Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Life history traits as predictors of plant rarity, with particular reference to hemiparasiticOrobanchaceae

  • Published:
Folia Geobotanica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We made a comparison between life history and reproductive characteristics of a group of Dutch rare (30) and common (105) plant species, all dicotyledonous and insect-visited forbs. The traits life span, clonality, breeding system, seed production, seed dispersal, and soil seed bank longevity are considered. All trait values have been ranked according to their possible effect on the vulnerability of a species for extinction, where low values indicate a low risk and high values a high risk for a species. Rare and common plants differed significantly in four traits: seed production, breeding system, seed bank longevity and clonality. The discriminant analysis showed that 79% of the 135 species was correctly classified in the group they presently belong to. Especially species that are rare now but were much more common 50–100 years ago were classified as being common species, pointing at the detrimental effect of habitat loss these species encountered at which they have not yet been able to adapted to. The data set include eight hemiparasitic plant species (familyOrobanchaceae), of which six are endangered in The Netherlands and two more common. Both rare and common hemiparasites scored high traits values, indicating that they are vulnerable for extinction. The hemiparasites had several characteristics in common: they are all annuals or biennials that have no means of clonal reproduction. They all have non-clustered, zygomorphic flowers that produce nectar and have a precise pollen presentation and are mainly visited by (bumble) bees. Mean life span was significantly shorter in the eight hemiparasiticOrobanchaceae than in the non-hemiparasiticScrophulariaceae used for comparison (4 species). Overall, we concluded that hemiparasitic plants have a special combination of life history traits which makes them vulnerable for local and regional extinction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aizen M., Aizen L. Ashworth L. &Galetto L. (2002): Reproductive success in fragmented habitats: do compatibility systems and pollination specialization matter?J. Veg. Sci. 13: 885–892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen-Wardell G., Bernhardt P., Bitner R., Burquez A., Buchmann S., Cane J., Cox P.A., Dalton V., Feisinger P., Ingram M., Inouye D., Jones C.E., Kennedy K., Kevan P., Koopowitz H., Medellin R., Medellin-Morales S., Nabhan G.P., Kavlik B., Tepedino V., Torchio P. &Walker S. (1998): The potential consequences of pollinator declines on the conservation of biodiversity and stability of food crop yields.Conservation Biol. 12: 8–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker J. P., Poschlod P., Strijkstra R.J., Bekker R.M. &Thompson K. (1996): Seed banks and seed dispersal: important topics in restoration ecology.Acta Bot. Neerl. 45: 461–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakker J. P. &Berendse F. (1999): Constraints in the restoration of ecological diversity in grassland and heath land communities.Trends Ecol. Evol. 14: 63–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bekker R. M., Bakker J. P., Grandin U., Kalamees R., Milberg P., Poschlod P., Thompson K. &Willems J. H. (1998a): Seed size, shape and vertical distribution in the soil: Indicators of seed longevity.Funct. Ecol. 12: 834–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekker R. M., Schaminée J.H.J., Bakker J.P. &Thompson K. (1998b): Seed bank characteristics of Dutch plant communities.Acta Bot. Neerl. 47: 15–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond W. (1994): Do mutualisms matter? Assessing the impact of pollinator and disperser disruption on plant extinction.Philos. Trans., Ser. B 344: 83–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonn S. &Poschlod P. (1998):Ausbreitungsbiologie der Pflanzen Mitteleuropas. Quelle und Meyer Verlag, Wiesbaden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouman F., Boesewinkel D., Bregman R., Devente N. &Oostermeijer G. (2000):Verspreiding van zaden (Seed dispersal). KNNV Uitgeverij, Utrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • CBS (1987):Botanisch basisregister (Botanical statistics). Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chittka L. &Schürkens S. (2001): Successful invasion of a floral market.Nature 411: 653.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Coombe D.E. (1956): Biological flora of the British Isles:Impatiens parviflora DC.J. Ecol. 44: 701–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Kroon H. &van Groenendael J. M. (1997):The ecology and evolution of clonal plants. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen B., Molau U. &Svensson M. (1993): Reproductive strategies in two arcticPedicularis species (Scrophulariaceae).Ecography 16: 154–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenner M. (1992):Seeds. The ecology of regeneration in plant communities. CAB International, Wallingford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fossel A. (1974): Die Bienenweide der Ostalpen, dargestelt am Beispiel des steirischen Ennstales.Mitt. Naturwiss. Vereins Steiermark 104: 87–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fossel A. (1977): Raffinierter Nektarraub beim klappertopf (Rhinanthus sp.).Bienenvater 1: 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez J.M. (2002): Self-pollination inEuphrasia wilkommii Freyn (Scrophulariaceae), an endemic species from the alpine of the Sierra Nevada (Spain).Pl. Syst. Evol. 232: 63–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartl D. (1974):Scrophulariaceae. In:Hegi G.,Illustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa 6. Carl Hanser Verlag, München, pp. 451–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huenneke L.F. (1991): Ecological implications of genetic variation in plant populations. In:Falk D.A. &Holsinger K.E. (eds.),Genetics and conservation of rare plants, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 31–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (1994).IUCN Red List Categories. Prepared by the IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karrenberg S. &Jensen K. (2000): Effects of pollination and pollen source on the seed set ofPedicularis palustris.Folia Geobot. 35: 191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kearns C.A., Inouye D.W. &Waser N. M. (1998): Endangered mutualisms: the conservation of plant-pollinator interactions.Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29: 83–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klimeš L. &Klimešová J. (1999): CLO-PLA 2 — A database of clonal plants in central Europe.Pl. Ecol. 141: 9–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kremen C. &Ricketts T. (2000): Global perspectives on pollination disruption.Conservation Biol. 14: 1226–1228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwak M.M. (1977): Pollination ecology of five hemiparasitic, large-floweredRhinanthoideae with special reference to the pollination behaviour of nectar-thieving, short-tongued bumblebees.Acta Bot. Neerl. 26: 97–017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwak M.M. (1979): Effects of bumblebee visits on the seed set ofPedicularis, Rhinanthus andMelampyrum (Scrophulariaceae) in the Netherlands.Acta Bot. Neerl. 28: 177–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwak M.M. (1980). The pollination value of honeybees to the bumblebee plantRhinanthus.Acta Bot. Neerl. 29: 597–603.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwak M.M. (1988): Pollination ecology and seedset in the rare annual speciesMelampyrum arvense L. (Scrophulariaceae).Acta Bot. Neerl. 37: 153–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwak M.M. &Jennersten O. (1986): The significance of pollination time and frequency and of purity of pollen loads for the seed set inRhinanthus angustifolius (Scrophulariaceae) andViscaria vulgaris (Caryophyllaceae).Oecologia (Berlin) 70: 502–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwak M.M. &Jennersten O. (1991): Bumblebee visitation and seed set inMelampyrum pratense andViscaria vulgaris: heterospecific pollen and pollen limitation.Oecologia (Berlin) 86: 99–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwak M.M. &Bergman P. (1996): Early flowers ofBartsia alpina (Scophulariaceae) and the visitation by bumblebees.Acta Bot. Neerl. 45: 355–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwak M.M. &Tieleman I. (2000):Het Hommelleven (The life of bumblebees). KNNV uitgeverij, Utrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lande R. (1998): Anthropogenic, ecological and genetic factors in extinction and conservation.Res. Populat. Ecol. 40: 259–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macior L.W. (1982): Plant community and pollinator dynamics in the evolution of pollination mechanisms inPedicularis (Scrophulariaceae). In:Amstrong J.A., Powell J.M. &Richards A.J. (eds.),Pollination and evolution, Royal Botanic Gardens, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macior L.W. (1986): Floral resource sharing by bumblebees and hummingbirds inPedicularis (Scrophulariaceae) pollination.Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 113: 101–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macior L.W. (1993): Pollination ecology ofPedicularis palustris L. (Scrophulariaceae) in North America.Pl. Spec. Biol. 8: 35–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macior L.W. (1995): Pollination ecology ofPedicularis in the Teton Mountain Region.Pl. Spec. Biol. 10: 77–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olesen J.M. &Jain S.K. (1994): Fragmented populations and their lost interactions. In:Loeschcke V., Tomiuk J. &Jain S.K. (eds.),Conservation genetics, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, pp. 417–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrins J., Fitter A. &Williamson M. (1993): Population biology and rates of invasion of 3 introducedImpatiens species in the British-isles.J. Biogeogr. 20: 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philipp M., Woodell S.R.J., Bocher J. &Mattsson O. (1996): Reproductive biology of four species ofPedicularis (Scrophulariaceae) in West Greenland.Arctic Alpine Res. 28: 403–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor M., Yeo P. &Lack A. (1996):The natural history of pollination. Harper Collins Publishers, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmont P. (1988):Monographie ecologique et zoogeographique des bourdons de France et de Belgique (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Bombinae). PhD. Thesis, University of Gembloux, Gembloux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rathcke B. (1983): Competition and facilitation among plants for pollination. In:Real L. (ed.),Pollination biology, Academic Press, New York, pp. 305–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rathcke B.J. &Jules E.S. (1993): Habitat fragmentation and plant-pollinator interactions.Curr. Sci. 65: 273–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rocio J., Pastor J. &Immaculada F. (1996): Studies of fruits, seeds and pollen morphology ofPedicularis sylvatica L. subsp.lusitanica (Hoffmanns andLink)Cout. (Scrophulariaceae).Anales Jard. Bot. Madrid 54: 312–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal G. &Fink S. (1996):Pedicularis palustris L. in the Bremen area: Distribution, ecology, and causes of its decline.Abh. Naturwiss. Vereine Bremen 43: 429–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salisbury E. J. (1942):The reproductive capacity of plants. Studies in quantitative biology. G. Bells and Son, Ltd, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Šerá B. &Šerý M. (2004): Number and weight of seeds and reproductive strategies of herbaceous plants.Folia Geobot. 39: 27–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SPSS (2003):SPSS Base 12.0 user’s guide. SPSS Inc. Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strykstra R.J., Verweij G.L. &Bakker J.P. (1997): Seed dispersal by mowing machinery in a Dutch brook valley system.Acta Bot. Neerl. 46: 387–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strykstra R.J., Bekker R.M. &van Andel J. (2002): Dispersal and life span spectra in plant communities: a key to safe site dynamics, species coexistence and conservation.Ecography 25: 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tamis W.L.M., van der Meijden R., Runhaar J, Bekker R.M., Ozinga W., Odi B. &Hoste I. (2004): Standaardlijst van de Nederlandse flora 2003 (Standard list of the flora of the Netherlands 2003).Gorteria 30: 101–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson K., Bakker J.P. &Bekker R.M. (1997):Soil seed banks of NW Europe: methodology, density and longevity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull L.A., Crawley M.J. &Rees M. (1999): Are plant populations seed-limited? A review of seed sowing experiments.Oikos 88: 225–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meijden R., Odi B., Groen C.L.G., Witte J.P.M. &Bal D. (2000): Bedreigde en kwetsbare vaatplanten in Nederland, Basisrapport met voorstel voor de Rode Lijst (Endangered vascular plants in The Netherlands, with proposal for the Red List).Gorteria 26: 85–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller S.G. (1994): The relationship of rarity to plant reproductive biology. In:Bowles M.L. &Whelan C.J. (eds.),Restoration of endangered species: conceptual issues, planning, and implementation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 90–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams P.H. (1989): Why are there so many bumble bees at Dungeness?Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 101: 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Community and Conservation Ecology Group, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 14, 9750 AA, Haren, The Netherlands

    Renie M. Bekker & Manja M. Kwak

Authors
  1. Renie M. Bekker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Manja M. Kwak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bekker, R.M., Kwak, M.M. Life history traits as predictors of plant rarity, with particular reference to hemiparasiticOrobanchaceae . Folia Geobot 40, 231–242 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02803237

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02803237

Keywords

Nomenclature

Search

Navigation