Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart, New York full text link Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart, New York
Full text links

Actions

Share

Review
.2006 Nov;8(6):740-7.
doi: 10.1055/s-2006-923956.

Nutrient limitation and stoichiometry of carnivorous plants

Affiliations
Review

Nutrient limitation and stoichiometry of carnivorous plants

A M Ellison. Plant Biol (Stuttg).2006 Nov.

Abstract

The cost-benefit model for the evolution of carnivorous plants posits a trade-off between photosynthetic costs associated with carnivorous structures and photosynthetic benefits accrued through additional nutrient acquisition. The model predicts that carnivory is expected to evolve if its marginal benefits exceed its marginal costs. Further, the model predicts that when nutrients are scarce but neither light nor water is limiting, carnivorous plants should have an energetic advantage in competition with non-carnivorous plants. Since the publication of the cost-benefit model over 20 years ago, marginal photosynthetic costs of carnivory have been demonstrated but marginal photosynthetic benefits have not. A review of published data and results of ongoing research show that nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium often (co-)limit growth of carnivorous plants and that photosynthetic nutrient use efficiency is 20 - 50 % of that of non-carnivorous plants. Assessments of stoichiometric relationships among limiting nutrients, scaling of leaf mass with photosynthesis and nutrient content, and photosynthetic nutrient use efficiency all suggest that carnivorous plants are at an energetic disadvantage relative to non-carnivorous plants in similar habitats. Overall, current data support some of the predictions of the cost-benefit model, fail to support others, and still others remain untested and merit future research. Rather than being an optimal solution to an adaptive problem, botanical carnivory may represent a set of limited responses constrained by both phylogenetic history and environmental stress.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Related information

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart, New York full text link Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart, New York
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp