Water availability regulates plant community dynamics but the drought response of seedlings remains poorly known despite their vulnerability, especially for the Asian tropics. In particular, discerning how functional traits of seedlings mediate drought response can aid generalizable predictions of tree responses to global environmental change. We assessed interspecific variation in drought response explained by above- and below-ground seedling traits. We conducted a dry-down experiment in the greenhouse using 16 tree species from the humid forests of Western Ghats in southern India, chosen to represent differences in seasonality affiliations–sites of high and low seasonal drought. We compared seedling survival, growth, and photosynthetic performance under drought and well-watered conditions, and assessed the extent to which species responses were explained by seasonality affiliation and 12 traits of root, stem and leaf. We found that the species from seasonally dry forest reduced photosynthetic rate in drought compared to well-watered conditions, but seasonality affiliation did not explain differences in growth and survival. Performance changes in drought vs well-watered conditions were best explained by anatomical traits of xylem, veins and stomata. Species with larger xylem reduced their growth and photosynthesis to tolerate desiccation. In drought, species with smaller stomata showed reduced survival even though photosynthetic activity decreased by a larger extent with larger stomata. Our study shows that anatomical traits related to xylem and stomata, directly related to water transport and gas-exchange, played a more prominent role than commonly used soft traits (e.g., specific leaf area, wood density) in explaining species response to drought, and may offer a better proxy for physiological traits related to drought tolerance of seedlings.

Dominant and non-dominant plants could be subject to different biotic and abiotic influences, partially because dominant plants modify the environment where non-dominant plants grow, causing an interaction asymmetry. Among other possibilities, if dominant plants compete strongly, they should deplete most resources forcing non-dominant plants into a more constrained niche space. Conversely, if dominant plants are constrained by the environment, they might not fully deplete available resources but instead ameliorate some of the environmental constraints limiting non-dominants. Hence, the nature of the interactions between the non-dominants could be modified by dominant species. However, when plant competition and environmental constraints have similar effects on dominant and non-dominant species no difference is expected. By estimating phylogenetic dispersion in 78 grasslands across five continents, we found that dominant species were clustered (underdispersed), suggesting dominant species are likely organized by environmental filtering, and that non-dominant species were either randomly assembled or overdispersed. Traits showed similar trends, but insufficient data prevented further analyses. Furthermore, several lineages scattered in the phylogeny had more non-dominant species, suggesting that traits related to non-dominants are phylogenetically conserved and have evolved multiple times. We found some environmental drivers of the dominant—non-dominant disparity. Our results indicate that assembly patterns for dominants and non-dominants are different, consistent with asymmetries in assembly mechanisms. Among the different mechanisms we evaluated, the results suggest two complementary hypotheses seldom explored: (1) Non-dominant species include lineages adapted to thrive in the environment generated by the dominant species. (2) Even when dominant species reduce resources to non-dominant ones, dominant species could have a stronger effect on—at least—some non-dominants by ameliorating the impact of the environment on them, than by depleting resources and increasing the environmental stress to those non-dominants. The results show that the dominant–non-dominant asymmetry has ecological and evolutionary consequences fundamental to understand plant communities.