Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-544b6db54f-mdtzd Total loading time: 0.293 Render date: 2021-10-17T17:33:46.355Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Effects of Amazonian forest fragmentation on the interaction between plants, insect herbivores, and their natural enemies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2008

Sarita B. Fáveri*
Affiliation:
Coordenação de Zoologia, Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Avenida Perimetral 1901, Bairro Terra Firme, 66077-530 Belém, PA, Brazil
Heraldo L. Vasconcelos
Affiliation:
Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, CP 593, 38400-902 Uberlândia, MG, Brazil
Rodolfo Dirzo
Affiliation:
Stanford University, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
*
1Corresponding author. Email: sfaveri@museu-goeldi.br

Abstract:

We evaluated the effects of forest fragmentation on herbivory on central Amazonian trees. Levels of herbivory were measured on leaves from a total of 1200 saplings from 337 species. There was a positive and significant effect of forest fragment area on herbivore damage, with plants from continuous forest having twice as much damage as plants in the smallest fragments studied (1 ha). Measurements of herbivory rates on two species, however, indicate that the effect can be species-specific. Forest area had a positive and linear effect on rates of herbivory in Henriettella caudata (Melastomataceae), whereas in Protium hebetatum (Burseraceae), rates of herbivory were greater in the 10-ha fragments than in the 1-ha fragments and in continuous forest. There is no evidence that the nutritional and defensive characteristics of the leaves of the species we studied changed as a result of forest fragmentation, at least not in a manner consistent with the observed herbivory patterns. Herbivore predation levels, measured with artificial caterpillars, also showed no significant relationship with forest area. Therefore, neither of these top-down and bottom-up forces could explain the observed patterns of herbivory. It is suggested, instead, that forest fragmentation may affect the dispersal of insect herbivores, and reduce their abundances on small forest isolates. Altered patterns of herbivory on tree saplings may have important consequences for forest structure and dynamics.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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

AIZEN, A. M. & FEINSINGER, P. 1994. Habitat fragmentation, native insect pollinators, and feral honey bees in Argentine “Chaco Serrano”. Ecological Applications 4:378392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ANDERSON, J. M. & INGRAM, J. S. I. 1993. Tropical soil biology and fertility: a handbook of methods. C.A.B. International, Wallingford. 171 pp.Google Scholar
ANDRESEN, E. 2003. Effect of forest fragmentation on dung beetle communities and functional consequences for plant regeneration. Ecography 26:8797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ARNOLD, A. E. & ASQUITH, N. M. 2002. Herbivory in a fragmented tropical forest: patterns from islands at Lago Gatún, Panamá. Biodiversity and Conservation 11:16631680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BARONE, J. A. 1998. Host-specificity of folivorous insects in a moist tropical forest. Journal of Animal Ecology 67:400409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BARONE, J. A. & COLEY, P. D. 2002. Herbivorismo y la defensas de las plantas. Pp. 465492 in Guariguata, M. R. & Kattan, G. H. (eds.). Ecología y conservación de bosques neotropicales. Libro Universitario Regional, Costa Rica.Google Scholar
BENÍTEZ-MALVIDO, J. 2001. Regeneration in tropical rain forest fragments. Pp. 136145 in Bierregaard, R. O., Gascon, C., Lovejoy, T. & Mesquita, R. (eds.). Lessons from Amazonia: The ecology and management of a fragmented forest. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
BENÍTEZ-MALVIDO, J. & LEMUS-ALBOR, A. 2005. The seedling community of tropical rain forest edges and interactions with herbivores and leaf pathogens. Biotropica 37:301313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BENÍTEZ-MALVIDO, J. & MARTÍNEZ-RAMOS, M. 2003. Impact of forest fragmentation on understory plant species richness in Amazonia. Conservation Biology 17: 389400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BENÍTEZ-MALVIDO, J., GARCÍA-GUZMÁN, G. & KOSSMANN-FERRAZ, I. D. 1999. Leaf-fungal incidence and herbivory on tree seedlings in tropical rainforest fragments: an experimental study. Biological Conservation 91:143150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BENSON, W. W. & HARADA, A. Y. 1987. Local diversity of tropical and temperate ant faunas (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Acta Amazônica 18:275289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BROWN, K. S. & HUTCHINGS, , R. W. 1997. Disturbance, fragmentation, and the dynamics of diversity in Amazon forest butterflies. Pp. 91110 in Laurance, W. F. & Bierregaard, R. O. (eds.). Tropical forest remnants: ecology, management, and conservation of fragmented communities. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
CAMARGO, J. L. C. & KAPOS, V. 1995. Complex edges effects on soil moisture and microclimate in central Amazonian forest. Journal of Tropical Ecology 11:205221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CARVALHO, K. S. & VASCONCELOS, H. L. 1999. Forest fragmentation in central Amazonia and its effects on litter-dwelling ants. Biological Conservation 91:151157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CHAUVEL, A. 1983. Os latossolos amarelos, alicos, argilosos dentro dos ecossistemas das bacias experimentais do INPA e da região vizinha. Acta Amazônica 12:4760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COLEY, P. D. 1983. Herbivory and defensive characteristics of tree species in a lowland tropical forest. Ecological Monographs 53:209233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COLEY, P. D. 1998. Possible effects of climate change on plant/herbivore interactions in moist tropical forest. Climatic Change 39:455472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CRAWLEY, M. J. 1983. Herbivory: the dynamics of animal-plant interactions. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford. 437 pp.Google Scholar
DIRZO, R. 1984. Herbivory: a phytocentric overview. Pp. 141165 in Dirzo, R. & Sarukhán, J. (eds.). Perspectives on plant population ecology. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.Google Scholar
FÁVERI, S. B. 2004. Efeitos da fragmentação florestal sobre as interações plantas, herbívoros e inimigos naturais na Amazônia central. Tese de Doutorado. INPA/UFAM. 81 pp.Google Scholar
GASCON, C. & BIERREGAARD, R. O. 2001. The biological dynamics of forest fragments project: the study site, experimental design, and research activity. Pp. 3142 in Bierregaard, R. O., Gascon, C., Lovejoy, T. & Mesquita, R. (eds.). Lessons from Amazonia: the ecology and conservation of fragmented forest. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
GASCON, C., LOVEJOY, T. E., BIERREGAARD, R. O., MALCOM, J. R., STOUFFER, P. C., VASCONCELOS, H. L., LAURANCE, W. F., ZIMMERMAN, B., TOCHER, M. & BORGES, S. 1999. Matrix habitat and species richness in tropical forest remnants. Biological Conservation 91:17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARBORNE, J. B. 1988. Phytochemical methods: a guide to modern techniques of plant analyses. (Second edition). Chapman & Hall, London. 320 pp.Google Scholar
JANZEN, D. H. 1987. Insect diversity of a Costa Rican dry forest: why keep it, and how? Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 30:343356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KOH, L. P. & MENGE, D. N. L. 2006. Rapid assessment of Lepidoptera predation rates in neotropical forest fragments. Biotropica 38:132134.Google Scholar
KRUESS, A. & TSCHARNTKE, T. 1994. Habitat fragmentation, species loss, and biological control. Science 264:15811584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LAURANCE, S. G. W., STOUFFER, P. C. & LAURANCE, W. F. 2004. Effects of road clearings on movement patterns of understory rainforest birds in central Amazonia. Conservation Biology 18:10991109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LOISELLE, B. A. & FARJI-BRENER, A. G. 2002. What's up? An experimental comparison of predation levels between canopy and understory in a tropical wet forest. Biotropica 34:327330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MAGURRAN, A. E. 1989. Diversidad ecológica y su medición. Ediciones Vedrá. Barcelona. 184 pp.Google Scholar
MARQUIS, R. J. 1987. Variación en la herbivoria foliar y su importancia selectiva en Piper arieianum (Piperaceae). Revista de Biología Tropical 35:133149.Google Scholar
MURCIA, C. 1995. Edge effects in fragmented forests: implications for conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10:5862.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
NOVOTNY, V. & BASSET, Y. 2005. Host specificity of insect herbivores in tropical forests. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 272:10831090.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
POSA, M. R. C., SODHI, N. S. & KOH, L. P. 2007. Predation on artificial nests and caterpillar models across a disturbance gradient in Subic Bay, Philippines. Journal of Tropical Ecology 23:2733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PRICE, P. W. 1992. Plant resources as the mechanistics basis for insect herbivore population dynamics. Pp. 287312 in Hunter, M. D., Ohgushi, T. & Price, P. W. (eds.). Effects of resource distribution on animal-plant interactions. Academic Press. San Diego.Google Scholar
PRICE, M. L. & BUTLER, L. G. 1977. Rapid visual estimation and spectrophotometric determination of tannin content of sorghum grain. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 25:12681273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RANKIN-DE Merona, J. M., PRANCE, G. T., HUTCHINGS, R. W., SILVA, F. M., RODRIGUES, W. A. & UEHLING, M. E. 1992. Preliminary results of large scale tree inventory of upland rain forest in the central Amazon. Acta Amazonica 22:493534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RAO, M., TERBORGH, J. & NUÃEZ, P. 2000. Increased herbivory in forest isolates: implications for plant community structure and composition. Conservation Biology 15:624633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SCHOWALTER, T. D. 2000. Insect ecology: an ecosystem approach. Academic Press, London. 483 pp.Google Scholar
SHAHABUDDIN, G. & TERBORGH, J. W. 1999. Frugivorous butterflies in Venezuelan forest fragments: abundance, diversity and the effects of isolation. Journal of Tropical Ecology 15:703722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
STOUFFER, P. C. & BIERREGAARD, R. O. 1995. Use of Amazonian forest fragments by understory insectivorous birds. Ecology 76:24292445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TURNER, I. M. 1996. Species loss in fragments of tropical rain forest: a review of the evidence. Journal of Applied Ecology 33:200209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VASCONCELOS, H. L. 1999. Levels of leaf herbivory in Amazonian trees from different stages in forest regeneration. Acta Amazonica 29:615623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VASCONCELOS, H. L. & LAURANCE, W. F. 2005. Influence of habitat, litter type, and soil invertebrates on leaf-litter decomposition in a fragmented Amazonian landscape. Oecologia 143:456462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WATERMAN, P. G. & MOLE, S. 1994. Analysis of phenolic plant metabolites. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford. 238 pp.Google Scholar
YAMASAKI, M. & KIKUZAWA, K. 2003. Temporal and spatial variations in leaf herbivory within a canopy of Fagus crenata. Oecologia 137:226232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Effects of Amazonian forest fragmentation on the interaction between plants, insect herbivores, and their natural enemies
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Effects of Amazonian forest fragmentation on the interaction between plants, insect herbivores, and their natural enemies
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Effects of Amazonian forest fragmentation on the interaction between plants, insect herbivores, and their natural enemies
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *