The Botanical Review

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 534–545 | Cite as

The climax concept

  • G. W. Selleck


Textbook definitions of climax reveal a severe rift in basic ecological assumptions. The monoclimax theory is not workable in all vegetation types. The polyclimax theory is limited because it does not recognize the geological time scale, and because its numerous terms lack precision. The prevailing climax may be critized, since a minor constituent of forest understory may become a leading dominant of the next generation. A definition of climax should avoid terms which denote “finality” in succession. Research should be concentrated on concepts which suggest universal application. The development, verification and acceptance of a unified ecological philosophy would provide the impetus required for a firm establishment of plant ecology as a world science.


Botanical Review Upland Forest Edaphic Factor Climax Species Braided Stream 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Becking, R. W. 1957. The Zürich-Montpellier School of Phytosociology. Bot. Rev.23: 411–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Braun, Lucy. 1935. The undifferentiated deciduous forest climax and the association-segregate. Ecology16: 514–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Braun-Blanquet, J. 1932. Plant sociology. [Transl. by Fuller, G. D., and H. S. Conard] 322 pp.Google Scholar
  4. 3a.
    Brown, R. T., andJ. T. Curtis. 1952. The upland conifer-hardwood forests of northern Wisconsin. Ecol. Monog.23: 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 4.
    Cain, S. A. 1932. Concerning certain phytosociological concepts. Ecol. Monog.2: 475–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 5.
    ————— 1939. The climax and its complexities. Amer. Mid. Nat.21: 146–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 6.
    ————— 1947. Characteristics of natural areas and factors in their development. Ecol. Monog.17: 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 7.
    Clements, F. E. 1916. Plant succession. Carnegie Inst. Wash., Publ. 242.Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    ————— 1928. Plant succession and indicators. H. W. Wilson Co., New York. [pp. 8–31]Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    ————— 1949. Dynamics of vegetation. H. W. Wilson Co., New York.Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    Conard, H. S. 1951. The background of plant ecology, a translation from the German “The plant life of the Danube Basin” by Kerner (1863). Ames, Iowa, State College Press. 238 pp.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Cooper, W. S. 1926. The fundamentals of vegetational change. Ecology7: 391–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 12.
    Coupland, R. T. 1950. Ecology of mixed prairie in Canada. Ecol. Monog.20: 271–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 13.
    Cowles, H. C. 1899. The ecological relations of the vegetation on the sand dunes of Lake Michigan. I. Geographical relations of the dune floras. Bot. Gaz.27: 95–117, 167–202, 281–308, 361–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 14.
    ————— 1901. The physiographic ecology of Chicago and vicinity. Bot. Gaz.31: 73–108, 145–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 15.
    Crocker, R. L., andJ. G. Wood. 1947. Some historical influences on the development of South Australia vegetation communities and their bearing on concepts and classification in ecology. Trans. Roy. Soc. Aust.71: 91–136.Google Scholar
  17. 16.
    Curtis, J. T. 1955. A prairie continuum in Wisconsin. Ecology36: 558–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 17.
    ————— andR. P. McIntosh. 1951. An upland forest continuum in the prairie-forest border region of Wisconsin. Ecology32: 476–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 18.
    Daubenmire, R. 1952. Forest vegetation of north Idaho and adjacent Washington and its bearings on concepts of vegetation classification. Ecol. Monog.22: 301–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 19.
    Domin, K. 1923. Is the evolution of the earth’s vegetation tending toward a small number of climatic formations? Acta Bot. Bohemia2: 54–60.Google Scholar
  21. 20.
    Egler, F. E. 1947. Arid southeastern Oahu vegetation, Hawaii. Ecol. Monog.17: 303–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 21.
    ————— 1951. A commentary on American Plant Ecology based on the textbooks of 1947–1949. Ecology32: 673–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 22.
    Gleason, H. A. 1939. The individualistic concept of the plant association. Amer. Mid. Nat.21: 92–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 23.
    Hale, M. E. 1955. Phytosociology of corticolus cryptograms in the upland forests of southern Wisconsin. Ecology36: 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 24.
    Hanson, H. C. Characteristics of theStipa commata-Bouteloua gracilis-Bouteloua curtipendula association of northern Colorado. Ecology36: 269-280.Google Scholar
  26. 25.
    Holmes, A. 1951. Principles of physical geology. Thomas Nelson & Sons, New York. [pp. 188–189]Google Scholar
  27. 26.
    Nichols, G. E. 1917. The interpretation and application of certain terms and concepts in the ecological classification of plant communities. Plant World20: 305–319.Google Scholar
  28. 27.
    ————— 1935. The hemlock-white pine-northern hardwood region of eastern North America. Ecology16: 403–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 28.
    Odum, E. P. 1953. Fundamentals of ecology. W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. 196 pp.Google Scholar
  30. 29.
    Oosting, H. J. 1953. The study of plant communities. W. H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco, California. 224 pp.Google Scholar
  31. 30.
    Phillips, J. 1934. Succession, development, the climax and the complex organism: an analysis of concepts. Jour. Ecol.22: 554–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 31.
    ————— 1935. Succession, development, the climax and the complex organism: an analysis of concepts. Part 2. Jour. Ecol.23: 210–246, 488–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 32.
    Pound, R., andF. E. Clements. 1898. The phytogeography of Nebraska. Jacob North & Co., Lincoln.Google Scholar
  34. 33.
    Randall, W. E. 1951. Interrelations of autecological characteristics of woodland herbs. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Amer.32: 57. [Abstract]Google Scholar
  35. 34.
    Richards, P. W. 1952. The tropical rain forest. Cambridge Univ. Press. 450 pp.Google Scholar
  36. 35.
    Schimper, A. F. W. 1903. Plant geography on a physiological basis. Oxford at the Clarendon Press. 839 pp.Google Scholar
  37. 36.
    Selander, S. 1950. Floristic phytogeography of southwestern Lule Lappmark. Acta Phytogeogr. Suecica27: 1–200.Google Scholar
  38. 37.
    Stearns, F. W. 1951. The composition of the sugar-maple-hemlock-yellow birch association in northern Wisconsin. Ecology32: 245–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 38.
    Tansley, A. G. 1939. The British Islands and their vegetation. Cambridge Univ. Press. [pp. 127–210, 234–240]Google Scholar
  40. 39.
    Weaver, J. E., andF. W. Albertson. 1936. Effects of the great drought on the prairies of Iowa, Nebraska and Kansas. Ecology17: 567–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 40.
    ————— andW. E. Bruner. 1954. Nature and placeof transition from the true prairie to mixed prairie. Ecology35: 117–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 41.
    ————— andF. E. Clements. 1938. Plant ecology. McGraw-Hill Co., New York [pp. 75–76]Google Scholar
  43. 42.
    Whitaker, R. H. 1953. A consideration of climax theory: the climax as a population and pattern. Ecol. Monog.23: 41–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 1960

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. W. Selleck
    • 1
  1. 1.University of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations