Open Access

Pascal Karitter

• Anthropogenic activities have a major impact on our planet and rapidly drive biodiversity loss in ecosystems at a global scale. Particularly over the last century, rising CO2 emissions significantly raised global temperatures and increased the intensity and frequency of droughts and heatwaves. Additionally, agricultural land use and fossil fuel combustion contribute to the continuous release of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) into ecosystems worldwide through extensive fertilization and deposition from the atmosphere. It is important to understand how these rapid changes affect the evolution of plant populations and their adaptive potential. Adaptation by natural selection (i.e., adaptive evolution) within a few generations is an essential process as a response to rapid environmental changes. Rapid evolution of plant populations can be detected by using the so-called resurrection approach. Here, diaspores (i.e., seeds) from a population are collected before (ancestors) and after (descendants) a potential selection pressure (e.g., consecutive years of drought or changes in nutrient supply). Comparing phenotypes of ancestors and descendants in a common environment such as an outside garden, greenhouse, or climate chamber, may then reveal evolutionary changes. Ideally, plants are first grown in a common environment for an intermediate refresher generation to reduce parental and storage effects. The aim of this thesis was to investigate the occurrence of adaptive evolution in natural plant populations in response to rapidly changing environments over the past three decades. I conducted three experiments using the resurrection approach to generate comprehensive data on the adaptive processes that acted on three plant populations from three different species over the last three decades. Furthermore, I filled knowledge gaps in plant evolutionary ecology and conceptually developed the resurrection approach further. In Chapter I, I performed a novel approach by testing for adaptive evolution in natural plant populations using the resurrection approach in combination with in-situ transplantations. I cultivated seedlings from ancestors (23 – 26 years old) and contemporary descendants of three perennial species (Melica ciliata, Leontodon hispidus and Clinopodium vulgare) from calcareous grasslands in the greenhouse and In Chapter III, I assessed the reproducibility of phenotypic differences between genotypes among three different growth facilities (climate chamber, greenhouse, and outdoor garden). I also evaluated differences in phenotypic expression between plants grown after one vs. two intermediate generations (i.e., refresher generations). I performed this experiment within the framework of the resurrection approach and compared ancestors and descendants of the same population of Leontodon hispidus. I observed very strong differences among plants growing in the different growth facilities. I found a significant interaction between the growth facility and the temporal origin (ancestors vs. descendants): descendants had significantly larger rosettes than ancestors only in the greenhouse and they flowered significantly later than ancestors exclusively in the climate chamber. I did not find significant differences between intermediate generations within the growth facilities. Overall, Chapter III shows that the use of a particular experimental system can dictate the presence and magnitude of phenotypic differences. This implies that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence when it comes to investigating genetically based trait differentiation among plant origins (in space or time). Experimental systems should be carefully designed to provide meaningful conditions, ideally mimicking the environmental conditions of the population’s origins. Finally, growing a second intermediate generation did not impact the genetic differences of ancestors and descendants within the environments, supporting the idea that only one intermediate generation may be sufficient to reduce detectable parental and storage effects. The resurrection approach allows a better understanding of rapid plant adaptation, but some limitations deserve to be highlighted. I only studied one population per species, and Chapters II and III only focus on one population of L. hispidus, which is also hampering generalizations, as adaptive potential can vary greatly among populations of the same species. I only compared the ancestral genotypes to one descendant sample with a long time span in between (26 – 28 years), which makes it hard to pinpoint the selection agents that caused the genetic differentiation among the sampling years. Hence, closely monitoring biotic and abiotic factors of the studied populations between the ancestral and descendant sampling in future studies, would make identifying the responsible selection pressures more precise. I also recommend sampling multiple populations over consecutive years to improve the robustness of results and make generalizations more approachable.Furthermore, combining the resurrection approach with other methods such as in-situ transplantations will be valuable to offset the limitation that adaptations cannot be proven under artificial conditions (e.g., in the greenhouse).