Muraina Taofeek O, Vitra Amarante, Probo Massimiliano, Martina Jason P, Buttler Alexandre, Mariotte Pierre
Department of Biology Texas State University San Marcos Texas USA.
Department of Animal Health and Production Oyo State College of Agriculture and Technology Igbo-Ora Oyo State Nigeria.
Ecol Evol. 2025 Jun 24;15(6):e71569. doi: 10.1002/ece3.71569. eCollection 2025 Jun.
Increases in droughts may disrupt the life-supporting services of grasslands, including the forage provision for herbivores. However, less is known about drought impacts on forage quality (i.e., dynamics of the cell characteristics of leaves and stems of herbs). Leaf economic traits reflect drought effects on plant communities, but whether they can predict forage quality patterns under drought remains unclear. We assessed the effects of early- and late-season extreme droughts on (i) forage quality parameters [readily digestible, internal cellular constituents: protein, minerals, water-soluble carbohydrate (WSC); and non-readily digestible, cell wall components: neutral detergent fibre (NDF) and acid detergent fibre (ADF)]; (ii) community-weighted leaf traits [specific leaf area (cwmSLA) and leaf dry matter content (cwmLDMC)]; and (iii) leaf traits-quality parameters relationships across three grasslands over two growing seasons. Both early and late droughts decreased ash and ADF and increased WSC across sites, while early drought slightly reduced protein and NDF. Both droughts decreased cwmSLA and increased cwmLDMC across sites. Community-weighted leaf traits and forage quality parameters were unrelated under early ambient conditions, but their relationships under early-season drought imply that lower cwmSLA and higher cwmLDMC communities had higher forage quality (higher protein and less lignified fibre contents) than higher cwmSLA and lower cwmLDMC communities. Under late-season ambient or drought conditions, most relationships indicate that lower cwmSLA and cwmLDMC communities had higher forage quality (higher protein and ash, and more digestible fibre contents) than higher cwmSLA and cwmLDMC communities. Overall, forage quality was higher under late-season ambient conditions compared to the early season, and both drought types had limited negative effects on forage quality in the studied grasslands. Moreover, leaf traits can predict forage quality patterns and plants' adaptation under certain circumstances, including regular intra-seasonal dry periods and extreme drought conditions.
干旱加剧可能会扰乱草原的生命维持服务,包括食草动物的草料供应。然而,关于干旱对草料质量(即草本植物叶片和茎的细胞特征动态)的影响,我们了解得较少。叶片经济性状反映了干旱对植物群落的影响,但它们是否能预测干旱条件下的草料质量模式仍不清楚。我们评估了早季和晚季极端干旱对以下方面的影响:(i)草料质量参数[易消化的内部细胞成分:蛋白质、矿物质、水溶性碳水化合物(WSC);以及难消化的细胞壁成分:中性洗涤纤维(NDF)和酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)];(ii)群落加权叶片性状[比叶面积(cwmSLA)和叶片干物质含量(cwmLDMC)];以及(iii)两个生长季节中三个草原上叶片性状与质量参数之间的关系。早季和晚季干旱均降低了各地点的灰分和ADF含量,并增加了WSC含量,而早季干旱略微降低了蛋白质和NDF含量。两次干旱均降低了各地点的cwmSLA,并增加了cwmLDMC。在早季环境条件下,群落加权叶片性状与草料质量参数无关,但它们在早季干旱条件下的关系表明,与较高cwmSLA和较低cwmLDMC的群落相比,较低cwmSLA和较高cwmLDMC的群落具有更高的草料质量(更高的蛋白质含量和更少的木质化纤维含量)。在晚季环境或干旱条件下,大多数关系表明,与较高cwmSLA和cwmLDMC的群落相比,较低cwmSLA和cwmLDMC的群落具有更高的草料质量(更高的蛋白质和灰分含量,以及更易消化的纤维含量)。总体而言,与早季相比,晚季环境条件下的草料质量更高,并且两种干旱类型对研究草原的草料质量的负面影响有限。此外,叶片性状可以在某些情况下预测草料质量模式和植物的适应性,包括季节性内定期干旱期和极端干旱条件。