms, an increase or neutral pattern was found depending on the species considered. However, in a review based on provenance trials, Nabais et al. [93] found that in 8 out of the 25 tree species considered, there was a tendency toward higher WD in populations from drought-prone sites. Provided that provenance trials act as a common garden experiment, the result of Nabais et al. [93] points out that for some species, trait differences are the result of local adaptation. These results suggest that WD is not a universal trait that can be used to detect changes along aridity gradients in an unequivocal way (i.e., higher density in drier sites). That is, WD can covary with other factors, allowing species to tolerate aridity. For example, a greater allocation of biomass to the roots in response to dryness can be associated with lower stem WD [93].
There are other traits that have received less attention so far. Root traits are rarely considered in field studies [94,95,96,97], and several studies pointed out their importance in understanding ITV along climatic gradients [23, 51••, 59]. Trees have the capacity to modify their roots in response to drought with growth and anatomical changes, as well as by changing symbioses and relations with free-living soil organisms, but these have been less studied than aboveground reactions [73, 95]. Interestingly, rooting depth capacity can be estimated by using 18O and 2H measurements in soil and xylem water samples [80, 98]. Recent advances also make it possible to measure rooting depth in the field by using techniques such as ground penetrating radar [99]. These belowground estimations of water uptake can be combined with aboveground measures of leaf water potential and growth to study responses to drought at the whole tree level [73]. Besides, belowground responses to drought may depend not only on specific tree features such as age or size but also on species interactions and site conditions, a myriad of factors that operate simultaneously [100]. It is thus advisable to evaluate how measures of growth resilience to drought relate to rooting depth capacity both at the intra- and interspecific level to widen the understanding of how trait variation affects drought tolerance capacity.
The temporal dimension of trait variation is also a factor that deserves further attention. Estimating phenotypic plasticity in mature forest stands can be achieved by measuring temporal variation in functional traits, where temporal variation in climate conditions generates different environmental conditions, and genotype is controlled by measuring the same individual trees over time [43, 101]. For example, Kerr et al. [62••] studied the variation in drought-related traits of P. tremuloides and P. ponderosa along an aridity gradient and found that temporal variation was in general higher than spatial variation. To date, few studies have compared intraspecific differences in traits such as leaf size [102] and leaf lifespan [103] across environmental gradients or how previous growth patterns affected intraspecific variations [104]. Xylem trait variation can depend on the climate of origin, with populations from dry sites presenting higher resistance to drought due to the presence of a higher number of vasicentric tracheids [105]. However, Fajardo et al. [106] found that tree height, not climate, is the factor driving vessel diameter across contrasting climates in two Patagonian tree species. Besides, traits such as xylem vessel density and lumen area can vary considerably from 1 year to another, so this temporal variation also needs to be accounted for [69••, 74]. Refining measures of xylem anatomy and leaf variations over time may help to understand relationships between growth and functional traits at the intraspecific level.
It is important to note that we did not consider provenance trials in our study, as we were interested in how mature trees behave under natural conditions and whether the potential effects of local adaptations and plastic responses are apparent even when species interactions and microenvironmental conditions affect performance. Provenance trials represent special situations that are mainly performed considering the seedling or sapling stages since seedling establishment and development are bottlenecks of forest regeneration [107, 108]. To what extent do tree populations show adaptive differences to aridity? How does their phenotypic expression vary between populations? These are questions that can be approached using provenance trials [56••]. Besides, if maintained over several years, they allow for testing how trait variations translate into growth responses to drought [109]. In a scenario in which temperatures are expected to increase and droughts will become more severe, identifying those tree populations that better tolerate drought appears to be an attractive natural solution to mitigate deforestation [16•]. Achieving these objectives requires studies under controlled conditions that allow us to understand adaptive variations and phenotypic plasticity, as well as how ITV relates to tree performance under natural conditions, which is the focus of this review.
Conclusions
Here we provide an overview of how functional traits vary at the intraspecific level, considering field studies, and how this variation relates to measures of plant performance. The results show that while we have a good degree about information for some tree species (mostly European tree species), our knowledge of others is quite limited. Species with a wide distribution and important ecological value, such as P. sylvestris or several oaks, have been the focus of many studies. As usual, hundreds of tree species from the tropics remain understudied, and therefore, our conclusions will always be partial. It would be essential to have ITV studies come from tropical dry forests, as these represent communities adapted to drought.
Evidence coming from field studies indicates that ITV exists, is non-negligible, and responds to changes in water availability. However, such responses are contingent on the species, traits, and gradients considered. In the case of temperate species, gradients of water availability overlap with gradients of coldness, which complicates finding clear trait-climate relationships. In more arid regions, when gradients are wide enough and not confounded by different factors, it is possible to find clear coordination for some traits but not for others. This suggests including as wide gradients as possible and considering rear-edge populations [72].
How ITV translates into differences in performance (i.e., growth and survival) should be the goal of understanding how species will respond to climate change. This implies trying to understand how traits and their relationship to drought vary along gradients while also focusing on the set of traits that make some individuals or tree populations more resistant to drought stress. Thus, it is important to scrutinize different traits so that we can identify the sets of traits able to predict within species variations in response to drought [61]. Besides, it is important to assume that both ITV (phenotypic plasticity) and performance vary in time and that their variation may differ between populations (phenotypic integration). Monitoring how the relationships between ITV and tree performance change as a function of climate change across species distribution ranges is fundamental to advancing our understanding of how tree species will thrive in a warmer and drier future [73].
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
FAO and UNEP. The state of the world’s forests. Forests, biodiversity and people. Rome. 2020;2020:2023. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8642enAccessedon14Apr.
Díaz S, Pascual U, Stenseke M, Martín-López B, Watson RT, Molnár Z, et al. Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science. 2018;359:270–2. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap8826.
Gamfeldt L, Snäll T, Bagchi R, Jonsson M, Gustafsson L, Kjellander P, et al. Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species. Nat Commun. 2013;4:1340. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2328.
Brodribb TJ, Powers J, Cochard H, Choat B. Hanging by a thread? For Drought Sci. 2020;368:261–6. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat7631.
McDowell NG, Allen CD, Anderson-Teixeira K, Aukema BH, Bond-Lamberty B, Chini L, et al. Pervasive shifts in forest dynamics in a changing world. Science. 2020;368:eaaz9463. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz9463.
Allen CD, Breshears DD, McDowell NG. On underestimation of global vulnerability to tree mortality and forest die-off from hotter drought in the Anthropocene. Ecosphere. 2015;6:1–55. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES15-00203.1.
Seidl R, Thom D, Kautz M, Martin-Benito D, Peltoniemi M, Vacchiano G, et al. Forest disturbances under climate change. Nature Clim Change. 2017;7:395–402. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3303.
Hammond WM, Williams AP, Abatzoglou JT, Adams HD, Klein T, López R, et al. Global field observations of tree die-off reveal hotter-drought fingerprint for Earth’s forests. Nat Commun. 2022;13:1761. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-29289-2.
Camarero JJ, Gazol A, Sangüesa-Barreda G, Oliva J, Vicente-Serrano SM. To die or not to die: early warnings of tree dieback in response to a severe drought. J Ecol. 2015;103:44–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12295.
Jump AS, Hunt JM, Penuelas J. Rapid climate change-related growth decline at the southern range edge of Fagus sylvatica. Glob Chang Biol. 2006;12:2163–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01250.x.
Archambeau J, Ruiz-Benito P, Ratcliffe S, Fréjaville T, Changenet A, Muñoz-Castañeda JM, et al. Similar patterns of background mortality across Europe are mostly driven by drought in European beech and a combination of drought and competition in Scots pine. Agric For Meteorol. 2020;280:107772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.107772.
Changenet A, Ruiz-Benito P, Ratcliffe S, Fréjaville T, Archambeau J, Porte AJ, et al. Occurrence but not intensity of mortality rises towards the climatic trailing edge of tree species ranges in European forests. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2021;30:1356–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13301.
Gazol A, Camarero JJ. Compound climate events increase tree drought mortality across European forests. Sci Tot Env. 2022;816:151604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151604.
• Aspinwall MJ, Loik ME, Resco de Dios V, Tjoelker MG, Payton PR, Tissue DT. Utilizing intraspecific variation in phenotypic plasticity to bolster agricultural and forest productivity under climate change. Plant Cell Environ. 2015;38:1752–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.12424. This paper reviews how intraspecific variation in phenotypic plasticity can contribute to buffer the negative consequences of climate change on forest species.
Aubin I, Munson AD, Cardou F, Burton PJ, Isabel N, Pedlar JH, et al. Traits to stay, traits to move: a review of functional traits to assess sensitivity and adaptive capacity of temperate and boreal trees to climate change. Environ Rev. 2016;24:164–86. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2015-0072.
• Bussotti F, Pollastrini M, Holland V, Brüggemann W. Functional traits and adaptive capacity of European forests to climate change. Environ Exp Bot. 2015;111:91–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2014.11.006. This paper conceptualizes why species with a large distribution range can be less vulnerable to climate change than species with a narrow distribution range and lower intraspecific variability.
Cheaib A, Badeau V, Boe J, Chuine I, Delire C, Dufrêne E, et al. Climate change impacts on tree ranges: model intercomparison facilitates understanding and quantification of uncertainty. Ecol Lett. 2012;15:533–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01764.x.
Alberto FJ, Aitken SN, Alía R, González-Martínez SC, Hänninen H, Kremer A, et al. Potential for evolutionary responses to climate change–evidence from tree populations. Glob Chang Biol. 2013;19:1645–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12181.
Willi Y, Van Buskirk J. A review on trade-offs at the warm and cold ends of geographical distributions. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2022;377:20210022. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0022.
Fréjaville T, Vizcaíno-Palomar N, Fady B, Kremer A, Benito-Garzón M. Range margin populations show high climate adaptation lags in European trees. Glob Chang Biol. 2020;26:484–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14881.
Leites L, Benito-Garzón M. Forest tree species adaptation to climate across biomes: building on the legacy of ecological genetics to anticipate responses to climate change. Glob Chang Biol. 2023;29:4711–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16711.
Alla AQ, Camarero JJ. Contrasting responses of radial growth and wood anatomy to climate in a Mediterranean ring-porous oak: implications for its future persistence or why the variance matters more than the mean. Eur J Forest Res. 2012;131:1537–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-012-0621-x.
Vicente E, Didion-Gency M, Morcillo L, Morin X, Vilagrosa A, Grossiord C. Aridity and cold temperatures drive divergent adjustments of European beech xylem anatomy, hydraulics and leaf physiological traits. Tree Physiol. 2022;42:1720–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpac029.
Matesanz S, Blanco-Sánchez M, Ramos-Muñoz M, de la Cruz M, Benavides R, Escudero A. Phenotypic integration does not constrain phenotypic plasticity: differential plasticity of traits is associated to their integration across environments. New Phytol. 2021;231:2359–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17536.
Valladares F, Matesanz S, Guilhaumon F, Araújo MB, Balaguer L, Benito-Garzón M, et al. The effects of phenotypic plasticity and local adaptation on forecasts of species range shifts under climate change. Ecol Lett. 2014;17:1351–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12348.
Kuppler J, Albert CH, Ames GM, Armbruster WS, Boenisch G, Boucher FC, et al. Global gradients in intraspecific variation in vegetative and floral traits are partially associated with climate and species richness. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2020;29:992–1007. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13077.
Aitken SN, Bemmels JB. Time to get moving: assisted gene flow of forest trees. Evol Appl. 2016;9:271–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12293.
Varas-Myrik A, Sepúlveda-Espinoza F, Fajardo A, Alarcón D, Toro-Núñez Ó, Castro-Nallar E, Hasbún R. Predicting climate change-related genetic offset for the endangered southern South American conifer Araucaria araucana. For Ecol Manage. 2022;504:119856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119856.
Violle C, Navas ML, Vile D, Kazakou E, Fortunel C, Hummel I, Garnier E. Let the concept of trait be functional! Oikos. 2007;116:882–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2007.15559.x.
McGill BJ, Enquist BJ, Weiher E, Westoby M. Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. Trends Ecol Evol. 2006;21:178–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.02.002.
Adler PB, Fajardo A, Kleinhesselink AR, Kraft NJ. Trait-based tests of coexistence mechanisms. Ecol Lett. 2013;16:1294–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12157.
Li Y, Jiang Y, Zhao K, Chen Y, Wei W, Shipley B, Chu C. Exploring trait–performance relationships of tree seedlings along experimentally manipulated light and water gradients. Ecology. 2022;103:e3703. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.3703.
Joswig JS, Wirth C, Schuman MC, Kattge J, Reu B, Wright IJ, et al. Climatic and soil factors explain the two-dimensional spectrum of global plant trait variation. Nat Ecol Evol. 2022;6:36–50. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01616-8.
Grime JP, Hodgson JG, Hunt R. Comparative plant ecology. London: UnwinHyman; 1988.
Westoby M, Falster DS, Moles AT, Vesk PA, Wright IJ. Plant ecological strategies: some leading dimensions of variation between species. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2002;33:125–59. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.33.010802.150452.
Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M, Ackerly DD, Baruch Z, Bongers F, et al. The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature. 2004;428:821–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02403.
Chave J, Coomes D, Jansen S, Lewis SL, Swenson NG, Zanne AE. Towards a worldwide wood economics spectrum. Ecol Lett. 2009;12:351–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01285.x.
Reich PB. The world-wide “fast–slow” plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto. J Ecol. 2014;102:275–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12211.
Díaz S, Kattge J, Cornelissen JH, Wright IJ, Lavorel S, Dray S, et al. The global spectrum of plant form and function. Nature. 2016;529:167–71. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16489.
Reich PB, Rich RL, Lu X, Wang YP, Oleksyn J. Biogeographic variation in evergreen conifer needle longevity and impacts on boreal forest carbon cycle projections. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:13703–8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1216054110.
Choat B, Jansen S, Brodribb TJ, Cochard H, Delzon S, Bhaskar R, et al. Global convergence in the vulnerability of forests to drought. Nature. 2012;491:752–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11688.
Fajardo A, Siefert A. Intraspecific trait variation and the leaf economics spectrum across resource gradients and levels of organization. Ecology. 2018;99:1024–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2194.
Roches SD, Post DM, Turley NE, Bailey JK, Hendry AP, Kinnison MT, Schweitzer JA, Palkovacs EP. The ecological importance of intraspecific variation. Nat Ecol Evol. 2018;2:57–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0402-5.
Choat B, Sack L, Holbrook NM. Diversity of hydraulic traits in nine Cordia species growing in tropical forests with contrasting precipitation. New Phytol. 2007;175:686–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.02137.x.
Martínez-Vilalta J, Cochard H, Mencuccini M, Sterck F, Herrero A, Korhonen JFJ, et al. Hydraulic adjustment of Scots pine across Europe. New Phytol. 2009;184:353–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02954.x.
Fajardo A, Piper FI. Intraspecific trait variation and covariation in a widespread tree species (Nothofagus pumilio) in southern Chile. New Phytol. 2011;189:259–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03468.x.
Violle C, Enquist BJ, McGill BJ, Jiang LIN, Albert CH, Hulshof C, et al. The return of the variance: intraspecific variability in community ecology. Trends Ecol Evol. 2012;27:244–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.11.014.
Siefert A, Violle C, Chalmandrier L, Albert CH, Taudiere A, Fajardo A, et al. A global meta-analysis of the relative extent of intraspecific trait variation in plant communities. Ecol Lett. 2015;18:1406–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12508.
Lucani CJ, Brodribb TJ, Jordan G, Mitchell PJ. Intraspecific variation in drought susceptibility in Eucalyptus globulus is linked to differences in leaf vulnerability. Funct Plant Biol. 2018;46:286–93. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP18077.
• Anderegg LD, Loy X, Markham IP, Elmer CM, Hovenden MJ, HilleRisLambers J, Mayfield MM. Aridity drives coordinated trait shifts but not decreased trait variance across the geographic range of eight Australian trees. New Phyt. 2021;229:1375–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16795. This paper shows how intraspecific trait variation and trait coordination along aridity gradients vary between species and depending on environmental factors.
•• González de Andrés E, Rosas T, Camarero JJ, Martínez-Vilalta J. The intraspecific variation of functional traits modulates drought resilience of European beech and pubescent oak. J Ecol. 2021;109:3652–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.13743. This study shows that trait variation at the within species level influences growth resilience to drought.
Santini F, Climent JM, Voltas J. Phenotypic integration and life history strategies among populations of Pinus halepensis: an insight through structural equation modelling. Ann Bot. 2019;124:1161–71. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcz088.
Santini F, Serrano L, Kefauver SC, Abdullah-Al M, Aguilera M, Sin E, Voltas J. Morpho-physiological variability of Pinus nigra populations reveals climate-driven local adaptation but weak water use differentiation. Environ Exp Bot. 2019;166:103828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2019.103828.
Nock CA, Vogt RJ, Beisner BE. Functional traits. In: Encyclopedia of Life Science (eLS). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2016. pp 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470015902.a0026282.
Belluau M, Shipley B. Linking hard and soft traits: physiology, morphology and anatomy interact to determine habitat affinities to soil water availability in herbaceous dicots. Plos One. 2018;13:e0193130. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193130.
•• Ramírez-Valiente JA, Santos del Blanco L, Alía R, Robledo-Arnuncio JJ, Climent J. Adaptation of Mediterranean forest species to climate: lessons from common garden experiments. J Ecol. 2022;110:1022–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.13730. This study reviews the existence of trait genetic variation among populations of pines and oaks in the Mediterranean region and the importance of this variation in sight of climate change.
Sterck FJ, Martínez-Vilalta J, Mencuccini M, Cochard H, Gerrits P, Zweifel R, et al. Understanding trait interactions and their impacts on growth in Scots pine branches across Europe. Funct Ecol. 2012;26:541–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2012.01963.x.
Fajardo A, Piper FI, García-Cervigón AI. The intraspecific relationship between wood density, vessel diameter and other traits across environmental gradients. Funct Ecol. 2022;36:1585–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.14069.
González de Andrés E, Gazol A, Querejeta JI, Igual JM, Colangelo M, Sánchez-Salguero R, et al. The role of nutritional impairment in carbon-water balance of silver fir drought-induced dieback. Glob Chang Biol. 2022;28:4439–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16170.
• Rosas T, Mencuccini M, Batlles C, Regalado Í, Saura-Mas S, Sterck F, Martínez-Vilalta J. Are leaf, stem and hydraulic traits good predictors of individual tree growth? Funct Ecol. 2021;35:2435–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13906. A nice study showing how intraspecific trait variation relates to tree growth across species and along environmental gradients.
Serra-Maluquer X, Granda E, Camarero JJ, Vilà-Cabrera A, Jump AS, Sánchez-Salguero R, et al. Impacts of recurrent dry and wet years alter long-term tree growth trajectories. J Ecol. 2021;109:1561–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.13579.
•• Kerr KL, Anderegg LD, Zenes N, Anderegg WR. Quantifying within-species trait variation in space and time reveals limits to trait-mediated drought response. Funct Ecol. 2022;36:2399–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.14112. A very nice study evaluating the relationship between trait plasticity and drought-induced mortality along an aridity gradient.
Salazar-Zarzosa PS, Herraiz AD, Olmo M, Ruiz-Benito P, Barrón V, Bastias CC, et al. Linking functional traits with tree growth and forest productivity in Quercus ilex forests along a climatic gradient. Sci Tot Env. 2021;786:147468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147468.
Laforest-Lapointe I, Martínez-Vilalta J, Retana J. Intraspecific variability in functional traits matters: case study of Scots pine. Oecologia. 2014;175:1337–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-014-2967-x.
Gazol A, Camarero JJ, Igual JM, de Andrés EG, Colangelo M, Valeriano C. Intraspecific trait variation, growth, and altered soil conditions at tree species distribution limits: from the alpine treeline to the rear edge. Agric For Meteorol. 2022;315:108811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2022.108811.
He P, Fontana S, Sardans J, Peñuelas J, Gessler A, Schaub M, et al. The biogeochemical niche shifts of Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica along an environmental gradient. Environ Exp Bot. 2019;167:103825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2019.103825.
Rosas T, Mencuccini M, Barba J, Cochard H, Saura-Mas S, Martínez-Vilalta J. Adjustments and coordination of hydraulic, leaf and stem traits along a water availability gradient. New Phytol. 2019;223:632–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15684.
Anderegg LD, HilleRisLambers J. Drought stress limits the geographic ranges of two tree species via different physiological mechanisms. Glob Chang Biol. 2016;22:1029–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13148.
•• García-Cervigón AI, Fajardo A, Caetano-Sánchez C, Camarero JJ, Olano JM. Xylem anatomy needs to change, so that conductivity can stay the same: xylem adjustments across elevation and latitude in Nothofagus pumilio. Ann Bot. 2020;125:1101–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcaa042. This study evaluates how xylem traits vary at the intraspecific level and between years considering both latitudinal and altitudinal gradients.
• López R, Cano FJ, Martin-StPaul NK, Cochard H, Choat B. Coordination of stem and leaf traits define different strategies to regulate water loss and tolerance ranges to aridity. New Phytol. 2021;230:497–509. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17185. A nice study showing how the coordination between traits varies between species along an aridity gradient.
Didion-Gency M, Bachofen C, Buchmann N, Gessler A, Morin X, Vicente E, et al. Interactive effects of tree species mixture and climate on foliar and woody trait variation in a widely distributed deciduous tree. Funct Ecol. 2021;35:2397–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13898.
Martínez‐Vilalta J, García‐Valdés R, Jump A, Vilà‐Cabrera A, Mencuccini M. Accounting for trait variability and coordination in predictions of drought‐induced range shifts in woody plants. New Phytol. 2023;240:23–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.19138.
Rowland L, Ramírez-Valiente JA, Hartley IP, Mencuccini M. How woody plants adjust above-and below-ground traits in response to sustained drought. New Phytol. 2023;239:1173–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.19000.
Weithmann G, Paligi SS, Schuldt B, Leuschner C. Branch xylem vascular adjustments in European beech in response to decreasing water availability across a precipitation gradient. Tree Physiol. 2022;42:2224–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpac080.
Buzatti RSDO, Pfeilsticker TR, Muniz AC, Ellis VA, Souza RPD, Lemos-Filho JP, Lovato MB. Disentangling the environmental factors that shape genetic and phenotypic leaf trait variation in the tree Qualea grandiflora across the Brazilian savanna. Front Plant Sci. 2019;10:1580. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01580.
Paing AMM, Chen S, Tsumura Y, Tomaru N, Homma K, Kadomatsu M, et al. Determination of intraspecific variation in seed weight, leaf functional traits, and sapling size of Betula ermanii using a common garden experiment. J For Res. 2021;26:419–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/13416979.2021.1964151.
Liang X, He P, Liu H, Zhu S, Uyehara IK, Hou H, et al. Precipitation has dominant influences on the variation of plant hydraulics of the native Castanopsis fargesii (Fagaceae) in subtropical China. Agric For Meteorol. 2019;271:83–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.02.043.
Bennett AC, McDowell NG, Allen CD, Anderson-Teixeira KJ. Larger trees suffer most during drought in forests worldwide. Nat Plants. 2015;1:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2015.139.
Trugman AT, Anderegg LD, Anderegg WR, Das AJ, Stephenson NL. Why is tree drought mortality so hard to predict? Trends Ecol Evol. 2021;36:520–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2021.02.001.
Ripullone F, Camarero JJ, Colangelo M, Voltas J. Variation in the access to deep soil water pools explains tree-to-tree differences in drought-triggered dieback of Mediterranean oaks. Tree Physiol. 2020;40:591–604. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpaa026.
Duan H, Resco de Dios V, Wang D, Zhao N, Huang G, Liu W, et al. Testing the limits of plant drought stress and subsequent recovery in four provenances of a widely distributed subtropical tree species. Plant Cell Environ. 2022;45:1187–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.14254.
Castro-Díez P, Villar-Salvador P, Pérez-Rontomé C, Maestro-Martínez M, Montserrat-Martí G. Leaf morphology, leaf chemical composition and stem xylem characteristics in two Pistacia (Anacardiaceae) species along a climatic gradient. Flora. 1998;193:195–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0367-2530(17)30840-X.
Challis A, Blackman C, Ahrens C, Medlyn B, Rymer P, Tissue D. Adaptive plasticity in plant traits increases time to hydraulic failure under drought in a foundation tree. Tree Physiol. 2022;42:708–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpab096.
Huber B. Weitere quantitative Untersuchungen über das Wasserleitungssystem der Pflanzen. Jahrb wiss Bot. 1928;67:877–959.
Bartlett MK, Zhang Y, Kreidler N, Sun S, Ardy R, Cao K, Sack L. Global analysis of plasticity in turgor loss point, a key drought tolerance trait. Ecol Lett. 2014;17:1580–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12374.
Fajardo A. Wood density relates negatively to maximum plant height across major angiosperm and gymnosperm orders. Am J Bot. 2022;109:250–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajb2.1805.
Castorena M, Olson ME, Enquist BJ, Fajardo A. Toward a general theory of plant carbon economics. Trends Ecol Evol. 2022;37:829–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2022.05.007.
Markesteijn L, Poorter L, Bongers F, Paz H, Sack L. Hydraulics and life history of tropical dry forest tree species: coordination of species’ drought and shade tolerance. New Phytol. 2011;191:480–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03708.x.
Olson M, Rosell JA, Martínez-Pérez C, León-Gómez C, Fajardo A, Isnard S, et al. Xylem vessel-diameter–shoot-length scaling: ecological significance of porosity types and other traits. Ecol Monogr. 2020;90:e01410. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1410.
Serra-Maluquer X, Gazol A, Anderegg WR, Martínez-Vilalta J, Mencuccini M, Camarero JJ. Wood density and hydraulic traits influence species’ growth response to drought across biomes. Glob Chang Biol. 2022;28:3871–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16123.
Li X, Blackman CJ, Choat B, Rymer PD, Medlyn BE, Tissue DT. Drought tolerance traits do not vary across sites differing in water availability in Banksia serrata (Proteaceae). Funct Plant Biol. 2019;46:624–33. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP18238.
Clough BJ, Curzon MT, Domke GM, Russell MB, Woodall CW. Climate-driven trends in stem wood density of tree species in the eastern United States: ecological impact and implications for national forest carbon assessments. Global Ecol Biogeogr. 2017;26:1153–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12625.
Nabais C, Hansen JK, David-Schwartz R, Klisz M, López R, Rozenberg P. The effect of climate on wood density: what provenance trials tell us? For Ecol Manage. 2018;408:148–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2017.10.040.
Filella I, Peñuelas J. Partitioning of water and nitrogen in co-occurring Mediterranean woody shrub species of different evolutionary history. Oecologia. 2003;137:51–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1333-1.
Brunner I, Herzog C, Dawes MA, Arend M, Sperisen C. How tree roots respond to drought. Front Plant Sci. 2015;6:547. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00547.
Tiemuerbieke B, Min XJ, Zang YX, Xing P, Ma JY, Sun W. Water use patterns of co-occurring C3 and C4 shrubs in the Gurbantonggut desert in northwestern China. Sci Tot Env. 2018;634:341–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.307.
Qin Y, Gao C, Jin G, Liu Z, Shi B. Latitude patterns in fine root morphological and anatomical traits across root orders of Pinus koraiensis. Scand J For Res. 2021;36:539–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2021.1981430.
Voltas J, Lucabaugh D, Chambel MR, Ferrio JP. Intraspecific variation in the use of water sources by the circum-Mediterranean conifer Pinus halepensis. New Phytol. 2015;208:1031–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13569.
Lombardi E, Ferrio JP, Rodríguez-Robles U, Resco de Dios V, Voltas J. Ground-penetrating radar as phenotyping tool for characterizing intraspecific variability in root traits of a widespread conifer. Plant Soil. 2021;468:319–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-021-05135-0.
del Castillo J, Comas C, Voltas J, Ferrio JP. Dynamics of competition over water in a mixed oak-pine Mediterranean forest: spatio-temporal and physiological components. For Ecol Manage. 2016;382:214–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.10.025.
Borghetti M, Gentilesca T, Leonardi S, van Noije T, Rita A. Long-term temporal relationships between environmental conditions and xylem functional traits: a meta-analysis across a range of woody species along climatic and nitrogen deposition gradients. Tree Physiol. 2017;37:4–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpw087.
Li Y, Zou D, Shrestha N, Xu X, Wang Q, Jia W, Wang Z. Spatiotemporal variation in leaf size and shape in response to climate. J Plant Ecol. 2020;13:87–96. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpe/rtz053.
dos Santos MG, Neves SP, do Couto-Santos AP, Cerqueira CO, Rossatto DR, de Miranda LD, Funch LS. Phenological diversity of Maprounea guianensis (Euphorbiaceae) in humid and dry neotropical forests. Aust J Bot. 2020;68:288–99. https://doi.org/10.1071/BT19196.
Morán-López T, Poyatos R, Llorens P, Sabaté S. Effects of past growth trends and current water use strategies on Scots pine and pubescent oak drought sensitivity. Eur J Forest Res. 2014;133:369–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-013-0768-0.
Fontes CG, Pinto-Ledezma J, Jacobsen AL, Pratt RB, Cavender-Bares J. Adaptive variation among oaks in wood anatomical properties is shaped by climate of origin and shows limited plasticity across environments. Funct Ecol. 2022;36:326–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13964.
Fajardo A, Martínez-Pérez C, Cervantes-Alcayde MA, Olson ME. Stem length, not climate, controls vessel diameter in two species across a sharp precipitation gradient. New Phytol. 2020;225:2347–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.16287.
Harper JL. Population Biology of Plants. New York: NY Academic Press; 1977.
Silvertown JW, Charlesworth D. Introduction to plant population biology. Ames, Iowa: Blackwell; 2001.
Zas R, Sampedro L, Solla A, Vivas M, Lombardero MJ, Alía R, Rozas V. Dendroecology in common gardens: population differentiation and plasticity in resistance, recovery and resilience to extreme drought events in Pinus pinaster. Agric For Meteorol. 2020;291:108060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2020.108060.
Funding
Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. AG is supported by the “Ramón y Cajal” Program of the Spanish MICINN under Grant RyC2020-030647-I and by CSIC under grant PIE-20223AT003. This research was funded by the Science and Innovation Ministry and the AEI with projects PID2021-123675OB-C43 and TED2021-129770B-C21. AF thanks ANID PIA/BASAL FB210006.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.F. and A.G. conceived the idea, A.G. did the article searching and led the writing of the manuscript with the help of A.F. and J.J.C.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Gazol, A., Fajardo, A. & Camarero, J.J. Contributions of Intraspecific Variation to Drought Tolerance in Trees. Curr. For. Rep. 9, 461–472 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-023-00199-w
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-023-00199-w