Functional traits indicate a continuum of tree drought strategies across a soil water availability gradient in a tropical dry forest

• Published in: Forest ecology and management 2021-02, Vol.482, p.118740, Article 118740
• Main Authors: Chaturvedi, R.K., Tripathi, Anshuman, Raghubanshi, A.S., Singh, J.S.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Drought avoidance; Drought resistance; Drought tolerance; Functional guilds; Soil moisture content; Tropical dry forest
• ISSN: 0378-1127; 1872-7042
• DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118740

Fig. Boxplot showing distribution of canopy cover intensity (CC), wood traits, and leaf traits, for tree species in the three functional guilds in tropical dry forest. DAFG, drought avoiding functional guild; DRFG, drought resistant functional guild; DTFG, drought tolerant functional guild; WSG, wood specific gravity; QWsat, saturated stem water content; LA, leaf size or leaf area; SLA, specific leaf area; RWC, relative water content; LDMC, leaf dry matter content; LNC, leaf nitrogen content; LPC, leaf phosphorus content; Gsmax, maximum saturated stomatal conductance; Amax, maximum saturated photosynthetic rate; WUEi, intrinsic water use efficiency. Different letters and colours indicate significant differences (Tukey’s HSD test, P < 0.01) between functional guilds. [Display omitted] •Gradient of soil moisture indicates a continuum of drought adapting strategies in tropical dry forest.•Drought avoiding species assemblage was significantly affected by stem water potential.•Wood specific gravity and canopy cover significantly influenced drought tolerant tree assemblage.•Drought tolerant trees registered highest biomass and biomass accumulation capacity.•Functional traits explained up to 60% variance in biomass accumulation capacity of trees. This study evaluates drought survival mechanisms of tropical dry forest (TDF) trees based on their functional traits (FTs). We addressed the following questions: (i) What are the dominant functional guilds (FGs) of tree species across a soil water availability gradient in TDF? (ii) What are the important FTs influencing tree species assemblage in different FGs? (iii) What is the functional composition of different FGs in the study sites, and how are they influencing biomass accumulation capacity (BAC) across the soil water availability gradient? We selected 12 FTs associated with plant water use strategies, viz., canopy cover intensity (CC), wood specific gravity (WSG), saturated stem water content (QWsat), leaf size or leaf area (LA), specific leaf area (SLA), relative water content (RWC), leaf dry matter content (LDMC), leaf nitrogen content (LNC), leaf phosphorus content (LPC), maximum saturated stomatal conductance (Gsmax), maximum saturated photosynthetic rate (Amax), and intrinsic water use efficiency (WUEi). By using these FTs, we classified 47 tree species by HCPC (hierarchical clustering on principal components) into three FGs, viz, drought avoiding (DAFG), drought resistant (DRFG), and drought tolerant (DTFG).