Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PeerJ logoLink to PeerJ
. 2020 Jun 17;8:e9266. doi: 10.7717/peerj.9266

Legacy effects of historical grazing alter leaf stomatal characteristics in progeny plants

Jingjing Yin 1,2, Xiliang Li 2, Huiqin Guo 3, Jize Zhang 2, Lingqi Kong 2, Weibo Ren 1,✉
Editor: Claudio Ramirez
PMCID: PMC7305771  PMID: 32596041

Abstract

Grazing, one of the primary utilization modes of grassland, is the main cause of grassland degradation. Historical overgrazing results in dwarf phenotype and decreased photosynthesis of perennial plants. However, it remains unknown what the mechanism underlying of this legacy effect is, and the role of stomata in the resulting decreased photosynthesis also remains unclear. To address these questions, differences in stomatal density, length and width on both adaxial and abaxial epidermis were compared between overgrazing and ungrazed Leymus chinensis offspring by using rhizome buds cultivated in a greenhouse, and the correlation between photosynthetic capacity and stomatal behavior was also investigated. Our results showed that historical grazing significantly impacted phenotype, photosynthesis and stomatal traits of L. chinensis. The offspring plants taken from overgrazed parents were dwarfed compared to those taken from ungrazed parents, and the photosynthesis and stomatal conductance of plants with a grazing history decreased by 28.6% and 21.3%, respectively. In addition, stomatal density and length on adaxial and abaxial leaf surfaces were significantly increased; however, stomatal width on abaxial leaf surfaces of overgrazed L. chinensis was significantly decreased compared with ungrazed individuals. Moreover, the expression patterns of eight genes related to stomatal regulation were tested: seven were down-regulated (2–18 times) and one was up-regulated (three times). Genes, involved in ABC transporter and receptor-like serine/threonine protein kinase were down-regulated. These results suggest that legacy effects of historical grazing affect the stomatal conductance by decreasing the stomatal width in progeny plants, which thus results in lower photosynthesis. Furthermore, changes of stomatal traits and function were regulated by the inhibition of ABC transporter and serine/threonine protein kinase. These findings are helpful for future exploration of the possible mechanisms underlying the response of grassland plants to long-term overgrazing.

Keywords: Leymus chinensis, Historical grazing, Legacy effects, Stomata, Photosynthesis, Dwarf phenotype

Introduction

Grazing is one of the harshest environmental stresses and affects both the composition of the plant community and the soil properties of the natural grassland (Krzic et al., 2006; Byrnes et al., 2018), and has led to severe degradation of arid and semi-arid grasslands globally (Van Der Westhuizen, Snyman & Fouché, 2005; Liang et al., 2009; Schönbach et al., 2011; Vanderpost et al., 2011). Previous studies have also shown that long-term overgrazing can change the composition of plant species from a perennial grass-dominated state to several degraded states dominated by sub-shrubs, shrubs, or annual plants in grasslands (Wang, Wang & Wang, 2006; Sasaki et al., 2008; Lohmann et al., 2012). Moreover, overgrazing was found to increase soil sand content, while decreasing both the macroporosity and water-holding capacity of soil (Zhao et al., 2011). Recently, it has been suggested that grazing-induced changes in plant traits may persist even after the grazing pressure is removed. This may therefore affect the performance of the following progeny plants, a phenomenon that is called the legacy effect (Veen et al., 2014; Casas et al., 2016).

The legacy effect has been described in ecology since the early 1990s and has been shown to be involved in plant succession, plant invasion, human land-use impacts, and herbivory or grazing impacts (Simard, 1995; Cuddington, 2011). The legacy effect of herbivory, which means that herbivory-induced effects in the parental generation can result in the modification of offspring plants, has recently received increasing attention (Agrawal, Laforsch & Tollrian, 1999; Poma et al., 2014). Herbivory-induced effects may persist across one or more generations of the offspring via sexual or asexual reproduction (Yin et al., 2019). Generally, these legacy effects are often considered adaptive, particularly when they trigger pre-adaption in offspring plants to similar stresses that parent plants have experienced (Herman & Sultan, 2011; Holeski, Jander & Agrawal, 2012). A meta-analysis summarizing 139 experimental studies in plants and animals, focusing on 1,170 effect sizes, showed that transgenerational effects benefit offspring plants in response to stressful conditions (Yin et al., 2019). Moreover, legacy effects can be enabled by altering seed quality (Herman & Sultan, 2011) or by epigenetic modification (Holeski, Jander & Agrawal, 2012). For example, drought stress has been shown to have negative effects on seed quality by reducing germination and seedling vigor in the F1 generation (Wijewardana et al., 2019). Boyko et al. (2010) showed that stress-induced trans-generational effects were regulated by changes in DNA methylation and small-RNA silencing in Arabidopsis thaliana.

Over the past few decades, much research has been conducted to analyze the ecological and physiological aspects of grazing stresses on natural grasslands (Zhang et al., 2017; Dong et al., 2018; Mueller et al., 2017). Recently, studies on the mechanism of degeneration from individual traits have increased. It has been shown that long-term overgrazing led to the miniaturization of plant individuals, causing for example, stunted height, shortened and narrowed leaves and similar effects (Wang et al., 2000). At the same time, physiological traits such as photosynthetic rate also decreased severely after long-term overgrazing, which were still maintained in offspring plants (Ren et al., 2017). However, little is known about how this legacy effect on phenotypic characteristics is maintained. Therefore, this article explored likely underlying mechanisms based on the stomatal behavior and function.

Stomata, the small pores on the surfaces of leaves and stems, formed by a pair of guard cells, play a critical role in the balance of CO2 uptake for photosynthesis and water loss through transpiration. It is interesting to note that the area of the total stomatal pore may only be 5% of a plant leaf surface (Fricker & Willmer, 1996). Moreover, previous studies have suggested that photosynthesis is positively correlated with stomatal conductance (gs) (Wong, Cowan & Farquhar, 1979; Lawson et al., 2018), and maximum level of gs is dictated by the density and size of stomata (Hetherington & Woodward, 2003; Franks & Farquhar, 2007). Stomatal characteristics are affected by many factors, such as CO2 (Woodward & Kelly, 1995; Sekiya & Yano, 2008), water (Yordanova, Uzunova & Popova, 2005; Arve et al., 2013; Saradadevi et al., 2017), light (Shimazaki et al., 2007; Mott, 2009), and temperature (Liu et al., 2018; Hill et al., 2014). The correct coordination between photosynthesis and stomatal behavior is essential for different plant function. Numerous studies have explored the effects of herbivory on photosynthesis (Chen et al., 2005; Peng et al., 2007; Kerchev et al., 2012). In contrast, little is known about the role of stomata in this process. The genetic regulation of stomatal development and movement was mainly studied in the model plant A. thaliana (Nadeau & Sack, 2002; Vráblová et al., 2017); however few studies attempted to study this in forage plants. Therefore, this topic is worthy of further study and it is particularly interesting which genes participate in the regulation of the stomata response to overgrazing.

Leymus chinensis is a perennial, rhizomatous clonal grass with high palatability and forage value (Liu, 2006), that largely covers the eastern Eurasian temperate grassland area. As the dominant grass species of the grasslands, L. chinensis plays an important role in the grassland ecosystem. The present study focused on L. chinensis and investigated the effects of historical overgrazing on phenotype, photosynthesis and leaf stomatal characteristics of offspring plants. Previous studies showed that a history of overgrazing can lead to dwarfing in plants and significantly decreased photosynthesis (Ren et al., 2017). However, little is known about the regulating mechanisms of this decrease in photosynthesis. As an important organ of photosynthesis, it is unknown whether stomata play a key role in this process. Therefore, two questions were addressed by this research: (i) Do legacy effects induced by historical grazing change the characteristics of leaf stomata in the following generation? (ii) Which genes take part in the regulation of the stomata response to overgrazing?

Meterials and Methods

Field site and plant material

The experimental materials were taken from an artificial grassland located at the field station of the Grassland Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, located in Hohhot, Inner Mongolia, China (N: 40°36′; E: 111°45′; H: 1,065 m). The artificial grassland was established for the field research in July 2009, and planted with the forage species L. chinensis, Elymus nutans Griseb., and Medicago sativa L. cv. Aohan., Emanmus sibiricus L., etc. The two treatments included overgrazing (GZ) and no grazing (NG) in this grazing experiment plot, three replications were conducted for each treatment, and the area of each plot was about 0.64 hm2. For grazing treatments, six sheep continuously grazed in the GZ plot during the growing season from May to October each year at a stocking rate of about nine sheep per hectare. This study selected the rhizome buds of L. chinensis as offspring generation to examine the legacy effects of historical grazing in parental plants.

Greenhouse experiment

Fresh grass had not germinated at the early spring of 2018, and the rhizome buds of L. chinensis were randomly taken from both GZ and NG plots in the artificial grassland. The rhizomes coming from different parental plants were cut to 2–3 cm lengths and each rhizome with a bud was planted into a pot and transferred to the greenhouse for cultivation. The buds were kept in the greenhouse for 7 weeks. Soil was taken from the grazing experiment plots, and was sieved and mixed to ensure uniformity of the soil. The rhizomes were planted into pots with a diameter of 18 cm after the pots were filled with soil. Each treatment used seven pots with three rhizomes per pot. In total, 14 pots were randomly arranged in the greenhouse. The temperature was about 25 °C during the day and 15 °C at night. The phenotypic traits, gas exchange parameters, stomatal traits, and related gene expression studies were successively tested after plant transplantation based on the following methods.

Morphological traits

The plant height was measured from the 2nd week after transplantation and was continually tested every week. The leaf length (LL) and leaf width (LW) of the second leaf from the top of each individual were measured at week seven of growth in the greenhouse. The leaf area was calculated according to the formula: Area = 0.655* (LL × LW) (Yajun, 2009).

Gas exchange measurements

After about 7 weeks of culture, the gas exchange parameters of the second leaf from the top of each plant were measured using a LI-6400 (LI-COR, Lincoln, NE, USA) photosynthetic measurement system during a clear morning from 9:00 to 11:00. Measurement indicators included: net photosynthetic rate (PN), transpiration rate (E), inter-cellular CO2 concentration (Ci), stomatal conductance (gs), and water use efficiency (WUE) calculated from photosynthetic rate and transpiration rate (WUE = PN/E). The gas exchanges were measured as photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) of 1000 ± 10 μmol m−2 s−1 and CO2 concentration of 350 ± 3 ppm.

Stomatal traits

After about 7 weeks of culturing, the second leaf of each of the treated plants of L. chinensis was collected to determine the stomatal traits using the impression approach (Xu & Zhou, 2008). After collection, the leaves were rapidly fixed with 2.5% glutaraldehyde, and brought back to the laboratory. The abaxial and adaxial epidermis of the leaf were first cleaned using a paper towel, and then carefully smeared with transparent nail polish in the tail, middle, and top area, gently peeled off after approximately 15 min, then immediately mounted on a glass slide, covered with a cover slip, and finally observed and photographed using an optical microscope (BX53, Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). To count the number of stomata in adaxial and abaxial leaf surfaces in the microscope at 40× magnification, and to calculate the stomatal density (stomatal density = number of stomata/area in view), five fields of view were randomly observed for each piece. Seven stomata were randomly selected from the microscopic slides, and stomatal length and width in the microphotographs were analyzed with Image J 1.0 image processing software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA). Since the degree of opening of the pores changes constantly, the length and width of guard cells were selected to represent the maximum degree of opening of the pores, that is, the size of the pores (Fig. S1).

Real-time PCR analysis

Samples were taken from the second or third leaf of offspring plants treated with enclosure and overgrazing of parental plants after about 7 weeks of culture, then stored at −80 °C. RNA isolation used the TRIZOL reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) following the procedures provided by the manufacturer. Then, the quantity of RNA was evaluated by electrophoresis on a 1.0% agarose gel, and the concentration was measured by an ultraviolet spectrophotometer (UV-2550PC, Shimadzu, Japan). High-quality total RNA samples were used for subsequent experiments. According to the manufacturer’s instructions, any possible DNA contamination was eliminated from RNA samples, and first-stand cDNA was synthesized by using the Prime Script RT reagent Kit with gDNA Eraser (Takara, Tokyo, Japan). The cDNA samples were stored at −20 °C for real-time PCR analysis. In addition, eight differentially expressed genes related to stomatal development and regulation were selected based on transcriptome data (Ren et al., 2018). The program primer premier 5 was used to design the required primer sequences, and the primer details of these genes are presented in Table S1 of the Supporting Information. The real-time PCR for gene expression was performed on Quant Studio™ 6 Flex System Software using SYBR Green 1 reagents, following the instructions of test kits.

Statistical analyses

All statistical analyses were conducted in Microsoft Excel, and independent samples T tests were performed to assess the differences between treatments for phenotypic characteristics, photosynthetic parameters, and stomatal traits at the P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 levels of significance using SPSS 19.0 statistical software (Systat Software Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Graphical representations were generated with Sigmaplot 13.0 software (Systat Software Inc., San Jose, CA, USA).

Results

Historical grazing on parent plants significantly affected the growth of offspring plants (Figs. 1 and 2). Offspring developed from grazed parents grew much slower than those from ungrazed parents (Fig. 1B). Compared with the ungrazed control, the plant height and leaf length of grazed progeny decreased by 23.5% and 15.4% (Figs. 1 and 2A), the leaf width and area of grazed progeny decreased by 9.7% and 23.1% respectively (Figs. 2B and 2C), and the aboveground biomass of individual grazed plants also decreased by 12.9% (Fig. 2D).

Figure 1. The differences in growth of offspring plants developed from overgrazed and ungrazed Leymus chinensis respectively in the culture period (Mean ± SE).

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

(A) The change of plant height with culture time; (B) The change of growth rate of plant height with culture time. NG, Ungrazed; GZ, Grazed.

Figure 2. Effects of historical grazing on leaf length (A), width (B), area (C), and aboveground biomass (D) in offspring of Leymus chinensis (Mean ± SE).

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

NG, Ungrazed; GZ, Grazed. The asterisk indicates a significant difference between the grazing and ungrazing treatments. *p < 0.05.

Historical grazing has also significant impact on photosynthesis. PN and gs in progeny plants generated from grazed parents were significantly decreased by 28.6% and 21.3%, respectively, compared with control plants (P < 0.05, Figs. 3A and 3B). However, Ci in ungrazed progeny plants increased and WUE decreased significantly (P < 0.05, Figs. 3C and 3E).

Figure 3. Effects of historical grazing on leaf photosynthetic characteristics in progeny plants (Mean ± SE).

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

PN, net photosynthetic rate; gs, stomatal conductance; Ci, intercellular carbon dioxide concentration; E, transpiration rate; WUE, water use efficiency. NG, Ungrazed; GZ, Grazed. Different asterisks indicate a significant difference between the grazing and ungrazing treatments. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Stomatal density on the basal adaxial leaf surfaces in progeny plants of grazing-stressed L. chinensis increased significantly in the greenhouse experiment (Fig. 4A). However, no significant differences were found both in the middle and top leaf surfaces (Figs. 4B and 4C). Noticeably, historical grazing significantly increased stomatal density and length; however, the stomatal width on the basal of abaxial leaf surfaces decreased (Figs. 4D–4F). Moreover, stomatal density and width on the middle of abaxial leaf surfaces in offspring plants taken from grazed parents decreased significantly compared with those taken from ungrazed parents (Figs. 4D–4F). Notably, no significant differences were found in stomatal characteristics on the top of adaxial and abaxial leaf surfaces (Figs. 4D–4F), suggesting that stomatal differences were mainly found at the basal and middle of leaves, not at the top of leaves.

Figure 4. Effects of historical grazing on stomatal characteristics (stomatal density, length and width) of adaxial (A–C) and abaxial (D–F) leaf surfaces in progeny plants of Leymus chinensis (Mean ± SE).

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

NG, Ungrazed; GZ, Grazed. Different asterisks indicate a significant difference between the grazing and ungrazing treatments. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

To explore the possible mechanism of stomatal differences induced by historical grazing, the expressions of eight key genes related to stomatal regulation were investigated (Table 1). These genes are classified into two types based on the pathways they are involved in: (1) stomatal movements (ABCCL4, ABCG5, SAPK10, and GNAT1); (2) stomatal development (ER1, ER, ERL1, and CYCP3L-1) (Table 1). The results showed that all genes of grazed progeny plants were down-regulated by 2–18 times except for CYCP3L-1 which was up-regulated (Figs. 5A–5H). This suggests that stomatal characteristics were mainly affected by the down-regulation of related genes.

Table 1. The expression of genes related stomatal development and regulation.

Gene No. Annotation Abbreviation Function
>c118857.graph_c0 ABC transporter C family member 4-like (LOC109773936) ABCCL4 Stomatal movements
>c92989.graph_c0 ABC transporter G family member 5 (LOC109768344) ABCG5 Stomatal movements
>c89156.graph_c0 Serine/threonine-protein kinase SAPK10 (LOC109758947) SAPK10 Stomatal movements
>c103838.graph_c0 Guanine nucleotide-binding protein alpha-1 subunit (LOC112875249) GNAT1 Stomatal movements
>c128305.graph_c0 Receptor-like serine/threonine protein kinase 1 (ER1) gene (JQ599260) ER1 Stomatal development
>c93997.graph_c0 LRR receptor-like serine/threonine-protein kinase ERECTA (LOC109740979) ER Stomatal development
>c113269.graph_c0 LRR receptor-like serine/threonine-protein kinase ERL1 (LOC109783729) ERL1 Stomatal development
>c134962.graph_c0 Cyclin-P3-1-like (LOC109778329) CYCP3L-1 Stomatal development
Open in a new tab

Note:

Up, up-regulation; Down, down-regulation.

Figure 5. Differences in expression of genes related to stomatal regulation of progeny plants developed from overgrazed and ungrazed Leymus chinensis respectively.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

NG, Ungrazed; GZ, Grazed. Different asterisks indicate a significant difference between the grazing and ungrazing treatments. **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Discussion

The effects of historical grazing on stomatal characteristics

Plants can alter stomatal activity to cope with environmental stresses such as drought (Changhai et al., 2010), cold (Reynolds-Henne et al., 2010), insects (Papazian et al., 2016), and even grazing (Zhang, 2010). This study provides clear evidence that the grazing history can impress legacy effects on traits and functions of leaf stomata in L.chinensis. After grazing, stomatal density increased significantly on the basal of adaxial and abaxial leaf surfaces and decreased significantly on the middle of abaxial leaf surfaces. Similar findings have been reported for Thalictrum aplinum, Kobresia humilis, Gentiana straminea, and Elymus nutans Griseb (Zhang, 2010). Moreover, stomatal length of the progeny developed from grazed parents increased, while stomatal width decreased significantly in abaxial leaf surfaces. These data suggested that stomata of progeny plants tended to close because of the long-term overgrazing experience of their parental plants, which resulted in a decrease in gs. A similar result of stomatal closure caused by herbivory was also reported previously (Papazian et al., 2016). Hence, it may be an alternative strategy to close the stomata to adapt to grazing stress.

Stomata are deliberately regulated by a series of genes to help plants adapt to environmental stimuli. This study investigated eight key genes that play key roles in the development and movement of stomata. It has been suggested that historical grazing affects the expression level of these genes on the progeny developed from grazed parents. After long-term grazing, the expression of seven of these eight tested genes, mainly related to stomatal development and regulation, were significantly decreased. For example, ABCCL4 and ABCG5 are two members in the superfamily of the ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters, which has more than 120 members in both rice (Oryza sativa) and A. thaliana. Stomatal regulation is one of the fundamental processes in which ABC transporters participate (Rea, 2007). A previous study supported that ABC transporter AtMRP5 mutants tended to have more closed stomata than wild-type control plants, resulting in decreased transpiration rate and increased drought tolerance (Klein et al., 2003). Therefore, the down-regulation of the expressions of ABCCL4 and ABCG5 may also be relevant to closing stomata. In addition, GNAT1 plays an important role in signal transmission, as G proteins participate in ethylene-induced stomatal closure and functions through hydrogen peroxide synthesis in A. thaliana (Ge et al., 2015). Moreover, in this study, three cell-surface-resident receptor-like kinases genes (ER1, ER, and ERL1) were detected, which encode members of the large family of plant LRR receptor-like kinases (RLKs) (Shpak et al., 2004), which play a critical role in the regulation of stomatal density. Shpak (2005) identified the ER-family LRR-RLKs as negative regulators of stomatal development, and the down-regulation of ER genes and the up-regulation of CYCP3L-1 provide molecular evidence for increased stomatal density and length on the basal of adaxial and abaxial leaf surfaces. Another serine/threonine–protein kinase gene (SAPK10), which is specifically expressed in guard cells, plays an important role in stomatal movement (Min et al., 2019). However, the regulation mechanism of SAPK10 remains unclear and requires further study.

Legacy effects on stomata

Stomatal numbers and their pattern on the leaf surface can be either directly or indirectly influenced by the growth environment. Stomatal density is one of the key factors that may regulate the stomatal conductance and functions (Doheny-Adams et al., 2012). Increased stomatal density offers more potential for CO2 diffusion into the leaf, which facilitates higher rates of gas exchange in responses to environmental stimuli (Yoo et al., 2011; De Boer et al., 2016). Furthermore, a close positive correlation exists between stomatal conductance and photosynthetic rate (Buckley & Mott, 2013; Farquhar & Sharkey, 1982). Tanaka et al. (2013) investigated A. thaliana mutants with altered stomatal density and showed that the photosynthetic rate could be enhanced by 30% via increasing stomatal density in STOMAGEN-overexpressing A. thaliana compared with wild-type plants. In the present research, the photosynthetic rate decreased significantly in response to long-term grazing treatment in the parental generation of L. chinensis. A similar finding was also reported in previous research (Ren et al., 2017). The performance is the same in the subsequent generation that developed from grazed parents. However, the photosynthetic rate of offspring plants decreased by 28.6% compared with that of the un-grazed control. The possible reason is that stomatal aperture weights much than stomatal density on which gs is determined (Weyers & Lawson, 1997). Furthermore, changes in stomatal density can be compensated for by changes in stomatal opening or closure. For example, Büssis et al. (2006) used transgenic A. thaliana plants that over-expressed the SDD1 gene and sdd1-1 mutants showed that increased stomatal density could be compensated for by decreased stomatal aperture.

Many studies have showed that livestock grazing may change soil quality or properties and leads to soil compaction relative to ungrazed soil (Daniel et al., 2002; Drewry, Cameron & Buchan, 2008; Kotzé et al., 2013; Pulido et al., 2016; Byrnes et al., 2018). This in turn can result in decreased soil pore space, reduced infiltration, and even decrease the supply of available water (Willatt & Pullar, 1984; Kotzé et al., 2013; Tate et al., 2004). To address the water limitation, plants may decrease their stomatal aperture to minimize water loss. However, the closure of stomata may also decrease the uptake of CO2, which may decrease the photosynthetic rate and inhibit plant growth. Hence, plants may face the trade-off between water loss and CO2 uptake. For example, Case & Barrett (2001) investigated two populations of Wurmbea dioica separately in wet and dry conditions, their results showed that the stomata of the dry populations were partly closed to minimize water loss and decrease photosynthesis rates. The detailed mechanisms of the stomatal response to grazing are not easy to explain, because grazing involves a complex set of factors. However, the results of the present study suggested the existence of legacy effects of livestock grazing in the parents with regard to the stomatal behavior in offspring generation of L. chinensis. Moreover, the changes in stomatal characteristics decreased stomatal conductance and photosynthesis rate, which resulted in a dwarf phenotype of offspring plants (Fig. 6). So far, exceedingly little is known about the detailed mechanisms of these legacy effects; however, increasing evidence suggests that epigenetic mechanisms such as DNA methylation, histone modifications, and small RNAs contribute to these legacy effects (Agarwal, 2001; Champagne, 2008; Richards, 2011; Boyko et al., 2010). Further research is needed to fully understand the epigenetic mechanisms of how the legacy effects are induced by grazing from the parents to progeny plants.

Figure 6. Schematic diagram illustrates the regulation pathway of historical overgrazing-induced dwarf phenotype in Leymus chinensis.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

Legacy effects of historical grazing on progeny plants

Long-term overgrazing, which can affect the stability of the plant community by altering the growth of individual plants (Niu et al., 2015; Zuo et al., 2018), is an important cause for grassland degradation (Bai et al., 2012). Previous research has shown that transgenerational morphological plasticity induced by overgrazing heavily involves photosynthetic function in L. chinensis (Ren et al., 2017). In general, phenotypic plasticity refers to the ability of organisms to modify their morphology, physiology, or behavior and adapt to changing environmental conditions (Wadgymar & Austen, 2019). This experiment further observed that overgrazing experienced by the parental generation could alter stomatal characteristics of the offspring of L. chinensis. The decreased photosynthesis and the dwarfed phenotype may be attributed to transgenerational stomatal plasticity. However, little is known about transgenerational effects induced by overgrazing in forage grass. According to a recent study by Kafle, Wurst & Dam (2019), single herbivory in the parental generation did not prime the transgenerational response, only sequential above- and below- ground herbivory did. Therefore, it can be speculated that transgenerational responses require a certain threshold of environmental stress. Moreover, the developmental stage at which the parental generation is subjected to stress can also influence the performance of their offspring (Burton & Metcalfe, 2014). However, for perennial asexual plants, the threshold of cross-generational effects and how long it can last in the offspring generation remain unknown and require further exploration.

Transgenerational legacy effects have received increasing attention in recent years. Although only the legacy effects raised from historical grazing in L. chinensis was investigated in this study, the results still provide hints what may happen in other plants. Holeski, Jander & Agrawal (2012) have also summarized several examples of transgenerational effects of the resistance to herbivores and pathogens in 11 plant species. Previous studies have shown that the offspring generation could perform better in the maternal than in the non-maternal environment (Galloway & Etterson, 2007; Latzel et al., 2014). L. chinensis, as an asexual plant, consists of many interconnected ramets, where each ramet may experience different environmental conditions. This leads to better adaptation of offspring ramets to the living environment by inheriting information from the maternal generation. Therefore, the legacy effects of historical grazing are more conducive to both the survival and growth of progeny plants.

Conclusion

This study found that legacy effects of historical grazing can alter leaf stomatal characteristics in progeny plants. The results suggested the existence of a trade-off between density and aperture of stomata in L. chinensis in response to long-term overgrazing stress. Changes in stomatal characteristics caused decreases in gs and photosynthesis rate, which resulted in a dwarf phenotype of offspring plants. Moreover, five important genes (ABCCL, ABCG5, ER1, ER and ERL1), which are involved in ABC transporter and receptor-like serine/threonine protein kinase, played a key role in the process of stomatal regulation. This regulation mechanism of the process has important significance for a better understanding of the dwarf phenotype of perennial grassland plants.

Supplemental Information

Supplemental Information 1. Raw data.
Click here for additional data file. (25.6KB, xlsx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9266/supp-1
Supplemental Information 2. The stomatal characteristics (20×) in progeny plants.

(A) and (B), the adaxial leaf surfaces in enclosure and overgrazing Leymus chinensis respectively. (C) and (D), the abaxial leaf surfaces in enclosure and overgrazing Leymus chinensis, respectively.

Click here for additional data file. (724.6KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9266/supp-2
Supplemental Information 3. qRT-PCR primer details of genes related to stomatal development and regulation in Leymus chinensis leaves.
Click here for additional data file. (18.8KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9266/supp-3

Acknowledgments

We gratefully thank Fenghui Guo for his help with fieldwork, and we also thank Xiumin Yu for the technical help during the experiment.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31872407), Major Science and Technology Project of Inner Mongolia (No. 2019ZD008) and Foundation for High-level Talents of Inner Mongolia University (No. 12000-15031908). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Additional Information and Declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Jingjing Yin conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Xiliang Li conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Huiqin Guo performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Jize Zhang performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Lingqi Kong performed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Weibo Ren conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Data Availability

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

Raw data is available as a Supplemental File.

References

  • Agarwal (2001).Agarwal AA. Transgenerational consequences of plant responses to herbivory: an adaptive maternal effect? American Naturalist. 2001;157:555–569. doi: 10.1086/319932. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Agrawal, Laforsch & Tollrian (1999).Agrawal AA, Laforsch C, Tollrian R. Transgenerational induction of defences in animals and plants. Nature. 1999;401(6748):60–63. doi: 10.1038/43425. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Arve et al. (2013).Arve L, Terfa M, Gislerød H, Olsen J, Torre S. High relative air humidity and continuous light reduce stomata functionality by affecting the ABA regulation in rose leaves. Plant, Cell & Environment. 2013;36(2):382–392. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2012.02580.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Bai et al. (2012).Bai Y, Wu J, Clark CM, Pan Q, Zhang L, Chen S, Wang Q, Han X, Wisley B. Grazing alters ecosystem functioning and C:N:P stoichiometry of grasslands along a regional precipitation gradient. Journal of Applied Ecology. 2012;49(6):1204–1215. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02205.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Boyko et al. (2010).Boyko A, Blevins T, Yao Y, Golubov A, Bilichak A, Ilnytskyy Y, Hollander J, Meins F, Jr, Kovalchuk I. Transgenerational adaptation of Arabidopsis to stress requires DNA methylation and the function of dicer-like proteins. PLOS ONE. 2010;5(3):e9514. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Buckley & Mott (2013).Buckley T, Mott K. Modelling stomatal conductance in response to environmental factors. Plant, Cell & Environment. 2013;36(9):1691–1699. doi: 10.1111/pce.12140. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Burton & Metcalfe (2014).Burton T, Metcalfe NB. Can environmental conditions experienced in early life influence future generations? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2014;281(1785):20140311. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2014.0311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Byrnes et al. (2018).Byrnes RC, Eastburn DJ, Tate KW, Roche LM. A global meta-analysis of grazing impacts on soil health indicators. Journal of Environmental Quality. 2018;47(4):758–765. doi: 10.2134/jeq2017.08.0313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Büssis et al. (2006).Büssis D, Von Groll U, Fisahn J, Altmann T. Stomatal aperture can compensate altered stomatal density in Arabidopsis thaliana at growth light conditions. Functional Plant Biology. 2006;33(11):1037–1043. doi: 10.1071/FP06078. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Casas et al. (2016).Casas C, Torretta JP, Exeler N, Omacini M. What happens next? Legacy effects induced by grazing and grass-endophyte symbiosis on thistle plants and their floral visitors. Plant and Soil. 2016;405(1–2):211–229. doi: 10.1007/s11104-015-2644-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Case & Barrett (2001).Case AL, Barrett SCH. Ecological differentiation of combined and separate sexes of Wurmbea dioica (colchicaceae) in sympatry. Ecology. 2001;82(9):2601–2616. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2601:EDOCAS]2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Champagne (2008).Champagne FA. Epigenetic mechanisms and the transgenerational effects of maternal care. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology. 2008;29(3):386–397. doi: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2008.03.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Changhai et al. (2010).Changhai S, Baodi D, Yunzhou Q, Yuxin L, Lei S, Mengyu L, Haipei L. Physiological regulation of high transpiration efficiency in winter wheat under drought conditions. Plant, Soil and Environment. 2010;56(7):340–347. doi: 10.17221/220/2009-PSE. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen et al. (2005).Chen SP, Bai YF, Lin GH, Liang Y, Han XG. Effects of grazing on photosynthetic characteristics of major steppe species in the Xilin River Basin, Inner Mongolia, China. Photosynthetica. 2005;43(4):559–565. doi: 10.1007/s11099-005-0088-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Cuddington (2011).Cuddington K. Legacy effects: the persistent impact of ecological interactions. Biological Theory. 2011;6:203–210. doi: 10.1007/s13752-012-0027-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Daniel et al. (2002).Daniel J, Potter KN, Altom W, Aljoe H, Stevens R. Long-term grazing density impacts on soil compaction. Transactions of the ASAE. 2002;45(6):1911–1915. doi: 10.13031/2013.11442.1911. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • De Boer et al. (2016).De Boer HJ, Price CA, Wagner-Cremer F, Dekker SC, Franks PJ, Veneklaas EJ. Optimal allocation of leaf epidermal area for gas exchange. New Phytologist. 2016;210(4):1219–1228. doi: 10.1111/nph.13929. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Doheny-Adams et al. (2012).Doheny-Adams T, Hunt L, Franks PJ, Beerling DJ, Gray JE. Genetic manipulation of stomatal density influences stomatal size, plant growth and tolerance to restricted water supply across a growth carbon dioxide gradient. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2012;367(1588):547–555. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0272. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dong et al. (2018).Dong B-C, Wang M-Z, Liu R-H, Luo F-L, Li H-L, Yu F-H. Direct and legacy effects of herbivory on growth and physiology of a clonal plant. Biological Invasions. 2018;20(12):3631–3645. doi: 10.1007/s10530-018-1801-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Drewry, Cameron & Buchan (2008).Drewry JJ, Cameron KC, Buchan GD. Pasture yield and soil physical property responses to soil compaction from treading and grazing—a review. Australian Journal of Soil Research. 2008;46(3):237–256. doi: 10.1071/SR07125. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Farquhar & Sharkey (1982).Farquhar GD, Sharkey TD. Stomatal conductance and photosynthesis. Annual Review of Plant Physiology. 1982;33:317–345. [Google Scholar]
  • Franks & Farquhar (2007).Franks PJ, Farquhar GD. The mechanical diversity of stomata and its significance in gas-exchange control. Plant Physiology. 2007;143(1):78–87. doi: 10.1104/pp.106.089367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Fricker & Willmer (1996).Fricker M, Willmer C. Stomata. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 1996. [Google Scholar]
  • Galloway & Etterson (2007).Galloway LF, Etterson JR. Transgenerational plasticity is adaptive in the wild. Science. 2007;318(5853):1134–1136. doi: 10.1126/science.1148766. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ge et al. (2015).Ge X-M, Cai H-L, Lei X, Zhou X, Yue M, He J-M. Heterotrimeric g protein mediates ethylene-induced stomatal closure via hydrogen peroxide synthesis in Arabidopsis. Plant Journal. 2015;82(1):138–150. doi: 10.1111/tpj.12799. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Herman & Sultan (2011).Herman JJ, Sultan SE. Adaptive transgenerational plasticity in plants: case studies, mechanisms, and implications for natural populations. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2011;2:102. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2011.00102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hetherington & Woodward (2003).Hetherington AM, Woodward FI. The role of stomata in sensing and driving environmental change. Nature. 2003;424(6951):901–908. doi: 10.1038/nature01843. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hill et al. (2014).Hill KE, Guerin GR, Hill RS, Watling JR. Temperature influences stomatal density and maximum potential water loss through stomata of Dodonaea viscosa subsp. angustissima along a latitude gradient in southern Australia. Australian Journal of Botany. 2014;62(8):657. doi: 10.1071/BT14204. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Holeski, Jander & Agrawal (2012).Holeski LM, Jander G, Agrawal AA. Transgenerational defense induction and epigenetic inheritance in plants. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2012;27(11):618–626. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kafle, Wurst & Dam (2019).Kafle D, Wurst S, Dam N. Legacy effects of herbivory enhance performance and resistance of progeny plants. Journal of Ecology. 2019;107(1):58–68. doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.13038. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Kerchev et al. (2012).Kerchev P, Fenton B, Foyer C, Hancock R. Plant responses to insect herbivory: interactions between photosynthesis, reactive oxygen species and hormonal signalling pathways. Plant Cell and Environment. 2012;35(2):441–453. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2011.02399.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Klein et al. (2003).Klein M, Perfus-Barbeoch L, Frelet A, Gaedeke N, Reinhardt D, Mueller-Roeber B, Martinoia E, Forestier C. The plant multidrug resistance ABC transporter AtMRP5 is involved in guard cell hormonal signalling and water use. Plant Journal. 2003;33(1):119–129. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-313X.2003.016012.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kotzé et al. (2013).Kotzé E, Sandhage-Hofmann A, Meinel J-A, Du Preez CC, Amelung W. Rangeland management impacts on the properties of clayey soils along grazing gradients in the semi-arid grassland biome of South Africa. Journal of Arid Environments. 2013;97:220–229. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2013.07.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Krzic et al. (2006).Krzic M, Newman R, Trethewey C, Bulmer C. Cattle grazing effects on plant species composition and soil compaction on rehabilitated forest landings in central interior British Columbia. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 2006;61:137. [Google Scholar]
  • Latzel et al. (2014).Latzel V, Janeček Š, Doležal J, Klimešová J, Bossdorf O. Adaptive transgenerational plasticity in the perennial Plantago lanceolata. Oikos. 2014;123(1):41–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00537.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Lawson et al. (2018).Lawson T, Terashima I, Fujita T, Wang Y. Coordination between photosynthesis and stomatal behavior. In: Adams WW III, Terashima I, editors. The Leaf: A Platform for Performing Photosynthesis. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. pp. 141–161. [Google Scholar]
  • Liang et al. (2009).Liang Y, Han G, Zhou H, Zhao M, Snyman HA, Shan D, Havstad KM. Grazing intensity on vegetation dynamics of a typical steppe in northeast Inner Mongolia. Rangeland Ecology & Management. 2009;62(4):328–336. doi: 10.2111/08-167.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Liu (2006).Liu Effects of sowing depth on the seedling emergence of Leymus chinensis with different seed source. Seed. 2006;25:20–23. [Google Scholar]
  • Liu et al. (2018).Liu C, He N, Zhang J, Li Y, Wang Q, Sack L, Yu G, Niu S. Variation of stomatal traits from cold temperate to tropical forests and association with water use efficiency. Functional Ecology. 2018;32(1):20–28. doi: 10.1111/1365-2435.12973. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Lohmann et al. (2012).Lohmann D, Tietjen B, Blaum N, Joubert DF, Jeltsch F. Shifting thresholds and changing degradation patterns: climate change effects on the simulated long-term response of a semi-arid savanna to grazing. Journal of Applied Ecology. 2012;49(4):814–823. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02157.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Min et al. (2019).Min MK, Choi E-H, Kim J-A, Yoon IS, Han S, Lee Y, Lee S, Kim B-G. Two clade a phosphatase 2Cs expressed in guard cells physically interact with abscisic acid signaling components to induce stomatal closure in rice. Rice. 2019;12(1):93. doi: 10.1186/s12284-019-0297-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Mott (2009).Mott KA. Opinion: stomatal responses to light and CO2 depend on the mesophyllpce. Plant, Cell & Environment. 2009;32:1479–1486. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.02022.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Mueller et al. (2017).Mueller P, Granse D, Nolte S, Do HT, Weingartner M, Hoth S, Jensen K. Top-down control of carbon sequestration: grazing affects microbial structure and function in salt marsh soils. Ecological Applications. 2017;27(5):1435–1450. doi: 10.1002/eap.1534. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Nadeau & Sack (2002).Nadeau JA, Sack FD. Control of stomatal distribution on the Arabidopsis leaf surface. Science. 2002;296(5573):1697–1700. doi: 10.1126/science.1069596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Niu et al. (2015).Niu K, Messier J, He J-S, Lechowicz MJ. The effects of grazing on foliar trait diversity and niche differentiation in Tibetan alpine meadows. Ecosphere. 2015;6(9):150. doi: 10.1890/ES14-00547.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Papazian et al. (2016).Papazian S, Khaling E, Bonnet C, Lassueur S, Reymond P, Moritz T, Blande JD, Albrectsen BR. Central metabolic responses to ozone and herbivory affect photosynthesis and stomatal closure. Plant Physiology. 2016;172(3):2057–2078. doi: 10.1104/pp.16.01318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Peng et al. (2007).Peng Y, Jiang GM, Liu XH, Niu SL, Liu MZ, Biswas DK. Photosynthesis, transpiration and water use efficiency of four plant species with grazing intensities in Hunshandak Sandland, China. Journal of Arid Environments. 2007;70(2):304–315. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2007.01.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Poma et al. (2014).Poma A, Colafarina S, Fontecchio G, Chichiricco G. Transgenerational effects of NMs. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. 2014;811:235–254. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-8739-0_12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Pulido et al. (2016).Pulido M, Schnabel S, Lavado Contador Jín F, Lozano-Parra J, González F. The impact of heavy grazing on soil quality and pasture production in rangelands of SW Spain. Land Degradation & Development. 2016;29(2):219–230. doi: 10.1002/ldr.2501. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Rea (2007).Rea PA. Plant ATP-binding cassette transporters. Annual Review of Plant Biology. 2007;58(1):347–375. doi: 10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ren et al. (2017).Ren W, Hu N, Hou X, Zhang J, Guo H, Liu Z, Kong L, Wu Z, Wang H, Li X. Long-term overgrazing-induced memory decreases photosynthesis of clonal offspring in a perennial grassland plant. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2017;8:1331. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00419. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ren et al. (2018).Ren W, Xie J, Hou X, Li X, Guo H, Hu N, Kong L, Zhang J, Chang C, Wu Z. Potential molecular mechanisms of overgrazing-induced dwarfism in sheepgrass (Leymus chinensis) analyzed using proteomic data. BMC Plant Biology. 2018;18(1):81. doi: 10.1186/s12870-018-1304-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Reynolds-Henne et al. (2010).Reynolds-Henne CE, Langenegger A, Mani J, Schenk N, Zumsteg A, Feller U. Interactions between temperature, drought and stomatal opening in legumes. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2010;68(1):37–43. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2009.11.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Richards (2011).Richards EJ. Natural epigenetic variation in plant species: a view from the field. Current Opinion in Plant Biology. 2011;14(2):204–209. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2011.03.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Saradadevi et al. (2017).Saradadevi R, Bramley H, Palta JA, Siddique KHM. Stomatal behaviour under terminal drought affects post-anthesis water use in wheat. Functional Plant Biology. 2017;44(3):279. doi: 10.1071/FP16078. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sasaki et al. (2008).Sasaki T, Okayasu T, Jamsran U, Takeuchi K. Threshold changes in vegetation along a grazing gradient in Mongolian rangelands. Journal of Ecology. 2008;96:145–154. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2007.01315.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Schönbach et al. (2011).Schönbach P, Wan H, Gierus M, Bai Y, Müller K, Lin L, Susenbeth A, Taube F. Grassland responses to grazing: effects of grazing intensity and management system in an Inner Mongolian steppe ecosystem. Plant and Soil. 2011;340(1–2):103–115. doi: 10.1007/s11104-010-0366-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Sekiya & Yano (2008).Sekiya N, Yano K. Stomatal density of cowpea correlates with carbon isotope discrimination in different phosphorus, water and CO2 environments. New Phytologist. 2008;179(3):799–807. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02518.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shimazaki et al. (2007).Shimazaki K-I, Doi M, Assmann SM, Kinoshita T. Light regulation of stomatal movement. Annual Review of Plant Biology. 2007;58(1):219–247. doi: 10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105434. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shpak (2005).Shpak ED. Stomatal patterning and differentiation by synergistic interactions of receptor kinases. Science. 2005;309(5732):290–293. doi: 10.1126/science.1109710. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shpak et al. (2004).Shpak ED, Berthiaume CT, Hill EJ, Torii KU. Synergistic interaction of three ERECTA-family receptor-like kinases controls Arabidopsis organ growth and flower development by promoting cell proliferation. Development. 2004;131(7):1491–1501. doi: 10.1242/dev.01028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Simard (1995).Simard S. Interspecific carbon transfer in ectomycorrhizal tree species mixtures. Ann Arbor: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing; 1995. [Google Scholar]
  • Tanaka et al. (2013).Tanaka Y, Sugano SS, Shimada T, Hara-Nishimura I. Enhancement of leaf photosynthetic capacity through increased stomatal density in Arabidopsis. New Phytologist. 2013;198(3):757–764. doi: 10.1111/nph.12186. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Tate et al. (2004).Tate KW, Dudley DM, McDougald NK, George MR. Effect of canopy and grazing on soil bulk density. Journal of Range Management. 2004;57(4):411–417. doi: 10.2307/4003867. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Van Der Westhuizen, Snyman & Fouché (2005).Van Der Westhuizen HC, Snyman HA, Fouché HJ. A degradation gradient for the assessment of rangeland condition of a semi-arid sourveld in Southern Africa. African Journal of Range & Forage Science. 2005;22(1):47–58. doi: 10.2989/10220110509485861. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Vanderpost et al. (2011).Vanderpost C, Ringrose S, Matheson W, Arntzen J. Satellite based long-term assessment of rangeland condition in semi-arid areas: an example from Botswana. Journal of Arid Environments. 2011;75(4):383–389. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2010.11.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Veen et al. (2014).Veen G, De Vries S, Bakker ES, Van Der Putten WH, Olff H. Grazing-induced changes in plant-soil feedback alter plant biomass allocation. Oikos. 2014;123(7):800–806. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.01077.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Vráblová et al. (2017).Vráblová M, Vrábl D, Hronková M, Kubásek J, Šantrůček J, Elzenga JTM. Stomatal function, density and pattern, and CO2 assimilation in Arabidopsis thaliana tmm1 and sdd1-1 mutants. Plant Biology. 2017;19(5):689–701. doi: 10.1111/plb.12577. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wadgymar & Austen (2019).Wadgymar SM, Austen EJ. Shifting perspectives on the impacts of phenotypic plasticity. New Phytologist. 2019;224(3):1009–1011. doi: 10.1111/nph.16210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wang et al. (2000).Wang W, Liang C-Z, Liu Z-L, Hao D-Y. Analysis of the plant individual behaviour during the degradation and restoring succession in steppe community. Acta Phytoecolog ica Sinica. 2000;24(3):268–274. [Google Scholar]
  • Wang, Wang & Wang (2006).Wang WY, Wang QJ, Wang HC. The effect of land management on plant community composition, species diversity, and productivity of alpine Kobersia steppe meadow. Ecological Research. 2006;21(2):181–187. doi: 10.1007/s11284-005-0108-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Weyers & Lawson (1997).Weyers JDB, Lawson T. Heterogeneity in stomatal characteristics. Advances in Botanical Research. 1997;26:317–352. [Google Scholar]
  • Wijewardana et al. (2019).Wijewardana C, Reddy KR, Krutz LJ, Gao W, Bellaloui N. Drought stress has transgenerational effects on soybean seed germination and seedling vigor. PLOS ONE. 2019;14:e214977. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214977. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Willatt & Pullar (1984).Willatt ST, Pullar DM. Changes in soil physical properties under grazed pastures. Soil Research. 1984;22(3):343–348. doi: 10.1071/SR9840343. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Wong, Cowan & Farquhar (1979).Wong SC, Cowan IR, Farquhar GD. Stomatal conductance correlates with photosynthetic capacity. Nature. 1979;282(5737):424–426. doi: 10.1038/282424a0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Woodward & Kelly (1995).Woodward FI, Kelly CK. The influence of CO2 concentration on stomatal density. New Phytologist. 1995;131(3):311–327. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.1995.tb03067.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Xu & Zhou (2008).Xu Z, Zhou G. Responses of leaf stomatal density to water status and its relationship with photosynthesis in a grass. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2008;59(12):3317–3325. doi: 10.1093/jxb/ern185. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yajun (2009).Yajun L. The determination method of leaf area on Leymus chinensis. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences. 2009;37:6819–6851. doi: 10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2009.15.093. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Yin et al. (2019).Yin J, Zhou M, Lin Z, Li QQ, Zhang Y-Y. Transgenerational effects benefit offspring across diverse environments: a meta-analysis in plants and animals. Ecology Letters. 2019;22(11):1976–1986. doi: 10.1111/ele.13373. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yoo et al. (2011).Yoo CY, Pence HE, Jin JB, Miura K, Gosney MJ, Hasegawa PM, Mickelbart MV. The Arabidopsis GTL1 transcription factor regulates water use efficiency and drought tolerance by modulating stomatal density via transrepression of SDD1. Plant Cell. 2011;22(12):4128–4141. doi: 10.1105/tpc.110.078691. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yordanova, Uzunova & Popova (2005).Yordanova RY, Uzunova AN, Popova LP. Effects of short-term soil flooding on stomata behaviour and leaf gas exchange in barley plants. Biologia Plantarum. 2005;49(2):317–319. doi: 10.1007/s10535-005-7319-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Zhang (2010).Zhang LR. Effects of temperature increase and grazing on stomatal density and length of four alpine kobresia meadow species, Qinghai-tibetan plateau. Acta Ecologica Sinica. 2010;30:6961–6969. [Google Scholar]
  • Zhang et al. (2017).Zhang J, Zuo X, Zhou X, Lv P, Lian J, Yue X. Long-term grazing effects on vegetation characteristics and soil properties in a semiarid grassland, northern China. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2017;189(5):216. doi: 10.1007/s10661-017-5947-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Zhao et al. (2011).Zhao Y, Peth S, Reszkowska A, Gan L, Krümmelbein J, Peng X, Horn R. Response of soil moisture and temperature to grazing intensity in a Leymus chinensis steppe, Inner Mongolia. Plant and Soil. 2011;340(1–2):89–102. doi: 10.1007/s11104-010-0460-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Zuo et al. (2018).Zuo X, Zhang J, Lv P, Wang S, Yang Y, Yue X, Zhou X, Li Y, Chen M, Lian J, Qu H, Liu L, Ma X. Effects of plant functional diversity induced by grazing and soil properties on above- and below ground biomass in a semiarid grassland. Ecological Indicators. 2018;93:555–561. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.05.03. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental Information 1. Raw data.
Click here for additional data file. (25.6KB, xlsx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9266/supp-1
Supplemental Information 2. The stomatal characteristics (20×) in progeny plants.

(A) and (B), the adaxial leaf surfaces in enclosure and overgrazing Leymus chinensis respectively. (C) and (D), the abaxial leaf surfaces in enclosure and overgrazing Leymus chinensis, respectively.

Click here for additional data file. (724.6KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9266/supp-2
Supplemental Information 3. qRT-PCR primer details of genes related to stomatal development and regulation in Leymus chinensis leaves.
Click here for additional data file. (18.8KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9266/supp-3

Data Availability Statement

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

Raw data is available as a Supplemental File.

Articles from PeerJ are provided here courtesy of PeerJ, Inc

RESOURCES