4.7 Article

In Site Soil Seed-Banks: Size, Composition and Persistence across Tropical Successional Stages

期刊

PLANTS-BASEL
卷 12, 期 15, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/plants12152760

关键词

old-fields; persistence; plant growth-forms; primary forests; regeneration; secondary forests; Selva Lacandona

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the size, composition, and persistence of the seed-bank in different successional stages in southern Mexico. The seed-bank provided a greater number of plants in old-fields compared to other propagule sources. Forest modification altered the input of propagules in the seed-bank for different plant growth-forms.
I investigated the size, composition and persistence of the seed-bank in primary forests, secondary forests and old-fields in southern Mexico. I also assessed the contribution of the seed-bank to regeneration relative to other propagule sources. In all habitats, I removed by hand all plants and litter and excluded the seed-rain. For one year, I counted the number of plant species (5-50 cm tall) emerged and grouped them into different growth-forms: trees, shrubs, palms, herbs, woody lianas, epiphytes and hemi-epiphytes. A total of 95 species emerged. The seed-bank size, composition and persistence showed strong variation among successional stages. Emergence was low for primary and secondary forests, but high for old-fields (19, 26, and 68 plants per m(-2), respectively). Herbs were the most abundant in the seed-bank and palms the less. Time had a negative effect on seed-bank size in primary forests and old-fields; whereas for secondary forests size remained constant throughout the year. The number of emerged plants in different growth-forms changed significantly across time for all successional stages. Overall, the seed-bank provided a greater number of plants in old-fields relative to other propagule sources combined. The results showed that forest modification alters the input of propagules throughout the seed-bank for different plant growth-forms.

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

4.7
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