Effect of Size Area Open to Colonization on Species Composition in Early Old-Field Succession

Davis, Roger M.; Cantlon, John E.

doi:10.2307/2483546

Cited by 32 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gross (1980) also found that mullein (Verbascum thapsus) suffered high mortality and failed to reproduce in all but the largest (larger than 0.5 mZ) of the openings she produced in the existing vegetation. Both mullein and teasel, however, are typical colonizing species, as are most of the species examined by Davis and Cantlon (1969). Unlike these colonizers R. minor appears not to rely on effective use of openings in the vegetation, although openings in a thick litter may be helpful.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Why is Rhinanthus minor (Scrophulariaceae) such a good invader?

Hulst¹,

Shipley²,

Thériault³

1987

Can. J. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

VAN HULST, R., SHIPLEY, B., and TH~RIAULT, A. 1987. Why is Rhinanthus minor (Scrophulariaceae) such a good invader?Can. J. Bot. 65: 2373 -2379. Rhinanthus minor L. is an annual grassland hemiparasite often found where other annuals are rare or absent. In addition to its invasive abilities, R. minor has other characteristics seldom found in annuals: virtual lack of a seed bank; few seeds per plant; seeds too big to be readily dispersed under natural conditions; and a Deevey type I or 11 survivorship curve. A combination of correlative and experimental studies was performed to investigate the variables influencing fecundity and survivorship in R. minor. Fecundity is positively correlated with surrounding vegetation biomass and negatively with R. minor density. Survivorship is negatively correlated with surrounding vegetation biomass and with R. minor density. Presumably, R. minor is an effective invader in relatively unproductive grassland because its finite rate of increase is a nonlinear function of the biomass of the surrounding vegetation, being maximized when the surrounding vegetation is dense enough to allow effective root parasitism (increasing R. minor fecundity) but not so dense that young R. minor plants are outcompeted for light (decreasing R. minor survivorship). VAN HULST, R., SHIPLEY, B., et TH~RIAULT, A. 1987. Why is Rhinanthus minor (Scrophulariaceae) such a good invader?Can. J. Bot. 65 : 2373-2379. Rhinanthus minor L. est une plante annuelle hCmiparasite qu'on trouve dans des prairies et autres vCgCtations dominCes par des graminkes, souvent dans des stations oh elle est la seule plante annuelle. Outre ses capacitks de plante envahissante, R. minor a d'autres attributs qui sont peu communs pour une plante annuelle : quasi-absence d'une banque de graines, peu de graines par plante, graines trop grosses pour &tre facilement dispersCes sous conditions naturelles et une courbe de survie de type Deevey I ou II. Nous avons conduit des Ctudes de type corrklatif et expkrimental pour Ctablir quels facteurs peuvent influencer les taux de survie et de fCconditC de R. minor. La fCconditC est en corrClation positive avec la biomasse de la vCgCtation environnante et en codlation nCgative avec la densit6 de R. minor. Le taux de survie est en codlation negative avec la biomasse de la vCgCtation environnante et avec la densite de R. minor. Apparemment R. minor est capable d'envahir efficacement des prairies relativement peu productives parce que son taux fini de croissance est une fonction non IinCaire de la biomasse de la v6gCtation environnante, dont le maximum est atteint quand la vCgCtation est assez dense pour permettre un parasitisme racinaire efficace (augmentation de la fCconditC de R. minor) sans que les jeunes plantes de R. minor soient perdantes dans la concurrence pour la lumibre (diminution du taux de survie de R. minor).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Why is Rhinanthus minor (Scrophulariaceae) such a good invader?

Hulst¹,

Shipley²,

Thériault³

1987

Can. J. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2c, above; see Liu and Ashton, 1999) may be preferable to leaving a few large areas intact, but isolating much of the degraded habitat from sources of regenerative propagules (Fig. 2c, below; see also Davis and Cantlon, 1969).…”

Section: Edges and Fragmentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Restoration ecology and conservation biology

Young

2000

Biological Conservation

544

344

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoration ecology is undergoing rapid growth as an academic discipline, similar to that experienced by conservation biology over the last 15 years. Restoration ecology and conservation biology share many underlying biodiversity goals, but dier in striking ways. Using data from published literature in these two ®elds, I document that conservation biology has been more zoological, more descriptive and theoretical, and more focused on population and genetic studies than restoration ecology, which has been more botanical, more experimental, and more focused on population, community and ecosystem studies. I also use documented trends in population, land use, and biodiversity awareness to suggest that in the future ecological restoration will play an increasing role in biodiversity conservation. The conservation mind set is one of loss on a relatively short time horizon, whereas the restoration mind set is one of long-term recovery. I suggest that a restoration mind set can provide useful insights into problems of conservation today, illustrated with examples examining edge eects and integrated conservation and development projects. #

show abstract

“…Gap size can strongly influence patterns of germination and survival (Davis and Cantlon 1969;Goldberg and Werner 1983;Sousa 1984;Goldberg 1987). Molehills and dung pats average about 0.07 m2 in area, whereas most grassland disturbances are larger (0.2-2.0 m2).…”

Section: Recruitment and Colonizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The colonization of dung pats and molehills in permanent pastures

Parish¹,

Turkington²

1990

Can. J. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PARISH, R., and TURKINGTON, R. 1990. The colonization of dung pats and molehills in permanent pastures. Can. J. Bot. 68: 1706-171 1. The colonization of areas affected by molehills and dung pats was monitored in three adjacent pastures of different ages. Seedling establishment was infrequent, and most colonization took place by rhizomes, e.g., Agropyron repetzs and Poa compressa, or by stolons, e.g., Trifoliu~n repens. Tillering species, e.g., Dactylis glomerata, Holcus lanatus, and Lolium perenne, were poor colonizers of disturbed areas. Invasion of gaps by a species was not proportional to its abundance in the pasture. Individual plants are eliminated at random by the disturbances. Small-scale disturbances tend to decrease community heterogeneity.PARISH, R., et TURKINGTON, R. 1990. The colonization of dung pats and molehills in permanent pastures. Can. J. Bot. 68 : 1706-171 1. La colonisation des aires affectCes par les taupinikres et les bouses a ktC suivie dans trois piturages adjacents d'ige diffkrent. L'Ctablissement de semis Ctait rare. La plus grande part de la colonisation Ctait due aux rhizomes, par exemple, d'Agropyron repens et de Poa compressa, ou aux stolons, par exemple, de Trifolium repens. Des espkces formant des talles, comme Dactylis glomerata, Holcus lanatus et Lolium perenne, se sont comportCes en piktres colonisateurs des aires perturbkes.L'invasion des vides par les espkces n'a pas CtC proportionnelle a l'abondance de cesdernikres dans le piturage. Les plantes individuelles sont CliminCes au hasard par les perturbations. Les perturbations B petite Cchelle tendent a diminuer I'hCtCro-gCnCitk de la communautC.

show abstract

Effect of Size Area Open to Colonization on Species Composition in Early Old-Field Succession

Cited by 32 publications

References 0 publications

Why is Rhinanthus minor (Scrophulariaceae) such a good invader?

Why is Rhinanthus minor (Scrophulariaceae) such a good invader?

Restoration ecology and conservation biology

The colonization of dung pats and molehills in permanent pastures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About