4.0 Article

Importance of nurse logs as a substrate for the regeneration of pioneer tree species on Barro Colorado Island, Panama

期刊

JOURNAL OF TROPICAL ECOLOGY
卷 25, 期 -, 页码 429-437

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0266467409006130

关键词

seed germination; seedling establishment; seedling growth; species coexistence; treefall gap; wood

类别

资金

  1. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI)
  2. National Science Foundation [0342925]
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences
  4. Division Of Environmental Biology [0342925] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences
  6. Emerging Frontiers [752017] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fallen tree trunks ('nurse logs') are important recruitment sites for trees in temperate forest, however nurse log use is seldom reported in tropical forests. We predicted that logs should be important for the regeneration of small-seeded tropical pioneer species because surface leaf litter and competition with established vegetation reduces the establishment success of these species from soil seed banks. In a survey oil Barre, Colorado Island, Panama, we found that pioneer seedlings were present oil logs in 40 of 95 recent treefall gaps. In gaps where seedlings were present oil logs, seedling density was not significantly different from adjacent areas of soil. However, species composition was significantly different: logs were disproportionately colonized by smaller-seeded and wind-dispersed species. In growing-house experiments using 1.2 species. we found that wood substrate had little effect: oil seed germination. In contrast, seedling growth was 50%, lower on decayed wood than soil. Furthermore, species growth rates on wood were not significantly correlated with growth rates in soil (df = 10, r = 0.48). If establishment on logs eventually leads to recruitment to the forest canopy, then logs may promote the maintenance of diversity by favouring a different group of species from those that recruit in Soil.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据