2003
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-09389-4_3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Factors Affecting Persistence in Formerly Common and Historically Rare Plants

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 86 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is tempting to assume a priori that M. guttatus is a superior competitor, as it germinates earlier, occupies more space, occurs at extremely high densities and is more fecund than M. nudatus . However, careful laboratory experimentation by Brigham () failed to find deleterious effects of interspecific competition on either species. Whether their results translate into the field remains an open question.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is tempting to assume a priori that M. guttatus is a superior competitor, as it germinates earlier, occupies more space, occurs at extremely high densities and is more fecund than M. nudatus . However, careful laboratory experimentation by Brigham () failed to find deleterious effects of interspecific competition on either species. Whether their results translate into the field remains an open question.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, certain other naturally rare species show the reduced genetic variation and high genetic differentiation that are more commonly associated with small population size and isolation in recently rare species (Coates & Hamley, 1999; Dolan et al, 1999; Matolweni et al, 2000). The data on historically rare species are sparse but indicate that a large proportion of these do not show reductions in diversity or fitness with small population size (Brigham & Thomson, 2003). As the genetic consequences of the different forms of rarity existing in nature may be very diverse, our study provides further evidence that not all rare species lack genetic variation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rare plants may be rare, in part, because they are more susceptible to interactions that decrease fitness (e.g., herbivory, competition, and lack of pollinators) than more common, widespread species (Drury, 1974; Kruckeberg and Rabinowitz, 1985; Kunin and Gaston, 1997; Brigham, 2003). In addition, rare plants may possess certain traits that predispose them to small populations and/or narrow distributions (Bevill and Louda, 1999; Lavergne et al, 2004).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although some researchers have attempted to tease out rare–common differences (Bevill and Louda, 1999; Murray et al, 2002; Lavergne et al, 2004; Boieiro et al, 2010a; Talve et al, 2012), our understanding of the processes that contribute to plant rarity is still limited. Ecologists attribute the lack of progress in this area to the fact that (1) rare species tend to be understudied (Kunin and Gaston, 1993; Ancheta and Heard, 2011); (2) comparative studies of congeneric rare and common species, especially comparisons of sympatric populations, are infrequent (Kunin and Gaston, 1997; Lavergne et al, 2004; Münzbergova, 2005); (3) data from different studies make generalization difficult because of differences in life history, site factors, or attributes measured (Bevill and Louda, 1999; Brigham, 2003); and (4) studies often do not examine mechanistic factors (intrinsic and extrinsic) that influence seed loss (Ancheta and Heard, 2011).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%