Summary
Hand-pollination significantly increased seed production in a Canada yew (Taxus canadensis) population that had been browsed previously by white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) indicating that pollen availability limited seed production in this population. Handpollination did not significantly increase seed production in a population never browsed by deer. Deer-browsing significantly reduces yew density and pollen production, which in turn results in reduced pollination and seed production. Pollen limitation of yew seed production is an indirect effect of deer browsing on Canada yew and results from an interaction between the direct effect of deer browsing and the pollination syndrome of Canada yew. Artificially created female yews had lower seed set than monoecious yews when yew seed production was pollen-limited, but not when pollen did not limit seed production.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allison TD (1987) The reproductive biology of Canada yew (Taxus canadensis Marsh.) and its modification by herbivory. PhD Thesis, University of Minnesota, USA
Allison TD (1990) Pollen production and plant density affects pollination and seed production in Taxus canadensis. Ecology 71:516–522
Bateman AJ (1947) Contamination of seed crops. II. Wind pollination. Heredity 1:235–246
Beals EW, Cottam G (1967) Survey of Apostle Islands vegetation. Wisconsin Conservation Department, Job Completion Report No. W-141-R-2
Beals EW, Cottam G, Vogl RJ (1960) Influence of deer on vegetation of the Apostle Islands, Wisconsin. J Wildl Manage 24:68–80
Brander RB (1983) Environmental assessment: Natural resources inventory and management Apostle Islands National Lakeshore, Wisconsin. Department of Interior, unpublished report
Curtis JT (1959) The vegetation of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison WI USA
Dallimore W, Jackson AB (Revised by Harrison SG) (1967) A handbook of Coniferae and Ginkgoaceae. Edward Arnold Publishers, London England
Den Ouden P, Boom BK (1965) Manual of cultivated conifers. The Hague, Netherlands
Faegri K, van der Pijl L (1979) The principles of pollination ecology. 3rd edition, Pergamon Press, Oxford England
Janzen DH, De Vries P, Gladstone DE, Higgins ML, Lewisohn TM (1980) Self-and cross-pollination of Encyclia cordigera (Orchidaceae) in Santa Rosa National Park Costa Rica. Biotropica 12:72–74
Lemen C (1980) Allocation of reproductive effort to the male and female strategies in wind-pollinated plants. Oecologia 45:156–159
Lovett Doust L, Lovett Doust JL, Turi K (1986) Fecundity and size relationships in Jack-in-the-Pulpit, Arisaema triphyllum (Araceae). Am J Bot 73:489–494
Pimlott DH (1965) Influence of deer and moose on boreal forest vegetation in 2 areas of eastern Canada. Inter Congr Game Biol 6:105–116
Schemske DW, Willson MF, Melampy MN, Miller LJ, Verner L, Schemske KM, Best LB (1978) Flowering ecology of some spring woodland herbs. Ecology 59:350–366
Snyder JD, Janke RA (1976) Impact of moose browsing on boreal-type forests of Isle Royale National Park. Am Midl Nat 95:79–92
Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry. 2nd edition, WH Freeman and Co., San Francisco CA USA
Spiker CJ (1935) Some late winter and early spring observations on the white-tailed deer of the Adirondacks. Roosevelt Wildl Bull 6:327–385
Stearns FW (1951) The composition of the sugar maple-hemlock-yellow birch association of northern Wisconsin. Ecology 32:245–265
Tilman D (1983) Plant succession and gopher disturbance along an experimental gradient. Oecologia 60:285–292
Vandermeer JH (1980) Indirect mutualism: variations on a theme by Stephen Levine. Am Nat 116:441–448
Weisberg S, Koehler KJ (1982) IVAN users manual, version 2.1. School of Statistics Tech Rep No 266, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN USA
Willson MF, Burley N (1983) Mate choice in plants. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ USA
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Allison, T.D. The influence of deer browsing on the reproductive biology of Canada yew (Taxus canadensis marsh.). Oecologia 83, 530–534 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00317205
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00317205