Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T11:29:18.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A test of the hypothesis of ecological equivalence in an Australian subtropical rain forest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2002

Guy C. Penfold
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia
David Lamb
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rain forest Ecology and Management, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia

Abstract

We tested the hypothesis that tree species in a subtropical rain forest in south-east Queensland are ecologically equivalent and therefore have identical environmental requirements for their regeneration. We assessed the evidence that juveniles of species differed in their distributions in treefall gap microsites and along gradients of light availability, soil pH, soil PO4-P availability and soil NO3-N availability. Pairwise comparisons were made on a subset of the common species selected on the basis that they showed a relatively high level of positive association, and would therefore, a priori, be expected to have similar regeneration requirements. Detailed comparisons between the species failed to demonstrate evidence for species differentiation with respect to their tolerance of the disturbance associated with gap microsites or to the gradient of NO3-N availability. However, species differed markedly in their distributions along the soil pH gradient and along the gradients of light availability and soil PO4-P availability. The overall level of ecological differentiation between the species is high: seven out of the 10 possible species pairings showed evidence for ecological differentiation. Such niche differentiation amongst the juveniles of tree species may play an important role in maintaining the species richness of rain-forest communities.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
2002 Cambridge University Press

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.)