Annals of Forest Science

, Volume 69, Issue 4, pp 467–476 | Cite as

Reproductive ecology of Pinus nigra in an invasive population: individual- and population-level variation in seed production and timing of seed release

  • Shaun R. Coutts
  • Paul Caplat
  • Katrina Cousins
  • Nick Ledgard
  • Yvonne M. Buckley
Original Paper

Abstract

• Context

The details of fecundity, such as its distribution and timing, can have important consequences for forest dynamics.

• Aims

We detail two aspects of the reproductive ecology of an exotic population of Pinus nigra in New Zealand. We compare our findings with those reported for P. nigra in southern France and Britain.

• Methods

We describe variation in fecundity, both within the population and through time, and relate seed release to climatic conditions.

• Results

On average, trees entered reproduction earlier than reported in European studies. Although the mean number of cones per tree varied through time, the distribution of cone production among trees was consistently best described using a negative binomial or mixed gamma-exponential distribution. Both distributions are right skewed and trees maintained fecundity hierarchies over time, suggesting that some trees in the population have much higher lifetime reproduction than others. We found that trees released significantly more seeds when conditions were dry and windy, potentially increasing the proportion of seeds that disperse long distances.

• Conclusions

Right-skewed fecundity distributions have the potential to slow spread rates, while preferentially releasing seeds in dry windy conditions is likely to increase spread rates. The net effect of these processes is an open question.

Keywords

Cone production Individual variation Pinus nigra Seed abscission Linear mixed-effects models Negative binomial distribution Seed traps 

References

  1. Bates D, Maechler M (2010). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-35. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
  2. Boulant N, Garnier A, Curt T, Lepart J (2009) Disentangling the effects of land use, shrub cover and climate on the invasion speed of native and introduced pines in grasslands. Divers Dist 15:1047–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buckley YM, Brockerhoff E, Langer L, Ledgard N, North H, Rees M (2005) Slowing down a pine invasion despite uncertainty in demography and dispersal. J Appl Ecol 42:1020–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bullock SH (1989) Life-history and seed dispersal of the short-lived chaparral shrub dendromecon-rigida (Papaveraceae). Am J Bot 76:1506–1517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caplat P, Coutts SR, Buckley Y (2012a) Modeling population dynamics, landscape structure and management decisions for controlling the spread of invasive plants. Ann NY Acad Sci. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06313.x
  6. Caplat P, Nathan R, Buckley Y (2012b) Seed terminal velocity, wind turbulence and demography drive the spread of an invasive tree in an analytical model. Ecology. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/11-0820.1
  7. Clark JS (2007) Models for ecological data: an introduction. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark JS, Lewis M, Horvath L (2001) Invasion by extremes: POPULATION spread with variation in dispersal and reproduction. Am Nat 157:537–554PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cook RE, Lyons EE (1983) The biology of Viola fimbriatula in a natural disturbance. Ecology 64:654–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dawson J, Vincent JFV, Rocca AM (1997) How pine cones open. Nature 390:668–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dehlin H, Peltzer DA, Allison VJ, Yeates GW, Nilsson MC, Wardle DA (2008) Tree seedling performance and below-ground properties in stands of invasive and native tree species. N Z J Ecol 32:67–79Google Scholar
  12. Greene DF, Quesada M, Calogeropoulos C (2008) Dispersal of seeds by the tropical sea breeze. Ecology 89:118–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris AS (1969) Ripening and dispersal of a bumper western hemlock-Sitka spruce seed crop in southeast Alaska. Note PNW-105. United States Forest Service, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  14. Herrera CM (1991) Dissecting factors responsible for individual variation in plant fecundity. Ecology 72:1436–1448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Herrera CM, Jovani R (2010) Lognormal distribution of individual lifetime fecundity: insights from a 23-year study. Ecology 91:422–430PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Higgins SI, Richardson DM (1999) Predicting plant migration rates in a changing world: the role of long-distance dispersal. Am Nat 153:464–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jongejans E, Pedatella NM, Shea K, Skarpaas O, Auhl R (2007) Seed release by invasive thistles: the impact of plant and environmental factors. P Roy Soc B-Biol Sci 274:2457–2464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kerr G (2000) Natural regeneration of Corsican pine (Pinus nigra subsp laricio) in Great Britain. Forestry 73:479–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kerr G, Gosling P, Morgan G, Stokes V, Cunningham V, Parratt M (2008) Seed production and seedling survival in a 50-year-old stand of Corsican pine (Pinus nigra subsp laricio) in southern Britain. Forestry 81:525–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nathan R, Ne'eman G (2004) Spatiotemporal dynamics of recruitment in Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis Miller). Plant Ecol 171:123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nathan R, Safriel UN, Noy-Meir I, Schiller G (1999) Seed release without fire in Pinus halepensis, a Mediterranean serotinous wind-dispersed tree. J Ecol 87:659–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Oliver CD, Larson BC (eds) (1996) Forest stand dynamics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Pinheiro J, Bates D (2000) Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. Statistics and Computing Series. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, the R Development Core Team (2010) nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3:1–97Google Scholar
  25. R Development Core Team (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/
  26. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM (1996) What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology 77:1655–1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reyssat E, Mahadevan L (2009) Hygromorphs: from pine cones to biomimetic bilayers. J R Soc Interface 6:951–957PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Richardson DM, Pysek P (2006) Plant invasions: merging the concepts of species invasiveness and community invasibility. Prog Phys Geogr 30:409–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Richardson DM, Rejmanek M (2004) Invasive conifers: a global survey and predictive framework. Divers Distrib 10:321–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Santos-del-Blanco L, Zas R, Notivol E, Chambel MR, Majada J, Climent J (2010) Variation of early reproductive allocation in multi-site genetic trials of maritime pine and Aleppo pine. For Syst 19:381–392Google Scholar
  31. Scheiner SM (1987) Size and fecundity hierarchies in an herbaceous perennial. Oecologia 74:128–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Soons MB, Bullock JM (2008) Non-random seed abscission, long-distance wind dispersal and plant migration rates. J Ecol 96:581–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Venables WN, Ripley BD (2002) Modern applied statistics with S, 4th edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Warton DI, Hui FKC (2011) The arcsine is asinine: the analysis of proportions in ecology. Ecology 92:3–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© INRA / Springer-Verlag France 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shaun R. Coutts
    • 1
  • Paul Caplat
    • 1
  • Katrina Cousins
    • 1
  • Nick Ledgard
    • 1
  • Yvonne M. Buckley
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations