Plant Ecology

, Volume 159, Issue 2, pp 185–199

Crown illumination limits the population growth rate of a neotropical understorey palm (Geonoma macrostachys, Arecaceae)

  • Jens-Christian Svenning
Article

Abstract

The importance of light as a limiting factor for growth and reproductionin tropical understorey plants is well known, but the population-levelconsequences of light limitation remain little explored. Here, I usedemographicmodelling to examine if the effect of canopy gaps on individual-levelperformance in a tropical understorey palm translates into an effect on thepopulation growth rate. The demographic effects of heterogeneity in crownillumination (index of hemispherical canopy openness), forest-phase, and othermicroenvironmental parameters were quantified using data on 2592 individuals ofall sizes in permanent plots followed over a 1.5 year period. Supplementaryexperiments investigating the effects of canopy conditions on seedlingrecruitment were also conducted. Among the microenvironmental parameters onlycrown illumination and forest-phase had strong and consistent demographiceffects. Growth and fecundity generally increased with increasing crownillumination. Under open forest-phase conditions growth tended to increase andsurvival to decrease (due to increased physical damage). Seedlings transplantedinto gap centres were damaged by solarization. The population-level effect ofheterogeneity in crown illumination and forest-phase was investigated usingtransition matrix models. The overall population growth rate was 0.999, and notsignificantly different from 1. Illumination-specific models showed thatG. macrostachys would be unable to persist at permanentlylow illumination, but would increase in density under higher illumination.Forest-phase-specific models gave similar, but weaker results. Thus, inG. macrostachys effects of canopy openness onindividual-level performance strongly limit the population growth rate. Thepresent study thereby shows that fine-scale spatiotemporal variation in canopyopenness in the tropical rain forest understorey can play a central role in thepopulation ecology of shade-tolerant understorey plants.

Crown illumination index Demography Ecuador Matrix modelling Shade Understorey plants 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alvarez-Buylla E.R. and Slatkin M. 1991. Finding confidence limits on population growth rates: three real examples revisited. Ecol. 75: 255-260.Google Scholar
  2. Bentley B.L. 1979. Longevity of individual leaves in a tropical rainforest understory. Ann. Bot. 43: 119-121.Google Scholar
  3. Bernal R. 1998. Demography of the vegetable ivory palm Phytelephas seemannii in Colombia, and the impact of seed harvesting. J. Appl. Ecol. 35: 64-74.Google Scholar
  4. Borchsenius F., Pedersen H.B. and Balslev H. 1998. Manual to the palms of Ecuador. AAU Reports, Department of Systematic Botany, University of Aarhus, Aarhus.Google Scholar
  5. Bullock S.H. 1980. Demography of an undergrowth palm in littoral Cameroun. Biotropica 12: 247-255.Google Scholar
  6. Caswell H. 1989. Matrix Population Models. Sinauer Ass., Inc. Publishers, Sunderland, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  7. Chazdon R.L. 1985. Leaf display, canopy structure, and light interception of two understory palm species. Am. J. Bot. 72: 1493-1502.Google Scholar
  8. Chazdon R.L. 1986a. The costs of leaf support in understory palms: economy versus safety. Am. Nat. 127: 9-30.Google Scholar
  9. Chazdon R.L. 1986b. Light variation and carbon gain in rain forest understorey palms. J. Ecol. 74: 995-1012.Google Scholar
  10. Chazdon R.L. 1986c. Physiological and morphological basis of shade tolerance in rain forest understory palms. Principes 30: 92-99.Google Scholar
  11. Chazdon R.L. 1992. Patterns of growth and reproduction of Geonoma congesta, a clustered understory palm. Biotropica 24: 43-51.Google Scholar
  12. Chazdon R.L. and Fetcher N. 1984. Light environments of tropical forests. In: Medina E., Mooney H.A. and Vásquez-Yánes C. (eds), Physiological Ecology of Plants of the Wet Tropics. Dr W. Junk Publishers, The Hague, pp. 27-36.Google Scholar
  13. Chazdon R.L., Pearcy R.W., Lee D.W. and Fetcher N. 1996. Photosynthetic responses of tropical forest plants to contrasting light environments. In: Mulkey S.S., Chazdon R.L. and Smith A.P. (eds), Tropical Forest Plant Ecophysiology. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 5-55.Google Scholar
  14. Cintra R. 1997. A test of the Janzen-Connell model with two common tree species in Amazonian forest. J. Trop. Ecol. 13: 641-658.Google Scholar
  15. Clark D.A. and Clark D.B. 1992. Life history diversity of canopy and emergent trees in a neotropical rain forest. Ecological Monographs 62: 315-344.Google Scholar
  16. Clark D.B., Clark D.A. and Rich P.M. 1993. Comparative analysis of microhabitat utilization by saplings of nine tree species in neotropical rain forest. Biotropica 25: 397-407.Google Scholar
  17. Clark D.B., Clark D.A., Rich P.M., Weiss S. and Oberbauer S.F. 1996. Landscape-scale evaluation of understory light and canopy structure: methods and application in a neotropical lowland rain forest. Can. J. For. Res. 26: 747-757.Google Scholar
  18. Clark J.S., Macklin E. and Wood L. 1998. Stages and spatial scales of recruitment limitation in southern Appalachian forests. Ecol. Monogr. 68: 213-235.Google Scholar
  19. Condit R., Hubbell S.P. and Foster R.B. 1994. Density dependence in two understory tree species in a neotropical forest. Ecology 75: 671-680.Google Scholar
  20. Condit R., Hubbell S.P. and Foster R.B. 1995. Mortality rates of 205 neotropical tree and shrub species and the impact of a severe drought. Ecological Monographs 65: 419-439.Google Scholar
  21. Crawley M.J. 1997a. Life history and environment. In: Crawley M.J. (ed.), Plant Ecology. Blackwell Science Ltd., Oxford, pp. 73-131.Google Scholar
  22. Crawley M.J. (ed.) 1997b. Plant Ecology. Blackwell Science Ltd., Oxford.Google Scholar
  23. Cunningham S.A. 1997. The effect of light environment, leaf area, and stored carbohydrates on inflorescence production by a rain forest understory palm. Oecologia 111: 36-44.Google Scholar
  24. Davies S.J., Palmiotto P.A., Ashton P.S., Lee H.S. and LaFrankie J.V. 1998. Comparative ecology of 11 sympatric species of Macaranga in Borneo: tree distribution in relation to horizontal and vertical resource heterogeneity. J. Ecol. 86: 662-673.Google Scholar
  25. de Granville J.-J. 1992. Life forms and growth strategies of Guianan palms as related to their ecology. Bulletin de l'Institut français d'études andines 21: 533-548.Google Scholar
  26. Denslow J.S. 1987. Tropical rainforest gaps and tree species diversity. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18: 431-451.Google Scholar
  27. Denslow J.S., Newell E. and Ellison A.M. 1991. The effect of understory palms and cyclanths on the growth and survival of Inga seedlings. Biotropica 23: 225-234.Google Scholar
  28. Dixon P.M. 1993. The bootstrap and the jackknife: describing the precision of ecological indices. In: Scheiner S.M. and Gurevitch J. (eds), Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 290-318.Google Scholar
  29. Fowler N. 1988. The effects of environmental heterogeneity in space and time on the regulation of populations and communities. In: Davy A.J., Hutchings M.J. and Watkinson A.R. (eds), Plant Population Ecology. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp. 249-269.Google Scholar
  30. Gerwing J.J. 1995. Competitive effects of three tropical tree species on two species of Piper. Biotropica 27: 47-56.Google Scholar
  31. Givnish T.J. 1988. Adaptation to sun and shade: a whole-plant perspective. Aus. J. Plant Phys. 15: 63-92.Google Scholar
  32. Goldberg D.E. and Barton A.M. 1992. Patterns and consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants. Am. Natural. 139: 771-801.Google Scholar
  33. Hensher D.A. and Johnson L.W. 1981. Applied Discrete-Choice Modelling. Halsted Press, a Division of John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  34. Hodel D.R. 1992. Chamaedorea Palms - The Species and Their Cultivation. Allen Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
  35. Horvitz C.C. and Schemske D.W. 1995. Spatiotemporal variation in demographic transitions of a tropical understory herb: projection matrix analysis. Ecol. Monogr. 65: 155-192.Google Scholar
  36. Hosmer D.W. and Lemeshow S. 1989. Applied Logistic Regression. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  37. Hubbell S.P., Condit R. and Foster R. 1990. Presence and absence of density dependence in a neotropical tree community. 330: 269-281 Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London., series B.Google Scholar
  38. Kobe R.K. 1999. Light gradient partitioning among tropical tree species through differential seedling mortality and growth. Ecology 80: 187-201.Google Scholar
  39. Larcher W. 1995. Physiological Plant Ecology: Ecophysiology and Stress Physiology of Functional Groups. Springer Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  40. Lee D.W. 1986. Unusual strategies of light absorption in rain-forest herbs. In: Givnish T.J. (ed.), On the Economy of Plant Form and Function. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 105-131.Google Scholar
  41. Mack A.L. 1995. Distance and non-randomness of seed dispersal by the dwarf cassowary Casuarinus bennetti. Ecography 18: 286-295.Google Scholar
  42. Mendoza A., Piñero D. and Sarukhán J. 1987. Effects of experimental defoliation on growth, reproduction and survival of Astrocaryum mexicanum. J. Ecol. 75: 545-554.Google Scholar
  43. Nicotra A.B., Chazdon R.L. and Iriarte S.V.B. 1999. Spatial heterogeneity of light and woody seedling regeneration in tropical wet forests. Ecology 80: 1908-1926.Google Scholar
  44. Niklas K.J. 1988. The role of phyllotactic patterns as a “developmental constraint” on the interception of light by leaf surfaces. Evolution 42: 1-16.Google Scholar
  45. Oyama K. 1990. Variation in growth and reproduction in the neotropical dioecious palm Chamaedorea tepejilote. J. Ecol. 78: 648-663.Google Scholar
  46. Pascarella J.B. and Horvitz C.C. 1998. Hurricane disturbance and the population dynamics of a tropical understory shrub: megamatrix elasticity analysis. Ecology 79: 547-563.Google Scholar
  47. Piñero D. and Sarukhán J. 1982. Reproductive behaviour and its individual variation in a tropical palm, Astrocaryum mexicanum. J. Ecol. 70: 461-472.Google Scholar
  48. Piñero D., Martinez-Ramos M. and Sarukhán J. 1984. A population model of Astrocaryum mexicanum and a sensitivity analysis of its finite rate of increase. J. Ecol. 72: 977-991.Google Scholar
  49. Pulliam H.R. 1996. Sources and sinks: empirical evidence and population consequences. In: Rhodes J.O.E., Chesser R.K. and Smith M.H. (eds), Population Dynamics in Ecological Space and Time. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 45-69.Google Scholar
  50. SAS Institute 1994. JMP Statistics and Graphics Guide. Version 3 of JMP. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  51. Schupp E.W. and Frost E.J. 1989. Differential predation of Wel fia georgii seeds in treefall gaps and the forest understory. Biotropica 21: 200-203.Google Scholar
  52. Sheil D. 1995. A critique of permanent plot methods and analysis with examples from Budongo Forest, Uganda. For. Ecol. Man. 77: 11-34.Google Scholar
  53. Sherman P.T. 1996. Family Psophiidae (Trumpeters). In: del Hoyo J., Elliott A. and Sargata J. (eds), Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. 3. Lynx Ediciones, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 96-107.Google Scholar
  54. Silvertown J., Franco M., Pisanty I. and Mendoza A. 1993. Comparative plant demography - relative importance of life-cycle components to the finite rate of increase in woody and herbaceous perennials. J. Ecol. 81: 465-476.Google Scholar
  55. Smith A.P., Hogan K.P. and Idol J.R. 1992. Spatial and temporal patterns of light and canopy structure in a lowland tropical moist forest. Biotropica 24: 503-511.Google Scholar
  56. Svenning J.-C. 1999. Microhabitat specialization in a species-rich palm community in Amazonian Ecuador. J. Ecol. 87: 55-65.Google Scholar
  57. Vandermeer J. 1994. Effects of hurricane Joan on the palms of the Caribbean coast rainforest of Nicaragua. Principes 38: 182-189.Google Scholar
  58. Vandermeer J.H., Stout J. and Miller G. 1974. Growth rates of Wel fia georgii, Socratea durissima, and Iriartea gigantea under various conditions in a natural rainforest in Costa Rica. Principes 18: 148-154.Google Scholar
  59. Walsh R.P.D. 1996. Microclimate and hydrology. In: Richards P.W. (ed.), The Tropical Rain Forest-An Ecological Study. 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 206-236.Google Scholar
  60. Wessels Boer J. 1968. The geonomoid palms. Verhandelingenn der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Natuurkunde. Tweede Reeks 58: 1-202.Google Scholar
  61. Whitmore T.C. 1998. An Introduction to Tropical Rain Forests. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  62. Wolfram S. 1996. The Mathematica Book. Wolfram Media/Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  63. Wright S.J. 1992. Seasonal drought, soil fertility and the species density of tropical forest plant communities. Trends Ecol. Evol. 7: 260-263.Google Scholar
  64. Zuidema P.A. 2000. Demography of exploited tree species in the Bolivian Amazon, Scientific Series 2. PROMAB, Riberalta, Bolivia.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jens-Christian Svenning
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Systematic BotanyUniversity of AarhusAarhus C.Denmark

Personalised recommendations