Kin Interactions of Arabidopsis Based on the Integrated Performance of Plants

  • 1. Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China;
    2. Key Laboratory of Ecosystem Network Observation and Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China;
    3. University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China

Received date: 2016-06-27

  Online published: 2017-03-28

Supported by

National Natural Science Foundation of China (31470560).


Mechanisms of kin selection have been studied to explain how siblings grow together, but the findings remain controversial. This can be ascribed to the use of single indicators without considering other factors. Three ecotypes of Arabidopsis were used to examine kin responses of siblings growing together. Plant traits of leaves, plant shape, reproductive activity, and roots were investigated. We found that Arabidopsis recognized their kin neighbors, showed selective responses to distinct plant traits among ecotypes, and modes of responses were dependent on neighbor's growing distance. If single traits were used to judge kin response performance, the results were chaotic. However, by developing and studying an integrated performance value based on multiple traits, we determined that Ler showed similar integrated performances at all planting distances, while the integrated performance of Col was ranked mainly as medium distancedistance> small distance> large distance, which suggested kin cooperation. However, in comparison to medium and small distances, at which performance was consistent with kin recognition, we found that at large distance, strangers of Ws performed better than kin plants, which suggested competition. Thus, we conclude that kin recognition could be affected by plant competition conditions that are the result of growing distance, and that the integrated performance of individuals was more suitable to evaluate kin interactions of plant species.

Cite this article

LI Jie, XU Xingliang, LIANG Tao . Kin Interactions of Arabidopsis Based on the Integrated Performance of Plants[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2017 , 8(2) : 185 -190 . DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2017.02.009


[1] Biedrzycki M, Jilany T, Dudley S A, et al . 2010. Root exudates mediate kin recognition in plants. Communicative & Integrative Biology , 3(1): 1-8.
[2] Biernaskie M. 2010. Evidence for competition and cooperation among climbing plants. Process of the Royal Society, Biological Sciences , 278: (1714): 1989-1996.
[3] Bijma P, Wade M J. 2008. The joint effects of kin, multilevel selection and indirect genetic effects on response to genetic selection. Journal of Evolutionary Biology , 21(5): 1175-1188.
[4] Chapais B, Savard L, Gauthier C. 2001. Kin selection and the distribution of altruism in relation to degree of kinship in Japanese macaques ( Macaca fuscata ). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology , 49(6): 493- 502.
[5] Cornelissen J H C, Cerabolini B, Castro-Díez P, et al . 2003a. Functional traits of woody plants, correspondence of species rankings between field adults and laboratory grown seedlings. Journal of Vegetation Science , 14(3): 311-322.
[6] Cornelissen JHC, Lavorel S, Garnier E, et al . 2003b. A handbook of protocols for standardised and easy measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Australian Journal of Botany , 51(4): 335-380.
[7] Crepy M A, Casal J J. 2015. Photoreceptor-mediated kin recognition in plants. New Phytologist , 205(1): 329-338.
[8] Collins A, Hart EM, Molofsky J. 2010. Differential response to frequency-dependent interactions, an experimental test using genotypes of an invasive grass. Oecologia , 164(4): 959-969.
[9] Dudley S A, File A L. 2007. Kin recognition in an annual plant. Biology Letters, 3(4), 435-438.
[10] Donohue K. 2004. Density-dependent multilevel selection in the Great Lakes sea rocket. Ecology , 85(1): 180-191.
[11] Fajardo A, McIntire E J B. 2010. Under strong niche overlap conspecifics do not compete but help each other to survive, facilitation at the intraspecific level. Journal of Ecology , 99(2): 642-650.
[12] File A L, Murphy G P, Dudley S A. 2010. Fitness consequences of plants growing with siblings, reconciling kin selection, niche partitioning and competitive ability. Process of the Royal Society, Biological Sciences , 279(1727): 209-218.
[13] Gardner A, West S A. 2010. Greenbeards. Evolution , 64(1): 25-38.
[14] Garnier E, Navas M L. 2012. A trait-based approach to comparative functional plant ecology, concepts, methods and applications for agroecology: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development , 32(2): 365-399.
[15] Goodnight C J. 2005. Multilevel selection, the evolution of cooperation in non-kin groups. Population Ecology , 47(1), 3-12.
[16] Hamilton W D. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behavior, I & II. J. Journal of Theoretical Biology , 7(1): 1-52.
[17] Lavorel S, Garnier E. 2002. Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits, revisiting the Holy Grail. Functional Ecology , 16(5): 545-556.
[18] Lepik A, Abakumova M, Zobel K, et al . 2012. Kin recognition is density- dependent and uncommon among temperate grassland plants. Functional Ecology , 26(5): 1214-1220.
[19] Murphy G P, Dudley S A. 2009. Kin recognition, competition and cooperation in Impatiens (Balsaminaceae). American Journal of Botany , 96(11): 1990-1996.
[20] Masclaux F, Hammond RL, Meunier J, et al . 2010. Competitive ability not kinship affects growth of Arabidopsis thaliana accessions. New Phytologist , 185(1): 322-331.
[21] Milla R, Forero D M, Escudero A, et al . 2009. Growing with siblings, a common ground for cooperation or for fiercer competition among plants? Proceedings of the Royal Society , Biological Sciences , 276(1667): 2531-2540.
[22] Maliakal S K, McDonnell K, Dudley S A, et al . 1999. Effects of red to far-red ratio and plant density on biomass allocation and gas exchange in Impatiens capensis . International Journal of Plant Sciences , 160(4): 723-733.
[23] Mercer C A, Eppley S M. 2014. Kin and sex recognition in a dioecious grass. Plant Ecology , 215(8): 845-852.
[24] Platt T G, Bever J D. 2009. Kin competition and the evolution of cooperation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution , 24(7): 370-377.
[25] Semchenko M, John E A, Hutchings M J. 2007. Effects of physical connection and genetic identity of neighbouring ramets on root-placement patterns in two clonal species. New Phytologist , 176(3): 644-654.
[26] Segovia N I, Vasquez J A, Faugeron S, et al . 2015. On the advantage of sharing a holdfast, effects of density and occurrence of kin aggregation in the kelp Lessonia berteroana. Marine Ecology , 36(4): 1107-1117.
[27] Simonsen A K, Chow T, Stinchcombe J R. 2014. Reduced plant competition among kin can be explained by Jensen's inequality. Ecology and Evolution , 4(23): 4454-4466.
[28] Tilman D. 1982. Resource Competition and Community Structure . Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
[29] Tozer D J, Peach M J G. 2014. Density functional theory and its applications. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics , 16(28): 14333
[30] Willis C G, Brock M T, Weinig C. 2010. Genetic variation in tolerance of competition and neighbour suppression in Arabidopsis thaliana . Journal of Evolutionary Biology , 23(7): 1412-1424.
[31] Violle C, Navas ML, Vile D, et al . 2007. Let the concept of trait be functional! Oikos , 116(5): 882-892.