4.5 Article

Ontogenetic shifts in interactions of two dominant shrub species in a semi-arid coastal sand dune system

期刊

JOURNAL OF VEGETATION SCIENCE
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 535-546

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.01055.x

关键词

Competition; Facilitation; Nurse plants; Rooting depth; Salinity; Water stress

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Education and Science [RNM2001-1544/GLO]
  2. I3P CSIC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

How does the interaction between two dominant shrub species in a coastal sand dune community change during their life history? Does this interaction influence their population dynamics? A semiarid coastal sand dune system in southeast Spain. For 3 years we monitored physiological status, growth and reproductive effort of Juniperus phoenicea and Pistacia lentiscus, the dominant shrub species, growing either alone or in close spatial association. We also recorded adult mortality patterns and characterized seedling survival, soil properties and microclimate conditions beneath canopies and in bare ground. There was a strong bi-directional interaction between the two studied species, with a net balance that changed in sign with increasing plant development. While mature individuals facilitated the establishment of seedlings of both species, adult mortality patterns suggested asymmetric competition at later life stages. The interaction with Pistacia negatively affected growth of juniper and contributed to its high mortality rates, while juniper had almost no effect on mature Pistacia individuals. Physiological data suggested that Pistacia had a competitive advantage over juniper, most likely because of differences in rooting patterns and tolerance to salinity, which may determine the source of water available for each species. Community dynamics are governed by facilitation at the seedling stage and shaped by differences in physiological traits in adult plants. Plant-plant interactions, which are strongly affected by environmental gradients, are important drivers of community dynamics in this system.

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

4.5
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