Oecologia

, Volume 147, Issue 2, pp 261–271 | Cite as

Disturbance-mediated trophic interactions and plant performance

Plant-Animal Interactions

Abstract

Disturbances, such as flooding, play important roles in determining community structure. Most studies of disturbances focus on the direct effects and, hence, the indirect effects of disturbances are poorly understood. Within terrestrial riparian areas, annual flooding leads to differences in the arthropod community as compared to non-flooded areas. In turn, these differences are likely to alter the survival, growth, and reproduction of plant species via an indirect effect of flooding (i.e., changes in herbivory patterns). To test for such effects, an experiment was conducted wherein arthropod predators and herbivores were excluded from plots in flooded and non-flooded areas and the impact on a common riparian plant, Mimulus guttatus was examined. In general, the direct effect of flooding on M. guttatus was positive. The indirect effects, however, significantly decreased plant survival for both years of the experiment, regardless of predator presence, because of an increased exposure to grasshoppers, the most abundant herbivore in the non-flooded sites. Leafhoppers, which were more abundant in the flooded sites, had much weaker and varying effects. During 2000, when the leafhopper herbivory was high, arthropod predators did not significantly reduce damage to plants. In 2001, the mean herbivory damage was lower and predators were able to significantly reduce overall leafhopper damage. The effects of predators on leafhoppers, however, did not increase plant survival, final weight, or the reproduction potential and, thus, did not initiate a species-level trophic cascade. Overall, it was the differences in the herbivore community that led to a significant decrease in plant survival. While flooding certainly alters riparian plant survival through direct abiotic effects, it also indirectly affects riparian plants by changing the arthropod community, in particular herbivores, and hence trophic interactions.

Keywords

Disturbance Flooding Lycosidae Mimulus guttatus DC Trophic interactions 

References

  1. Caicco SL (1998) Current status, structure, and plant species composition of the riparian vegetation of the Truckee River, California and Nevada. Madroño 45:17–30Google Scholar
  2. Canales J, Trevisan MC, Silva JF, Caswell H (1994) A demographic study of an annual grass (Andropogon brevifolius Schwarz) in burnt and unburnt savanna. Acta Oecologica 15:261–273Google Scholar
  3. Carson WP, Root RB (2000) Herbivory and plant species coexistence: community regulation by an outbreaking phytophagous insect. Ecol Monogr 70:73–99Google Scholar
  4. Collins SL (2000) Disturbance frequency and community stability in native tallgrass prairie. Am Nat 155:311–325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Day RT, Keddy PA, McNeil J, Carleton T (1988) Fertility and disturbance gradients: a summary model for riverine marsh vegetation. Ecology 69:1044–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DeLong DM (1971) The bionomics of leafhoppers. Annu Rev Entomol 16:179–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dempster JP (1963) The population dynamics of grasshoppers and locusts. Biol Rev 38:490–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diamond J (1986) Overview: laboratory experiments, field experiments, and natural experiments. In: Diamond J, Case TJ (eds) Community ecology. Harper and Row, New York, pp 65–79Google Scholar
  9. Doak DF (1992) Lifetime impacts of herbivory for a perennial plant. Ecology 73:2086–2099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elderd BD (2003) Changing flow regimes: its impacts on riparian vegetation and a common riparian species, Mimulus guttatus. Ecol Appl 13:1610–1625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. von Ende CN (1993) Repeated-measures analysis: growth and other time-dependent measures. In: Scheiner SM, Gurevitch J (eds) Design and analysis of ecological experiments. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 113–137Google Scholar
  12. Fine PVA, Mesones I, Coley PD (2004) Herbivores promote habitat specialization by trees in Amazonian Forests. Science 305:663–665CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Framenau VW, Manderbach R, Baehr M (2002) Riparian gravel banks of upland and lowland rivers in Victoria (south-east Australia): arthropod community structure and life-history patterns along a longitudinal gradient. Aust J Zool 50:103–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grant AL (1924) A monograph of the genus Mimulus. Ann Mo Bot Gard 11:99–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hairston NG (1989) Ecological experiments: purpose, design, and execution. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Halaj J, Wise DH (2001) Terrestrial trophic cascades: how much do they trickle? Am Nat 157:262–281CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hewitt GB (1979) Hatching and development of rangeland grasshoppers in relation to forage, growth, temperature, and precipitation. Environ Entomol 8:24–29Google Scholar
  18. Hewitt GB (1985) Review of factors affecting fecundity oviposition, and egg survival of grasshoppers in North America. US Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service, Washington, p 35Google Scholar
  19. Hickman JC (ed) (1993) The Jepson manual: higher plants of California. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  20. Hobbs RJ, Mooney HA (1991) Effects of rainfall variability and gopher disturbance on serpentine annual grassland dynamics. Ecology 72:59–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holling CS (1959) The components of predation as revealed by a study of small mammal predation of the European pine sawfly. Can Entomol 91:293–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Huntly N (1991) Herbivores and the dynamics of communities and ecosystems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 22:477–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Knight TM, Holt RD (2005) Fire generates spatial gradients in herbivory: an example from a Florida sandhill ecosystem. Ecology 86:587–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lenssen JPM, de Kroon H (2005) Abiotic constraints at the upper boundaries of two Rumex species on a freshwater flooding gradient. J Ecol 93:138–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lindsay DW (1964) Natural dispersal of Mimulus guttatus. Proc Utah Acad 41:237–241Google Scholar
  26. Louda SM (1982) Distribution ecology: variation in plant recruitment over a gradient in relation to insect seed predation. Ecol Monogr 52:25–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lude A, Reich M, Plachter H (1999) Life strategies of ants in unpredictable floodplain habitats of alpine rivers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Entomol Gen 24:75–91Google Scholar
  28. Milford ER (1999) Ant communities in flooded and unflooded riparian forest of the middle Rio Grande. Southwest Nat 44:278–286Google Scholar
  29. Neter J, Kutner MH, Nachtsheim CJ, Wasserman W (1996) Applied linear statistical models. McGraw-Hill, BostonGoogle Scholar
  30. Olff H, Ritchie ME (1998) Effects of herbivores on grassland plant diversity. Trends Ecol Evol 13:261–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Paine RT, Levin SA (1981) Intertidal landscapes: disturbance and the dynamics of pattern. Ecol Monogr 51:145–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pascarella JB, Horvitz CC (1998) Hurricane disturbance and the population dynamics of a tropical understory shrub: megamatrix elasticity analysis. Ecology 79:547–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rand TA (2002) Variation in insect herbivory across a salt marsh tidal gradient influences plant survival and distribution. Oecologia 132:549–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reich M (1991) Grasshoppers (Orthoptera, Saltatoria) on alpine and dealpine riverbanks and their use as indicators for natural floodplain dynamics. Regul Rivers: Res Manage 6:333–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Risch SJ, Carrol CR (1982) Effect of a keystone predaceous ant, Solenopsis geminata, on arthropods in a tropical agroecosystem. Ecology 63:1979–1983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Root RB, Cappuccino N (1992) Patterns in population change and the organization of the insect community associated with goldenrod. Ecol Monogr 63:393–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. SAS Institute Inc. (1999) Version 8.00. SAS Institute Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
  38. Savage W (1973) Annotated check-list of vascular plants of Sagehen creek basin, Nevada County, California. Madroño 22:115–139Google Scholar
  39. Scheiner SM (1993) MANOVA: multiple response variables and multispecies interactions. In: Scheiner SM, Gurevitch J (eds) Design and analysis of ecological experiments. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 94–112Google Scholar
  40. Schmitz OJ, Beckerman AP, O‘Brien KM (1997) Behaviorally mediated trophic cascades: effects of predation risk on food web interactions. Ecology 78:1388–1399Google Scholar
  41. Shafroth PB, Stromberg JC, Patten DT (2002) Riparian vegetation response to altered disturbance and stress regimes. Ecol Appl 12:107–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Silvertown J, Dodd ME, Gowing DJG, Mountford JO (1999) Hydrologically defined niches reveal a basis for species richness in plant communities. Nature 400:61–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sousa W (1979) Disturbance in marine intertidal boulder fields: the nonequilibrium maintenance of species diversity. Ecology 60:1225–1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Strong DR (1992) Are trophic cascades all wet? Differentiation and donor-control in speciose ecosystems. Ecology 73:747–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Townsend PA (2001) Relationships between vegetation patterns and hydroperiod on the Roanoke River floodplain, North Carolina. Plant Ecol 156:43–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Underwood AJ (1990) Experiments in ecology and management: their logics, functions, and interpretations. Aust J Ecol 15:365–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Underwood AJ (1997) Experiments in ecology: their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  48. Vickery RK Jr (1978) Case studies in the evolution of species complexes in Mimulus. Evol Biol 11:405–506Google Scholar
  49. White PS, Pickett STA (eds) (1985) The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  50. Wootton JT, Parker MS, Power ME (1996) Effects of disturbance on river food webs. Science 273:1558–1561CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental StudiesUniversity of CaliforniaSanta CruzUSA
  2. 2.Center for Integrating Statistical and Environmental ScienceUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations