Advertisement

Community Ecology

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 171–177 | Cite as

Impacts of land use change on seed removal patterns of native and exotic species in a forest landscape

  • R. O. Bustamante
  • E. I. BadanoEmail author
  • S. T. A. Pickett
Article

Abstract

Land use changes may alter seed consumption patterns by vertebrates in forest landscapes. However, while some studies reported increased seed removal rates from the interior of forest patches towards the surrounding matrix habitat, other studies showed the opposite pattern. These inconsistencies perhaps occur because most of these experiments were focused on species with similar seed traits, instead of including species with different seed traits, and because they have not considered that seeds of different species can be available at the same time across the landscape. Further, it is also important to consider that land use changes may promote the spread of exotic species, which may introduce an additional source of seeds into these landscapes. This study focused on experimentally assessing whether native species with different seed traits are differentially removed across the contrasting habitat types of a temperate forest affected by land use changes, and to determine whether seeds of native and exotic species are differentially removed when they are simultaneously available. For this, our experiment included three native species (red maple, black cherry and red oak) and an exotic species (the tree of heaven), whose seeds were placed at the matrix habitat (abandoned agricultural fields), at the edges of forest patches, and at two distances inwards forest patches (40 and 100 m). Overall, seed removal rates of native species decreased from the interior of forest patches towards the abandoned fields, suggesting that the habitat type in which seeds are placed would be more important than seed traits in determining their removal rates across the landscape. Conversely, the exotic species showed higher removal rates at abandoned fields, suggesting that land use changes would differentially affect seed removal of native and exotic species.

Keywords

Anthropic disturbances Plant invasions Seed consumers Seed ecology Temperate forest 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Becerra, P.I. 2006. Invasión de árboles alóctonos en una cuenca pre-andina de Chile central. Gayana Bot. 63: 161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blair, B.C., D.K. Letourneau, S.G. Bothwell and G.F. Hayes. 2010. Disturbance, resources, and exotic plant invasion: gap size effects in a redwood forest. Madroño 57: 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bjorkbom, J.C. 1979. Seed production and advance regeneration in Allegheny hardwood forests. Research Paper NE-435, USDA Forest Service, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  4. Bucar, F., M.F. Roberts and H.R. El-Seedi. 2007. Sterones and in-dole alkaloid from Ailanthus altissima callus cultures. Chem. Nat. Comp. 43: 234–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burch, P.L. and S.M. Zedaker. 2003. Removing the invasive tree Ailanthus altissima and restoring natural cover. J. Arboricul. 29: 18–24.Google Scholar
  6. Bustamante, R.O. and J.A. Simonetti. 2005. Is Pinus radiata invading the native vegetation in Central Chile? Demographic responses in a fragmented forest. Biol. Inv. 7: 243–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bustamante R.O and R.A. Vásquez. 1995. Granivoría en Crypto-carya alba (Mol.) Looser (Lauraceae): los efectos del tipo de hábitat y la densidad de semillas. Rev. Chil. Hist. Nat. 68: 117–122.Google Scholar
  8. Bustamante, R.O., I.A. Serei and S.T.A. Pickett. 2003. Forest fragmentation, plant regeneration and invasion processes across edges in central Chile. In: G.A. Bradshaw and P.A. Marquet (eds.), How Landscapes Change: Human Disturbance and Ecosystem Fragmentation in the Americas. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 145–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bustamante, R.O., A.A. Grez and J.A. Simonetti. 2006. Efectos de la fragmentación del bosque maulino sobre la abundancia y la diversidad de especies. In: A.A. Grez, J.A. Simonetti and R.O. Bustamante (eds.), Biodiversidad en Ambientes Fragmentados de Chile, Patrones y Procesos a Diferentes Escalas. Editorial Universitaria, Santiago de Chile, pp. 83–98.Google Scholar
  10. Côté, M., J. Ferron and R. Gagnon. 2003 Impact of seed and seedling predation by small rodents on early regeneration establishment of black spruce. Can. J. Forest Res. 33: 2362–2371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Feo, V., L. De Martino, E. Quaranta and C. Pizza. 2003. Isolation of phytotoxic compounds from tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altis-sima Swingle). J. Agric. Food. Chem. 51: 1177–1180.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Díaz, I., C. Papic and J.J. Armesto. 1999. An assessment of post-dispersal seed predation in temperate rain forest fragments in Chiloe Island, Chile. Oikos 87: 228–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Donoso, D.S., A.A. Grez and J.A. Simonetti. 2003. Effects of forest fragmentation on the granivory of differently sized seeds. Biol. Conserv. 115: 63–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fagan, W.F., R.S. Cantrell and C. Cosner. 1999. How habitat edges change species interactions. Am. Nat. 153: 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Farina, A. 1998. Principles and Methods in Landscape Ecology. Chapman & Hall, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heisey, R.M. 1997. Allelopathy and the secret life of. Ailanthus al-tissima. Arnoldia 57: 28–36.Google Scholar
  17. Heisey, R.M. 2005. Evidence for alellopathy by the tree-of-heaven. Ailanthus altissima. J. Chem. Ecol. 16: 1561–1573.Google Scholar
  18. Hill, S.J., P.J. Tung and M.R. Leishman. 2005. Relationships between anthropogenic disturbance, soil properties and plant invasion in endangered Cumberland Plain Woodland, Australia. Austral Ecol. 30: 775–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hobbs, R.J. and L.F. Huenneke. 1992. Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for conservation. Conserv. Biol. 6: 324–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hunter, J.C. 1995. Ailanthus altissima (Miller) Swingle: its biology and recent history. California Exotic Pest Plant Council News 3: 4–5.Google Scholar
  21. Hunter, J.C. and J.A. Mattice. 2002. The spread of woody exotics into the forests of a northeastern landscape, 1938–1999. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 129: 220–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaplan, E.L. and P. Meier. 1958. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 53: 457–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Knapp, L.B. and C.D. Canham. 2000. Invasion of an old-growth forest in New York by Ailanthus altissima: sapling growth and recruitment in canopy gaps. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 127: 307–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee, E.T., M.M. Desu and E.A. Gehan. 1975. A Monte Carlo study of the power of some two–sample tests.Biometrika 62: 425–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lee, E.T. 1980. Statistical methods for survival data analyses. Lifetime Learning Publications, Belmont.Google Scholar
  26. Loman, J. 2007. Effect of woodland patch size on rodent seed preda-tion in a fragmented landscape. Web Ecol. 7: 47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Manson, R.H. and E.W. Stiles. 1998. Links between microhabitat preferences and seed predation by small mammals in old fields. Oikos 82:37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marquis, D.A., P.L. Eckert and B.A. Roach. 1976. Acorn weevils, rodents, and deer all contribute to oak-regeneration difficulties in Pennsylvania. Research Paper NE-356, USDA Forest Service, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  29. McCormick, J.T. and S.J. Meiners. 2000. Season and distance from forest-old field edge affect seed predation by white-footed mice. Northeastern Nat. 7: 7–16.Google Scholar
  30. Meiners, S.J. and K. LoGiudice. 2003. Temporal consistency in the spatial pattern of seed predation across a forest-old field edge. Plant Ecol. 168: 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moore, D.J. and R.K. Swihart. 2007. Importance of fragmentation-tolerant species as seed dispersers in disturbed landscapes. Oe-cologia 151: 663–674.Google Scholar
  32. Myers, N. 1998. Threatened biotas: “hot spots” in tropical forests. The Environmentalist 8: 187–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nathan, R. and H.C. Muller-Landau. 2000. Spatial patterns of seed dispersal, their determinants and consequences for recruitment. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 278–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nupp, T.E. and R.K. Swihart. 2000. Landscape-level correlates of small mammal assemblages in forest fragments of farmland. J. Mammal. 81: 512–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ostfeld, R.S., N. Lewin, J. Schnurr, C.D. Canham and S.T.A. Pickett. 1994. The roles of small rodents in creating patchy environments. Pol. Ecol. Stud. 20: 265–276.Google Scholar
  36. Ostfeld, R.S., R.H. Manson and C.D. Canham. 1997. Effects of rodents on survival of tree seeds and seedlings invading old fields. Ecology 78: 1531–1542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Raghubanshi, A.S. and A. Tripathi. 2009. Effect of disturbance, habitat fragmentation and alien invasive plants on floral diversity in dry tropical forestsof Vindhyan highland: a review. Trop. Ecol. 50: 57–69.Google Scholar
  38. R Development Core Team (2005)R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, Version 2.3. Available online at http://www.R-project.org.
  39. Sander, I.L. 1965. Northern red oak Quercus rubra L. In: H.A. Fow-ells (ed.) Silvics of Forest Trees of the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington D.C., pp. 588–592.Google Scholar
  40. Sander, I.L. 1977. Manager’s Handbook for Oaks in the North Central States. General Technical Report NC-37, USDA Forest Service, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  41. Saunders, D.A., Hobbs, R.J. & Margules, C.R. 1991. Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv. Biol. 5: 18–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shah, B. 1997. The checkered career of. Ailanthus altissima. Ar-noldia 37: 20–27.Google Scholar
  43. Sieving, K.E., M.F. Willson and T.L. DeSanto. 1996. Habitat barriers to movement of understory birds in fragmented south-temperate rainforest. The Auk 113: 944–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sork, V.L. 1983. Distributionof pignut hickory (Carya glabra) along a forest to edge transect, and factors affecting seedling recruitment. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club. 110: 494–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Steele, M.A. and P.D. Smallwood. 2002. Acorn dispersal by birds and mammals. In: W.J. McShea and W.M. Healy (eds.), Oak Forest Ecosystems: Ecology and Management for Wildlife. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 182–195.Google Scholar
  46. Steele, M.A., L.A. Wauters and K.W. Larsen. 2005. Selection, pre-dation and dispersal of seeds by tree squirrels in temperate and boreal forests: are tree squirrels keystone granivores? In: P.M. Forget, J.E. Lambert, P.E. Hulme and S.B. Vanderwall (eds.) Seed Fate: Predation, Dispersal and Seedling Establishment. CABI, Oxfordshire. pp 205–221.Google Scholar
  47. Townsend, A.M. 1972. Geographical variation in fruit characteristics of Acer rubrum. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 99: 122–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Webb, S.L. and M.F. Willson. 1985. Spatial heterogeneity in post-dispersal predation on Prunus and Uvularia seeds. Oecologia 67: 150–153.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Winstead, J.E., B.H. Smith and & G.I. Wardell. 1977. Fruit weight dines in populations of ash, ironwood, cherry, dogwood, and maple. Castanea 42: 56–60.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2012

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. O. Bustamante
    • 1
  • E. I. Badano
    • 2
    Email author
  • S. T. A. Pickett
    • 3
  1. 1.Departamento de Ciencias Ecológicas and Instituto de Ecología y Biodiversidad, Facultad de CienciasUniversidadde ChileÑuñoa, SantiagoChile
  2. 2.División de Ciencias AmbientalesInstituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y TecnológicaSan Luis PotosíMéxico
  3. 3.Cary Institute of Ecosystem StudiesMillbrookUSA

Personalised recommendations