4.5 Article

Growth and ecophysiological acclimation of the foliose lichen Lobaria pulmonaria in forests with contrasting light climates

Journal

OECOLOGIA
Volume 147, Issue 3, Pages 406-416

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00442-005-0283-1

Keywords

acclimation; boreal forest; epiphytes; forest canopy; successional stage

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to assess biomass and area growth of 600 thalli of the old forest lichen, Lobaria pulmonaria, transplanted to three successional boreal forest stands with (1) natural rainfall regime, (2) additional moistening during dry days, and (3) additional moistening with added nutrients. Mean biomass growth during 100 days varied from 8.3% in the dark young spruce forest to 23.1% in the clear-cut area, with the old forest in between (16.0%). Additional moistening did not enhance lichen growth, probably because the transplantation period was wet. Nutrient additions slightly increased area growth compared to artificial water additions only. Growth was determined by a combination of external (forest stand, site factors) and internal factors (chlorophyll content, biomass per area). Transplants acclimated to high light by increasing thickness and chlorophyll a/b-ratio. Some visible bleaching and a strong positive correlation between chlorophyll content per area and lichen growth in clear-cuts suggest some high light-induced chlorophyll degradation. We believe that biomass growth and natural occurrence of L. pulmonaria is controlled by a delicate balance between light availability and desiccation risk, and that the species is confined to old forests due to a physiological trade-off between growth potential and fatal desiccation damage, both of which increase with increasing light. The discrepancy between potential and realized ecological niches is probably caused by a long-term risk to be killed in open habitats by high light during long periods with no rain.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available