Towards understanding resprouting at the global scale

Abstract

SummaryUnderstanding and predicting plant response to disturbance is of paramount importance in our changing world. Resprouting ability is often considered a simple qualitative trait and used in many ecological studies. Our aim is to show some of the complexities of resprouting while highlighting cautions that need be taken in using resprouting ability to predict vegetation responses across disturbance types and biomes. There are marked differences in resprouting depending on the disturbance type, and fire is often the most severe disturbance because it includes both defoliation and lethal temperatures. In the Mediterranean biome, there are differences in functional strategies to cope with water deficit between resprouters (dehydration avoiders) and nonresprouters (dehydration tolerators); however, there is little research to unambiguously extrapolate these results to other biomes. Furthermore, predictions of vegetation responses to changes in disturbance regimes require consideration not only of resprouting, but also other relevant traits (e.g. seeding, bark thickness) and the different correlations among traits observed in different biomes; models lacking these details would behave poorly at the global scale. Overall, the lessons learned from a given disturbance regime and biome (e.g. crown-fire Mediterranean ecosystems) can guide research in other ecosystems but should not be extrapolated at the global scale.

Sequential Management of Commercial Rosewood (Aniba rosaeodora Ducke) Plantations in Central Amazonia: Seeking Sustainable Models for Essential Oil Production

“…Mortality may be related to an initial difficulty in acquiring post-disturbance resources [32,33,71]. In this study, no results were found to explain the mortality of individuals.…”

“…The increase in frequency of mass loss causes changes in the content of carbohydrate stores available in reserve tissues for the production of subsequent shoots [75], while resource allocation patterns and the capacity for continuous regrowth may be influenced by the disturbance regime to which the species are adapted [43], which is unknown in the case of rosewood. Plant responses to injury are ecologically and evolutionarily important, allowing sprouting individuals to persist in the environment without changes in population size, while non-regenerating species face the challenges of seed-based regeneration, including pollination failures, the uncertainties associated with dispersion, seedling mortality, and competitive interactions while growing [33]. This makes the regrowth mechanisms important as indicators of how plants will react to ecological dynamics and in determining the likely responses of a species to the threat of extinction, as well as to the methods used in plantation management.…”

“…The post-harvest regrowth capacity of a tree is influenced by such factors as pre-disturbance condition [32,33], initial capacity to acquire post-disturbance resources, genetic predisposition [34], as well the dormant seedbank [35]. In rosewood, vigorous regrowth of managed trees has been reported [6,7,36].…”

“…Post-harvest plants have no immediate photosynthetic capacity and therefore require nutrient stocks in their underground organs to meet the demands of respiration and the regrowth process until leaves appear on regrown shoots [34,40]. Additionally, several authors [33,[41][42][43] have associated photosynthetic characteristics with the nutritional status of sprouting. Clearly, in the case of plants such as rosewood that are of commercial interest, these sprout (issued after harvest) must have the characteristics that meet the market requirements.…”

Increased aridity drives post‐fire recovery of Mediterranean forests towards open shrublands

“…Projected changes occur more rapidly in this area as compared to the global average (Guiot & Cramer, 2016). Seeder shrubs are in general less vulnerable to aridity than resprouter species Saura-Mas et al, 2009;Pausas et al, 2016). Plant types with different responses to fires are associated to dissimilar responses to drought.…”