1. The Ecological Impacts Of Nitrogen Deposition: Insights From The Carnivorous Pitcher Plant Sarracenia purpurea Nicholas J. Gotelli Department of Biology University of Vermont Burlington, VT 05405 U.S.A.

4. Effects of N Deposition Individual  Altered morphology  Changes in reproduction, survivorship

5. Effects of N Deposition Individual  Altered morphology  Changes in reproduction, survivorship Population  Increased long-term extinction risk  Changes in short-term dynamics

6. Effects of N Deposition Individual  Altered morphology  Changes in reproduction, survivorship Population  Increased long-term extinction risk  Changes in short-term dynamics Community  Changes in abundance and composition  Altered nutrient transfer and storage

7. Effects of N Deposition on Carnivorous Plants Life History Effects on Individuals Effects on Populations Effects on Communities The Role of Ecologists

8. Effects of N Deposition on Carnivorous Plants Life History Effects on Individuals Effects on Populations Effects on Communities The Role of Ecologists

9. Carnivorous plants: well- known, but poorly studied

10. Carnivory in plants Phylogenetically diverse Morphological, chemical adaptations for attracting, capturing, digesting arthropods Common in low N habitats Poor competitors for light, nutrients

11. Family Sarraceniaceae GenusCommon Name Number of Species Distribution DarlingtoniaCobra Lilly1Northwest USA HeliamphoraSun Pitchers5North-central South America SarraceniaPitcher Plants8Eastern USA, Canada

12. Genus Sarracenia 8 described species Center of diversity in southeastern US Many subvarieties Extensive hybridization Sarracenia purpurea (New Jersey- Canada)

13. The Northern Pitcher Plant Sarracenia purpurea Perennial plant of low-N peatlands Lifespan 30-50 y Arthropod prey capture in water- filled pitchers Diverse inquiline community in pitchers

16. The Inquilines Wyeomyia smithii Metriocnemus knabiHabrotrocha rosa Blaesoxipha fletcheri Sarraceniopus gibsoni

17. Inquiline food web

18. Phyllodia Flat leaves No prey capture High concentration of chlorophyll, stomates Photosynthetically more efficient than pitchers

19. Flowering Stalks Single stalk per rosette Flowering after 3 to 5 years Bumblebee, fly pollinated Short-distance dispersal of seeds

20. Leaf Senescence End-of-season die off Production of new leaves in following spring Annual increase in rosette diameter

21. Effects of N Deposition on Carnivorous Plants Life History Effects on Individuals Effects on Populations Effects on Communities The Role of Ecologists

22. Nutrient Treatments Distilled H 2 0 Micronutrients Low N (0.1 mg/L) High N (1.0 mg/L) Low P (0.025 mg/L) High P (0.25 mg/L) N:P(1) Low N + Low P N:P(2) Low N + High P N:P(3) High N + Low P Nutrient Source: Micronutrients: Hoaglands N: NH 4 Cl P: NaH 2 PO 4

23. Anthropogenic N additions alter growth and morphology

25. Increasing N

26. Effects of Anthropogenic N additions Increased production of phyllodia  Phenotypic shift from carnivory to photosynthesis Increased probability of flowering

27. Contrasting effects of anthropogenic N vs. N derived from prey

28. Wakefield, A. E., N. J. Gotelli, S. E. Wittman, and A. M. Ellison. 2005. Prey addition alters nutrient stoichiometry of the carnivorous plant Sarracenia purpurea. Ecology 86: 1737-1743.

29. Food Addition Experiment Ecological “press” experiment Food supplemented with house flies Treatments: 0, 2, 4,6, 8,10,12, 14 flies/week Plants harvested after one field season

30. Food additions do not alter growth and morphology Increasing prey

31. N uptake increases with food level

32. P uptake increases with food level

33. N:P ratio decreases with added food

34. Altered N:P ratios suggest P limitation under ambient conditions P limitation (Koerselman & Meuleman 1996, Olde Venternik et al. in press) Ambient

35. Food additions do not alter growth and morphology Increasing prey

36. Anthropogenic N additions alter growth and morphology Increasing N

37. Contrasting effects of anthropogenic and natural sources of N Anthropogenic N  Altered N:P ratios  Morphological shift  Reduction in prey uptake Prey N  Uptake, storage of N & P  No morphological shifts  Continued prey uptake

38. Contrasting effects of anthropogenic and natural sources of N Anthropogenic N  Altered N:P ratios  Morphological shift  Reduction in prey uptake Prey N  Uptake, storage of N & P  No morphological shifts  Continued prey uptake Although Sarracenia has evolved adaptations for low N environments, chronic N deposition may have caused populations to be currently limited by P, not N.

39. Effects of N Deposition on Carnivorous Plants Life History Effects on Individuals Effects on Populations Effects on Communities The Role of Ecologists

42. Study Sites

46. Demography survey 100 adult, juvenile plants tagged at each site Plants censused and measured each year Seed plantings to estimate recruitment functions

50. Recruits Juveniles Adults Flowering Adults Sarracenia matrix model

51. Recruits Juveniles Adults Flowering Adults Hawley Bog Transitions 0.10 4.00 0.04 0.09 0.18 0.83 0.950.70 0.17

52. Recruits Juveniles Adults Flowering Adults Molly Bog Transitions 0.10 4.00 0.13 0.17 0.10 0.66 0.850.71 0.31

53. Matrix Transition Model (stationary) n t+1 = An t Population vector at time (t + 1) Transition matrix Population vector at time (t)

54. Population Projections Siter individuals/individualyear Doubling Time Hawley Bog0.00456152 y Molly Bog0.00554125 y

55. Deterministic Model: Results Growth, survivorship, and reproduction are closely balanced in both sites Doubling times > 100 y Juvenile, adult persistence contribute most to population growth rate Sexual reproduction, recruitment relatively unimportant

56. How do N and P concentrations affect population growth of Sarracenia?

58. Nutrient Addition Experiment 10 juveniles, 10 adults/treatment Nutrients added to leaves twice/month Nutrient concentrations bracket observed field values Nutrient treatments maintained 1998, 1999 “Press” experiment

60. Nutrient Treatments Distilled H 2 0 Micronutrients Low N (0.1 mg/L) High N (1.0 mg/L) Low P (0.025 mg/L) High P (0.25 mg/L) N:P(1) Low N + Low P N:P(2) Low N + High P N:P(3) High N + Low P Nutrient Source: Micronutrients: Hoaglands N: NH 4 Cl P: NaH 2 PO 4

61. Effects of N additions Increased production of phyllodia Increased probability of flowering

62. Effects of N additions Increased production of phyllodia Increased probability of flowering Decreased juvenile survivorship

63. L L M H H

64. Effects of Nitrogen on Demography: Results Population growth rates respond to different N and P regimes Population growth rate decreases in response to increasing N Population growth rate decreases in responses to increasing N:P

65. Modeling Long-term Environmental Change Observed N Deposition Long-term Forecast N(t) Transition Matrix (t) Population Structure (t) Time Series Modeling Transition Function Population Time Series Extinction Risk Time to Extinction Matrix Multiplication

66. Modeling Long-term Environmental Change Observed N Deposition Long-term Forecast N(t) Transition Matrix (t) Population Structure (t) Time Series Modeling Transition Function Population Time Series Extinction Risk Time to Extinction Matrix Multiplication

67. N monitoring National Atmospheric Deposition Program NH 4, NO 3 measured as mg/l/yr Annual data 1984-1998 Monitoring sites  Shelburne, VT  Quabbin, MA

68. Quabbin, MA Shelburne, VT NH 4 N0 3

69. Quabbin, MA Shelburne, VT NH 4 N0 3

70. Regression Models Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) N t = a + bt + e First-order auto- regressive (AR-1) N t = a +bN t-1 + e

72. Modeling Long-term Environmental Change Observed N Deposition Long-term Forecast N(t) Transition Matrix (t) Population Structure (t) Time Series Modeling Transition Function Population Time Series Extinction Risk Time to Extinction Matrix Multiplication

73. Modeling Demographic Transitions as a Function of Nitrogen

74. Modeling Long-term Environmental Change Observed N Deposition Long-term Forecast N(t) Transition Matrix (t) Population Structure (t) Time Series Modeling Transition Function Population Time Series Extinction Risk Time to Extinction Matrix Multiplication

75. Matrix Transition Model (changing environment) n t+1 = A t n t Population vector at time (t + 1) Sequentially changing transition matrix at time (t) Population vector at time (t)

76. Estimated population size at Hawley bog StageNumber of individuals Recruits1500 Juveniles23,500 Non-flowering Adults1400 Flowering Adults500

77. Quabbin Exponential Forecast Models (AR-1) ScenarioAnnual % Change P (ext) at 100 y Time to ext (p = 0.95) Best case-4.7%0.00> 10,000 y No change0.0%0.038650 y Small increase 1%0.378290 y Worst case4.7%0.99670 y

78. Shelburne Exponential Forecast Models (AR-1) ScenarioAnnual % Change P (ext) at 100 y Time to ext (p = 0.95) Best case-2.2%0.158> 10,000 y No change0.0%0.510230 y Small increase 1.0%0.694200 y Worst case2.2%0.838140 y

79. Shelburne Nitrogen Forecast Model

80. Forecasting Models for Nitrogen Deposition: Results Increasing or stationary models of Nitrogen deposition drive Sarracenia populations to extinction Extinction risk declines with reduced nitrogen Correlated nitrogen series can induce cycles and complex population dynamics

81. Effects of N Deposition on Carnivorous Plants Life History Effects on Individuals Effects on Populations Effects on Communities The Role of Ecologists

82. Sarracenia Nutrient Feedback Loop Pitcher Nutrient Pool [N,P] Inquiline Community Arthropod Prey Plant Growth Atmospheric Deposition

83. Sarracenia Nutrient Feedback Loop Pitcher Nutrient Pool [N,P] Inquiline Community Arthropod Prey Plant Growth Atmospheric Deposition

84. Sarracenia Nutrient Feedback Loop Pitcher Nutrient Pool [N,P] Inquiline Community Arthropod Prey Plant Growth Atmospheric Deposition

85. Sarracenia Nutrient Feedback Loop Pitcher Nutrient Pool [N,P] Inquiline Community Arthropod Prey Plant Growth Atmospheric Deposition

86. Four-level Multi-Factorial Experiment Atmospheric N (8 levels) Prey supplement (yes,no) Top predator removal (yes,no)

87. Four-level Multi-Factorial Experiment Atmospheric N (8 levels) Prey supplement (yes,no) Top predator removal (yes,no) Nutrient exchange with plant (unmanipulated, isolated, control)

88. Quantifying Trophic Structure Food web saturation is our response variable. Each taxon in the food web is given a binary value representing its presence (1xxxx) or absence (0xxxx): TaxonBinary valueDecimal value Metriocnemus11 Habrotrocha102 Sarraceniopus1004 Wyeomyia10008 Fletcherimyia1000016 The saturation of the food web in a given pitcher is the sum of the equivalent decimal values of each taxon present. Food webs with higher saturation values have both more trophic levels present and more trophic links present. There are 32 possible food webs that can be assembled with these 5 taxa; the decimal value for each food web ranges from 0 – 31, with increasing numbers indicating more saturated food webs.

89. Nutrient exchange with the plant and top predators affect food web structure

90. Sarracenia Nutrient Feedback Loop Pitcher Nutrient Pool [N,P] Inquiline Community Arthropod Prey Plant Growth Atmospheric Deposition

91. Inquilines → Nutrients Manipulate [N], [P] in leaves Orthogonal “regression” design Establish initial [] in a “pulse” experiment

92. Response Surface Experimenal Design

93. Null Hypothesis

94. Community Regulation of Nutrients

96. Sarracenia Nutrient Feedback Loop Pitcher Nutrient Pool [N,P] Inquiline Community Arthropod Prey Plant Growth Atmospheric Deposition

97. Nutrients ↔ Inquilines

100. Effects of N Deposition on Carnivorous Plants Life History Effects on Individuals Effects on Populations Effects on Communities The Role of Ecologists

102. Ecology ≠ Environmental Science

103. Reasons for Studying Ecology

104. Natural History

106. Reasons for Studying Ecology Natural History Field Studies & Experiments

108. Reasons for Studying Ecology Natural History Field Studies & Experiments Statistics & Data Analysis

110. Reasons for Studying Ecology Natural History Field Studies & Experiments Statistics & Data Analysis Modeling

111. Pitcher Nutrient Pool [N,P] Inquiline Community Arthropod Prey Plant Growth Atmospheric Deposition

112. Reasons for Studying Ecology Natural History Field Studies & Experiments Statistics & Data Analysis Modeling Collaboration

113. Aaron M. Ellison Harvard Forest

114. Conclusions Anthropogenic deposition of N is a major ecological challenge

115. Conclusions Anthropogenic deposition of N is a major ecological challenge Carnivorous plants in ombrotrophic bogs are a model system

116. Conclusions Anthropogenic deposition of N is a major ecological challenge Carnivorous plants in ombrotrophic bogs are a model system Individual response  plants alter morphology and growth in response to N:P ratios

117. Conclusions Anthropogenic deposition of N is a major ecological challenge Carnivorous plants in ombrotrophic bogs are a model system Individual response  plants alter morphology and growth in response to N:P ratios Population response  N and P environments affect population growth rate

118. Conclusions Anthropogenic deposition of N is a major ecological challenge Carnivorous plants in ombrotrophic bogs are a model system Individual response  plants alter morphology and growth in response to N:P ratios Population response  N and P environments affect population growth rate Community response  Further study of nutrient ↔ inquiline feedback loop