Published July 25, 2022 | Version v1
Dataset Open

Circum-Arctic distribution of chemical anti-herbivore compounds arctic shrubs

  • 1. Umeå University
  • 2. Utrecht University
  • 3. University of Göttingen
  • 4. Umeå Plant Science Centre
  • 5. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
  • 6. Agricultural University of Iceland
  • 7. Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research
  • 8. University of Alaska Fairbanks
  • 9. The Arctic University of Norway
  • 10. Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
  • 11. University of Tartu
  • 12. University of Montreal
  • 13. University of Bergen
  • 14. University of Lapland
  • 15. University of Greifswald
  • 16. Wageningen University & Research
  • 17. Memorial University of Newfoundland
  • 18. Simon Fraser University
  • 19. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research
  • 20. Aarhus University
  • 21. University of Iceland
  • 22. University of Helsinki
  • 23. University of Eastern Finland
  • 24. Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation, Wageningen*
  • 25. University of Edinburgh
  • 26. University of California, Davis
  • 27. University of Notre Dame
  • 28. Russian Academy of Sciences
  • 29. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, University Museum*
  • 30. Melnikov Permafrost Institute of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Science
  • 31. Université Laval
  • 32. Dartmouth College
  • 33. Alaska Department of Health and Social Services

Description

Spatial variation in plant chemical defence towards herbivores can help us understand variation in herbivore top-down control of shrubs in the Arctic and possibly also shrub responses to global warming. Less defended, non-resinous shrubs could be more influenced by herbivores than more defended, resinous shrubs. However, sparse field measurements limit our current understanding of how much of the circum-Arctic variation in defence compounds is explained by taxa or defence functional groups (resinous/non-resinous). We measured circum-Arctic chemical defence and leaf digestibility in resinous (Betula glandulosa, B. nana ssp. exilis) and non-resinous (B. nana ssp. nana, B. pumila) shrub birches to see how it varies among and within taxa and functional groups. Using LC-MS metabolomic analyses and in-vitro leaf digestibility via incubation in cattle rumen fluid, we analysed defence composition and leaf digestibility in 128 samples from 44 tundra locations. We found biogeographical patterns in anti-herbivore defence where mean leaf triterpene concentrations and twig resin gland density were greater in resinous taxa and mean concentrations of condensing tannins were greater in non-resinous taxa. This indicates a biome-wide trade-off between triterpene or tannin dominated defences. However, we also found variations in chemical defence composition and resin gland density both within and among functional groups (resinous/non-resinous) and taxa, suggesting these categorisations only partly predict chemical herbivore defence. Complex tannins were the only defence compounds negatively related to In-Vitro Digestibility, identifying this previously neglected tannin group as having a potential key role in birch anti-herbivore defence. We conclude that circum-Arctic variation in birch anti-herbivore defence can be partly derived from biogeographical distributions of birch taxa, although our detailed mapping of plant defence provides more information on this variation and can be used for better predictions of herbivore effects on arctic vegetation.

Notes

The data file includes metadata and a sheet with data explanation, including units for all measures.

Files

Files (189.2 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:6c0f66f8b96d24af4d1ca746ca5738ff
189.2 kB Download