4.5 Article

Gap percolation in rainforests

期刊

OIKOS
卷 110, 期 1, 页码 177-185

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2005.13843.x

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. ICREA Funding Source: Custom

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rainforests biodiversity is sustained by the three-dimensional structure of their canopy which provides a wide range of physical microenvironments. Given the dynamic nature of the forest, the recognition of stable vertical layers or strata in the canopy is controversial. The spatial characterisation of potential habitats of understory species is not straightforward due to the complex structure of rainforest canopies and the wide ecological variability to which rainforest species can be adapted. Here we present a new description of potential understory habitats that give rise to a well-defined characteristic vertical scale of forest organization h(c)approximate to 13 m. Species living in microenvironments occurring at canopy heights below this critical height h(c) can only experience landscapes with disconnected habitat patches (i.e. fragmented habitat landscapes), while those species capable of living also above h(c) will experience a fully connected landscape of suitable microenvironmental conditions. The possible implications for plant dispersal and animal colonisation strategies living at the understory or close-to-floor are discussed in relation to rainforest gap-dynamics, habitat loss and habitat fragmentation processes. Long-range and directed dispersal strategies (e.g. plant seed dispersal by animals) are optimal for those species living below h(c), providing the best exploration of scarce habitats and a major robustness to habitat changes. On the other hand, dispersal strategies of those species capable to exploit habitats above h(c) need not to be based on directed long-range mechanisms. Different dispersal strategies may in turn imply different sensitiveness of species to habitat loss and habitat fragmentation processes in the rainforest.

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