No abstract

Proliferation of lianas in canopy gaps can restrict tree regeneration in tropical forests through competition. Liana effects may differ between tree species, depending on tree requirements for aboveand below-ground resources. We conducted an experiment in a shade house over 12 months to test the effect of light (7 and 27% external irradiance) on the competitive interactions between seedlings of one liana species and three tree species and the contribution of both above-and below-ground competition. Seedlings of the liana Acacia kamerunensis were grown with tree seedlings differing in shade tolerance: Nauclea diderrichii (Pioneer), Khaya anthotheca (Non-Pioneer Light Demander) and Garcinia afzelii (Non-Pioneer Shade Bearer). Trees were grown in four competition treatments with the liana: no competition, root competition, shoot competition and root and shoot competition. Both root and root-shoot competition significantly reduced relative growth rates in all three tree species. After one year, root-shoot competition reduced growth in biomass to 58% of those (all species) grown in no competition. The root competition treatment had a more important contribution in the effect of the liana on tree growth. Tree seedlings did not respond to competition with the liana by altering their patterns of biomass allocation. Although irradiance had a great effect on tree growth and allocation of biomass, the interaction between competition treatments and irradiance was not significant. Nauclea diderrichii, the tree species which responded most to the effects of competition, showed signs of being pot-bound, the stress of which may have augmented the competition effects. The understanding of the interaction of above-and below-ground competition between lianas and trees and its moderation by the light environment is important for a proper appreciation of the influence of lianas on tropical forest regeneration.

No abstract

No abstract

Questions: Do lianas alter the relative success of tree species during regeneration? Are the effects of lianas on tree seedlings moderated by canopy openness? How are patterns of biomass allocation in tree seedlings affected by liana competition? Location: Tropical moist semi-deciduous forest in Ghana. Methods: Seedlings of the trees Nauclea diderrichii (pioneer), Khaya anthotheca (non-pioneer light demander) and Garcinia kola (non-pioneer shade bearer) were planted with the lianas Acacia kamerunensis (fast growing) and Loeseneriella rowlandii (slow growing) in large and small gaps (ca. 15% and 8% PAR respectively) and in the forest understorey (ca. 4% PAR). Seedling survival, growth and biomass allocation were measured. Results: Canopy openness moderated the interaction between liana and tree seedlings. The nature of the interaction was both liana and tree species specific and displayed temporal variation. Acacia competition effects were stronger in sites with greater canopy openness. In big gaps, Acacia reduced significantly the biomass of Nauclea by 32% and Khaya by about 50%. Khaya growth in leaf area was five times greater without Acacia, while Nauclea and Garcinia were not affected. Acacia was more plastic than Loeseneriella in response to the environment and the tree species. Our results show that while Loeseneriella, with lower rates of growth, did not affect seedling growth of the three species evaluated, Acacia could alter the relative success of tree species during regeneration. Conclusions: There is evidence that competitive effects by Acacia on tree regeneration through competition could modify tree species capacity to establish. Effects by lianas at the regeneration phase may have important implications for forest management.Nomenclature: Hall & Swaine (1981) and Hawthorne (1995).Abbreviations: BG = Big gap; FU = Forest understorey; GLM = General Linear Model; LAR = Leaf area ratio; LMR = Leaf mass ratio; RCI = Relative competitive response; RGRh = Relative growth rate in height; RGRd = Relative growth rate in diameter; RGR LA = Relative growth rate in leaf area; RMR = Root mass ratio; SG = Small gap; SLA = Specific leaf area; SMR = Stem mass ratio.

We assessed the effectiveness of repopulating the inner canopy and middle canopy of oak trees with seeds and seedlings of the epiphytic bromeliad Tillandsia eizii. Canopy germination was 4.7 percent, considerably lower than in vitro (92%). Of the tree-germinated seedlings, only 1.5 percent survived 6 mo. In contrast, 9.3 percent of transplanted laboratory seedlings survived 15 mo. To repopulate trees, we recommend transplanting laboratory-grown seedlings, as large as practically possible, to branches in the middle canopy.Abstract in Spanish is available at http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/btp.

Tropical forest restoration initiatives are becoming more frequent worldwide in an effort to mitigate biodiversity loss and ecosystems degradation. However, there is little consensus on whether an active or a passive restoration strategy is more successful for recovering biodiversity because few studies make adequate comparisons. Furthermore, studies on animal responses to restoration are scarce compared to those on plants, and those that assess faunal recovery often focus on a single taxon, limiting the generalization of results. We assessed the success of active (native mixed-species plantations) and passive (natural regeneration) tropical cloud forest restoration strategies based on the responses of three animal taxa: amphibians, ants, and dung beetles. We compared community attributes of these three taxa in a 23-year-old active restoration forest, a 23-year-old passive restoration forest, a cattle pasture, and a mature forest, with emphasis on forest-specialist species. We also evaluated the relationship between faunal recovery and environmental variables. For all taxa, we found that recovery of species richness and composition were similar in active and passive restoration sites. However, recovery of forest specialists was enhanced through active restoration. For both forests under restoration, similarity in species composition of all faunal groups was 60–70% with respect to the reference ecosystem due to a replacement of generalist species by forest-specialist species. The recovery of faunal communities was mainly associated with canopy and leaf litter covers. We recommend implementing active restoration using mixed plantations of native tree species and, whenever possible, selecting sites close to mature forest to accelerate the recovery of tropical cloud forest biodiversity. As active restoration is more expensive than passive restoration, both strategies might be used in a complementary manner at the landscape level to compensate for high implementation costs.

Aim: Shaded coffee plantations constitute an important refuge for biodiversity. Despite the fact that epiphytic plants form a significant component of these agroecosystems, their removal from the shade trees is commonplace in Latin America. To what extent does the epiphyte community recover from this severe disturbance? Location: Shaded coffee agroecosystem in Veracruz, Mexico (19°28′03″ N, 96°55′58″ W; 1200 m asl). Methods: We assessed the diversity, biomass and recolonization patterns of vascular epiphytes in shade trees, 8‐9 yr after complete epiphyte removal (E−), and in control ‘non‐removal’ sites (E+). In order to evaluate the effects of prior epiphyte removal, all vascular epiphytes were completely removed from 10 trees per treatment (E− and E+); all epiphyte species collected were identified and dry biomass measured. Results: Eight to nine years after removal, epiphyte biomass in the E− shade trees was 35% of that found in the control sites. A total of 55 epiphyte species, belonging to 12 families, were registered; 40 in E−, and 48 in E+. Six species belonging to Bromeliaceae, Orchidaceae, Cactaceae and Araceae accounted for 75% of the biomass in E+ while six species of bromeliads accounted for 76% of the biomass in E−. Some bromeliads proliferated following disturbance; however, ferns showed lower recovery. Conclusions: Epiphyte community recovery, in terms of biomass and diversity, is considerably higher in the coffee plantation than has been previously reported for other tropical ecosystems. Epiphyte recolonization patterns reflected both the abundance of species in the surrounding matrix and certain species‐specific traits. For such agroecosytems to function as effective reservoirs of epiphyte diversity, epiphyte stripping should be avoided.