Plant Ecology

, Volume 157, Issue 2, pp 151–164

Regeneration in fringe mangrove forests damaged by Hurricane Andrew

  • Andrew Baldwin
  • Michael Egnotovich
  • Mark Ford
  • William Platt
Article

Abstract

Mangrove forests along many tropical coastlines are frequently andseverely damaged by hurricanes. The ability of mangrove forests to regeneratefollowing hurricanes has been noted, but changes that occur in vegetationfollowing disturbance by hurricane winds and storm tides have not been studied.We measured changes in plant community structure and environmental variables intwo fringe mangrove forests in south Florida, USA that experienced high windvelocities and storm tides associated with Hurricane Andrew (August1992). Loss of the forest canopy stimulated regeneration via seedlinggrowth and recruitment, as well as resprouting of some trees that survived thehurricane. Initial regeneration differed among species in both forests:Rhizophora mangle L. regenerated primarily via growth ofseedlings present at the time of the hurricane (i.e., release of advancerecruits), but many trees of Avicennia germinans(L.) Stearn and Laguncularia racemosa Gaertn.f.resprouted profusely from dormant epicormic buds. In one forest, which wasformerly dominated by Laguncularia, high densities ofRhizophora seedlings survived the hurricane and grew toform dense stands of saplings and small trees ofRhizophora. In the other forest, there were lowerdensitiesof surviving Rhizophora seedlings (possibly due tohigher storm tide), and extensive bare areas that were colonized byAvicennia, Laguncularia, andherbaceous species. This forest, predominantly Rhizophoraat the time of the hurricane, now contains stands of saplings and small treesofall three species, interspersed with patches dominated by herbaceous plants.These findings indicate that moderately damaged fringe forests may regenerateprimarily via release of Rhizophora advance recruits,leading to single-species stands. In severely damaged forests, seedlingrecruitment may be more important and lead to mixed-species stands.Regeneration of mangrove forests following hurricanes can involve differentpathways produced by complex interactions between resprouting capability,seedling survival, post-hurricane seedling recruitment, and colonizationby herbaceous vegetation. These differences in relative importance ofregeneration pathways, which may result in post-hurricane forestsdifferent from their pre-hurricane structure, suggest that models forregeneration of mangrove forests will be more complex than “directregeneration” models proposed for other tropical forests whereregeneration after hurricanes is dominated by resprouting.

Avicennia germinans Laguncularia racemosa Resprouting Rhizophora mangle Seedling recruitment Storm tide Wind 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Armentano T.V., Doren R.F., Platt W.J. and Mullins T. 1995. Effects of Hurricane Andrew on coastal and interior forests of Southern Florida: overview and synthesis. Journal of Coastal Research SI21: 111-144.Google Scholar
  2. Baldwin A.H., Platt W.J., Gathen K.L., Lessmann J.M. and Rauch T.L. 1995. Hurricane damage and regeneration in fringe mangrove forests of southeast Florida, USA. Journal of Coastal Research SI21: 169-183.Google Scholar
  3. Basnet K. 1993. Recovery of a tropical rain forest after hurricane damage. Vegetatio 109: 1-4.Google Scholar
  4. Bellingham P.J., Tanner E.V.J. and Healey J.R. 1995. Damage and responsiveness of Jamaican montane tree species after disturbance by a hurricane. Ecology 76: 2562-2580.Google Scholar
  5. Boucher D.H. 1989. When the hurricane destroyed the rain forest. Biology Digest 16: 11-18.Google Scholar
  6. Connell J.H. and Slatyer R.O. 1977. Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their role in community stability and organization. American Naturalist 111: 1119-1144.Google Scholar
  7. Craighead F.C. and Gilbert V.C. 1962. The effects of Hurricane Donna on the vegetation of southern Florida. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences 25: 1-28.Google Scholar
  8. Craighead F.C. 1971. The Trees of South Florida. University of Miami Press, Miami.Google Scholar
  9. Davis J.H. 1940. The ecology and geologic role of mangroves in Florida. Papers from the Tortugas Laboratory 32. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication 517: 307-412.Google Scholar
  10. Egler F.E. 1952. Southeast Saline Everglades vegetation, Florida, and its management. Vegetatio 3: 233-265.Google Scholar
  11. Egler F.E. 1954. Vegetation science concepts I. Initial floristic composition, a factor in old-field vegetation development. Vegetatio 4: 412-417.Google Scholar
  12. Elmqvist T., Rainey W.E., Pierson E.D. and Cox P.A. 1994. Effects of tropical Cyclones Ofa and Val on the structure of a Samoan lowland rain forest. Biotropica 26: 384-391.Google Scholar
  13. Everham E.M. and Brokaw N.V.L. 1996. Forest damage and recovery from catastrophic wind. Botanical Review 62: 113-185.Google Scholar
  14. Faulkner S.P., Patrick W.H. and Gambrell R.P. 1989. Field techniques for measuring wetland soil parameters. Soil Science Society of America Journal 53: 883-890.Google Scholar
  15. Granzow-de la Cerda I., Zamora N., Vandermeer J.H. and Boucher D.H. 1997. Diversidad de especies arbó reas en el bosque tropical hú medo del Caribe nicaragüense siete añ os después huracán Juana. Revista de Biologia Tropical 45: 1409-1419.Google Scholar
  16. Herbert D.A. 1999. Hurricane damage to a Hawaiian forest: nutrient supply rate affects resistance and resilience. Ecology 80: 908-920.Google Scholar
  17. Imbert D., Labbé P. and Rousteau A. 1996. Hurricane damage and forest structure in Guadeloupe, French West Indies. Journal of Tropical Ecology 12: 663-680.Google Scholar
  18. Imbert D., Rousteau A. and Labbé P. 1998. Ouragans et diversité biologique dans les forê ts tropicales. L'exemple de la Guadeloupe. Acta Oecologica 19: 251-262.Google Scholar
  19. Lugo A.E. and Snedaker S.C. 1974. The ecology of mangroves. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 5: 39-64.Google Scholar
  20. McCoy E.D., Mushinsky H.R., Johnson D. and Meshaka W.E. 1996. Mangrove damage caused by Hurricane Andrew on the southwestern coast of Florida. Bulletin of Marine Science 59: 1-8.Google Scholar
  21. McKee K.L. 1993. Soil physicochemical patterns and mangrove species distribution — reciprocal effects. Journal of Ecology 81: 477-487.Google Scholar
  22. Mitsch W.J. and Gosselink J.G. 2000. Wetlands. 3rd edn. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Noel J.M., Maxwell A., Platt W.J. and Pace L. 1995. Effects of Hurricane Andrew on cypress (Taxodium distichum var. nutans) in South Florida. Journal of Coastal Research SI21: 184-196.Google Scholar
  24. Ogden J.C. 1992. The impact of Hurricane Andrew on the ecosystems of South Florida. Conservation Biology 6: 488-490.Google Scholar
  25. Olmsted I., Dunevitz H. and Platt W.J. 1993. Effects of freezes on tropical trees in Everglades National Park, Florida, USA. Tropical Ecology 34: 17-34.Google Scholar
  26. Pascarella J.B. 1998. Hurricane disturbance, plant-animal interactions, and the reproductive success of a tropical shrub. Biotropica 30: 416-424.Google Scholar
  27. Patrick W.H., Gambrell R.P. and Faulkner S.P. 1996. Redox measurements of soils. In: Anonymous, Methods of soil analysis. Part 3. Chemical Methods. Soil Science Society of America and American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, pp. 1255-1273.Google Scholar
  28. Platt W.J., Doren R.F. and Armentano T.V. 2000. Effects of Hurricane Andrew on stands of slash pine (Pinus elliottii var. densa) in the Everglades region of south Florida (USA). Plant Ecology 146: 43-60.Google Scholar
  29. Poulson T.L. and Platt W.J. 1996. Replacement patterns of beech and sugar maple in Warren Woods, Michigan. Ecology 77: 1234-1253.Google Scholar
  30. Powell M.D. and Houston S.H. 1996. Hurricane Andrew's landfall in south Florida. 2. Surface wind fields and potential real-time applications. Weather and Forecasting 11: 329-349.Google Scholar
  31. Quigley M.F. and Platt W.J. 1996. Structure and pattern in temperate seasonal forests. Vegetatio 123: 117-138.Google Scholar
  32. Rappaport E. 1993. Preliminary report: Hurricane Andrew (16–28 August, 1992). Unpublished Mimeograph Report. National Hurricane Center, Coral Gables, Miami, Florida.Google Scholar
  33. Roth L.C. 1992. Hurricanes and mangrove regeneration: effects of hurricane Joan, October 1988, on the vegetation of Isla del Venado, Bluefields, Nicaragua. Biotropica 24: 375-384.Google Scholar
  34. Slater H.H., Platt W.J., Baker D.B. and Johnson H.A. 1995. Effects of Hurricane Andrew on damage and mortality of trees in subtropical hardwood hammocks of Lone Pine Key, Everglades National Park, Florida, USA. Journal of Coastal Research SI21: 197-207.Google Scholar
  35. Smith T.J., Robblee M.B., Wanless H.R. and Doyle T.W. 1994. Mangroves, hurricanes, and lightning strikes. BioScience 44: 256-262.Google Scholar
  36. Sokal R.R. and Rohlf F.J. 1995.Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
  37. Tomlinson P.B. 1986. The biology of trees native to tropical Florida. Harvard University Printing Office, Allston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  38. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1994. Technical summary document for the advance identification of possible future disposal sites and areas generally unsuitable for disposal of dredged or fill material in wetlands adjacent to southwest Biscayne Bay, Dade County, Florida. Report No. Report EPA 904/ R-94/007 and DERM Technical Report 94-2, USEPA Region IV, Wetlands Planning Unit, Atlanta, Georgia.Google Scholar
  39. Vandermeer J.H., Zamora N., Yih K. and Boucher D.H. 1990. Regeneració n inicial en una selva tropical en la costa caribeñ a de Nicaruagua después del huracán Juana. Revista de Biología Tropical 38: 347-359.Google Scholar
  40. Vandermeer J.H., Mallona M.A., Boucher D.H., Yih K. and Perfecto I. 1995. Three years of ingrowth following catastrophic hurricane damage on the Caribbean coast of Nicaragua: evidence in support of the direct regeneration hypothesis. Journal of Tropical Ecology 11: 465-471.Google Scholar
  41. Vandermeer J.H., Boucher D.H., Perfecto I. and Granzow-de la Cerda I. 1996. A therory of disturbance and species diversity: evidence from Nicaragua after Hurricane Joan. Biotropica 28: 600-613.Google Scholar
  42. Wakimoto R.M. and Black P.G. 1994. Damage survey of Hurricane Andrew and its relationship to the eyewall. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 75: 189-200.Google Scholar
  43. Walker L.R. 1991. Tree damage and recovery from Hurricane Hugo in Luquillo Experimental Forest, Puerto Rico. Biotropica 23: 379-385.Google Scholar
  44. Walker L.R., Lodge D.J., Brokaw N.V.L. and Waide R.B. 1991. An introduction to hurricanes in the Caribbean. Biotropica 23: 313-316.Google Scholar
  45. Whigham D.F., Olmsted I., Cabrera Cano E. and Harmon M.E. 1991. The impact of Hurricane Gilbert on trees, litterfall, and woody debris in a dry tropical forest in the northeastern Yucatan peninsula. Biotropica 23: 434-441.Google Scholar
  46. Woodroffe C.D. and Grime D. 1999. Storm impact and evolution of a mangrove-fringed chenier plain, Shoal Bay, Darwin, Australia. Marine Geology 159: 303-321.Google Scholar
  47. Yih K., Boucher D.H., Vandermeer J.H. and Zamora N. 1991. Recovery of the rain forest of southeastern Nicaragua after destruction by Hurricane Joan. Biotropica 23: 106-113.Google Scholar
  48. Zimmerman J.K., Everham E.M., Waide R.B., Lodge D.J., Taylor C.M. and Brokaw N.V.L. 1994. Responses of tree species to hurricane winds in subtropical wet forest in Puerto Rico: implications for tropical tree life histories. Journal of Ecology 82: 911-922.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew Baldwin
    • 1
  • Michael Egnotovich
    • 2
  • Mark Ford
    • 3
  • William Platt
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Biological Resources EngineeringUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.Center for Environmental Sciences, Chesapeake Biological LaboratoryUniversity of MarylandSolomonsUSA
  3. 3.Louisiana Environmental Research CenterMcNeese State UniversityLake CharlesUSA
  4. 4.Department of Biological SciencesLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA

Personalised recommendations