Research Article |
Corresponding author: Paola Fortini ( fortini@unimol.it ) Academic editor: Fotios Xystrakis
© 2022 Luca Quaranta, Piera Di Marzio, Romeo Di Pietro, Fabrizio Ferretti, Umberto Di Salvatore, Paola Fortini.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Quaranta L, Di Marzio P, Di Pietro R, Ferretti F, Di Salvatore U, Fortini P (2022) Analysis of the functional traits of Quercus cerris L. seedlings in the Molise region (southern Italy). Plant Sociology 59(1): 11-24. https://doi.org/10.3897/pls2022591/02
|
This study deals with the analysis of seedling fitness in three Quercus cerris wood stands, namely Selva di Castiglione (SC), Bosco della Ficora (BF) and Bosco di San Leo (BSL), developed in different lithological and physiographic conditions and subjected to different forestry practices. A phytosociological study was carried out for analysing the coenological features of the forest stands and to classify these latter from a syntaxonomic point of view. The Pignatti-Ellenberg index (PEi) was calculated on the matrix composed of the phytosociological relevés in order to highlight possible ecological differences or gradients among stands. The phenotypic parameters considered were the stem and root length and the leaf area, whereas the plant functional traits (PFTs) were specific leaf area (SLA), leaf dry matter content (LDMC), leaf thickness (Lth) and chlorophyll content (CHL). The results showed that seedlings coming from different sampling sites exhibited similar values in all the phenotypic parameters. Instead, statistically significant differences were observed in the PFTs. The results suggested that the different adaptation strategies implemented by the seedlings are to be related to the physical environment of the sampling sites and to the different forest structures. The Selva di Castiglione forest stand (SC) exhibited better growth conditions for seedlings testified by higher values of SLA and CHL and lower values of LDMC and Lth. These were interpreted as greater investment in carbon production aimed at rapid development and renewal of the seedling rather than carbon storage aimed at ensuring leaf longevity.
functional trait, high forest, oak, phenotypic response, phytosociology, southern Apennines
Quercus cerris L. (Turkey oak, Fagaceae) acts as a dominant species in a large part of the oak forests of central and southern Italy (
This study is part of an interdisciplinary and broader line of research that has been undertaken by the Laboratory of Systematic Botany and Floristics of the University of Molise in the last decade, which aims to shed light on the morphological, ecological, and bio-molecular features of Quercus species (
The study was carried out in three Quercus cerris woods located in the submontane-lower montane belt of the Molise Region (Italy), namely Selva di Castiglione (SC), Bosco di San Leo (BSL), Bosco della Ficora (BF) (Fig.
Coordinate (DMS) | Stand development | Age | Altitude (m a.s.l.) | Aspect | Slope (%) | Substrate | |
Bosco di San Leo (BSL) | 41°40'33"N 14°15'18"E |
Mature high forest | 135 | 810 | NW | 15 | arenaceous-pelithic |
Bosco della Ficora (BF) | 41°42'55"N 14°18'55"E |
Young high forest | 55 | 920 | N-NW | 15 | arenaceous-pelithic |
Selva di Castiglione (SC) | 41°44'12"N 14°18'50"E |
Adult high forest | 90 | 1000 | - | 0 | varicoloured clay |
The sampled stands have already been the subject of experimentation on the Q. cerris forests by the Council for Research and Analysis of Agricultural Economics (CREA). From a forestry point of view, the three stands have different histories and are currently passing through different silvicultural stages. The BSL stand is an old forest (135 years) and is a result of a natural regeneration stage starting from a senescent high forest subjected to thinning interventions. The average diameter of Turkey oak individuals ranges between 30 and 35 cm. The BF stand is a young high forest (average age 55 years), which having never been subjected to silvicultural interventions, is currently characterised by an excessive density of tree individuals. The SC stand is an adult forest (average age ranging between 60 and 100 years). In 2006 and 2007, the following silvicultural treatments were applied to the three forest stands (
To obtain coenological information on the three Q. cerris stands a field-sampling campaign was carried out during the 2019 summer period using the phytosociological approach (
The in-field collection of Quercus cerris seedlings followed mainly the protocol reported in
The first stage of field sampling was carried out during three consecutive days (24, 25 and 26 June 2019) under the same climatic conditions (no wind and no clouds). A total of 90 seedlings were collected and further analysed. The chlorophyll contents of the leaves of the seedlings were determined in August 2019 for 30 different seedlings in each stand due to difficulties in obtaining the instrumentation for measuring the chlorophyll content during the June 2019 field campaign. Laboratory measurements followed
It should be noted (Table
Description of the functional traits analysed (
PFTs | Unit | Formula |
Specific leaf area (SLA): is the area of a fresh leaf, divided by its oven-dry mass | cm2/g | LA/LDM |
Leaf dry matter content (LDMC): is the oven-dry mass of a leaf, divided by its water-saturated fresh mass | mg/g | LDM/LFMsat. |
Leaf thickness (Lth) | - | 1/SLA*LDMC |
Leaf water content (LWC) | - | 1000-LDMC |
Leaf mass per area (LMA) is the oven-dry mass of a leaf, divided by its leaf area | g/cm2 | 1/SLA |
Leaf chlorophyll content (CHL) | mg/cm2 | § |
No published phytosociological relevés or previous syntaxonomic interpretation were available for the study area. All the three wood stands were assigned to a single association, Roso arvensis-Quercetum cerridis
Querco Roboris-Fagetea sylvaticae Br.-Bl. et Vlieger in Vlieger 1937
Fagetalia sylvaticae Pawlowski in Pawlowski, Sokolowski et Wallish 1928
Erythronio-Carpinion betuli (Horvat, 1958) Marincek in Wallnofer, Mucina et Grass 1993
Roso arvensis-Quercetum cerridis
Pignatti-Ellenberg's indices calculated for each forest stand were found to be the following: the SC stand: L= 5.179, T= 5.885, U= 5.408 and N= 5.600. For the BF stand, they were L= 5.932, T= 6.590, U= 4.644 and N= 4.962. For the BSL stand, they were L= 5.627, T= 6.742, U= 4.185 and N=3.341. The comparison among stands showed for the SC stand, higher values for soil moisture (U) and nutrients (N) compared to those of the BF and the BSL stands. In contrast, the BF and the BSL stands exhibited higher values for temperature and light (T and L) (Fig.
The bulk density is an indicator of soil compaction. The three sampled stands exhibit similar mean values of bulk density (p-value is not significant), although the BSL and the BF stands showed a wide range of values, whereas the SC stand showed a narrow range of values together with the presence of some outliers (Fig.
Seedling root lengths were found to be slightly shorter in the SC stand compared to the other two stands, whereas stem lengths were found to be slightly shorter for the BSL stand. However, these differences in the mean values of the stem and root lengths turned out not to be statistically significant, with the p-value very close to the threshold (alpha=0.05, Fig.
Specific leaf area (SLA) measurements showed the highest mean value in the SC stand (265.551), which differed significantly from the BF stand (215.078) and the BSL stand (205.224) (p=0.000 and p=0.0001 respectively), the values of the latter being very similar (p=0.508) (Fig.
The SC stand exhibited the highest average value for CHL (0.022 mg/cm2). This value differs significantly from those displayed by the BSL (0.016 mg/cm2) and BF stands (0.014 mg/cm2) (Fig.
Date | 6/6/2019 | 6/6/2019 | 6/6/2019 | 6/6/2019 | 7/22/2010 | 7/22/2010 | 6/25/2019 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forest Stand acronym | SC | SC | BF | BF | BSL | BSL | BSL | |
Relevé number | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
Aspect | - | - | NNW | E | N | NNE | NNE | |
Elevation (m a.s.l.) | 980 | 980 | 920 | 890 | 810 | 810 | 810 | |
Slope (%) | - | - | 10 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 5 | |
Soil surface aspect, rocky outcrops (%) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
Soil surface aspect, stoniness (%) | - | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | |
Upper tree layer cover (%) | 65 | 65 | 55 | 70 | 65 | 70 | 50 | |
Upper tree layer height (m) | 20 | 20 | 22 | 17 | 18 | 20 | 28 | |
Lower tree layer cover (%) | 80 | 50 | 40 | 30 | 30 | 20 | 70 | |
Lower tree layer height (m) | 2.5 | 2.5 | 3.4 | 5.6 | 4,5 | 6 | 4 | |
Shrubs layer cover (%) | - | - | - | 10 | 50 | 40 | 90 | |
Shrubs layer height (%) | - | - | - | 2 | 1.5 | 2 | 2 | |
Herbaceous layer cover (%) | 60 | 40 | 95 | 75 | 30 | 40 | 10 | |
Area (m2) | 200 | 200 | 200 | 200 | 200 | 200 | 300 | |
Coverage (%) | 100 | 80 | 90 | 90 | 100 | 100 | 100 | |
Species per relevé | 26 | 26 | 35 | 26 | 22 | 22 | 24 | frq. |
Roso arvensis-Quercetum cerridis |
||||||||
Rosa arvensis | 1 | + | 1 | 1 | 2 | + | 1 | V |
Ligustrum vulgare | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | V |
Lonicera caprifolium | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | + | + | . | V |
Crataegus laevigata | + | . | . | . | . | . | 1 | II |
Erythronio-Carpinion betuli (Horvat 1958) Marincek in Wallnofer, Mucina & Grass 1993 | ||||||||
Carpinus betulus | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | . | + | . | IV |
Primula vulgaris | + | 1 | + | . | 1 | + | . | IV |
Cardamine bulbifera | 2 | 2 | + | + | . | . | . | III |
Pulmonaria apennina | + | . | + | . | . | + | . | III |
Viola odorata | . | . | . | . | + | . | . | I |
Carex sylvatica | . | . | . | . | . | . | 1 | I |
Geranio versicoloris-Fagion Gentile 1970 | ||||||||
Cyclamen hederifolium | + | + | . | + | . | . | . | III |
Allium pendulinum | 2 | 1 | + | . | . | . | . | III |
Anemone apennina | + | + | + | + | . | . | . | III |
Ranunculus lanuginosus | . | . | + | . | 1 | . | . | II |
Geranium versicolor | . | . | + | . | . | . | . | I |
Lathyrus venetus | . | . | . | + | . | . | . | I |
Fagetalia sylvaticae Pawłowski in Pawłowski, Sokołowski & Wallisch 1928 | ||||||||
Euphorbia amygdaloides | . | . | 2 | . | . | . | 1 | II |
Euphorbia dulcis | . | . | + | + | . | . | . | II |
Fraxinus excelsior | + | |||||||
Asperula taurina | . | . | 1 | . | . | . | . | I |
Neottia nidus-avis | . | . | + | . | . | . | . | I |
Mycelis muralis | . | + | . | . | . | . | . | I |
Galium odoratum | . | . | . | . | . | + | . | I |
Abies alba | . | . | . | 1 | . | . | . | I |
Quercetalia pubescenti-petraeae Klika 1933 | ||||||||
Brachypodium rupestre | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | . | . | + | IV |
Sorbus torminalis | . | + | . | . | . | 1 | + | III |
Cornus mas | . | . | 1 | + | . | . | 1 | III |
Fraxinus ornus | . | . | . | + | . | 1 | 1 | III |
Carpinus orientalis | . | . | . | . | 1 | 2 | 2 | III |
Veronica chamaedrys | + | + | . | . | . | . | . | II |
Aegonychon purpurocaeruleum | . | . | 2 | . | . | . | . | I |
Helleborus foetidus | . | . | . | . | . | + | . | I |
Scutellaria columnae | . | . | . | . | . | . | 1 | I |
Querco-Fagetea Br.-Bl. & Vlieger in Vlieger 1937 | ||||||||
Quercus cerris | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | V |
Hedera helix | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | V |
Rubus hirtus | + | 1 | 2 | 3 | + | + | . | V |
Daphne laureola | 1 | + | + | . | + | + | . | IV |
Acer campestre | . | . | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | IV |
Ajuga reptans | + | 1 | . | . | + | . | 1 | III |
Festuca heterophylla | 2 | 2 | 1 | + | . | . | . | III |
Crataegus monogyna | . | . | 1 | 2 | + | . | + | III |
Fragaria vesca | 2 | 2 | + | . | . | . | . | III |
Cruciata glabra | + | + | + | + | . | . | . | III |
Luzula forsteri | 1 | 1 | . | . | + | . | . | III |
Dioscorea communis | . | + | + | . | . | . | . | II |
Digitalis micrantha | + | . | . | . | . | . | . | I |
Lilium bulbiferum | . | 1 | . | . | . | . | . | I |
Melica uniflora | . | . | . | + | . | . | . | I |
Bromopsis ramosa | . | . | . | . | + | . | . | I |
Campanula trachelium | . | . | . | . | . | . | 1 | I |
Epipactis helleborine | . | . | . | . | . | . | + | I |
Rhamno-Prunetea Rivas Goday & Borja ex Tuxen 1962 | ||||||||
Euonymus europaeus | . | . | 1 | 1 | + | 1 | . | III |
Cornus sanguinea | . | . | . | . | 3 | 2 | 1 | III |
Pyrus communis | . | . | + | + | 2 | . | . | III |
Clematis vitalba | . | . | 1 | . | . | . | 1 | II |
Prunus spinosa | . | . | . | . | 1 | + | . | II |
Rubus umifolius | . | . | . | . | . | 1 | 3 | II |
Ulmus minor | . | . | . | . | . | . | 1 | I |
Other species | ||||||||
Agrimonia eupatoria | . | . | . | + | + | + | . | III |
Carex remota | . | . | . | . | 1 | . | 1 | II |
Hieracium gr. murorum | + | . | . | . | . | . | . | I |
Malva thuringiaca | . | . | + | . | . | . | . | I |
Campanula glomerata | . | . | . | . | . | . | + | I |
Dactylis glomerata | . | + | . | . | . | . | . | I |
Astragalus glyciphyllos | . | . | + | . | . | . | . | I |
Carex sylvatica | . | . | 1 | . | . | . | . | I |
Arum italicum | . | . | . | + | . | . | . | I |
Orobanche hederae | . | . | . | . | . | + | . | I |
Bulk density and pH of soil in the three wood stands. Non-parametric comparison analysis (Kruskal-Wallis test) and pair comparison according to the Dunn method with Bonferroni correction for significance. Number of replicates for each stand: 30. Legend: red cross = mean; horizontal bar in the box = median; lower limit of the box = first quartile; upper limit of the box = third quartile; empty dots and stars outer the whiskers' bounds = outliers; filled diamonds = minimum and maximum values. Empty dots: values found in the [Q1 – 3 (Q3 - Q1); Q1 - 1.5 (Q3 - Q1)] interval or in the [Q3 + 1.5 (Q3 - Q1); Q3 + 3 (Q3 - Q1)] interval. See Appendix 1, Table
Stem length, root length and leaf area values in the three wood stands. Non-parametric comparison analysis (Kruskal-Wallis test) and pair comparison according to the Dunn method with Bonferroni correction for significance. Number of replicates for each stand: 30. Legend: red cross = mean; horizontal bar in the box = median; lower limit of the box = first quartile; upper limit of the box = third quartile; empty dots and stars outer the whiskers' bounds = outliers; filled diamonds = minimum and maximum values. Asterisks: values found outside the [Q1 - 3 (Q3- Q1); Q3 + 3 (Q3 - Q1)] interval. Empty dots: values found in the [Q1 – 3 (Q3 - Q1); Q1 - 1.5 (Q3 - Q1)] interval or in the [Q3 + 1.5 (Q3 - Q1); Q3 + 3 (Q3 - Q1)] interval. See Appendix 1, Table
SLA, LDMC and Lth values in the three wood stands. Non-parametric comparison analysis (Kruskal-Wallis test) and pair comparison according to the Dunn method with Bonferroni correction for significance. Number of replicates for each stand: 30. Legend: red cross = mean; horizontal bar in the box = median; lower limit of the box = first quartile; upper limit of the box = third quartile; empty dots and stars outer the whiskers' bounds = outliers; filled diamonds = minimum and maximum values. Empty dots: values found in the [Q1 – 3 (Q3 - Q1); Q1 - 1.5 (Q3 - Q1)] interval or in the [Q3 + 1.5 (Q3 - Q1); Q3 + 3 (Q3 - Q1)] interval. See Appendix 1, Table
All three wood stands investigated were assigned to the same association, which is Roso arvensis-Quercetum cerridis
The stem and root lengths and the leaf areas of the seedlings were found to be rather similar in the three wood stands. Even if the Q. cerris seedlings of the three wood stands investigated are phenotypically very close each other, they showed a different response to environmental conditions if the PFTs values are considered. In the ecological literature, high values of SLA are normally related to environments characterised by being rich in nutrients and/or by shaded conditions. The higher values of SLA showed by the saplings of the SC stand compared to those of the BF and the BSL testify to the propensity of the SC seedlings for an investment in carbon oriented to a rapid growth of the saplings rather than to store material for longevity. High SLA values are related to a lower occurrence of dense tissues, which, as a negative counterpart, makes these seedlings more palatable to grazing herbivores. This negative effect is balanced by a more rapid production of new leaves, linked to a higher availability in nutrients, water, as suggested by the PEi values (see Fig.
In both the BSL and the BF stands, the values of LDMC are higher than those measured in the SC, showing, therefore, for the seedlings of the BSL and the BF a greater propensity to longevity (
Considering that PFT values, such as SLA, LDMC and Lth, are in many cases used to estimate the growth rate of seedlings (
The pH of the soil, on the other hand, would seem to provide values in contrast, as it goes from 4.5 (SC) to 4.7 (BF) and 5.6 (BSL). These values are more consistent with a typical oligotrophic Quercetalia robori-petraea wood than with eutrophic Quercus cerris woods of Erythronio-Carpinion. Instead, the pH values of the BSL site were perfectly in line with this latter alliance. It would be interesting to understand if these low pH values of the SC and the BF could at least partially explain why the montane-belt Quercus cerris forests often give rise to almost monophytic communities, or in any case, communities lacking other species of oaks (see for example
Another resource that could explain the high SLA values observed for the SC stand could be the light radiation. The PEi values showed a significant difference between the low value (5.19) of the SC stand and the values of the BF and the BSL stands (5.932 and 5.627, respectively).
Observing the headline of the phytosociological table, it emerges that the SC wood stand, while showing a high coverage index at the upper tree layer is characterised by an almost total lack of shrub layer. On the contrary, the BSL wood stand shows the highest cover indices for the shrub layer. It is possible, therefore, that in the SC population, the high coverage of the tree layer was much more effective in reducing the amount of light available for the herb layer than the dense shrub layer occurring in the BSL stand. Accordingly, the high Lth values observed in the BSL stand could be due to the low coverage value of the upper tree layer. In this case, a shrub layer, composed of prostrate species, such as Hedera helix and Rubus ulmifolius occurring in the BSL would not seem to represent an effective impediment to light in reaching the herb layer.
As far as values of CHL are concerned, these were found to be higher in the SC stand than in the other two stands. A greater quantity of chlorophyll favours a greater absorption capacity of solar radiation. Based on published studies (e.g.,
CHL values in the three wood stands. Non-parametric comparison analysis (Kruskal-Wallis test) and pair comparison according to the Dunn method with Bonferroni correction for significance. Number of replicates for each stand: 30. Legend: red cross = mean; horizontal bar in the box = median; lower limit of the box = first quartile; upper limit of the box = third quartile; empty dots and stars outer the whiskers' bounds = outliers; filled diamonds = minimum and maximum values. Empty dots: values found in the [Q1 – 3 (Q3 - Q1); Q1 - 1.5 (Q3 - Q1)] interval or in the [Q3 + 1.5 (Q3 - Q1); Q3 + 3 (Q3 - Q1)] interval. See Appendix 1, Table
In this study, phenotypic parameters, and some plant functional traits of Quercus cerris seedlings were tested for the first time in natural forest communities to highlight possible adaptation strategies to environmental conditions. The results do not show a significant link between phenotypic plasticity and environmental parameters. It emerged (at least in our case), that the phenotypic expression is not related with the growth strategy of the seedlings. Accordingly, the phenotypic plasticity of the Quercus cerris seedlings should not be considered a target element to detect the fitness to ensure the growth of the tree. On the contrary, PFT values allowed for highlighting significant differences between the three wood stands considered and for hypothesising possible strategies adopted by Quercus cerris in the first years after germination, depending on the environmental characteristics of the sites. Apparently, the PFT values evidenced that the seedlings of Selva di Castiglione (SC) were following a different development strategy than those of the Bosco della Ficora (BF) and Bosco di San Leo (BSL). Thus, the SC seedlings strategy, expressed by higher values of SLA and CHL and lower values of LDMC and Lth leads to the production of thinner leaves and testifies a greater investment in carbon aimed to a rapid growth of the seedling. The presence of more favorable conditions in the SC stand for the development of the seedlings is supported by the Pignatti-Ellenberg index (PEi) values, which confirm for this site a greater availability of nutrients and soil humidity.
Beyond contributing to a relatively still poor national PFTs database with the first data of in situ PFTs from southern Italy regarding a species of enormous territorial value such as Quercus cerris, this study emphasises the importance of investigating on the relationships between young plant development and environmental conditions. The in situ studies on plant functional traits of seedlings of forest species, providing crucial information on their ecology, may assume a great importance to address forest management practices. This information is likely to prove useful in the near future, precisely in the light of recent Italian and European policies linked to the containment of global warming. The guidelines for the “urban and extra-urban forest plan” of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (Mission 2; Component 4; Investment 3.1) recently published by the Italian Ecological transition Ministry require specific references to natural forest communities and native woody flora to propose models of new urban forests that are consistent with the environmental characteristics of the sites and with the natural potential vegetation types. Yet, the new EU forestry strategy, which plans to plant 3 billion more trees in the European territory by 2030, can become an opportunity to apply the principles of ecology and vegetation science to sustainable land management.
Bulk density (g/cm3) | pH | |||||||
Stand | Minimum | Maximum | Average | Standard deviation | Minimum | Maximum | Average | Standard deviation |
SC | 0.627 | 1 399 | 1 113 | 0.181 | 3.93 | 4.94 | 4 469 | 0.267 |
BSL | 0.820 | 1 425 | 1 123 | 0.180 | 4.86 | 6.40 | 5 599 | 0.360 |
BF | 0.713 | 1 472 | 1 174 | 0.181 | 4.26 | 5.17 | 4 666 | 0.233 |
Stem length (cm) | Root length (cm) | Leaf area (cm2) | ||||||||||
Stand | Minimum | Maximum | Average | Standard deviation | Minimum | Maximum | Average | Standard deviation | Minimum | Maximum | Average | Standard deviation |
SC | 7 900 | 24 000 | 16 697 | 4 257 | 5 600 | 25 100 | 11 650 | 3 918 | 5 114 | 14 092 | 10 859 | 2 448 |
BSL | 9 100 | 32 100 | 16 780 | 4 825 | 4 200 | 23 900 | 13 397 | 5 102 | 6 124 | 22 033 | 12 799 | 4 272 |
BF | 11 600 | 30 500 | 18 633 | 3 698 | 6 800 | 23 500 | 13 707 | 4 512 | 4 710 | 23 806 | 11 495 | 4 742 |
SLA (cm2/g) | LDMC (mg/g) | Lth | ||||||||||
Stand | Minimum | Maximum | Average | Standard deviation | Minimum | Maximum | Average | Standard deviation | Minimum | Maximum | Average | Standard deviation |
SC | 146 135 | 359 631 | 265 551 | 51 847 | 283 037 | 416 391 | 339 652 | 37 281 | 0.806 | 2 854 | 1 362 | 0.431 |
BSL | 117 310 | 334 237 | 205 224 | 55 258 | 240 648 | 532 341 | 416 036 | 74 523 | 0.720 | 4 306 | 2 301 | 0.939 |
BF | 152 591 | 299 809 | 215 078 | 34 135 | 298 322 | 448 317 | 407 723 | 31 926 | 1 022 | 2 887 | 1 983 | 0.419 |