Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-g98kq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-20T08:22:17.782Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Links between leaf morphology and ecological strategy across secondary succession in a temperate deciduous forest (North Carolina, USA): implications for the fossil record

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2025

Alexander Lowe*
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington 98195, U.S.A.; present address: Paleobiology Department, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560, U.S.A.
Evonne Aguirre
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington 98195, U.S.A.; present address: The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York, New York 10016, U.S.A.
Josephine Meier
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington 98195, U.S.A.; present address: College of Forestry, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331, U.S.A.
Christopher Oishi
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory , Otto, North Carolina 28763, U.S.A.
Caroline A. E. Strömberg
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington 98195, U.S.A.; present address: Paleobiology Department, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560, U.S.A.
*
Corresponding author: Alexander Lowe; Email: Lowe.J.Alex@gmail.com

Abstract

The fossil record offers important opportunities to reconstruct plant community response to past disturbance events. Yet reconstructions are hindered by limited empirical evidence of successional variation in functional traits measurable on fossil leaves, including leaf morphology and δ13C. In addition, the role the leaf economic spectrum (LES) plays across succession within temperate deciduous forests is unresolved. Finally, it is unclear to what degree disturbance confounds the leaf morphology–climate relationships utilized in paleoclimate proxies.

We utilize a chronosequence spanning forest stands varied by time since logging (4, 21, 44, and 94 years old) and one old-growth stand in North Carolina. Leaf traits of woody non-monocot angiosperm (WNMA) leaves, including all trees and prominent understory plants, were measured to document patterns relating to the LES (e.g., leaf mass per area [LMA]), patterns of leaf morphology and δ13C, and their confounding influence on climatic estimates using the digital leaf physiognomy proxy.

LMA increased across succession among trees, driven by variation in both leaf thickness and leaf density, supporting the role of the LES. The petiole metric (PM), which is biomechanically linked to LMA, increased across succession among trees as hypothesized, as did the proportion of entire-margined leaves and, among tree dominants, leaf margin complexity. Measures of diversity (morphological and species richness, δ13C, and LMA variance) for all WNMAs were often highest in the old-growth stand, reflecting structural and niche complexity, yet peaked in mid-succession among trees, reflecting a mixing of ecological strategies. Other leaf traits had complicated or subtle trends across succession that were difficult to reconcile and tie to function. Changes in leaf morphology across succession did not strongly confound the accuracy of paleoclimate reconstructions. Successional patterns of this study importantly highlight the utility of PM, leaf margin, and leaf morphological richness in interpreting successional dynamics from fossil leaf assemblages sourced from temperate deciduous forests.

Information

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Paleontological Society
Figure 0

Table 1. Leaf traits measured in this study. Measurements were made on fresh leaves (before drying), unless stated otherwise

Figure 1

Figure 1. Changes in taxonomic composition (A, B) and leaf morphology across (C) different-aged stands. A, Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) plot with species weighted by relative abundance (i.e., proportion of total stem basal area [SBA]), with the top five most-abundant species listed. B, NMDS analysis including only taxon presence/absence. C, Scanned leaf images of the top five most-abundant leaves in each stand, excluding the 4 YO stand, where stem basal area was not measured, arranged in order of abundance. Leaf sizes are scaled to the 3 cm scale bar.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Changes in community leaf traits across ecological succession, including those related to ecological strategy, leaf δ13C, leaf size and shape, and leaf toothiness. Leaf traits are analyzed using three different approaches. Rec. LMA, reconstructed leaf mass per area; other abbreviations follow Table 1.

Figure 3

Table 2. The strength and significance of linear relationships between leaf mass per area (LMA) and traits considered to influence LMA directly, including leaf dry matter content (LDMC), which approximates leaf density, leaf thickness, and carbon/nitrogen ratio (C:N). A plus sign (+) signifies a positive slope

Figure 4

Figure 3. The relationships between reconstructed and measured leaf mass per area (LMA) across different-aged stands (shown by point color) compared with a 1:1 relationship (dashed line). A–C, Analyses including trees and understory plants for (A) species mean, (B) stand mean, and (C) stand variance. D–F, Analyses limited to trees for (D) species mean, (E) stand mean, and (F) stand variance.

Figure 5

Figure 4. Diversity indices for different-aged stands, including those related to leaf morphological diversity (A, D, G), species diversity (B, E), and the diversity of leaf economic spectrum (LES) strategies assessed by both (C) measured and (F) reconstructed (rec.) leaf mass per area (LMA). Leaf traits are analyzed using three different approaches. Species richness represents all taxa censused in the plot, including those not sampled (see Supplementary Appendix 4).

Figure 6

Figure 5. Estimated climatic variables using the digital leaf physiognomy (DiLP) proxy across different-aged stands and by combining data across all stands (i.e., site level; “combined”). Estimations are done for both trees only and trees and understory plants combined. The gold bar marks the true climate variable. A, Estimated mean annual temperature (MAT), with true site temperature at the old-growth stand adjusted to reflect its slightly higher elevation, and (B) mean annual precipitation (MAP), with the bar width capturing values across all stands.

Figure 7

Table 3. Results of this study that are most relevant to application in the fossil record. Successional patterns are described for trees only. LMA, leaf mass per area; LES, leaf economic spectrum; PM, petiole metric; WNMA, woody non-monocot angiosperm