Folia Geobotanica

, Volume 36, Issue 1, pp 3–8 | Cite as

On the species-pool hypothesis and on the quasi-neutral concept of plant community diversity

Article

5. Conclusions

5.1. According to the results from studying a broad variety of Estonian herbaceous communities (4.11) the question in 1.14 should be answered as:selection from a regional species pool into an actual species pool and selection from actual species pool into a microsite are mostlyrandom and neutral processesand they are not directed significantly by interspecific competition.

5.2. Yet, the formation of a diversity pattern should be called aquasi-neutral process,mainly because the exclusion of species from communities due to asymmetric light competition is common during succession (when taller species outcompete shorter ones).

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carley M.J. &Schiluter D. (1997): The relationship between local and regional diversity.Ecology 78: 70–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cornell H. &Lawton J. (1992): Species interactions, local and regional processes, and limits to the richness of ecological communities: a theoretical perspective.J. Anim. Ecol. 61: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. DeAngelis D.L. &Waterhouse J.C. (1987): Equilibrium and nonequilibrium concepts in ecological models.Ecol. Monogr. 57: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eriksson O. (1993): The species-pool hypothesis and plant community diversity.Oikos 68: 371–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Grime J.P. (1979):Plant strategies and vegetation processes. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  6. Huston M. (1979): A general hypothesis of species diversity.Amer. Naturalist 113: 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Oksanen J. (1996): Is the humped relationship between species richness and biomass an artefact due to plot size?J. Ecol. 84: 293–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Pärtel M., Zobel M., Zobel K. &van der Maarel E. (1996): The species pool and its relation to species richness: evidence from Estonian plant communities.Oikos 75: 111–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Weiner J. (1990): Asymmetric competition in plant populations.Trends Ecol. Evol. 5: 360–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Zobel K. &Liira J. (1997): A scale-independent approach to the richness vs biomass relationship in ground-layer plant communities.Oikos 80: 325–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Zobel M. (1997): The relative role of species pools in determining plant species richness: an alternative explanation of species coexistence?Trends Ecol. Evol. 12: 266–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Botany and EcologyTartu UniversityTartuEstonia

Personalised recommendations