Parasite-host network analysis provides insights into the evolution of two mistletoe lineages (Loranthaceae and Santalaceae)

doi:10.1016/j.pld.2023.03.008

Plant Diversity ›› 2023, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (06): 702-711.DOI: 10.1016/j.pld.2023.03.008

Parasite-host network analysis provides insights into the evolution of two mistletoe lineages (Loranthaceae and Santalaceae)

Jin Zhao^a,b, Yuanjie Li^c, Xuanni Wang^d, Manru Li^a,c, Wenbin Yu^a, Jin Chen^a, Ling Zhang^a

a. CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Forest Ecology, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Mengla 666303, Yunnan, China;
b. Engineering Research Center of Eco-environment in Three Gorges Reservoir Region, Ministry of Education, China Three Gorges University, Yichang 443002, Hubei, China;
c. Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
d. Linnaeus Labs Technology Co., Ltd, Wuyuan 333200, Jiangxi, China

收稿日期:2022-11-14 修回日期:2023-03-20 出版日期:2023-11-25 发布日期:2023-12-28
通讯作者: Jin Chen,E-mail:cj@xtbg.org.cn;Ling Zhang,E-mail:zhangl@xtbg.org.cn
基金资助:
This study was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 31670393 and 32270310). We thank the authorities from the Xishuangbanna National Nature Reserve Bureau to conducting this study. We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.cn) for English language editing.

Parasite-host network analysis provides insights into the evolution of two mistletoe lineages (Loranthaceae and Santalaceae)

Jin Zhao^a,b, Yuanjie Li^c, Xuanni Wang^d, Manru Li^a,c, Wenbin Yu^a, Jin Chen^a, Ling Zhang^a

a. CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Forest Ecology, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Mengla 666303, Yunnan, China;
b. Engineering Research Center of Eco-environment in Three Gorges Reservoir Region, Ministry of Education, China Three Gorges University, Yichang 443002, Hubei, China;
c. Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
d. Linnaeus Labs Technology Co., Ltd, Wuyuan 333200, Jiangxi, China

Received:2022-11-14 Revised:2023-03-20 Online:2023-11-25 Published:2023-12-28
Contact: Jin Chen,E-mail:cj@xtbg.org.cn;Ling Zhang,E-mail:zhangl@xtbg.org.cn
Supported by:
This study was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 31670393 and 32270310). We thank the authorities from the Xishuangbanna National Nature Reserve Bureau to conducting this study. We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.cn) for English language editing.

摘要/Abstract

摘要： Mistletoes are ecologically important parasitic plants, with > 1600 species from five lineages worldwide. Mistletoe lineages exhibit distinct patterns of species diversification and host specificity, however, the mechanisms underlying these differences are poorly understood. In this study, we analysed a comprehensive parasite–host network, including 280 host species from 60 families and 22 mistletoe species from two lineages (Santalaceae and Loranthaceae) in Xishuangbanna, located in a biodiversity hotspot of tropical Asia. We identified the factors that predict the infection strength of mistletoes. We also detected host specificity and the phylogenetic signal of mistletoes and their hosts. We found that this interaction network could be largely explained by a model based on the relative abundance of species. Host infection was positively correlated with diameter at breast height and tree coverage, but negatively correlated with wood density. Overall, closely related mistletoe species tend to interact more often with similar hosts. However, the two lineages showed a significantly different network pattern. Rates of host generality were higher in Loranthaceae than in Santalaceae, although neither lineage showed phylogenetic signal for host generality. This study demonstrates that the neutral interaction hypothesis provides suitable predictions of the mistletoe–host interaction network, and mistletoe species show significant phylogenetic signals for their hosts. Our findings also indicate that high species diversification in Loranthaceae may be explained by high rates of host generality and the evolutionary history shared by Loranthaceae species with diverse host plants in the tropics.

关键词: Loranthaceae, Mistletoe-host interaction, Neutral interaction hypothesis, Parasite-host network, Santalaceae

Abstract: Mistletoes are ecologically important parasitic plants, with > 1600 species from five lineages worldwide. Mistletoe lineages exhibit distinct patterns of species diversification and host specificity, however, the mechanisms underlying these differences are poorly understood. In this study, we analysed a comprehensive parasite–host network, including 280 host species from 60 families and 22 mistletoe species from two lineages (Santalaceae and Loranthaceae) in Xishuangbanna, located in a biodiversity hotspot of tropical Asia. We identified the factors that predict the infection strength of mistletoes. We also detected host specificity and the phylogenetic signal of mistletoes and their hosts. We found that this interaction network could be largely explained by a model based on the relative abundance of species. Host infection was positively correlated with diameter at breast height and tree coverage, but negatively correlated with wood density. Overall, closely related mistletoe species tend to interact more often with similar hosts. However, the two lineages showed a significantly different network pattern. Rates of host generality were higher in Loranthaceae than in Santalaceae, although neither lineage showed phylogenetic signal for host generality. This study demonstrates that the neutral interaction hypothesis provides suitable predictions of the mistletoe–host interaction network, and mistletoe species show significant phylogenetic signals for their hosts. Our findings also indicate that high species diversification in Loranthaceae may be explained by high rates of host generality and the evolutionary history shared by Loranthaceae species with diverse host plants in the tropics.

Key words: Loranthaceae, Mistletoe-host interaction, Neutral interaction hypothesis, Parasite-host network, Santalaceae

Jin Zhao, Yuanjie Li, Xuanni Wang, Manru Li, Wenbin Yu, Jin Chen, Ling Zhang. Parasite-host network analysis provides insights into the evolution of two mistletoe lineages (Loranthaceae and Santalaceae)[J]. Plant Diversity, 2023, 45(06): 702-711.

参考文献

[1] Aizen, M.A., Gleiser, G., Sabatino, M., et al., 2016. The phylogenetic structure of plant-pollinator networks increases with habitat size and isolation. Ecol. Lett. 19, 29-36.
[2] Amico, G.C., Nickrent, D.L., Vidal-Russell, R., 2019. Macroscale analysis of mistletoe host ranges in the Andean-Patagonian forest. Plant Biol. 21, 150-156.
[3] Allio, R., Nabholz, B., Wanke, S., et al., 2021. Genome-wide macroevolutionary signatures of key innovations in butterflies colonizing new host plants. Nat. Commun. 12, 354.
[4] APG IV., 2016. An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG IV. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 181, 1-20.
[5] Atencio, N.O., Vidal-Russell, R., Chacoff, N., et al., 2021. Host range dynamics at different scales: host use by a hemiparasite across its geographical distribution. Plant Biol. 23, 612-620.
[6] Aukema, J.E., Martinez del Rio, C., 2002. Variation in mistletoe seed deposition: effects of intra- and interspecific host characteristics. Ecography 25, 139-144.
[7] Barlow, B.A., Wiens, D., 1977. Host-parasite resemblance in Australian mistletoes: the case for cryptic mimicry. Evolution 31, 69-84.
[8] Barrett, L.G., Heil, M., 2012. Unifying concepts and mechanisms in the specificity of plant-enemy interactions. Trends Plant Sci. 17, 282-292.
[9] Bascompte, J., Jordano, P., Melian, C.J., et al., 2003. The nested assembly of plant-animal mutualistic networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100, 9383-9387.
[10] Bascompte, J., 2010. Structure and dynamics of ecological networks. Science 329, 765-766.
[11] Bergamini, L.L., Lewinsohn, T.M., Jorge, L.R., 2017. Manifold influences of phylogenetic structure on a plant-herbivore network. Oikos 126, 703-712.
[12] Bernays, E., Graham, M., 1988. On the evolution of host specificity in phytophagous arthropods. Ecology 69, 886-892.
[13] Blick, R.A.J., Burns, K.C., Moles, A.T., 2012. Predicting network topology of mistletoe-host interactions: do mistletoes really mimic their hosts? Oikos 121, 761-771.
[14] Blick, R.A.J., Burns, K.C., Moles, A.T., 2013. Dominant network interactions are not correlated with resource availability: a case study using mistletoe host interactions. Oikos 122, 889-895.
[15] Bluthgen, N., Menzel, F., Bluethgen, N., 2006. Measuring specialization in species interaction networks. BMC Ecology 6, 9.
[16] Cagnolo, L., Salvo, A., Valladares, G., 2011. Network topology: patterns and mechanisms in plant-herbivore and host-parasitoid food webs. J. Anim. Ecol. 80, 342-351.
[17] Cirtwill, A.R., Riva, G.V.D., Baker, N.J., et al., 2020. Related plants tend to share pollinators and herbivores, but strength of phylogenetic signal varies among plant families. New Phytol. 226, 909-920.
[18] Combes, C., 2001. Parasitism: the ecology and evolution of intimate interactions. Chicago Press, Chicago USA, p. 53.
[19] Cooper, N., Jetz, W., Freckleton, R.P., 2010. Phylogenetic comparative approaches for studying niche conservatism. J. Evol. Biol. 23, 2529-2539.
[20] Darriba, D., Taboada, G.L., Doallo, R., et al., 2012. jModelTest 2: more models, new heuristics and parallel computing. Nat. Methods. 9, 772-772.
[21] Delmas, E., Besson, M., Brice, M.H., et al., 2019. Analysing ecological networks of species interactions. Biol. Rev. 94, 16-36.
[22] Der, J.P., Nickrent, D.L., 2008. A molecular phylogeny of Santalaceae (Santalales). Syst. Bot. 33, 107-116.
[23] Donatti, C.I., Guimaraes, P.R., Galetti, M., et al., 2011. Analysis of a hyperdiverse seed dispersal network: modularity and underlying mechanisms. Ecol. Lett. 14, 773-781.
[24] Dormann, C.F., Gruber, B., Frund, J., 2008. Introducing the bipartite package: analysing ecological networks. R News 8, 8-11.
[25] Dormann, C., Frund, J., Bluthgen, N., et al., 2009. Indices, graphs and null models: analyzing bipartite ecological networks. Open Ecol. J. 2, 7-24.
[26] Doyle, J.J., Doyle, J.L., 1987. A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochem. Bull. 19, 11-15.
[27] Dunne, J.A., Williams, R.J., Martinez, N.D., 2002. Network structure and biodiversity loss in food webs: robustness increases with connectance. Ecol. Lett. 5, 558-567.
[28] Edger, P.P., Heidel-Fischer, H.M., Bekaert, M., et al., 2015. The butterfly plant arms-race escalated by gene and genome duplications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 8362-8366.
[29] Elias, M., Fontaine, C., Frank, van, Veen, F.J., 2013. Evolutionary history and ecological processes shape a local multilevel antagonistic network. Curr. Biol. 23, 1355-1359.
[30] Enquist, B.J., West, G.B., Charnov, E.L., et al., 1999. Allometric scaling of production and life-history variation in vascular plants. Nature 401, 907-911.
[31] Fadini, R., 2011. Non-overlap of hosts used by three congeneric and sympatric loranthaceous mistletoe species in an Amazonian savanna: host generalization to extreme specialization. Acta Bot. Brasilica. 25, 337-345.
[32] Fontaine, C., Thebault, E., Dajoz, I., 2009. Are insect pollinators more generalist than insect herbivores? Proc. Royal Soc. B-Bio. Sci. 276, 3027-3033.
[33] Fontaine, C., Thebault, E., 2015. Comparing the conservatism of ecological interactions in plant-pollinator and plant-herbivore networks. Popul. Ecol. 57, 29-36.
[34] Frainer, A., McKie, B. G., Amundsen, P.A., et al., 2018. Parasitism and the biodiversity-functioning relationship. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 260-268.
[35] Genini, J., Cortes, M.C., Guimaraes, P.R., et al., 2012. Mistletoes play different roles in a modular host-parasite network. Biotropica 44, 171-178.
[36] Gilbert, G.S., Briggs, H.M., Magarey, R., 2015. The impact of plant enemies shows a phylogenetic signal. PLoS One 10, e0123758.
[37] Goslee, S.C., Urban, D.L., 2007. The ecodist package for dissimilarity-based analysis of ecological data. J. Stat. Softw. 22, 1-19.
[38] Guimera, R., Amaral, L.N., 2005. Functional cartography of complex metabolic networks. Nature 433, 895-900.
[39] He, C.G., Feng, Y., Yang, Y.P., 2008. Research on evolution process and driving factors of forest landscape in Xishuangbanna. Yunnan Geogr. Environ. Res. 20, 12-17. (in Chinese, with English abstract).
[40] Hutchinson, M.C., Cagua, E.F., Stouffer, D.B., 2017. Cophylogenetic signal is detectable in pollination interactions across ecological scales. Ecology 98, 2640-2652.
[41] Ibanez, S., Arene, F., Lavergne, S., 2016. How phylogeny shapes the taxonomic and functional structure of plant-insect networks. Oecologia 180, 989-1000.
[42] Jin, Y., Qian, H., 2022. V.PhyloMaker2: An updated and enlarged R package that can generate very large phylogenies for vascular plant. Plant Divers. 44, 335-339.
[43] Jordano, P., 1987. Patterns of mutualistic interactions in pollination and seed dispersal-connectance, dependence asymmetries, and coevolution. Am. Nat. 129, 657-677.
[44] Jordano, P., Bascompte, J., Olesen, J.M., 2003. Invariant properties in coevolutionary networks of plant-animal interactions. Ecol. Lett. 6, 69-81.
[45] Kearse, M., Moir, R., Wilson, A., et al., 2012. Geneious basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics 28, 1647-1649.
[46] Kembel, S.W., Cowan, P.D., Helmus, M.R., et al., 2010. Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics 26, 1463-1464.
[47] Krasnov, B.R., Fortuna, M.A., Mouillot, D., et al., 2012. Phylogenetic signal in module composition and species connectivity in compartmentalized host-parasite networks. The Am. Nat. 179, 501-511.
[48] Maliet, O., Loeuille, N., Morlon, H., 2020. An individual-based model for the eco-evolutionary emergence of bipartite interaction networks. Ecol. Lett. 23, 1623-1634.
[49] Maruyama, P.K., Vizentin-Bugoni, J., Oliveira, G.M., et al., 2014. Morphological and spatio-temporal mismatches shape a Neotropical savanna plant-hummingbird network. Biotropica 46, 740-747.
[50] Medan, D., Basilio, A., Devoto, M., et al., 2006. Measuring generalization and connectance in temperate, long-lasting systems. In: Plant pollinator interactions. From specialization to generalization. Edited by Waser, N.M., Ollerton, J., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA, pp. 245-259.
[51] Mellado, A., Zamora, R., 2017. Parasites structuring ecological communities: The mistletoe footprint in Mediterranean pine forests. Funct. Ecol. 31, 2167-2176.
[52] Milner, K.V., Leigh, A., Gladstone, W., et al., 2020. Subdividing the spectrum-quantifying host specialization in mistletoes. Botany 98, 533-543.
[53] Mistry, J., 1998. Corticolous lichens as potential bioindicators of fire history: A study in the Cerrado of the Distrito Federal, central Brazil. J. Biogeogr. 25, 409-441.
[54] Muller-Landau, H. C., Wright, S. J., Calderon, O., et al., 2002. Assessing recruitment limitation: Concepts, methods and case-studies from a tropical forest. in: Levey, D.J., Silva, W.R., Galetti, M. (Eds.), Seed dispersal and frugivory: Ecology, evolution and conservation. CAB International, pp. 35-53.
[55] Muche, M., Muasya, A.M., Tsegay, B.A., 2022. Biology and resource acquisition of mistletoes, and the defense responses of host plants. Ecol. Process. 11, 24.
[56] Nickrent, D.L., Malecot, V., 2008. Molecular phylogenetic relationships of Olacaceae and related Santalales. Syst. Bot. 33, 97-106.
[57] Nickrent, D.L., Malecot, V., Vidal-Russell, R., et al., 2010. A revised classification of Santalales. Taxon 59, 538-558.
[58] Nickrent, D.L., Anderson, F., Kuijt, J., 2019. Inflorescence evolution in Santalales: integrating morphological characters and molecular phylogenetics. Am. J. Bot. 106, 402-414.
[59] Nickrent, D.L., 2020. Parasitic angiosperms: How often and how many? Taxon 69, 5-27.
[60] Norton, D.A., Carpenter, M.A., 1998. Mistletoes as parasites: host specificity and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 101-105.
[61] Norton, D. A., De Lange, P.J., 1999. Host specificity in parasitic mistletoes (Loranthaceae) in New Zealand. Funct. Ecol. 13, 552-559.
[62] Olesen, J.M., Bascompte, J., Dupont, Y.L., et al., 2011. Missing and forbidden links in mutualistic networks. Proc. Royal Soc. B-Bio. Sci. 278, 725-732.
[63] Olesen, J.M., Bascompte, J., Dupont, Y.L., et al., 2007. The modularity of pollination networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 19891-19896.
[64] Okubamichael, D.Y., Griffiths, M.E., Ward, D., 2016. Host specificity in parasitic plants-perspectives from mistletoes. AoB Plants 8, plw069.
[65] Pagel, M., 1999. Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 401, 877-884.
[66] Pequeno, P.A.C.L., Franklin, E., Norton, R.A., 2022. Modelling selection, drift, dispersal and their interactions in the community assembly of Amazonian soil mites. Oecologia 196, 805-814.
[67] Piazzon, M., Larrinaga, A.R., Santamaria, L., 2011. Are nested networks more robust to disturbance? A test using epiphyte-tree, comensalistic networks. PLoS One 6, e19637.
[68] Poisot, T., Thrall, P.H., Hochberg, M.E., 2012. Trophic network structure emerges through antagonistic coevolution in temporally varying environments. Proc. Royal Soc. B-Bio. Sci. 279, 299-308.
[69] Poulin, R., Krasnov, B.R., Mouillot, D., 2011. Host specificity in phylogenetic and geographic space. Trends Parasitol. 27, 355-361.
[70] Press, M.C., Phoenix, G.K., 2005. Impacts of parasitic plants on natural communities. New Phytol.166, 737-751.
[71] Rawsthorne, J., Watson, D.M., Roshier, D.A., 2011. Implications of movement patterns of a dietary generalist for mistletoe seed dispersal. Austral Ecol. 36, 650-655.
[72] Reid, N., Smith, S.S., 2000. Population dynamics of an arid zone mistletoe (Amyema preissii, Loranthaceae) and its host Acacia victoriae (Mimosaceae). Aust. J. Bot. 48, 45-58.
[73] Rezende, E.L., Lavabre, J.E., Guimaraes, P.R., et al., 2007. Non-random coextinctions in phylogenetically structured mutualistic networks. Nature 448, 925-928.
[74] Rezende, E.L., Albert, E.M., Fortuna, M.A., et al., 2009. Compartments in a marine food web associated with phylogeny, body mass, and habitat structure. Ecol. Lett. 12, 779-788.
[75] Rodriguez-Cabal, M.A., Barrios-Garcia, M.N., Amico, G.C., et al., 2013. Node-by-node disassembly of a mutualistic interaction web driven by species introductions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 16503-16507.
[76] Roxburgh, L., Nicolson, S.W., 2008. Differential dispersal and survival of an African mistletoe: does host size matter? Plant Ecol. 195, 21-31.
[77] Santamaria, L., Rodrigues-Girones, M.A., 2007. Linkage rules for plant-pollinator networks: trait complementarity or exploitation barriers? PLoS Biology 5, e31.
[78] Sayago, R., Lopezaraiza-Mikel, M., Quesada, M., et al., 2013. Evaluating factors that predict the structure of a commensalistic epiphyte-phorophyte network. Proc. Royal Soc. B-Bio. Sci. 280, 20122821.
[79] Sazatornil, F.D., More, M., Benitez-Vieyra, S., et al., 2016. Beyond neutral and forbidden links: morphological matches and the assembly of mutualistic hawkmoth-plant networks. J. Anim. Ecol. 85, 1586-1594.
[80] Stang, M., Klinkhamer, P.G.L., van der Meijden, E., 2007. Asymmetric specialization and extinction risk in plant-flower visitor webs: a matter of morphology or abundance. Oecologia 151, 442-453.
[81] Stang, M., Klinkhamer, P.G.L., Waser, N.M., et al., 2009. Size-specific interaction patterns and size matching in a plant-pollinator interaction web. Ann. Bot. 103, 1459-1469.
[82] Sui, Y., Zhang, L., 2014. Spatial distribution pattern of mistletoe species in tropical plantation. J. Yunnan Univ. 36, 755-764. (in Chinese, with English abstract).
[83] Taberlet, P., Gielly, L., Pautou, G., et al., 1991. Universal primers for amplification of three non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Mol. Biol. 17, 1105-1109.
[84] Thebault, E., Fontaine, C., 2010. Stability of ecological communities and the architecture of mutualistic and trophic networks. Science 329, 853-856.
[85] Thompson, J.N., Femandez, C.C., 2006. Temporal dynamics of antagonism and mutualism in a geographically variable plant-insect interaction. Ecology 87, 103-112.
[86] Tobias, J.A., Cornwallis, C.K., Derryberry, E.P., et al., 2014. Species coexistence and the dynamics of phenotypic evolution in adaptive radiation. Nature 506, 359-363.
[87] Tylianakis, J.M., Laliberte, E., Nielsenc, A., et al., 2010. Conservation of species interaction networks. Biol. Conserv. 143, 2270-2279.
[88] Ulrich, W., Almeida-Neto, M., Gotelli, N.J., 2009. A consumer's guide to nestedness analysis. Oikos 118, 3-17.
[89] Valverde, S., Vidiella, B., Montanez, R., et al., 2020. Coexistence of nestedness and modularity in host-pathogen infection networks. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 568.
[90] Vazquez, D.P., 2005. Degree distribution in plant-animal mutualistic networks: forbidden links or random interactions? Oikos 108, 421-426.
[91] Vazquez, D.P., Melian, C.J., Williams, N.M., et al., 2007. Species abundance and asymmetric interaction strength in ecological networks. Oikos 116, 1120-1127.
[92] Vazquez, D.P., Bluthgen, N., Cagnolo, L., et al., 2009a. Uniting pattern and process in plant-animal mutualistic networks: a review. Ann. Bot. 103, 1445-1457.
[93] Vazquez, D.P., Chacoff, N.P., Cagnolo, L., 2009b. Evaluating multiple determinants of the structure of plant? Animal mutualistic networks. Ecology 90, 2039-2046.
[94] Vidal-Russell, R., Nickrent, D.L., 2008a. The first mistletoes: origins of aerial parasitism in Santalales. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 47, 523-537.
[95] Vidal-Russell, R., Nickrent, D.L., 2008b. Evolutionary relationships in the showy mistletoe family (Loranthaceae). Am. J. Bot. 95, 1015-1029.
[96] Vidal-Russell, R., Premoli, A.C., 2015. Nothofagus trees show genotype difference that influence infection by mistletoes, Misodendraceae. Aust. J. Bot. 63, 541-548.
[97] Vitoria, R.S., Vizentin-Bugoni, J., Duarte, L.D.S., 2018. Evolutionary history as a driver of ecological networks: a case study of plant-hummingbird interactions. Oikos 127, 561-569.
[98] Wang, X., Zhang, L., 2017. Species diversity and distribution of mistletoes and hosts in four different habitats in Xishuangbanna, Southwest China. J. Yunnan Univ. 39, 701-711. (In Chinese, with English abstract).
[99] Watson, D.M., Herring, M., 2012. Mistletoe as a keystone resource: an experimental test. Proc. Royal Soc. B-Bio. Sci. 279, 3853-3860.
[100] Wood, C.L., Byers, J.E., Cottingham, K.L., et al., 2007. Parasites alter community structure. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 9335-9339.
[101] Xia, N., Gilber, M.G., 2003. Santalaceae. In: Flora of China, vol. 5. Science Press and Missouri Botanical Garden Press, Beijing and St. Louis, pp. 218-219.
[102] Zanne, A.E., Lopez-Gonzalez, G., Coomes, D.A., et al., 2009. Global wood density database. Plant Economics. Dryad Digital Repository, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.234.
[103] Zhang, K., 1963. A preliminary study on the climatic characteristic and the formation factors in southern Yunnan. Acta Meteorol. Sin. 33, 218-230. (In Chinese, with English abstract).
[104] Zhu, H., Cao, M., Hu, H., 2006. Geological history, flora, and vegetation of Xishuangbanna, southern Yunnan, China. Biotropica 38, 310-317.

Parasite-host network analysis provides insights into the evolution of two mistletoe lineages (Loranthaceae and Santalaceae)

Parasite-host network analysis provides insights into the evolution of two mistletoe lineages (Loranthaceae and Santalaceae)

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价