Skip to main content
Biology Letters logoLink to Biology Letters
. 2020 Nov 25;16(11):20200608. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2020.0608

Contrasting effects of Miocene and Anthropocene levels of atmospheric CO2 on silicon accumulation in a model grass

Fikadu N Biru 1,2,, Christopher I Cazzonelli 1, Rivka Elbaum 3, Scott N Johnson 1
PMCID: PMC7728683  PMID: 33232651

Abstract

Grasses are hyper-accumulators of silicon (Si), which they acquire from the soil and deposit in tissues to resist environmental stresses. Given the high metabolic costs of herbivore defensive chemicals and structural constituents (e.g. cellulose), grasses may substitute Si for these components when carbon is limited. Indeed, high Si uptake grasses evolved in the Miocene when atmospheric CO2 concentration was much lower than present levels. It is, however, unknown how pre-industrial CO2 concentrations affect Si accumulation in grasses. Using Brachypodium distachyon, we hydroponically manipulated Si-supply (0.0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 mM) and grew plants under Miocene (200 ppm) and Anthropocene levels of CO2 comprising ambient (410 ppm) and elevated (640 ppm) CO2 concentrations. We showed that regardless of Si treatments, the Miocene CO2 levels increased foliar Si concentrations by 47% and 56% relative to plants grown under ambient and elevated CO2, respectively. This is owing to higher accumulation overall, but also the reallocation of Si from the roots into the shoots. Our results suggest that grasses may accumulate high Si concentrations in foliage when carbon is less available (i.e. pre-industrial CO2 levels) but this is likely to decline under future climate change scenarios, potentially leaving grasses more susceptible to environmental stresses.

Keywords: carbon dioxide, climate change, plant defence, silica, silicon, trade-offs

1. Introduction

Grasslands account for 20–30% of land mass, one-third of carbon sequestration [1] and provide 70% of human calorie intake either directly or indirectly (via livestock production) [2]. A particular feature of grasses is their ability to accumulate large amounts of silicon (Si, hereafter) from the soil that they deposit in tissues in the form of solid silica (SiO2) [3]. Si is initially absorbed and transported in the form of monosilicic acid [Si(OH)4] [4] and relies on passive (i.e. transpiration stream) and active uptake [3]. The latter requires the use of energy derived from the proton gradient [5]. Scientists have debated the importance of Si accumulation in grasses for over 100 years, but there is a consensus that it plays an important role in ameliorating a range of environmental stresses [6]. These include biotic (e.g. pathogens and herbivores) and abiotic (e.g. heavy metal toxicity, extreme temperatures, nutrient deficiency, drought and salt) stresses [3,6].

Another advantage of Si uptake is for carbon substitution, conceivably the reason for the evolution of high Si uptake grasses under low CO2 [7]. High Si-accumulating Poales evolved during the Miocene, when atmospheric CO2 was much lower [3]. In particular, Si may be used in a structural capacity in lieu of more energetically costly carbon constituents like cellulose and lignin, which require 10–20 times more energy to incorporate into the cell wall than Si [8]. Moreover, Si may represent a more cost efficient form of plant defence than carbon-based defences such as phenolics and tannins [9]. The expansion of Si-rich grasses in the Miocene (15 million years ago (15 Ma)) [10], coincided with Si phytolith deposition that potentially played a role in resisting the effects of co-evolving herbivores, although the evidence for this is equivocal [11].

Since pre-industrial periods, we have witnessed dramatic increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations [12] and this often affects plant chemistry, with carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) being the most uniformly affected [13,14]. In this perspective, increased and decreased C and N concentrations in plant tissues under elevated CO2 concentration have been reported by Taub & Wang [15]. This is related to N dilution or N reallocation and increases in structural carbohydrates [16]. Studies on the effects of CO2 on Si accumulation are scarce and limited to the effects of elevated CO2. In general, elevated CO2 causes C concentrations to increase and Si concentrations to decline in several grass species [14,17]. Consequently, Si accumulation is often negatively correlated with C [14].

Brachypodium distachyon (Poaceae) is the model species for grasses, including major cereal crops, because it has phylogenetic and anatomical similarities with maize, wheat and barley [18]. Furthermore, it has a short generation time, a small stature, simple growth requirements and self-fertility [19]. It has comparable levels of shoot Si to major grass crops, which makes it useful for investigating the transport, accumulation and functional properties of Si in crop plants [20].

Given the functional importance of Si in grasses, the objective of this study was to investigate the impact of pre-industrial, current and future levels of atmospheric CO2 on Si uptake in this model grass and how this relates to stoichiometry (C and N). Therefore, we hypothesized that Si uptake is greatest under lower CO2 concentrations and lowest under eCO2 concentrations.

2. Material and methods

(a). Plant growth conditions

Seeds of B. distachyon were grown in three laboratory plant growth chambers (TPG-1260TH, Thermoline Scientific), maintained at pre-industrial (reduced) (rCO2), ambient (aCO2) and elevated (eCO2) CO2 concentrations; 200, 410 and 640 ppm (predicted for 2050 [21]), respectively. Chambers were illuminated with five 400 W Sunmaster Dual Spectrum High-Pressure Sodium globes generating 350 µmol m−2 s−1 at the plant canopy level. Air temperatures within each chamber were maintained at 26/18°C day/night on a 15 L : 9D photoperiod cycle. Humidity was controlled at 50% (±6%). Carbon dioxide within each chamber was monitored by CO2 probe (GMP222; Vaisala, Vantaa, Finland), with CO2 (food grade, Air Liquide, Australia) injected from pressurized cylinders through solenoid valves.

(b). Experimental procedure

B. distachyon (accession B21-3) seeds were obtained from French Institute for Agricultural Research and grown hydroponically. Briefly, seeds were soaked in water for 2 h to soften the lamella and palea, which were then removed using forceps. Subsequently, seeds were sterilized in a solution of 0.9% sodium hypochlorite and 0.1% Triton X-100 for 30 min, followed by washing several times with water before being inserted into perlite irrigated with water. Seeds were stratified at 4 °C for 3 days, and plants were grown in the glasshouse for 18 days to achieve uniform seedling growth and transplanted to hydroponics with one plant per cup. The hydroponics set-up consisted of two nested disposable plastic cups as previously described [22]. Each cup was filled with approximately 350 ml of the full strength standard hydroponic solutions as previously described [23], with the exception that Fe(III) EDTA concentration was doubled owing to iron deficiencies previously detected in B. distachyon [22].

A total of 180 cups were randomly assigned to one of eight treatments in a factorial combination of CO2 (200, 410 or 640 ppm) and Si concentrations (0.0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 and 2 mM). For Si treatments (+Si), liquid potassium silicate (K2SiO3) (Agsil32, PQ Australia, SA, Australia) at five different concentrations was added to the nutrient solution by adjusting at pH 5.5 using hydrochloric acid (HCl) to reduce polymerization of silicate, since silicic acid polymerizes when its concentration exceeds 2 mM [24]. Potassium chloride was added to the control (−Si) cups to balance additional K+ in +Si treatments. Solutions were replaced weekly for the first two weeks and then twice a week until harvesting. Cups were rotated and chambers were swapped weekly to minimize chamber effects and pseudo-replication, as previously described [25].

(c). Elemental analysis

All B. distachyon shoots and roots were harvested separately, dried at 60°C for 3 days and weighed. Above and below ground biomass was recorded. Weighed samples were ball-milled to powder, and a sub-sample of approximately 7 mg was analysed for C and N concentrations using an elemental analyser (FLASH EA 1112 Series CHN analyser, Thermo-Finnigan, Waltham, MA, USA). Foliar and root Si concentrations were analysed by pressing ca 80 mg of sample powder into a 3 mm thick, 13 mm diameter pellet. Si concentration (expressed as percentage dry mass (DM)) was analysed from the pellets with an X-ray fluorescence spectrometer (Epsilon 3x, PANalytical, EA Almelo, The Netherlands), as previously described by Reidinger et al. [23]. Si was calibrated against a certified plant reference material of known Si concentrations (NCS ZC73018 Citrus leaves) [26].

(d). Statistical analysis

Minitab software (v. 18.1) was used for statistical analyses and graphs were produced in SigmaPlot (v. 14.0). Spearman's rank correlation test was used to analyse the relationship between Si and C concentrations, as well as biomass and Si concentrations. To test the main and interaction effect of Si-supply and CO2 levels on plant biomass, foliar C and N concentrations, two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed and significant differences were separated using Bonferroni test for least-squares means separation adjusted for multiple comparisons. Foliar and root Si concentrations were square-root transformed and analysed similarly, with control plants excluded from analysis because control plants have a lower detection limit [23].

3. Results

(a). Silicon concentrations

Foliar Si concentrations were significantly increased with Si-supply (table 1). This increase, however, plateaued when Si-supply exceeded 1 mM for lower and ambient CO2 but 1.5 mM for eCO2 (figure 1a and table 1). rCO2 caused significant increases in foliar Si concentrations, while eCO2 caused the opposite effect by reducing foliar Si concentrations. Specifically, rCO2 increased foliar Si concentrations by 47% and 56% relative to plants grown under aCO2 and eCO2, respectively. Increasing Si-supply significantly increased root Si concentrations in a linear manner (figure 1b and table 1). However, root Si concentrations were higher under aCO2 compared with rCO2 and eCO2. The ratio of foliar to root Si concentrations was significantly higher under rCO2 relative to atmospheric and elevated CO2 (figure 1c and table 1). There was no significant interaction effect between CO2 and Si-supply on foliar and root Si concentrations (table 1).

Table 1.

Summary of ANOVA results showing the impacts of CO2 and Si-supply on plant traits. Statistically significant effects are indicated in bold at p-values < 0.05.

CO2
Si-supply
CO2 × Si-supply
F d.f. p F d.f. p F d.f. p
response variable
foliar Si (figure 1a) 143.56 2,84 <0.001 37.95 3,84 <0.001 1.34 6,84 0.249
root Si (figure 1b) 3.45 2,84 0.036 86.71 3,84 <0.001 1.65 6,84 0.143
foliar Si:root Si (figure 1c) 61.59 2,84 <0.001 14.59 3,84 <0.001 0.36 6,84 0.923
foliar C 0.09 2,45 0.917 0.29 4,45 0.880 0.09 8,45 0.999
root C 22.02 2,45 <0.001 5.81 4,45 0.001 3.91 8,45 0.001
foliar N 19.98 2,45 <0.001 2.66 4,45 <0.045 1.34 8,45 0.249
root N 5.27 2,45 <0.009 86.71 4,45 <0.001 4.03 8,45 0.001
shoot biomass (figure 2a) 86.46 2,144 <0.001 5.58 4,144 <0.001 0.97 8,144 0.465
root biomass (figure 2b) 13.53 2,144 <0.001 2.79 4,144 0.029 0.57 8,144 0.805

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Effect of Si-supply and the three CO2 regimes (reduced, rCO2; ambient, aCO2; and elevated, eCO2) on (a) foliar and (b) root Si concentrations (% dry mass) together with the (c) ratio of foliar to root Si concentrations. Mean ± s.e. (N = 8). For (a), (b) and (c), uppercase letters indicate significant differences between CO2 concentrations and lowercase letters indicate significant differences between Si-supply under each CO2 level. (d) Relationship between foliar C and Si-supply. For (d), the solid line represents linear regression through all data points.

(b). Primary chemistry

Si-supply significantly increased root C concentrations under ambient CO2 but had no significant effect on foliar C concentrations (table 1) (data not shown). By contrast, there was significantly higher root C concentration in control plants compared with Si-supplemented plants under rCO2. Both CO2- and Si-supply interactively increased root C concentrations (table 1). This relationship, however, was not observed for foliar C concentrations. There was a strong negative correlation between foliar C and Si-supply: r46 = − 0.29, p = 0.029 under eCO2 (figure 1d). However, no such relationship was observed under rCO2 and aCO2 concentrations.

(c). Plant biomass

Increasing Si-supply to 1 mM significantly increased shoot biomass, but this plateaued around 1 mM under lower and elevated CO2 (figure 2a and table 1). Additionally, root biomass significantly increased with increasing Si-supply up to 1.5 mM under lower CO2 (figure 2b and table 1). However, Si-supply had no significant effect on root biomass under ambient and elevated CO2. eCO2 caused significant increases in both shoot and root biomass. Si accumulation is positively correlated with plant biomass under rCO2 (r146 = − 0.52, p = 0.002), whereas it is negatively correlated under eCO2 (r146 = − 0.59, p = 0.004; figure 2c).

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Effect of Si-supply on shoot (a) and root (b) biomass of plants grown under three CO2 regimes (as figure 1). Mean ± s.e. (N = 8). For (a) and (b), uppercase letters indicate significant differences between CO2 concentrations and lowercase letters indicate significant differences between Si-supply under each CO2 level. (c) relationship between biomass and Si concentrations. For (c), the solid lines represent linear regression through all data points.

4. Discussion

In the present study, we examined the impact of pre-industrial (Miocene), ambient and elevated (Anthropocene) CO2 concentrations on Si uptake on B. distachyon. While several other studies [14,17,27] have reported that eCO2 can cause declines in Si concentrations in plants, to our knowledge this is the first study to demonstrate that lower CO2 causes Si concentrations to increase. This is owing to higher accumulation of Si overall, but also the reallocation of Si from the roots into the shoots. Si reallocation was reflected in the higher ratio of foliar to root Si concentrations under rCO2 conditions. Moreover, while Si accumulation was expectedly driven by Si-supply, eCO2 negated the positive effect of Si-supply. Given that Si uptake is driven by both active and passive mechanisms—the latter driven by the transpiration stream—the well-documented decreases in transpiration rates under eCO2 [28,29] may partly explain decreased Si uptake. Conversely, higher transpiration rates observed under rCO2 [30,31] may result in greater Si uptake. Increasing foliar concentrations greater than 1% [32], however, relies on active uptake so it seems plausible that active uptake is involved under rCO2, in addition to passive transpiration-based uptake. Expressed as a proportion of root DM, foliar Si accumulation was 10.96 mg g−1 under eCO2 and 36.4 mg g−1 under rCO2, which provides further support for this.

Si has been hypothesized to act as a structural substitute for C at lower metabolic cost [7], particularly at times when atmospheric CO2 concentrations were less abundant, such as during the Miocene [7]. Therefore, it is conceivable that C substitution with Si may have driven the evolution of high Si-accumulating grass species during this era [3,7]. In sharp contrast, CO2 concentrations are predicted to double by the end of the twenty-first century [12], potentially resulting in higher C and reduced Si accumulation within plants.

Our results indicated that eCO2 reduced grass Si accumulation, while limited to just four studies, to our knowledge, is consistent with other studies in grasses [14,17,27], suggesting that it is a common response among the grasses. Working with several tree species Fulweiler et al. [33] reported that eCO2 did not alter foliar Si concentrations, although they acknowledge that concentrations were unexpectedly high compared to high-accumulating species. In the present study, accumulating Si reduced plant biomass under eCO2, which was reflected in the strong negative correlation between Si accumulation and overall biomass. This is compatible with the proposed growth–defence trade-off in plants [14,34]. Conversely, Si accumulation was positively correlated with biomass under rCO2, supporting the hypothesized Si substitution for C under limited CO2 [7], possibly to maintain growth and defence [3].

In addition to offering support to the hypotheses about the evolution of Si hyper-accumulation in grasses under lower CO2 conditions [7], this study provides further evidence that grasses may accumulate less Si as global atmospheric CO2 concentration rises. Given the importance of Si in alleviating abiotic stresses such as salinity and drought, as well as providing protection against biotic pathogen infection and herbivore feeding [3,6], lower accumulation of Si in grasses could impact agricultural crop productivity. We still have limited information about the impacts of rising CO2 on Si accumulation in grasses, limited to a few species [14,17,27], but it could affect functional groups differently. C3 grasses, for instance, are generally more responsive to eCO2 than C4 grasses [35], so may be more affected (but see [36]). Further work to determine the effects of eCO2 on Si accumulation, particularly considering the C3/C4 pathway, is warranted [37]. Moreover, the declines in Si accumulation could have implications for the global Si cycle, its links to global primary productivity, and the C cycle [38].

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Rocky Putra, Tarikul Islam, Dr Casey R. Hall, Ximena Cibils-Stewart, Jamie M. Waterman, Dr Rebecca K. Vandegeer and Rhiannon Rowe for their edit to the manuscript. We thank the reviewers and a Biology Letters Board member for their constructive suggestions.

Data accessibility

Data available from the Dryad Digital Repository: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ncjsxkssv [39].

Authors' contributions

F.N.B., S.N.J. and C.I.C. conceived the experimental design. F.N.B. acquired and analysed the data. S.N.J., C.I.C. and R.E. supervised F.N.B. F.N.B wrote the initial draft of the paper, with C.I.C., R.E. and S.N.J. contributing critical edits to the manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript and agree to be held accountable for the content therein.

Competing interests

We declare we have no competing interests.

Funding

F.N.B. is the holder of a scholarship as part of an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (grant no. FT170100342) awarded to S.N.J.

References

  • 1.Gibson DJ, Newman JA. 2019. Grasslands and climate change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.O'Mara FP. 2012. The role of grasslands in food security and climate change. Ann. Bot. 110, 1263–1270. ( 10.1093/aob/mcs209) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Cooke J, Leishman MR. 2011. Is plant ecology more siliceous than we realise? Trends Plant Sci. 16, 61–68. ( 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.10.003) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Epstein E. 1994. The anomaly of silicon in plant biology. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 91, 11–17. ( 10.1073/pnas.91.1.11) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ma JF, Yamaji N. 2008. Functions and transport of silicon in plants. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 65, 3049–3057. ( 10.1007/s00018-008-7580-x) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Debona D, Rodrigues F, Datnoff L. 2017. Silicon's role in abiotic and biotic plant stresses. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 55, 85–107. ( 10.1146/annurev-phyto-080516-035312) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Craine JM. 2009. Resource strategies of wild plants. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Raven JA. 1983. The transport and function of silicon in plants. Biol. Rev. 58, 179–207. ( 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1983.tb00385.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Cooke J, Leishman MR. 2012. Tradeoffs between foliar silicon and carbon-based defences: evidence from vegetation communities of contrasting soil types. Oikos 121, 2052–2060. ( 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20057.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kürschner WM, Kvaček Z, Dilcher DL. 2008. The impact of Miocene atmospheric carbon dioxide fluctuations on climate and the evolution of terrestrial ecosystems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 449–453. ( 10.1073/pnas.0708588105) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Strömberg CAE, Di Stilio VS, Song ZL. 2016. Functions of phytoliths in vascular plants: an evolutionary perspective. Funct. Ecol. 30, 1286–1297. ( 10.1111/1365-2435.12692) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.IPCC. 2014. Climate Change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects . Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Karowe DN, Grubb C. 2011. Elevated CO2 increases constitutive phenolics and trichomes, but decreases inducibility of phenolics in Brassica rapa (Brassicaceae). J. Chem. Ecol. 37, 1332–1340. ( 10.1007/s10886-011-0044-z) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Johnson SN, Hartley SE. 2017. Elevated carbon dioxide and warming impact silicon and phenolic-based defences differently in native and exotic grasses. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 3886–3896. ( 10.1111/gcb.13971) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Taub DR, Wang X. 2008. Why are nitrogen concentrations in plant tissues lower under elevated CO2? A critical examination of the hypotheses. J. Integr. Plant. Biol. 50, 1365–1374. ( 10.1111/j.1744-7909.2008.00754.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.DeLucia EH, Nabity PD, Zavala JA, Berenbaum MR. 2012. Climate change: resetting plant–insect interactions. Plant Physiol. 160, 1677–1685. ( 10.1104/pp.112.204750) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Ryalls JMW, Hartley SE, Johnson SN. 2017. Impacts of silicon-based grass defences across trophic levels under both current and future atmospheric CO2 scenarios. Biol. Lett. 13, 20160912 ( 10.1098/rsbl.2016.0912) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Vogel JP, et al. 2006. EST sequencing and phylogenetic analysis of the model grass Brachypodium distachyon. Theor. Appl. Genet. 113, 186–195. ( 10.1007/s00122-006-0285-3) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Brkljacic J, et al. 2011. Brachypodium as a model for the grasses: today and the future. Plant Physiol. 157, 3–13. ( 10.1104/pp.111.179531) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Girin T, David LC, Chardin C, Sibout R, Krapp A, Ferrario-Méry S, Daniel-Vedele F. 2014. Brachypodium: a promising hub between model species and cereals. J. Exp. Bot. 65, 5683–5696. ( 10.1093/jxb/eru376) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Garnaut R. 2011. The Garnaut review 2011: Australia in the global response to climate change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Hall CR, Waterman JM, Vandegeer RK, Hartley SE, Johnson SN. 2019. The role of silicon in antiherbivore phytohormonal signalling. Front. Plant Sci. 10, 1132 ( 10.3389/fpls.2019.01132) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Reidinger S, Ramsey MH, Hartley SE. 2012. Rapid and accurate analyses of silicon and phosphorus in plants using a portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometer. New Phytol. 195, 699–706. ( 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04179.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ma JF, Yamaji N. 2006. Silicon uptake and accumulation in higher plants. Trends Plant Sci. 11, 392–397. ( 10.1016/j.tplants.2006.06.007) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Johnson SN, Ryalls JMW, Gherlenda AN, Frew A, Hartley SE. 2018. Benefits from below: silicon supplementation maintains legume productivity under predicted climate change scenarios. Front. Plant Sci. 9, 1–9. ( 10.3389/fpls.2018.00202) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Hiltpold I, Demarta L, Johnson SN, Moore BD, Power SA, Mitchell C. 2016. Silicon and other essential element composition in roots using X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy: a high throughput approach. In Invertebrate ecology of Australasian grasslands (ed. Johnson SN.), pp. 191–196. Hawkesbury, Australia: Western Sydney University. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Hall CR, Mikhael M, Hartley SE, Johnson SN. 2020. Elevated atmospheric CO2 suppresses jasmonate and silicon-based defences without affecting herbivores. Funct. Ecol. 34, 993–1002. ( 10.1111/1365-2435.13549) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.McDonald EP, Erickson JE, Kruger EL. 2002. Research note: Can decreased transpiration limit plant nitrogen acquisition in elevated CO2? Funct. Plant Biol. 29, 1115–1120. ( 10.1071/FP02007) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kirschbaum MUF, McMillan AMS. 2018. Warming and elevated CO2 have opposing influences on transpiration. Which is more important? Curr. For. Rep. 4, 51–71. ( 10.1007/s40725-018-0073-8) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Overdieck D. 1989. The effects of preindustrial and predicted future atmospheric CO2 concentration on Lyonia mariana L.D. Don. Funct. Ecol. 3, 569–576. ( 10.2307/2389571) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Sherwin GL, George L, Kannangara K, Tissue DT, Ghannoum O. 2013. Impact of industrial-age climate change on the relationship between water uptake and tissue nitrogen in eucalypt seedlings. Funct. Plant Biol. 40, 201–212. ( 10.1071/fp12130) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Deshmukh R, Bélanger RR. 2016. Molecular evolution of aquaporins and silicon influx in plants. Funct. Ecol. 30, 1277–1285. ( 10.1111/1365-2435.12570) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Fulweiler RW, Maguire TJ, Carey JC, Finzi AC. 2014. Does elevated CO2 alter silica uptake in trees? Front. Plant Sci. 5, 793 ( 10.3389/fpls.2014.00793) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Tuller J, Marquis RJ, Andrade SMM, Monteiro AB, Faria LDB. 2018. Trade-offs between growth, reproduction and defense in response to resource availability manipulations. PLoS ONE 13, e0201873 ( 10.1371/journal.pone.0201873) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Wand SJE, Midgley GF, Jones MH, Curtis PS. 1999. Responses of wild C4 and C3 grass (Poaceae) species to elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration: a meta-analytic test of current theories and perceptions. Glob. Change Biol. 5, 723–741. ( 10.1046/j.1365-2486.1999.00265.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Reich PB, Hobbie SE, Lee TD, Pastore MA. 2018. Unexpected reversal of C3 versus C4 grass response to elevated CO2 during a 20-year field experiment. Science 360, 317–320. ( 10.1126/science.aas9313) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Brightly WH, Hartley SE, Osborne CP, Simpson KJ, Strömberg CAE. 2020. High silicon concentrations in grasses are linked to environmental conditions and not associated with C4 photosynthesis. Glob. Change Biol. ( 10.1111/gcb.15343) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.De Tombeur F, Turner BL, Laliberté E, Lambers H, Mahy G, Faucon M-P, Zemunik G, Cornelis J-T. 2020. Plants sustain the terrestrial silicon cycle during ecosystem retrogression. Science 369, 1245–1248. ( 10.1126/science.abc0393) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Biru FN, Cazzonelli CI, Elbaum R, Johnson SN. 2020. Data from: Contrasting effects of Miocene and Anthropocene levels of atmospheric CO2 on silicon accumulation in a model grass Dryad Digital Repository. ( 10.5061/dryad.ncjsxkssv) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Associated Data

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

Data Citations

  1. Biru FN, Cazzonelli CI, Elbaum R, Johnson SN. 2020. Data from: Contrasting effects of Miocene and Anthropocene levels of atmospheric CO2 on silicon accumulation in a model grass Dryad Digital Repository. ( 10.5061/dryad.ncjsxkssv) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Data Availability Statement

Data available from the Dryad Digital Repository: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ncjsxkssv [39].


Articles from Biology Letters are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES