Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-17T03:10:53.134Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Density- and distance-dependent seedling survival in a ballistically dispersed subtropical tree species Philenoptera sutherlandii

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2008

S. Boudreau  and
M. J. Lawes
S. Boudreau*
Affiliation:
School of Biological and Conservation Sciences, Forest Biodiversity Research Unit, University of KwaZulu-Natal, P/Bag X01, Scottsville, 3209, South Africa
M. J. Lawes
Affiliation:
School of Biological and Conservation Sciences, Forest Biodiversity Research Unit, University of KwaZulu-Natal, P/Bag X01, Scottsville, 3209, South Africa
*
1Corresponding author. Current address: Northern Research Chair on Disturbance Ecology, Centre d’études nordiques, Département de Biologie, Université Laval, Sainte-Foy, Qc, G1K 7P4, Canada. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

We examine the density- and distance-dependent seedling survival of Philenoptera sutherlandii, a common pod-bearing and dehiscent legume (Fabaceae) in Ongoye Forest, South Africa. Short-range ballistic dispersal causes seed to fall beneath the parent tree, where density- or distance-dependent mortality effects are expected to be concentrated. One hundred and eighty marked seedlings were monitored in a 0.5-ha plot containing 30 adults. Our survival data do not support the escape hypothesis. Predation levels declined with increasing seedling density (positive density-dependent survival), but seedling survival after 15 mo was not distance-dependent. Nevertheless, a unimodal (hump-shaped) recruitment curve, typically associated with decreasing seedling density and increasing seedling survival with distance, was observed. In the context of ballistic dispersal, this recruitment curve may indicate a hump-shaped dispersal kernel with predator satiation at high seedling densities near a parent tree. This recruitment curve likely arises because generalized insect seedling predators while attracted to the adult trees also tend to forage farther away. Short dispersal distances, in turn generate the high densities needed to satiate seed and seedling predators. Predator satiation results in long-term survival rates in P. sutherlandii similar to more widely dispersed and less common tree species.

Keywords

ballistic dispersalescape hypothesisFabaceaeinsect predationJanzen–Connell modelmortalitypredator satiation
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 1 - 8
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

ALLEN, O. N. & ALLEN, E. K. 1981. The Leguminosae: source book of characteristics, uses and nodulation. University of Wisconsin Press, Wisconsin. 880 pp.Google Scholar
ANDERSON, D. R., BURNHAM, K. P. & WHITE, G. C. 1994. AIC model selection in overdispersed capture-recapture data. Ecology 75:1780–1793.Google Scholar
APPANAH, S. & TURNBULL, J. M. (eds.) 1998. A review of dipterocarps: taxonomy, ecology and silviculture. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia. 220 pp.Google Scholar
AUGSPURGER, C. K. 1983. Phenology, flowering synchrony, and fruit-set of six neotropical shrubs. Biotropica 15:257–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
AUGSPURGER, C. K. & KITAJIMA, K. 1992. Experimental studies of seedling recruitment from contrasting seed distributions. Ecology 73:1270–1284.Google Scholar
BLUNDELL, A. G. & PEART, D. R. 2004a. Seedling recruitment failure following dipterocarp mast fruiting. Journal of Tropical Ecology 20:229–231.Google Scholar
BLUNDELL, A. G. & PEART, D. R. 2004b. Density-dependent population dynamics of a dominant rain forest canopy tree. Ecology 85:704–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BOLKER, B. M. & PACALA, S. W. 1999. Spatial moment equations for plant competition: understanding spatial strategies and the advantages of short dispersal. American Naturalist 153:575–602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BOUDREAU, S. & LAWES, M. J. 2005. Small understorey gaps created by subsistence harvesters do not adversely affect the maintenance of tree diversity in a sub-tropical forest. Biological Conservation 126:279–286.Google Scholar
BURKEY, T. V. 1994. Tropical tree species-diversity – a test of the Janzen-Connell model. Oecologia 97:533–540.Google Scholar
BURNHAM, K. P. & ANDERSON, D. R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. (Second edition). Springer, New York.Google Scholar
CADE, B. S. & NOON, B. R. 2003. A gentle introduction to quantile regression for ecologists. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1:412–420.Google Scholar
CADE, B. S. & RICHARDS, J. D. 2005. User manual for Blossom statistical software. U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Discipline, Open-File Report 2005-1353, Fort Collins. 124 pp.Google Scholar
COATES PALGRAVE, M. 2002. Trees of Southern Africa. (Third edition). Struik, Cape Town. 1212 pp.Google Scholar
CONNELL, J. H. 1971. On the role of natural enemies in preventing competitive exclusion in some marine animals and in rain forest trees. Pp. 298–312 in den Boer, P. J. & Gradwell, G. R. (eds.). Dynamics of populations. PUDOC, Wageningen.Google Scholar
CONNELL, J. H., TRACEY, J. G. & WEBB, L. J. 1984. Compensatory recruitment, growth, and mortality as factors maintaining rain forest tree diversity. Ecological Monographs 54:141–164.Google Scholar
CURRAN, L. M. & LEIGHTON, M. 2000. Vertebrate responses to spatiotemporal variation in seed production of mast-fruiting Dipterocarpaceae. Ecological Monographs 70:101–128.Google Scholar
CURRAN, L. M. & WEBB, C. O. 2000. Experimental tests of the spatiotemporal scale of seed predation in mast-fruiting Dipterocarpaceae. Ecological Monographs 70 (1):129–148.Google Scholar
DE STEVEN, D. & PUTZ, F. E. 1984. Impact of mammals on early recruitment of a tropical canopy tree, Dipteryx panamensis, in Panama. Oikos 43:207–216.Google Scholar
DU, X. J., GUO, Q. F., GAO, X. M. & MA, K. P. 2007. Seed rain, soil seed bank, seed loss and regeneration of Castanopsis fargesii (Fagaceae) in a subtropical evergreen broad-leaved forest. Forest Ecology and Management 238; 212–219.Google Scholar
FORGET, P. M. 1992. Regeneration ecology of Eperua grandiflora (Caesalpiniaceae), a large-seeded tree in French-Guiana. Biotropica 24:146–156.Google Scholar
HAMMOND, D. S. & BROWN, V. K. 1998. Disturbance, phenology and life-history characteristics: factors influencing distance/density-dependent attack on tropical seeds and seedlings. Pp. 51–78 in Newbery, D. M., Prins, H. H. T. & Brown, N. D. (eds.). Dynamics of tropical communities. Blackwell Science, Oxford.Google Scholar
HAMMOND, D. S., BROWN, V. K. & ZAGT, R. J. 1999. Spatial and temporal patterns of seed attack and germination in a large-seeded neotropical tree species. Oecologia 119:208–218.Google Scholar
HARMS, K. E., WRIGHT, S. J., CALDERON, O., HERNANDEZ, A. & HERRE, E. A. 2000. Pervasive density-dependent recruitment enhances seedling diversity in a tropical forest. Nature 404:493–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HART, T. B. 1995. Seed, seedling and sub-canopy survival in monodominant and mixed forests of the Ituri Forest, Africa. Journal of Tropical Ecology 11:443–459.Google Scholar
HOULE, G. 1995. Seed dispersal and seedling recruitment – the missing link(s). Ecoscience 2:238–244.Google Scholar
HOWE, H. F. 1989. Scatter-dispersal and clump-dispersal and seedling demography – hypothesis and implications. Oecologia 79:417–426.Google Scholar
HOWE, H. F. & SMALLWOOD, J. 1982. Ecology of seed dispersal. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 13:201–228.Google Scholar
HOWE, H. F., SCHUPP, E. W. & WESTLEY, L. C. 1985. Early consequences of seed dispersal for a Neotropical tree (Virola surinamensis). Ecology 66:781–791.Google Scholar
HUTCHINGS, A., SCOTT, A. H., LEWIS, G. & CUNNINGHAM, A. B. 1996. Zulu medicinal plants – an inventory. University of Natal Press, Pietermaritzburg. 450 pp.Google Scholar
ITOH, A., YAMAKURA, T., OGINO, K. & LEE, H. S. 1995. Survivorship and growth of seedlings of 4 dipterocarp species in a tropical rain-forest of Sarawak, East Malaysia. Ecological Research 10:327–338.Google Scholar
JANZEN, D. H. 1970. Herbivores and the number of tree species in tropical forests. American Naturalist 104:501–528.Google Scholar
KITAJIMA, K. & AUGSPURGER, C. K. 1989. Seed and seedling ecology of a monocarpic tropical tree, Tachigalia versicolor. Ecology 70:1102–1114.Google Scholar
KRÜGER, S. C. & LAWES, M. J. 1997. Edge effects at an induced forest-grassland boundary: forest birds in the Ongoye Forest Reserve, KwaZulu-Natal. South African Journal of Zoology 32:82–91.Google Scholar
MACK, A. L., ICKES, K., JESSEN, J. H., KENNEDY, B. & SINCLAIR, J. R. 1999. Ecology of Aglaia mackiana (Meliaceae) seedlings in a New Guinea rain forest. Biotropica 31:111–120.Google Scholar
MALO, J. E. 2004. Potential ballistic dispersal of Cytisus scoparius (Fabaceae) seeds. Australian Journal of Botany 52:653–658.Google Scholar
MCCANNY, S. J. 1985. Alternatives in parent-offspring relationships in plants. Oikos 45:148–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MCCULLAGH, P. & NELDER, J. A. 1989. Generalized linear models. (Second edition). Chapman and Hall, London. 532 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NATHAN, R. & CASAGRANDI, R. 2004. A simple mechanistic model of seed dispersal, predation and plant establishment: Janzen-Connell and beyond. Journal of Ecology 92:733–746.Google Scholar
NEUBERT, M. G. & PARKER, I. M. 2004. Projecting rates of spread for invasive species. Risk Analysis 24:817–831.Google Scholar
PACKER, A. & CLAY, K. 2000. Soil pathogens and spatial patterns of seedling mortality in a temperate tree. Nature 404:278–281.Google Scholar
RAGHU, S., WILTSHIRE, C. & DHILEEPAN, K. 2005. Intensity of pre-dispersal seed predation in the invasive legume Leucaena leucocephala is limited by the duration of pod retention. Austral Ecology 30:310–318.Google Scholar
THOMSON, J. D., WEIBLEN, G., THOMSON, B. A., ALFARO, S. & LEGENDRE, P. 1996. Untangling multiple factors in spatial distributions: lilies, gophers, and rocks. Ecology 77:1698–1715.Google Scholar
TOY, R. J. 1991. Interspecific flowering patterns in the Dipterocarpaceae in West Malaysia – implications for predator satiation. Journal of Tropical Ecology 7:49–57.Google Scholar
TURNER, I. M. 2001. The ecology of trees in the tropical rain forest. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 298 pp.Google Scholar
VAN WYK, B., VAN OUDTSHOORN, B. & GERICKE, N. 1997. Medicinal plants of South Africa. Briza Publications, Pretoria. 304 pp.Google Scholar
VILJOEN, S. 1980. A comparative study on the biology of two subspecies of tree squirrels, Paraxerus palliatus tongensis Roberts, 1931 and Paraxerus palliatus ornatus (Gray, 1864) in Zululand. D.Sc. Thesis, University of Pretoria.Google Scholar
VON MALTITZ, G., MUCINA, L., GELDENHUYS, C., LAWES, M. J., EELEY, H. A. C., ADIE, H., VINK, D., FLEMING, G. & BAILEY, C. 2003. Classification system for South African indigenous forests: an objective classification for the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry. CSIR, Pretoria. 264 pp.Google Scholar
WEBB, C. O. & PEART, D. R. 1999. Seedling density dependence promotes coexistence of Bornean rain forest trees. Ecology 80:2006–2017.Google Scholar
WILLSON, M. F. 1993. Dispersal mode, seed shadows, and colonization patterns. Vegetatio 108:261–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WRIGHT, S. J., MULLER-LANDAU, H. C., CALDERON, O. & HERNANDEZ, A. 2005. Annual and spatial variation in seedfall and seedling recruitment in a neotropical forest. Ecology 86:848–860.Google Scholar
XIAO, Z. S., ZHANG, Z. B. & WANG, Y. S. 2005. The effects of seed abundance on seed predation and dispersal by rodents in Castanopsis fargesii (Fagaceae). Plant Ecology 177:249–257.Google Scholar