4.5 Article

Consumer pressure, seed versus safe-site limitation, and plant population dynamics

期刊

OECOLOGIA
卷 124, 期 2, 页码 260-269

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s004420000382

关键词

herbivory; plant population dynamics; seed- versus safe-site-limited recruitment seedbank; simulation model

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plants often suffer reductions in fecundity due to insect herbivory. Whether this loss of seeds has population-level consequences is much debated and often unknown. For many plants, particularly those with long-lived seedbanks, it is frequently asserted that herbivores have minimal impacts on plant abundance because safe-site availability rather than absolute seed number determines the magnitude of future plant recruitment and hence population abundance. However, empirical tests of this assertion are generally lacking and the interplay between herbivory, spatio-temporal variability in seed- or safe-site-limited recruitment, and seedbank dynamics is likely to be complex. Here we use a stochastic simulation model to explore how changes in the spatial and temporal frequency of seed-limited recruitment, the strength of density-dependent seedling survival, and longevity of seeds in the soil influence the population response to herbivory. Model output reveals several surprising results. First, given a seedbank, herbivores can have substantial effects on mean population abundance even if recruitment is primarily safe-site-limited in either time or space. Second, increasing seedbank longevity increases the population effects of herbivory, because annual reductions in seed input due to herbivory are accumulated in the seedbank. Third, population impacts of herbivory are robust even in the face of moderately strong density-dependent seedling mortality. These results imply that the conditions under which herbivores influence plant population dynamics may be more widespread than heretofore expected. Experiments are now needed to test these predictions.

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