Test of hypotheses for dead leaf retention in Protea

Connolly, Alexandra; Midgley, Jeremy J.

doi:10.1016/j.sajb.2020.03.014

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At our study site, dead leaves were retained by three NFMP proteas ( P. amplexicaulis , P. humiflora and Protea subulifolia ) but not in local bird pollinated proteas such as Protea laurifolia , Protea lorifolia , Protea nitida and Protea repens (Connolly & Midgley, 2020). This dead leaf retention contributes significantly to floral crypsis by altering the proportion of inflorescences obscured from view (Figure 2).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Flowers are hidden in nonflying mammal‐pollinated plants to deter birds

Connolly

Midgley

2020

Afr J Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Flowers are hidden in nonflying mammal‐pollinated plants to deter birds

Connolly

Midgley

2020

Afr J Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…He et al (2011) suggested that this either ensures seeds are released from their serotinous structures in response to fire or provides extra nutrients for self-seedlings establishing under the dead parent and gives them a competitive edge. Working on proteas in the Cape of South Africa, Connolly and Midgley (2020) recently showed that the seedlings beneath the crowns of fire-killed parents were no larger than those beyond them and so dismissed this idea.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant functional types determine how close postfire seedlings are from their parents in a species-rich shrubland

Lamont

Witkowski

2020

Annals of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aims Fine-scale spatial patterns of the seedlings of co-occurring species reveal the relative success of reproduction and dispersal and may help interpret coexistence patterns of adult plants. To understand whether postfire community dynamics are controlled by mathematical, biological or environmental factors, we documented seedling-adult (putative parent) distances for a range of co-occurring species. We hypothesised that nearest-seedling-to-adult distances should be a function of the distance between the closest conspecific seedlings, closest inter-adult distances and seedling-to-parent ratios, and also, that these should scale up in a consistent way from all individuals, to within and between species and finally between functional types (FTs). Methods We assessed seedling–adult, seedling–seedling and adult–adult distances for 19 co-occurring shrub species ten months after fire in a species-rich shrubland in southwestern Australia. Species were categorized into 2Ó2 FTs: those that are killed by fire (non(re)sprouters) versus those that survive (resprouters) in nine taxonomically-matched pairs, and those that disperse their seeds prefire (geosporous) versus those that disperse their seeds postfire (serotinous). Key Results For the total data set and means for all species, seedling–adult distance was essentially a mathematical phenomenon, correlated positively with seedling–seedling distance and adult–adult distance, and inversely with seedlings per adult. Among the four FTs, seedling–adult distance was shortest for geosporous nonsprouters and widest for serotinous resprouters. Why adults that produce few seedlings (resprouters) should be further away from them defies a simple mathematical or biological explanation at present. Ecologically, however, it is adaptive, the closest seedling was usually under the (now incinerated) parent crown of nonsprouters whereas those of resprouters were on average four times further away. Conclusions Our study highlights the value of recognizing four reproductive syndromes within fireprone vegetation, and shows how these are characterised by marked differences in their seedling–adult spatial relations that serve to enhance biodiversity of the community.

show abstract

Test of hypotheses for dead leaf retention in Protea

Cited by 2 publications

References 19 publications

Flowers are hidden in nonflying mammal‐pollinated plants to deter birds

Flowers are hidden in nonflying mammal‐pollinated plants to deter birds

Plant functional types determine how close postfire seedlings are from their parents in a species-rich shrubland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About