Hostname: page-component-669899f699-g7b4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T19:42:47.211Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An experimental assessment of seed adhesivity on animal furs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2007

Martine Couvreur ,
Martine Couvreur ,
Bart Vandenberghe ,
Kris Verheyen  and
Martin Hermy
Martine Couvreur*
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Forest, Nature and Landscape Research, University of Leuven, Vital Decosterstraat 102, Leuven, B-3000, Belgium
Martine Couvreur*
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Forest, Nature and Landscape Research, University of Leuven, Vital Decosterstraat 102, Leuven, B-3000, Belgium
Bart Vandenberghe
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Forest, Nature and Landscape Research, University of Leuven, Vital Decosterstraat 102, Leuven, B-3000, Belgium
Kris Verheyen
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Forest, Nature and Landscape Research, University of Leuven, Vital Decosterstraat 102, Leuven, B-3000, Belgium
Martin Hermy
Affiliation:
Laboratory for Forest, Nature and Landscape Research, University of Leuven, Vital Decosterstraat 102, Leuven, B-3000, Belgium
*
*Correspondence Fax: +32 16 32 97 60, Email: martine.couvreur@agr.kuleuven.ac.be
*Correspondence Fax: +32 16 32 97 60, Email: martine.couvreur@agr.kuleuven.ac.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Epizoochory is widely recognized as an effective long-distance seed dispersal mechanism. Nevertheless, few studies have focused on the investigation of its influencing factors. One of the key aspects of epizoochory is the adhesive interaction between seeds and furs. We describe a new method to quantify experimentally and standardize the adhesivity of seeds to animal fur, as a measure of epizoochorous dispersal potential. The method excludes the impact of animal behaviour and environmental factors, and allows the ranking of species according to their adhesivity score. We measured adhesivity scores for 66 species on the furs of seven mammals. Deep furs with long, rough, undulated hairs implanted at a large angle were most suited for seed adhesion, while seeds adhered less well to shallow furs with short, smooth, straight hairs implanted at small angles. Seeds with specialized adhesive appendages had higher adhesivity scores than seeds with unspecialized appendages and seeds without appendages. However, an interaction effect between certain seed and fur types exists. Although seed morphology is a good predictor for seed adhesivity on fur, less well-adhering seed types often still have relatively high adhesivity scores. Therefore, it is likely that nearly all species are, to some extent, able to disperse epizoochorously.

Keywords

adhesive seed dispersaladhesivity scoreepizoochorymammalian furmethodologyseed traits
Type
Research Article
Information
Seed Science Research , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , May 2004 , pp. 147 - 159
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agnew, A.D.Q. and Flux, J.E.C. (1970) Plant dispersal by hares (Lepus capensis L.) in Kenya. Ecology 51, 735–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonn, S. and Poschlod, P. (1998) Ausbreitungsbiologie der Pflanzen Mitteleuropas. Wiesbaden, Quelle and Meyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Briedermann, L. (1990) Schwarzwild (2nd edition). Berlin, Deutscher Landwirtschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Bullock, S.H. and Primack, R.B. (1977) Comparative experimental study of seed dispersal on animals. Ecology 58, 681–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castillo-Flores, A.A. and Calvo-Irabien, L.M. (2003) Animal dispersal of two secondary-vegetation herbs into the evergreen rain forest of south-eastern Mexico. Journal of Tropical Ecology 19, 271–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clustan, Ltd. (2001) Clustangraphics 5.08. Edinburgh, Clustan Ltd.Google Scholar
Dillon, W.R. and Goldstein, M. (1984) Multivariate analysis: Methods and applications. New York, John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Doyle, P. (1973) Nonmetric multidimentional scaling – users guide. European Journal of Marketing 7, 82–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, S.F., Poschlod, P. and Beinlich, B. (1996) Experimental studies on the dispersal of plants and animals on sheep in calcareous grasslands. Journal of Applied Ecology 33, 1206–1222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorb, E. and Gorb, S. (2002) Contact separation force of the fruit burrs in four plant species adapted to dispersal by mechanical interlocking. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 40, 373–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graae, B.J. (2002) The role of epizoochorous seed dispersal of forest plant species in a fragmented landscape. Seed Science Research 12, 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grime, J.P., Hodgson, J.G. and Hunt, R. (1988) Comparative plant ecology, London, Unwin Hyman Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinken, T. (2000) Dispersal of plants by a dog. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik, Pflanzengeschichte und Pflanzengeographie 122, 449–467.Google Scholar
Heinken, T. and Raudnitschka, D. (2002) Do wild ungulates contribute to the dispersal of vascular plants in central European forests by epizoochory? A case study in NE Germany. Forstwissenschaftliches Centralblatt 121, 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinken, T., Lees, R., Raudnitschka, D. and Runge, S. (2001) Epizoochorous dispersal of bryophyte stem fragments by roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) and wild boar (Sus scrofa). Journal of Bryology 23, 293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, S.I. and Richardson, D.M. (1999) Predicting plant migration rates in a changing world: the role of long-distance dispersal. American Naturalist 153, 464–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, S.I., Nathan, R. and Cain, M.L. (2003) Are long-distance dispersal events in plants usually caused by nonstandard means of dispersal? Ecology 84, 1945–1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, L., Dunlop, M., French, K., Leishman, M.R., Rice, B., Rodgerson, L. and Westoby, M. (1994) Predicting dispersal spectra – a minimal set of hypotheses based on plant attributes. Journal of Ecology 82, 933–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiviniemi, K. (1996) A study of adhesive seed dispersal of three species under natural conditions. Acta Botanica Neerlandica 45, 73–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiviniemi, K. and Telenius, A. (1998) Experiments on adhesive dispersal by wood mouse: seed shadows and dispersal distances of 13 plant species from cultivated areas in southern Sweden. Ecography 21, 108–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacey, E.P. (1981) Seed dispersal in wild carrot (Daucus carota). The Michigan Botanist 20, 15–20.Google Scholar
Lambinon, J., De Langhe, J.E., Delvosalle, L. and Duvigneaud, J. (1998) Flora van België, het Groothertogdom Luxemburg, Noord-Frankrijk en de aangrenzende gebieden. Meise, Nationale Plantentuin van België.Google Scholar
Lopez, O.R. (2001) Seed flotation and postflooding germination in tropical terra firme and seasonally flooded forest species. Functional Ecology 15, 763–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mrotzek, R., Halder, M. and Schmidt, W. (1999) Die Bedeutung von Wildschweinen für die Diasporenausbreitung von Phanerogamen. Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft für Ökologie 29, 437–443.Google Scholar
Shmida, A. and Ellner, S. (1983) Seed dispersal on pastoral grazers in open Mediterranean chaparral, Israel. Israel Journal of Botany 32, 147–159.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. and Castellan, N.J. (1988) Non-parametric statistics for the behavioural sciences. New York, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Sorensen, A.E. (1986) Seed dispersal by adhesion. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 17, 443–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SPSS (1999) SPSS 10.0. Chicago, SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
Stender, S., Poschlod, P., Vauk-Hentzelt, E. and Dernedde, T. (1997) Die Ausbreitung von Pflanzen durch Galloway-Rinder. Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft für Ökologie 27, 173–180.Google Scholar
Tackenberg, O., Poschlod, P. and Bonn, S. (2003) Assessment of wind dispersal potential in plant species. Ecological Monographs 73, 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ter, Braa, C.J.F., Smilauer, P. (2003) CANOCO reference manual and user's guide to Canoco for Windows, software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). Ithaca, New York, Microcomputer PowerGoogle Scholar