Oecologia

, Volume 155, Issue 4, pp 831–844 | Cite as

Spatial variation in plant interactions across a severity gradient in the sub-Antarctic

Community Ecology - Original Paper

Abstract

The stress–gradient hypothesis predicts that the intensity of interspecific positive interactions increases along environmental severity (i.e. stress and disturbance) gradients faster than the intensity of negative interactions. This study is the first to test if the stress–gradient hypothesis is supported for a location in the climatically extreme and species-poor sub-Antarctic. To do so, we investigate the fine-scale spatial distribution of plant species across altitude- and aspect-related abiotic severity gradients on a scoria cone on Marion Island. A clear altitudinal severity gradient was observed across the scoria cone, with lower temperatures, stronger winds and greater soil movement at higher altitudes. The altitudinal severity gradient was matched by stronger interspecific spatial association between the four dominant species at higher altitudes and in areas of lower vegetation cover. This suggests that, relative to the intensity of competition, the intensity of facilitation is greater under more severe conditions, supporting the stress–gradient hypothesis at the community level (i.e. for multiple pairs of species) and corroborating its usefulness for predicting variation in plant interactions at high latitudes and altitudes. Furthermore, the directional intraspecific aggregation and interspecific association plant cover patterns found within the gradient suggest that protection from the prevailing wind and from burial by loose substrate are the dominant facilitative mechanisms. Thus, plants benefit from the presence of neighbours when they provide shelter and substrate stability, and the relative intensity of this positive interaction is greatest at higher altitudes, and varies between species pairs. This study, therefore, not only provides support for the stress–gradient hypothesis in the sub-Antarctic, but also demonstrates fine-scale directional spatial patterns between multiple species nested within the severity gradient.

Keywords

Altitudinal gradient Cinder cone Facilitation Spatial association Stress–gradient hypothesis 

Supplementary material

442_2007_954_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (808 kb)
ESM1 (PDF 809 kb)

References

  1. Alftine KJ, Malanson GP (2004) Directional positive feedback and pattern at an alpine tree line. J Veg Sci 15:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arroyo MTK, Cavieres LA, Peñaloza A, Arroyo-Kalin MA (2003) Positive associations between the cushion plant Azorella monantha (Apiaceae) and alpine plant species in the Chilean Patagonian Andes. Plant Ecol 169:121–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Austin MP, Cunningham RB, Fleming PM (1984) New approaches to direct gradient analysis using environmental scalars and statistical curve-fitting procedures. Vegetatio 55:11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Badano EI, Cavieres LA, Molina-Montenegro MA, Quiroz CL (2005) Slope aspect influences plant association patterns in the Mediterranean matorral of central Chile. J Arid Environ 62:93–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bate GC, Smith VR (1983) Photosynthesis and respiration in the sub-Antarctic tussock grass Poa cookii. New Phytol 95:533–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bertness MD, Callaway RM (1994) Positive interactions in communities. Trends Ecol Evol 9:191–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boelhouwers J, Holness S, Sumner P (2000) Geomorphological characteristics of small debris flows on Junior’s Kop, Marion Island, maritime sub-Antarctic. Earth Surf Proc Land 25:341–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boelhouwers J, Holness S, Sumner P (2003) The maritime sub-Antarctic: a distinct periglacial environment. Geomorphology 52:39–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brooker RW (2006) Plant–plant interactions and environmental change. New Phytol 171:271–284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brooker RW, Callaghan TV (1998) The balance between positive and negative plant interactions and its relationship to environmental gradients: a model. Oikos 81:196–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brooker RW et al. (2008) Facilitation in plant communities: the past, the present, and the future. J Ecol 96:18–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bruno JF, Stachowicz JJ, Bertness MD (2003) Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol Evol 18:119–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bullock JA, Moy IL (2004) Plants as seed traps: inter-specific interference with dispersal. Acta Oecol 25:35–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Callaway RM (1998) Are positive interactions species-specific? Oikos 82:202–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Callaway RM, Walker LR (1997) Competition and facilitation: a synthetic approach to interactions in plant communities. Ecology 78:1958–1965Google Scholar
  16. Callaway RM et al. (2002) Positive interactions among alpine plants increase with stress. Nature 417:844–848Google Scholar
  17. Carlsson BÅ, Callaghan TV (1991) Positive plant interactions in tundra vegetation and the importance of shelter. J Ecol 79:973–983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cavieres LA, Arroyo MTK, Peñaloza A, Molina-Montenegro MA, Torres C (2002) Nurse effect of Bolax gummifera cushion plants in the alpine vegetation of the Chilean Patagonian Andes. J Veg Sci 13:547–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cavieres LA, Badano EI, Sierra-Almeida A, Gomez-Gonzalez S, Molina-Montenegro MA (2006) Positive interactions between alpine plant species and the nurse cushion plant Laretia acaulis do not increase with elevation in the Andes of central Chile. New Phytol 169:59–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Choler P, Michalet R, Callaway RM (2001) Facilitation and competition on gradients in alpine plant communities. Ecology 82:3295–3308Google Scholar
  21. Ennos AR (1997) Wind as an ecological factor. Trends Ecol Evol 12:108–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fehmi JS, Bartolome JW (2001) A grid-based method for sampling and analysing spatially ambiguous plants. J Veg Sci 12:467–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Franks SJ, Peterson CJ (2003) Burial disturbance leads to facilitation among coastal dune plants. Plant Ecol 168:13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Frenot Y, Gloaguen J-C, Cannavacciuolo M, Bellido A (1998) Primary succession on glacier forelands in the sub-Antarctic Kerguelen Islands. J Veg Sci 9:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. García LV (2004) Escaping the Bonferroni iron claw in ecological studies. Oikos 105:657–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gavilán RG, Sanchez-Mata D, Escudero A, Rubio A (2002) Spatial structure and interspecific interactions in Mediterranean high mountain vegetation (Sistema Central, Spain). Israel J Plant Sci 50:217–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gómez-Aparicio L, Zamora R, Gómez JM, Hódar JA, Castro J, Baraza E (2004) Applying plant facilitation to forest restoration: a meta-analysis of the use of shrubs as nurse plants. Ecol Appl 14:1128–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Haase P (2001) Can isotropy vs. anisotropy in the spatial association of plant species reveal physical vs. biotic facilitation? J Veg Sci 12:127–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hacker SD, Gaines SD (1997) Some implications of direct positive interactions for community species diversity. Ecology 78:1990–2003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heilbronn TD, Walton DWH (1984) Plant colonization of actively sorted stone stripes in the subAntarctic. Arctic Alpine Res 16:161–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holness SD (2004) Sediment movement rates and processes on cinder cones in the maritime Subantarctic (Marion Island). Earth Surf Proc Land 29:91–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huntley BJ (1970) Altitudinal distribution and phenology of Marion Island vascular plants. Tydsk vir Natuurwetenskap 10:255–262Google Scholar
  33. Huntley BJ (1971) Vegetation. In: van Zinderen Bakker EM Sr, Winterbottom JM, Dyer RA (eds) Marion and Prince Edward Islands: report on the South African biological and geological expeditions, 1965–1966. A.A. Balkema, Cape Town, South Africa, pp 98–160Google Scholar
  34. Kikvidze Z et al (2005) Linking patterns and processes in alpine plant communities: a global study. Ecology 86:1395–1400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Klanderud K, Totland O (2004) Habitat dependent nurse effects of the dwarf-shrub Dryas octopetala on alpine and arctic plant community structure. Ecoscience 11:410–420Google Scholar
  36. Lancaster J, Downes BJ (2004) Spatial point pattern analysis of available and exploited resources. Ecography 27:94–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. le Roux PC (2008) Climate and climate change. In: Chown SL, Froneman PW (eds) The Prince Edward Islands: land–sea interactions in a changing ecosystem. African SunMedia, Stellenbosch (in press)Google Scholar
  38. le Roux PC, McGeoch MA (2008) Changes in climate extremes, variability and signature on sub-Antarctic Marion Island. Clim Change 86:309–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lortie CJ, Callaway RM (2006) Re-analysis of meta-analysis: support for the stress–gradient hypothesis. J Ecol 94:7–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maestre FT, Valladares F, Reynolds JF (2005) Is the change of plant–plant interactions with abiotic stress predictable? A meta-analysis of field results in arid environments. J Ecol 93:748–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Maestre FT, Valladares F, Reynolds JF (2006) The stress–gradient hypothesis does not fit all relationships between plant–plant interactions and abiotic stress: further insights from arid environments. J Ecol 94:17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Michalet R et al. (2006) Do biotic interactions shape both sides of the humped-back model of species richness in plant communities? Ecol Lett 9:767–773Google Scholar
  43. Pammenter NW, Drennan PM, Smith VR (1986) Physiological and anatomical aspects of photosynthesis of two Agrostis species at a sub-Antarctic island. New Phytol 102:143–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Perry JN (1998) Measures of spatial pattern for counts. Ecology 79:1008–1017Google Scholar
  45. Perry JN, Dixon PM (2002) A new method to measure spatial association for ecological count data. Ecoscience 9:133–141Google Scholar
  46. Pugnaire FI, Luque MT (2001) Changes in plant interactions along a gradient of environmental stress. Oikos 93:42–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  48. Reichman OJ (1984) Spatial and temporal variation of seed distributions in Sonoran Desert soils. J Biogeogr 11:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Scheffer M, Holmgren M, Brovkin V, Claussen M (2005) Synergy between small- and large-scale feedbacks of vegetation on the water cycle. Glob Change Biol 11:1003–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scott JJ, Bergstrom DM (2005) Vegetation of Heard Island and the McDonald Islands. In: Green K, Woehler EJ (eds) Heard Island: Southern Ocean Sentinel. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton, UK, pp 69–90Google Scholar
  51. Smith VR (1987) The environment and biota of Marion Island. S Afr J Sci 83:211–220Google Scholar
  52. Smith VR, Mucina L (2006) Vegetation of Marion and Prince Edward Islands. In: Mucina L, Rutherford MC (eds) Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland: Strelitzia, vol 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria, pp 698–723Google Scholar
  53. Smith VR, Steenkamp M (1990) Climatic change and its ecological implications at a sub-Antarctic island. Oecologia 85:14–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tielbörger K, Kadmon R (2000) Temporal environmental variation tips the balance between facilitation and interference in desert plants. Ecology 81:1544–1553Google Scholar
  55. Tirado R, Pugnaire FI (2003) Shrub spatial aggregation and consequences for reproductive success. Oecologia 136:296–301PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Veblen TT, Ashton DH, Schlegel FM, Veblen AT (1977) Plant succession in a timberline depressed by vulcanism in south-central Chile. J Biogeogr 4:275–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Warren Wilson J (1959) Notes on wind and its effects in Arctic–alpine vegetation. J Ecol 47:415–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Conservation Ecology and EntomologyUniversity of StellenboschMatielandSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations