The Botanical Review

, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 335–371

Models, mechanisms and pathways of succession

  • S. T. A. Pickett
  • S. L. Collins
  • J. J. Armesto
Article

Abstract

The study of succession has been hampered by the lack of a general theory. This is illustrated by confusion over basic concepts and inadequacy of certain models. This review clarifies the basic ideas of pathway, mechanism, and model in succession. Second, in order to prevent inappropriate narrowness in successional studies, we analyze the mechanistic adequacy of the most widely cited models of succession, those of Connell and Slatyer. This analysis shows that models involving a single pathway or a dominant mechanism cannot be treated as alternative, testable hypotheses. Our review shows much more mechanistic richness than allowed by these widely cited models of succession. Classification of the mechanisms of specific replacement, called for by existing models, is problematic and less valuable than the search for the actual mechanisms of particular seres. For example, the “tolerance” mechanism of succession has at least two contrasting meanings and is unlikely to be disentangled from the “inhibition” mechanism in field experiments. However, the understanding of particular species replacements through experiment and knowledge of the conditions of a particular sere and species life histories is a reasonable and desirable goal. Finally, we suggest the need for a broad mechanistic concept of succession. Thus, based on classical causes of succession that have survived recent scrutiny, we erect a framework of successional mechanisms. This framework aims at comprehensiveness, and specific mechanisms are nested within more general causes. As a result of its breadth and hierarchical structure, the framework performs two important functions: First, it provides a context for studies at specific sites and, second, is a scheme for formulating general and testable hypotheses. The review of specific successional mechanisms and the general mechanistic framework can together guide future work on succession, and may foment the development of a broad theory.

Resumen

La ausencia de una teoría general sobre la sucesión ecológica obstaculiza el logro de un mayor conocimiento en la materia, crea confusión en torno a los conceptos más fundamentales de la disciplina, y fomenta el diseño de modelos inadecuados. Esta crítica tiene como meta el aclarar conceptos fundamentales acerca de la trayectoria, el mecanismo, y el modelo de la sucesión ecológica. En segundo lugar, intenta analizar la vtilidad mecánica de los modelos de la sucesión ecológica mas citados tales como el de Connell y Slatyer. Se señala por qué aquellos modelos con una trayectoria única o con un mecanismo dominante no deben considerarse como hipótesis válidas por probar. Por otra parte, se señala también la existencia de una riqueza mecánica que va mas allá de lo admitido por los modelos más citados. La clasificación de los mecanismos de reemplazo esbozados en los modelos actuales causa problemas y tienen poca utilidad. El mecanismo de tolerancia durante la sucesión ecológica, por ejemplo, tiene por lo menos dos significados contrastantes, y muchas veces resulta difícil distinguir en pruebas de campo entre un mecanismo de inhibición y un mecanismo de tolerancia. Un mejor conocimiento del reemplazo de una especie—mediante la experimentatión, conocimiento de las condiciones conducentes a la sucesión ecológica y del largo de vida de la especie—no obstante, sigue siendo una meta rezonable y legítima. Se subraya la necesidad de un concepto mecánico de la sucesión ecológica más abarcador y se propone un marco de referencia para los mecanismos de la sucesión ecológica que toma en cuenta las causas clásicas de la sucesión ecológica más escudriñadas. Este marco de referencia desempeña dos functiones importantes: provee una estructura para el estudio de lugares especificos, y provee un esquema para la formulación de hipótesis generales por probar. Esta critica tiene también como meta el servir como guia para futuros trabajos en la disciplina que fomenten el diseño de teorías generales de la sucesión ecológica.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Abugov, R. 1982. Species diversity and the phasing of disturbance. Ecology63: 289–293.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, E. B. &M. F. Allen. 1985. Competition between plants of different successional stages: Mycorrhizae as regulators. Canad. J. Bot.62: 2625–2629.Google Scholar
  3. Altieri, M. A. 1981. Effect of time of disturbance on the dynamics of weed communities in Nonh Florida. Geobios8: 145–151.Google Scholar
  4. Armesto, J. J. &S. T. A. Pickett. 1985. Experimental studies of disturbance in oldfield plant communities: Impact on species richness and abundance. Ecology66: 230–240.Google Scholar
  5. —. 1986. Removal experiments to test mechanisms of plant succession in old fields. Vegetatio66: 85–93.Google Scholar
  6. Ashby, K. R. 1958. Variations in the number of mice and voles (Apodemus, Clethrionomys andMicrotus) in woodland near Durham and an analysis of their effect on the regeneration of forest. Proc. Int. Congr. Zool.15: 759–760.Google Scholar
  7. Baalen, J. van &E. G. M. Prins. 1983. Growth and reproduction ofDigitalis purpurea in different stages of succession. Oecologia58: 84–91.Google Scholar
  8. Bakuzis, E. B. 1969. Forestry viewed in an ecosystem perspective. Pages 189–258in G. M.van Dyne (ed.), The ecosystem concept in natural resource management. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Bard, G. E. 1952. Secondary succession on the Piedmont of New Jersey. Ecol. Monogr.22: 195–215.Google Scholar
  10. Bartholomew, B. 1970. Bare zone between California shrub and grassland communities: The role of animals. Science170: 1210–1212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Bazzaz, F. A. 1979. The physiological ecology of plant succession. Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst.10: 351–371.Google Scholar
  12. —. 1983. Characteristics of populations in relation to disturbance in natural and manmodified ecosystems. Pages 259–275in H. A. Mooney & M. Godron (eds.), Disturbance and ecosystems: Components of change. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  13. — &R. W. Carlson. 1982. Photosynthetic acclimation of early and late successional plants. Oecologia54: 313–316.Google Scholar
  14. — &S. T. A. Pickett. 1980. The physiological ecology of tropical succession: A comparative review. Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst.11: 287–310.Google Scholar
  15. Beeftink, W. S., M. C. Daane, W. Demunck &J. Nieuwenhuize. 1978. Aspects of population dynamics inHalimione portulacoides communities. Vegetatio36: 31–34.Google Scholar
  16. Berendse, F. &R. Aerts. 1984. Competition betweenErica tetralix L. andMolinia caerulea (L.) Moench as affected by availability of nutrients. Oecol. Pl.5: 3–14.Google Scholar
  17. Bicknell, S. H. 1982. Development of canopy stratification during early succession in northern hardwoods. Forest Ecol. Managern.4: 41–51.Google Scholar
  18. Bormann, F. H. 1953. Factors determining the role of loblolly pine and sweetgum in early old-field succession in the Piedmont of North Carolina. Ecol. Monogr.23: 339–358.Google Scholar
  19. — &G. E. Likens. 1979. Pattern and process in a forested ecosystem. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Botkin, D. B. 1981. Causality and succession. Pages 36–55in D. C. West, H. H. Shugart & D. B. Botkin (eds.), Forest succession: Concepts and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Bragg, T. B. &L. C. Hulbert. 1976. Woody plant invasion of unburned Kansas bluestem prairie. J. Range Managern.29: 19–24.Google Scholar
  22. Breitburg, D. L. 1985. Development of a subtidal epibenthic community: Factors affecting species composition and the mechanisms of succession. Oecologia65: 173–184.Google Scholar
  23. Brewer, R. 1980. A half-century of changes in the herb layer of a climax deciduous forest in Michigan. J. Ecol.68: 823–832.Google Scholar
  24. Brokaw, N. 1982. Treefalls, frequency, timing and consequences. Pages 101–108in E. G. Leigh, Jr., A. S. Rand & D. M. Windsor (eds.), The ecology of a tropical forest. Smithsonian Inst. Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  25. Brown, V. K. 1984. Secondary succession: Insect-plant relationships. BioScience 34: 710–716.Google Scholar
  26. — 1985. Insect herbivores and plant successions. Oikos4: 17–22.Google Scholar
  27. Buell, M. F., H. F. Buell, J. A. Small &T. G. Siccama. 1971. Invasion of trees in secondary succession on the New Jersey Piedmont. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club98: 67–74.Google Scholar
  28. Campbell, C. S. 1983. Wind dispersal of some North American species ofAndropogon (Gramineae). Rhodora85: 65–72.Google Scholar
  29. Canham, C. D. &P. L. Marks. 1985. The response of woody plants to disturbance. Pages 197–216in S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White (eds.), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  30. Carmean, W. H., F. B. Clark, R. D. Williams & P. R. Hannah. 1976. Hardwoods planted in old fields favored by prior tree cover. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station Research Paper NC-134.Google Scholar
  31. Carvell, K. L. &E. H. Tryon. 1961. The effect of environmental factors on the abundance of oak regeneration beneath mature oak stands. Forest Sci.7: 98–105.Google Scholar
  32. Chapin, F. S., III. 1983. The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst.11: 233–260.Google Scholar
  33. Clements, F. E. 1916. Plant succession: An analysis of the development of vegetation. Carnegie Inst. Washington Publ. 242.Google Scholar
  34. Collins, B. S. &J. A. Quinn. 1982. Displacement ofAndropogon scoparius on the New Jersey Piedmont by the successional shrubMyrica pensylvanica. Amer. J. Bot.69: 680–689.Google Scholar
  35. Collins, S. L. &D. E. Adams. 1983. Succession in grasslands: Thirty-two years of change in a central Oklahoma tallgrass prairie. Vegetatio51: 181–190.Google Scholar
  36. — &G. E. Uno. 1983. The effect of early spring burning on vegetation in buffalo wallows. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club110: 474–481.Google Scholar
  37. — &G. E. Uno. 1985. Seed predation, seed dispersal and disturbance in grasslands: A comment. Amer. Naturalist125: 866–872.Google Scholar
  38. Connell, J. H. &M. J. Keough. 1985. Patch dynamics of subtidal marine animals on hard substrata. Pages 125–151in S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White (eds.), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  39. — &R. O. Slatyer. 1977. Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their role in community stability and organization. Amer. Naturalist111: 1119–1144.Google Scholar
  40. Cooper, W. S. 1926. The fundamentals of vegetational change. Ecology7: 391–413.Google Scholar
  41. Curtis, J. T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  42. Davis, R. M. &J. E. Cantlon. 1969. Effect of size of area open to colonization on species composition in old-field succession. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club96: 660–673.Google Scholar
  43. Debussche, M., J. Escarre &J. Lepart. 1982. Ornithochory and plant succession in Mediterranean abandoned orchards. Vegetatio48: 255–266.Google Scholar
  44. Delcourt, H. R., P. A. Delcourt &T. B. Webb, III. 1983. Dynamic plant ecology: The spectrum of vegetational change in space and time. Quat. Sci. Rev.1: 153–175.Google Scholar
  45. Denslow, J. S. 1980. Patterns of plant species diversity during succession under different disturbance regimes. Oecologia46: 18–21.Google Scholar
  46. — 1985. Disturbance-mediated coexistence of species. Pages 307–323in S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White (eds.), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  47. Doerr, T. R., E. F. Redente &F. B. Beevers. 1984. Effects of soil disturbance on plant succession and levels of mycorrhizal fungi in a sagebrush-grassland community. J. Range Managern.37: 135–139.Google Scholar
  48. Egler, F. E. 1954. Vegetation science concepts. I. Initial floristic composition, a factor in old field vegetational development. Vegetatio4: 412–417.Google Scholar
  49. Finegan, B. 1984. Forest succession. Nature312: 109–114.Google Scholar
  50. Foresta, H. de. 1983. Hétérogénéité de la végétation pionnière en forêt tropicale humide: Exemple d’une forêt couple papetière en forêt guyanaise. Oecologia Appl.4: 221–235.Google Scholar
  51. Forman, R. T. T. &M. Godron. 1981. Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology. BioScience31: 733–739.Google Scholar
  52. Fowler, N. 1982. Competition and coexistence in a North Carolina grassland. III. Mixtures of component species. J. Ecol.70: 77–92.Google Scholar
  53. Fuentes, E. R., R. D. Otaiza, M. C. Alliende, A. Hoffman &A. Poiani. 1984. Shrub clumps of the Chilean matorral vegetation: Structure and possible maintenance mechanisms. Oecologia62: 405–411.Google Scholar
  54. Glasser, J. 1982. On the causes of temporal change in communities: Modification of the biotic environment. Amer. Naturalist119: 375–390.Google Scholar
  55. Gleason, H. A. 1917. The structure and development of the plant association. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club44: 463–481.Google Scholar
  56. Grime, J. P. 1979. Plant strategies and vegetation processes. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  57. —,G. Mason, A. V. Curtis, J. Rodman, S. R. Band, M. A. G. Mowforth, A. M. Neal &S. Shaw. 1981. A comparative study of germination characteristics in a local flora. J. Ecol.69: 1017–1059.Google Scholar
  58. Gross, K. L. 1980. Colonization byVerbascum thapsus (Mullein) of an old-field in Michigan: Experiments on the effects of vegetation. J. Ecol.68: 919–927.Google Scholar
  59. — 1981. Predictions of fate from rosette size in four “biennial” plant species:Verbascum thapsus, Oenothera biennis, Daucus carota, andTragopogon dubius. Oecologia48: 209–213.Google Scholar
  60. — &P. A. Werner. 1982. Colonizing abilities of “biennial” plant species in relation to ground cover: Implications for their distributions in a successional sere. Ecology63: 921–931.Google Scholar
  61. Grubb, P. J. 1977. The maintenance of species-richness in plant communities: The importance of the regeneration niche. Biol. Rev. Cambridge Philos. Soc.52: 107–145.Google Scholar
  62. — 1982. Control of relative abundance in roadsideArrhenatheretum: Results of a long-term garden experiment. J. Ecol.70: 845–861.Google Scholar
  63. Halligan, J. P. 1975. Toxic terpenes fromArtemisia californica. Ecology56: 999–1003.Google Scholar
  64. Hancock, J. F. 1977. The relationship of genetic polymorphism and ecological amplitude in successional species ofErigeron. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club104: 279–281.Google Scholar
  65. — &R. E. Wilson. 1976. Biotype selection inErigeron annuus during old field succession. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club103: 122–215.Google Scholar
  66. Harris, L. G., A. W. Ebeling, D. R. Laur &R. J. Rowley. 1984. Community recovery after storm damage: A case of facilitation in primary succession. Science224: 1336–1338.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Hart, R. 1977. Why are biennials so few? Amer. Naturalist111: 792–799.Google Scholar
  68. Hibbs, D. 1982. Gap dynamics in a hemlock-hardwood forest. Canad. J. Forest Res.12: 522–527.Google Scholar
  69. Hilborn, R. &S. C. Stearns. 1982. On inference in ecology and evolutionary biology: The problem of multiple causes. Acta Biotheor.31: 145–164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Hils, M. H. &J. L. Vankat. 1982. Species removals from a first-year old-field plant community. Ecology63: 705–711.Google Scholar
  71. Horn, H. S. 1971. The adaptive geometry of trees. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  72. — 1974. The ecology of secondary succession. Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst.5: 25–37.Google Scholar
  73. —. 1981. Some causes of variety in patterns of secondary succession. Pages 24–35in D. C. West, H. H. Shugart & D. B. Botkin (eds.), Forest succession: Concepts and application. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  74. Houssard, C., J. Escarre &E. F. Romane. 1980. Development of species diversity in some Mediterranean plant communities. Vegetatio43: 59–72.Google Scholar
  75. Huston, M. S. 1979. A general hypothesis of species diversity. Amer. Naturalist113: 81–101.Google Scholar
  76. Jackson, J. R. &R. W. Willemsen. 1976. Allelopathy in the first stages of secondary succession on the Piedmont of New Jersey. Amer. J. Bot.63: 1015–1023.Google Scholar
  77. Karr, J. R. &K. E. Freemark. 1985. Disturbance and vertebrates: An integrative perspective. Pages 153–168in S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White (eds.), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  78. Keever, C. 1950. Causes of succession on old fields on the Piedmont, North Carolina. Ecol. Monogr.20: 229–250.Google Scholar
  79. —. 1979. Mechanisms of succession on old fields of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club106: 299–308.Google Scholar
  80. Kirkpatrick, B. L. &F. A. Bazzaz. 1979. Influence of certain fungi on seed germination and seedling survival of four colonizing annuals. J. Appl. Ecol.16: 515–527.Google Scholar
  81. Kozlowski, T. 1949. Light and water in relation to growth and competition of Piedmont forest tree species. Ecol. Monogr.19: 208–231.Google Scholar
  82. Kramer, P. J. &J. P. Decker. 1944. Relation between light intensity and rate of photosynthesis on loblolly pine and certain hardwoods. Pl. Physiol.19: 350–358.Google Scholar
  83. —,H. J. Oosting &C. F. Korstian. 1952. Survival of pine and hardwood seedlings in forest and open. Ecology33: 427–430.Google Scholar
  84. Kruger, F. J. 1983. Plant community diversity and dynamics in relation to fire. Pages 446–472in F. J. Kruger, D. T. Mitchell & J. V. M. Jarvis (eds.), Mediterranean type ecosystems: The role of nutrients. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  85. Kuhn, T. 1977. The essential tension: Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
  86. Leak, W. B. 1963. Delayed germination of white ash seeds under forest conditions. J. Forest.61: 768–772.Google Scholar
  87. Livingston, R. B. 1972. Influence of birds, stones and soil on the establishment of pasture juniper,Juniperus communis, and red cedar,J. virginiana in New England. Ecology53: 1141–1147.Google Scholar
  88. Maarel, E. van der. 1978. Experimental succession research in a coastal dune grassland, a preliminary report. Vegetatio38: 21–28.Google Scholar
  89. MacMahon, J. A. 1980. Ecosystems over time: Succession and other types of change. Pages 27–58in R. Waring (ed.), Forests: Fresh perspectives from ecosystem analyses. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon.Google Scholar
  90. — 1981. Successional processes: Comparison among biomes with special reference to probable roles of and influences on animals. Pages 277–304in D. C. West, H. H. Shugart & D. B. Botkin (eds.), Forest succession: Concepts and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  91. Malanson, G. P. 1984. Intensity as a third factor of disturbance regime and its effect on species diversity. Oikos43: 411–413.Google Scholar
  92. Maly, M. S. &G. W. Barrett. 1984. Effects of two types of nutrient environment on the structure and function of contrasting oldfield communities. Amer. Midl. Naturalist111: 342–357.Google Scholar
  93. Marks, P. L. 1974. The role of pin cherry (Prunus pensylvanica L.) in the maintenance of the stability in northern hardwood ecosystems. Ecol. Monogr.44: 73–88.Google Scholar
  94. —. 1975. On the relation between extension growth and successional status of deciduous trees of the northeastern United States. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club102: 172–177.Google Scholar
  95. McAuliffe, J. R. 1984. Saguaro-nurse tree associations in the Sonoran Desert: Competitive effects of saguaros. Oecologia64: 319–321.Google Scholar
  96. McBrien, H., R. Harmesen &A. Crowder. 1983. A case of insect grazing affecting plant succession. Ecology64: 1035–1039.Google Scholar
  97. McCormick, J. 1968. Succession. Via1: 22–35, 131–132.Google Scholar
  98. McDonnell, M. J. &E. W. Stiles. 1983. The structural complexity of old-field vegetation and the recruitment of bird-dispersed plant species. Oecologia56: 109–116.Google Scholar
  99. McIntosh, R. P. 1974. Plant ecology 1947–1972.In 25 years of botany, 1947–1972. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard.61: 132–165.Google Scholar
  100. —. 1980. The relationship between succession and the recovery process in ecosystems. Pages 11–62in J. Cairns (ed.), The recovery process in damaged ecosystems. Ann Arbor Sci. Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan.Google Scholar
  101. Miceli, J. C., G. L. Rolfe, D. R. Pelz &J. M. Edgington. 1977. Brownfield Woods, Illinois: Woody vegetation changes since 1960. Amer. Midl. Naturalist98: 469–476.Google Scholar
  102. Miles, J. 1974. Effects of experimental interference with stand structure on establishment of seedlings in Callunetum. J. Ecol.62: 675–687.Google Scholar
  103. —. 1979. Vegetation dynamics. Chapman & Hall, London, UK.Google Scholar
  104. Monte, J. A. 1973. The successional convergence of vegetation from grassland and bare soil on the Piedmont of New Jersey. William L. Hutcheson Mem. For. Bull.3: 3–13.Google Scholar
  105. Moral, R. del. 1983. Competition as a control mechanism in subalpine meadows. Amer. J. Bot.70: 232–245.Google Scholar
  106. Muller, C. H., W. H. Muller &B. L. Haines. 1964. Volatile growth inhibitors produced by aromatic shrubs. Science143: 471–473.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. Niering, W. A., R. H. Whittaker &C. H. Lowe. 1963. The saguaro: A population in relation to environment. Science142: 15–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. Noble, I. R. &R. O. Slatyer. 1980. The use of vital attributes to predict successional changes in plant communities subject to recurrent disturbances. Vegetatio43: 5–21.Google Scholar
  109. Noble, J. C., A. W. Smith &H. W. Leslie. 1980. Fire in the mallee shrublands of western New South Wales. Austral. Rangeland J.2: 104–114.Google Scholar
  110. Numata, M. 1982. Experimental studies on the early stages of secondary succession. Vegetatio48: 141–149.Google Scholar
  111. Odum, E. P. 1960. Organic production and turnover in old field succession. Ecology41: 34–49.Google Scholar
  112. Oliver, C. D. 1981. Forest development in North America following major disturbances. Forest Ecol. Managern.3: 153–168.Google Scholar
  113. Olson, J. S. 1958. Rates of succession and soil changes on southern Lake Michigan sand dunes. Bot. Gaz.119: 125–170.Google Scholar
  114. Olsson, G. 1984. Old-field forest succession in the Swedish west coast. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Lund, Lund, Sweden.Google Scholar
  115. Oosting, H. J. 1942. An ecological analysis of the plant communities of Piedmont, North Carolina. Amer. Midl. Naturalist28: 1–126.Google Scholar
  116. — &M. E. Humphreys. 1940. Buried viable seed in a successional series of old fields and forest soils. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club67: 253–273.Google Scholar
  117. Parrish, J. A. D. &F. A. Bazzaz. 1982a. Responses of plants from three successional communities to a nutrient gradient. J. Ecol.70: 233–248.Google Scholar
  118. —. 1982b. Niche responses of early and late successional tree seedlings on three resource gradients. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club109: 451–456.Google Scholar
  119. —. 1982c. Competitive interactions in plant communities of different successional ages. Ecology63: 314–320.Google Scholar
  120. Peet, R. K. &N. L. Christensen. 1980. Succession: A population process. Vegetatio43: 131–140.Google Scholar
  121. Perozzi, R. E. &F. A. Bazzaz. 1978. The response of an early successional community to shortened growing season. Oikos31: 89–93.Google Scholar
  122. Peterson, D. L. &F. A. Bazzaz. 1978. Life cycle characteristics ofAster pilosus in early successional habitats. Ecology59: 1005–1013.Google Scholar
  123. Petranka, J. W. &J. K. McPherson. 1979. The role ofRhus copallina in the dynamics in the forest-prairie ecotone in north-central Oklahoma. Ecology60: 956–965.Google Scholar
  124. Pickett, S. T. A. 1976. Succession: An evolutionary interpretation. Amer. Naturalist110: 107–119.Google Scholar
  125. — 1982. Population patterns through twenty years of old field succession. Vegetatio49: 45–59.Google Scholar
  126. — &J. M. Baskin. 1973. The role of temperature and light in the germination behaviorof Ambrosia artemisiifolia. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club100: 107–119.Google Scholar
  127. — &J. N. Thompson. 1978. Patch dynamics and the design of nature reserves. Biol. Conserv.13: 27–37.Google Scholar
  128. — &P. S. White. 1985a. Patch dynamics: A synthesis. Pages 371–384in S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White (eds.), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  129. — &P. S. White. (eds.). 1985b. The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  130. Pitelka, L. F. &J. W. Ashmun. 1985. Physiology and integration of ramets in clonal plants. Pages 399–435in J. B. C. Jackson, L. W. Buss & R. E. Cook (eds.), Population biology and evolution of clonal organisms. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.Google Scholar
  131. Quinn, J. A. 1974.Convolvulus sepium in old field succession on the New Jersey Piedmont. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club101: 89–95.Google Scholar
  132. Quinn, J. F. &A. E. Dunham. 1983. On hypothesis testing in ecology and evolution. Amer. Naturalist122: 602–617.Google Scholar
  133. Raynal, D. J. &F. A. Bazzaz. 1975. Interference of winter annuals withAmbrosia artemisiifolia in early successional fields. Ecology56: 35–49.Google Scholar
  134. Reader, R. J. 1985. Temporal variation in recruitment and mortality for the pasture weedHieracium floribundum: Implications for a model of population dynamics. J. Appl. Ecol.22: 175–183.Google Scholar
  135. Reeves, F. B., D. Wagner, T. Moorman &J. Kiel. 1979. The role of endomycorrhizae in revegetation practices in the semi-arid west. I. A comparison of incidence of mycorrhizae in severely disturbed vs. natural environments. Amer. J. Bot.66: 6–13.Google Scholar
  136. Rice, E. L. 1984. Allelopathy, ed. 2. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  137. — &S. K. Pancholy. 1972. Inhibition of nitrification by climax ecosystems. Amer. J. Bot.59: 1033–1040.Google Scholar
  138. Robertson, G. P. 1982. Factors regulating nitrification in primary and secondary succession. Ecology63: 1561–1573.Google Scholar
  139. — &P. M. Vitousek. 1981. Nitrification potentials in primary and secondary succession. Ecology62: 376–386.Google Scholar
  140. Roos, F. H. &J. A. Quinn. 1977. Phenology and reproductive allocation inAndropogon scoparius (Gramineae) populations in communities of different successional stages. Amer. J. Bot.64: 535–540.Google Scholar
  141. Runkle, J. R. 1982. Patterns of disturbance in some old-growth mesic forests of eastern North America. Ecology63: 1533–1546.Google Scholar
  142. Schimpf, D. J. &J. A. MacMahon. 1985. Insect communities and faunas of a Rocky Mountain subalpine sere. Great Basin Naturalist45: 37–60.Google Scholar
  143. Shafi, M. I. &G. A. Yarranton. 1973. Diversity, floristic richness and species evenness during a secondary (post-fire) succession. Ecology54: 897–902.Google Scholar
  144. Silvertown, J. 1984. Death of the elusive biennial. Nature310: 271.Google Scholar
  145. Small, J. A., M. F. Buell, H. F. Buell &T. G. Siccama. 1971. Old-field succession on the New Jersey Piedmont—The first year. William L. Hutcheson Mem. For. Bull.2: 26–30.Google Scholar
  146. Smith, A. J. 1975. Invasion and ecesis of bird-disseminated woody plants in a temperate forest sere. Ecology56: 19–34.Google Scholar
  147. Smith, A. P. &J. O. Palmer. 1976. Vegetative reproduction and close packing in plant species. Nature261: 232–233.Google Scholar
  148. Smith, J. L. &E. L. Rice. 1983. Differences in nitrate reductase activity between species of different stages in old field succession. Oecologia57: 43–48.Google Scholar
  149. Sobey, D. G. &P. Barkhouse. 1977. The structure and rate of growth of the rhizomes of some forest herbs and dwarf shrubs of the New Brunswick-Nova Scotia border region. Canad. Field-Naturalist91: 377–383.Google Scholar
  150. Soule, J. D. &P. A. Werner. 1981. Patterns of resource allocation in plants, with special reference toPotentilla recta L. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club108: 311–319.Google Scholar
  151. Sousa, W. P. 1984. Intertidal mosaics: Patch size, propagule availability, and spatially variable patterns of succession. Ecology65: 1918–1935.Google Scholar
  152. Southwood, T. R. E., V. K. Brown &P. M. Reader. 1979. The relationships of plant and insect diversities in succession. Jour. Linn. Soc., Biol.12: 327–348.Google Scholar
  153. Stewart, A. J. A. &K. Thompson. 1982. Reproductive strategies of six herbaceous perennial species in relation to a successional sequence. Oecologia52: 269–272.Google Scholar
  154. Tansley, A. G. 1935. The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology16: 284–307.Google Scholar
  155. Tilman, G. D. 1982. Resource competition and community structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  156. —. 1984. Plant dominance along an experimental nutrient gradient. Ecology65: 1445–1453.Google Scholar
  157. —. 1985. The resource-ratio hypothesis of plant succession. Amer. Naturalist125: 827–852.Google Scholar
  158. Trabaud, L. &J. Lepart. 1980. Diversity and stability in garrigue ecosystems after fire. Vegetatio43: 49–57.Google Scholar
  159. Turner, R. M., S. M. Alcorn, G. Olin &J. A. Booth. 1966. The influence of shade, soil and water on saguaro seedling establishment. Bot. Gaz.127: 95–102.Google Scholar
  160. Turner, T. 1983. Facilitation as a successional mechanism in a rocky intertidal community. Amer. Naturalist121: 729–738.Google Scholar
  161. van der Valk, A. G. 1981. Successions in wetlands: A Gleasonian approach. Ecology62: 688–696.Google Scholar
  162. Veblen, T. T. 1985. Stand dynamics in ChileanNothofagus forest. Pages 35–51in S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White (eds.), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  163. Vitousek, P. M. &P. S. White. 1981. Process studies in succession. Pages 267–276in D. C. West, H. H. Shugart & D. B. Botkin (eds.), Forest succession: Concepts and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  164. Wallace, L. L. &E. L. Dunn. 1980. Comparative photosynthesis of three gap phase successional tree species. Oecologia45: 331–340.Google Scholar
  165. Wendel, G. W. 1972. Longevity of black cherry seed in the forest floor. USDA Forest Service, Northeast Forest Experiment Station Research Note NE-375.Google Scholar
  166. Werner, P. A. 1976. The ecology of plant populations in successional environments. Syst. Bot.1: 246–268.Google Scholar
  167. —. 1977. Colonization success of a “biennial” plant species: Experimental field studies of species cohabitation and replacement. Ecology58: 840–849.Google Scholar
  168. — &A. L. Harbeck. 1982. The pattern of seedling establishment relative to staghorn sumac cover in Michigan old fields. Amer. Midl. Naturalist108: 124–132.Google Scholar
  169. White, P. S. 1979. Pattern, process and natural disturbance in vegetation. Bot. Rev.45: 229–299.Google Scholar
  170. — &S. T. A. Pickett. 1985. Patch dynamics: An introduction. Pages 3–13in S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White (eds.), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  171. Whitford, P. C. &P. B. Whitford. 1978. Effects of trees on ground cover in old-field succession. Amer. Midl. Naturalist99: 435–443.Google Scholar
  172. Whittaker, R. H. 1951. A criticism of the plant association and climatic climax concepts. Northw. Sci.25: 17–31.Google Scholar
  173. Willemsen, R. W. 1975. Dormancy and germination of common ragweed seeds in the field. Amer. J. Bot.62: 639–643.Google Scholar
  174. Woodwell, G. M. &J. K. Oosting. 1965. Effects of chronic gamma radiation on the development of oldfield plant communities. Radiat. Bot.5: 202–222.Google Scholar
  175. Yeaton, R. I. 1978. A cyclical relationship betweenLarrea tridentata andOpuntia leptocaulis in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. J. Ecol.66: 651–656.Google Scholar
  176. Zangerl, A. R. &F. A. Bazzaz. 1983. Responses of early and late successional species ofPolygonum to variations in resource availability. Oecologia56: 397–404.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. T. A. Pickett
    • 1
  • S. L. Collins
    • 2
  • J. J. Armesto
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Biological Sciences, Bureau of Biological ResearchRutgers UniversityNew Brunswick
  2. 2.Division of Pinelands Research, Center for Coastal and Environmental StudiesRutgers UniversityNew Brunswick
  3. 3.Department of Biological SciencesRutgers UniversityNew Brunswick
  4. 4.Institute of Ecosystem StudiesMary Flagler Cary Arboretum, The New York Botanical GardenMillbrook
  5. 5.Department of Botany and MicrobiologyUniversity of OklahomaNorman
  6. 6.Laboratorio de Sistematica y Ecologia Vegetal, Facultad de CienciasUniversidad de ChileCasilla 653Chile

Personalised recommendations