Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:25:28.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leaf litter effects on seed and seedling predation of the palm Astrocaryum murumuru and the legume tree Dipteryx micrantha in Amazonian forest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Renato Cintra
Renato Cintra
Affiliation:
Departmento de Ecologia, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, (INPA) CP. 478, 69011–970, Manaus, AM, Brasil
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The amount of leaf litter fall produced by different tree species in tropical forests varies in space and time. Falling litter may cover seeds and thereby enhance their survival by making their detection by seed predators more difficult. Tests were made to determine whether Astrocaryum murumuru and Dipteryx micrantha seeds survive better in microsites covered by leaf litter. Seed numbers and litter cover on the forest floor were experimentally manipulated. How natural variation in leaf litter cover and thickness affects seed and seedling survival of these two plant species was also examined. Seed survivorship was significantly higher for both plant species in microsites with leaf litter than in those with bare soil. Results from an experiment in which the litter was not disturbed showed that Astrocaryum seed survival was positively correlated with litter thickness (defined as the number of overlying dead leaves). Astrocaryum seedling survival was also significantly affected by leaf litter; more seedlings survived in shallow litter. Leaf litter had no effect on Dipteryx seedling survival. The results of the study suggest that early recruitment of both Astrocaryum and Dipteryx is influenced by the spatial distribution and amount of forest leaf litter.

Keywords

Leaf litter effectsseed predationseedling predationseedling survivalAstrocaryumlegume DipteryxAmazon forest
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 13 , Issue 5 , September 1997 , pp. 709 - 725
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

Bonacorso, F. J., Glanz, W. E. & Sanford, C. M. 1980. Feeding assemblages of mammals at fruiting Dipteryx panamensis (Papilionaceae) trees in Panama: seed predation, dispersal, and parasitism. Revista de Biologia Tropical 28:61–72.Google Scholar
Cintra, R. & Horna, V. 1997. Seed and seedling survival of the palm Astrocaryum murumuru and the legume tree Dipteryx micrantha in gaps in Amazonian forest. Journal of Tropical Ecology 13:257–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denslow, J. 1980. Gap partitioning among tropical rain forest trees. Biotropica 12:47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellenberg, H. 1988. Vegetation ecology of Central Europe. (4th edition) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Facelli, J. M. & Pickett, S. T. A. 1991. Plant litter: its dynamics and effects on plant community structure. Botanical Review 57:1–32.Google Scholar
Facelli, J. M. & Facelli, E. 1993. Interactions after death: plant litter controls priority effects in a successional plant community. Oecologia 95:277–282.Google Scholar
Fisher, B. L., Howe, H. F. & Wright, S. J. 1991. Survival and growth of Virola surinamensis yearlings: water augmentation in gap and understory. Oecologia 86:292–297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forget, J-M. 1991. Scatterhoarding of Astrocaryum paramaca by Proeckimys in French Guiana: comparisons with Myoprocta exilis. Tropical Ecology 32:155–167.Google Scholar
Frankie, G. W., Baker, H. G. & Opler, P. A. 1974. Comparative phenological studies of trees in tropical wet and dry forests in the lowlands of Costa Rica. Journal of Ecology 62:881–919.Google Scholar
Gentry, A. H. 1990. Four neotropical rainforests. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
Gentry, A. H. & Terborgh, J. 1990. Composition and dynamics of the Cocha Cashu mature floodplain forest. Pp. 542–564 in Gentry, A. H. (ed.). Four neotropical rainforests. Yale University Press, Newhaven.Google Scholar
Glanz, W. E. 1990. Neotropical mammal densities: how unusual is the community on Barro Colorado Island, Panama? Pp. 287–313 in Gentry, A. H. (ed.). Four neotropical rainforests. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
Grubb, P. J. 1977. The maintenance of species richness in plant communities: the importance of the regeneration niche. Biological Reviews 52:107–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, J. L. 1977. Population biology of plants. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Luizao, F. & Schubart, H. O. R. 1987. Litter production and decomposition in a terra-firme forest of Central Amazonia. Experientia 43:259–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molofsky, J. & Augspurger, C. K. 1992. The effect of leaf litter on early seedling establishment in a tropical forest. Ecology 73:68–77.Google Scholar
Persson, S., Maimer, N. & Wallen, B. 1987. Leaf litter fall and soil acidity during half a century of secondary succession in a temperate deciduous forest. Vegetatio 73:31–45.Google Scholar
Price, M. V. & Jenkins, S. H. 1986. Rodents as seed consumers and dispersers. Pp. 191–234 in Murray, D. R. (ed.). Seed dispersal. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Pyke, D. A. & Thompson, J. N. 1986. Statistical analysis of survival and removal rate experiments. Ecology 67:240–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reader, R. J. 1993. Control of seedling emergence by ground cover and seed predation in relation to seed size for some old-field species. Journal of Ecology 81:169–175.Google Scholar
Ricklefs, R. E. 1977. Environmental heterogeneity and plant species diversity: a hypothesis. American Naturalist 111:376–381.Google Scholar
SAS. 1988. SAS/Stat guide for personal computers. Version 4. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
Schupp, E. W. 1989. Factors affecting post-dispersal seed survival in a tropical forest. Oecologia 76:525–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schupp, E. W. 1990. Annual variation in seedfall, post-dispersal predation, and recruitment of a neotropical tree. Ecology 71:504–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smythe, N. 1989. Seed survival in the palm Astrocaryum standleyanum: evidence for dependence upon its seed dispersers. Biotropica 21:50–56.Google Scholar
Sork, V. 1983. Distribution of pignut hickory Carva glabra along a forest to edge transect and factors affecting seedling recruitment. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 110:494–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
S-PLUS. 1991. User's Manual. Vol. 2 Version 3.0. Statistical Sciences Inc. Seattle, Washington.Google Scholar
Terborgh, J. 1983. Five New World primates: a study in comparative ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Terborgh, J. 1986. Keystone plant resources in the tropical forest. Pp. 330–344 in Soulé, M. E. (ed.). Conservation biology: the science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.Google Scholar
Terborgh, J. & Petren, K. 1991. Development of habitat structure through succession in an Amazonian floodplain forest. Pp. 28–46 in Bell, S. S., McCoy, E. D. & Mushinsky, H. R. (eds). Habitat structure: the arrangement of objects and space. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. F. 1988. Spatial heterogeneity of post-dispersal survivorship of Queensland rainforest seeds. Australian Journal of Ecology 13:137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. J. & Cornejo, F. H. 1990. Seasonal drought and leaf fall in a tropical forest. Ecology 71:1165–1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, L. 1991. Systat: The system for statistics. SYSTAT Inc., Evanston, Illinois.Google Scholar
Zar, J. H. 1984. Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar