Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T16:25:15.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A test of the Janzen-Connell model with two common tree species in Amazonian forest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Renato Cintra
Renato Cintra
Affiliation:
Departamento de Ecologia, Institute National de Pesquisas da Amazonia (INPA), C.P. 478, 69011-970, Manaus, AM, Brasil
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments and survival analysis were used to test whether the Janzen-Connell model operated for two common Amazonian tree species in Peru: the midstorey palm, Astrocaryum murumuru, and the canopy-emergent legume, Dipteryx micrantha. Seed and seedling survival patterns of these species partially supported the model, depending on tree species, type of predator, spatial scale and the particular year. At a small scale of a 2.5-ha plot, Astrocaryum seed predation by insects and mammals was density-dependent. At a larger scale of 100 ha, Dipteryx seed survival increased with distance from conspecific adults, but for Astrocaryum seeds there was no distance dependence. At the scale of 200–400 ha Dipteryx seed survival was negatively related to the number of individuals present in groups of conspecific adult trees. In 1992 a higher proportion of Astrocaryum seedlings survived far from, compared with close to, conspecific adult trees, whilst in 1993 more Dipteryx seedlings survived beneath conspecific adult trees than farther away.

Keywords

Amazon forestAstrocaryum palmdensity and distance-dependent mortalityDipteryxJanzen-Connell modelplant diversityseed survivalseedling survival
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 13 , Issue 5 , September 1997 , pp. 641 - 658
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

Ausgpurger, C. K. 1983. Offspring recruitment around tropical trees: changes in cohort distance with time. Oikos 20:189–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augspurger, C. K. & Kitajima, K. 1992. Experimental studies of seedling recruitment from contrasting seed distributions. Ecology 73:1270–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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. 1994. Factors affecting post-dispersal seed and seedling survival of two tree species in the Amazon forest. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Duke University, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
Cintra, R. & Horna, V. 1997. Seed and seedling survival of the common upperstorey palm Astrocaryum murumuru and the canopy-emergent legume Dipteryx micrantha in gaps in the Amazon forest. Journal of Tropical Ecology 13:257–277.Google Scholar
Clark, D. A. & Clark, D. B. 1984. Spacing dynamics of a tropical rain forest tree: evaluation of the Janzen-Connell model. American Naturalist 124:769–788.Google Scholar
Clark, D. B. & Clark, D. A. 1987. Population ecology and microhabitat distribution of Dipteryx panamensis, a neotropical rain forest emergent tree. Biotropica 19:236–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, D. A. & Clark, D. A. 1992. Life history diversity of canopy and emergent trees in a neotropical rain forest. Ecological Monographs 62:315–344.Google Scholar
Condit, R., Hubbell, S. P. & Foster, R. B. 1994. Density dependence in two understory tree species in a neotropical forest. Ecology 75:671–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connell, J. H. 1971. On the role of natural enemies in preventing competitive exclusion in some marine animals and in rain forest trees. Pp. 298–310 in den Boer, P. J. & Gradwell, G. R. (eds). Dynamics of populations. Centre for Agricultural Publications and Documentation, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Connell, J. H., Tracey, J. G. & Webb, L. J. 1984. Compensatory recruitment, growth, and mortality as factors maintaining rain forest tree diversity. Ecological Monographs 54:141–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condit, R., Hubbell, S. P. & Foster, R. B. 1992. Recruitment near conspecific adults and the maintenance of tree and shrub diversity in a neotropical forest. American Naturalist 140:261–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, D. R. & Oakes, D. 1984. Analysis of survival data. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
De Steven, D. & Putz, F. E. 1984. Impact of mammals on early recruitment of a tropical canopy tree, Dipteryx panamensis, in Panama. Oikos 43:207–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denslow, J. 1980. Gap partitioning among tropical rain forest trees. Biotropica 12:47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmons, L. H. 1982. Ecology of Proechimys (Rodentia, Echirayidae) in Southern Peru. Tropical Ecology 23:280–290.Google Scholar
Forget, P-M. 1993: Post-dispersal predation and scatterhoarding of Dipteryx panamensis (Papilionaceae) seeds by rodents in Panama. Oecologia 94:255–261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forget, P-M. & Milleron, T. 1992. Evidence for secondary seed dispersal by rodents in Panama. Oecologia 87:596–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentry, A. H. 1990. Four neotropical rainforests Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
Howe, H. F. & Smallwood, J. 1982. Ecology of seed dispersal. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematic 13:201–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbell, S. P. 1979. Tree dispersion, abundance, and diversity in a tropical dry forest. Science 203:1299–1309.Google Scholar
Janson, C. H. & Emmons, L. H. 1990. Ecological Structure of the Nonflying Mammal Community at Cocha Cashu Biological Station, Manu National Park, Peru. Pp. 314–338 in Gentry, A. H. (ed.). Four neotropical rainforests. Yale University Press, London.Google Scholar
Janzen, D. H. 1970. Herbivores and the number of tree species in tropical forests. American Naturalist 104:501–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiltie, R. 1981. Distribution of palm fruits on a rain forest floor: why white-lipped peccaries forage near objects. Biotropica 13:141–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rankin, J. M. 1978. The influence of seed predation and plant competition on tree species abundances in two adjacent tropical rain forests. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.Google Scholar
Ridley, H. N. 1930. The dispersal of plants throughout the world. L. Reeve, Ashford, England.Google Scholar
SAS. 1987. SAS/Stat guide for personal computers. Version 4. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
Schupp, E. W. 1992. The Janzen-Connell model for tropical tree diversity: population implications and the importance of spatial scale. American Naturalist 140:526–530.Google Scholar
Smythe, N. 1989. Seed survival in the palm Astrocaryum standleyanum: evidence for dependence upon its seed dispersers. Biotropica 21:50–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
S-PLUS. 1991. User's Manual Vol. 2 Version 3.0. Statistical Sciences Inc. Seattle, Washington.Google Scholar
Swaine, M. D. & Whitmore, T. C. 1988. On the definition of ecological species groups in tropical rain forests. Vegetatio 75:81–86.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 Associates. Sunderland, Mass.Google Scholar
Terborgh, J., Losos, L., Riley, M. P. & Riley, M. B. 1993. Predation by vertebrates and invertebrates on the seeds of five canopy tree species of an Amazonian forest. Vegetatio 107/108:375–386.Google Scholar
Vandermeer, J. H. 1977. Notes of density-dependence on Welfia georgii ex Burrett (Palmae), a lowland rain forest species in Costa Rica. Brenesia 10/11:9–15.Google Scholar
Wallace, A. R. 1878. Tropical nature and other essays. MacMillan, London.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, L. 1991. SYSTAT: the system for statistics. SYSTAT, Inc., Evanston, Illinois.Google Scholar
Wright, S. J. 1983. The dispersion of eggs by a bruchid beetle among Scheelea palm seeds, and the effect of distance to the parent palm. Ecology 65:1016–1021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar