Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-d5ftd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-13T03:45:54.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - What temporal processes in trees tell us about competition, community structure and speciation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2013

By
Colleen K. Kelly ,
Michael G. Bowler ,
Gordon A. Fox ,
J. Arturo Solís-Magallanes ,
J. Marcela Ramos-Tapia ,
Pilar Lopera Blair ,
Susanne Schwinning ,
John N. Williams  and
Jeffrey B. Joy
Edited by
Colleen K. Kelly ,
Michael G. Bowler  and
Gordon A. Fox
Colleen K. Kelly
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Michael G. Bowler
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Gordon A. Fox
Affiliation:
University of South Florida
J. Arturo Solís-Magallanes
Affiliation:
Universidad de Guadalajara
J. Marcela Ramos-Tapia
Affiliation:
Plan de Ayala
Pilar Lopera Blair
Affiliation:
University of South Florida
Susanne Schwinning
Affiliation:
Texas State University
John N. Williams
Affiliation:
University of California
Jeffrey B. Joy
Affiliation:
Simon Fraser University
Colleen K. Kelly
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Michael G. Bowler
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Gordon A. Fox
Affiliation:
University of South Florida
Get access

Summary

Introduction

This chapter reviews evidence concerning the vital role that temporal dynamics can have in the ecology of trees and other long-lived species in the assembly and maintenance of natural communities. The research synthesised here was stimulated by a desire to determine the action of temporal dynamics in nature, and its implications for the nature of competition, community structure and assembly on multiple scales and across a range of climatic conditions. For the most part, the results discussed concern tropical forests, but we think they provide strong support for a more general view that can be applied across biomes. Finally, we ask if there may be a potential role for temporal dynamics in speciation, in light of what we have learned from the tropical trees.

A field programme begun in the late ’90s in the tropical dry forest of México was consciously designed to study the coexistence of closely related species in a very speciose community, but the role of temporal dynamics had not been suspected and its finding was serendipitous. With centuries-long lifespans, decades-long juvenile stages and low population turnover rates, trees are problematic candidates for demographic analyses, either observational or experimental. Unless instant death is involved, the particular hurdle with trees, as with any long-lived organism, is directly connecting any specific response in the early life of the individual with the long-term individual persistence or character of the standing population. However, trees differ from many long-lived organisms in carrying their history in their structure at both the individual and population levels. Thus, a tree population itself documents individual success over the history of the population (Parker et al. 1997, Cole et al. 2011). The distribution of a population with regard to physical conditions, size and age structure and relative to other woody species all contain information on the ecology and interactions of species (e.g. Veblen 1989, 1992, Villalba and Veblen 1998, Kelly et al. 2001) and it was the age structure of populations that revealed the action of temporal dynamics at Chamela Biological Station.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Temporal Dynamics and Ecological Process , pp. 41 - 81
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agrawal, A. A., Hastings, A. P., Johnson, M. T. J., Maron, J. L. and Salminen, J. P. (2012). Insect herbivores drive real-time ecological and evolutionary change in plant populations. Science 338, 113–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alexander, J. M., Kueffer, C., Daehler, C. C. et al. (2011). Assembly of nonnative floras along elevational gradients explained by directional ecological filtering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 108, 656–661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Angert, A. L., Huxman, T. E., Chesson, P. and Venable, D. L. (2009). Functional tradeoffs determine species coexistence via the storage effect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 106, 11641–11645.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anonymous (2011). Climate: observations, projections and impacts. Mexico. Exeter, UK: UK Met Office Hadley Centre.
Armas, C., Ordiales, R. and Pugnaire, F. I. (2004). Measuring plant interactions: a new comparative index. Ecology 85, 2682–2686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, R. A. and McGehee, R. (1980). Competitive exclusion. American Naturalist 115, 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augspurger, C. K. (1984). Seedling survival of tropical tree species: interactions of dispersal distance, light-gaps, and pathogens. Ecology 65, 1705–1712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augspurger, C. K. (2008). Early spring leaf out enhances growth and survival of saplings in a temperate deciduous forest. Oecologia 156, 281–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augspurger, C. K. (2009). Spring 2007 warmth and frost: phenology, damage and refoliation in a temperate deciduous forest. Functional Ecology 23, 1031–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augspurger, C. K. and Kelly, C. K. (1984). Pathogen mortality of tropical tree seedlings: experimental studies of the effects of dispersal distance, seedling density, and light conditions. Oecologia 61, 211–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Augspurger, C. K. and Wilkinson, H. T. (2007). Host specificity of pathogenic Pythium species: Implications for tree species diversity. Biotropica 39, 702–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayala, R. (2007) Datos climaticos estación meteorológica Chamela, Available at .
Becerra, J. X. (2003). Evolution of the Mexican Bursera (Burseraceae) inferred from ITS, ETS and 5S ribosomal DNA sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 26, 300–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becerra, J. X. (2005). Timing the origin and expansion of the Mexican tropical dry forest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 102, 10919–10923.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becerra, J. X. (2007). The impact of herbivore–plant coevolution on plant community structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 104, 7483–7488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Binggeli, P. and Blackstock, P. (1999). Impact of exposure on extension growth and stem quality of young ash and sycamore in farm forestry plantations. Agroforestry Forum 9, 19–23.Google Scholar
Bolnick, D. I. and Fitzpatrick, B. M. (2007). Sympatric speciation: models and empirical evidence. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 38, 459–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowler, M. G. and Kelly, C. K. (2012). On the statistical mechanics of species abundance distributions. Theoretical Population Biology 82, 85–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brachi, B., Faure, N., Horton, M. et al. (2010). Linkage and association mapping of Arabidopsis thaliana flowering time in nature. PLoSGenetics 6, e1000940. .Google ScholarPubMed
Brooks, M. L. (2000). Competition between alien annual grasses and native annual plants in the Mojave Desert. American Midland Naturalist 144, 92–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, Y. M. and Kelly, C. K. (2003). Comparison of population structures and ecology of a congeneric pair of common and rare neotropical tree species. Plant Ecology 167, 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, S. H. (1986). Climate of Chamela, Jalisco, and trends in the south coastal region of México. Archives of Meteorology, Geophysics and Bioclimatology, Series B. 36, 297–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, S. H. (1988). Rascos del ambiente fisico y biológico de Chamela, Jalisco, México. Folio Entomologica Mexicana 77, 5–17.Google Scholar
Bullock, S. H. and Solís-Magallanes, J. A. (1990). Phenology of canopy trees of a tropical deciduous forest in México. Biotropica 22, 22–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, S. H., Mooney, H. A. and Medina, E. (1995). Seasonally Dry Tropical Forests. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, J. H. and Strauss, S. (2011). More closely related species are more ecologically similar in an experimental test. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 108, 5302–5307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cahill, J. F., Kembel, S. W., Lamb, E. G. and Keddy, P. A. (2008). Does phylogenetic relatedness influence the strength of competition among vascular plants?Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 10, 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesson, P. and Huntly, N. (1997). The roles of harsh and fluctuating conditions in the dynamics of ecological communities. American Naturalist 150, 519–553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesson, P. and Kuang, J. J. (2008). The interaction between predation and competition. Nature 456, 235–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cole, K., Ironside, K., Eischeid, J. et al. (2011). Past and ongoing shifts in Joshua tree support future modeled range contraction. Ecological Applications 21, 137–149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Connell, J. H. (1978). Diversity in tropical rainforests and coral reefs. Science 199, 1302–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connell, J. H. and Green, P. T. (2000). Seedling dynamics over thirty-two years in a tropical rain forest tree. Ecology 81, 568–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coyne, J. A. and Orr, H. A. (2004). Speciation. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.Google Scholar
Daehler, C. C. (2003). Performance comparisons of co-occurring native and alien invasive plants: implications for conservation and restoration. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34, 183–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, M. B. (1986). Climatic instability, time lags, and community disequilibrium. In Diamond, J. and Case, T. J. (eds), Community Ecology. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 269–284.Google Scholar
De-Nova, J. A., Medina, R., Montero, J. C. et al. (2012). Insights into the historical construction of species-rich Mesoamerican seasonally dry tropical forests: the diversification of Bursera (Burseraceae, Sapindales). New Phytologist 193, 276–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dethioux, M. (1970). The sycamore seedling. Notes techniques du Centre d’écologie forestière et rurale, Belgium No. 10.
Devaux, C. and Lande, R. (2009). Displacement of flowering phenologies among plant species by competition for generalist pollinators. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 22, 1460–1470.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dieckmann, U. and Doebeli, M. (1999). On the origin of species by sympatric speciation. Nature 400, 354–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eichhorn, M. P., Compton, S. G. and Hartley, S. E. (2006). Seedling species determines rates of leaf herbivory in a Malaysian rain forest. Journal of Tropical Ecology 22, 513–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, C. (2007). Temporal niche axes in Acer pseudoplatanus L. and Fraxinus excelsior L: a climate change perspective. Final Honours Thesis, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Faith, D. P. (1992). Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biological Conservation 61, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felsenstein, J. (1985). Phylogenies and the comparative method. American Naturalist 125, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filip, V., Dirzo, R., Maass, J. M. and Sarukhán, J. (1995). Within- and among-year variation in the levels of herbivory on the foliage of trees from a Mexican tropical deciduous forest. Biotropica 27, 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firn, J., MacDougall, A., Schmidt, S. and Buckley, Y. M. (2010). Early emergence and resource availability can competitively favour natives over a functionally similar invader. Oecologia 163, 775–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, G. A. (2003). Assortative mating and plant phenology: evolutionary and practical consequences. Evolutionary Ecology Research 5, 1–18.Google Scholar
Fraser, L. H. and Keddy, P. A. (2005). Can competitive ability predict structure in experimental plant communities?Journal of Vegetation Science 16, 571–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentry, A. H. (1991). Alwyn H. Gentry forest transect data set. Available at: .
Givnish, T. J. (2010). Ecology of plant speciation. Taxon 59, 1326–1366.Google Scholar
Gotelli, N. J. and Colwell, R. K. (2001). Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecology Letters 4, 379–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanley, M. E., Fenner, M. and Edwards, P. J. (1995). An experimental field study of the effects of mollusc grazing on seedling recruitment and survival in grassland. Journal of Ecology 83, 621–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanley, M. E., Fenner, M. and Edwards, P. J. (1996). The effect of mollusc grazing on seedling recruitment in artificially created grassland gaps. Oecologia 106, 240–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hara, T., Kimura, M. and Kikuzawa, K. (1991). Growth patterns of tree height and stem diameter in populations of Abies veitchii, A. mariesii and Betula ermanii. Journal of Ecology 79, 1085–1098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, P. H. (1996). Phylogenies for ecologists. Journal of Animal Ecology 65, 255–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, P. H. and Pagel, M. D. (1991). The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Helliwell, D. R. (1965). Factors influencing the growth of seedlings of sycamore and Norway maple. Quarterly Journal of Forestry 59, 327–337.Google Scholar
Hernández-Apolinar, M., Valverde, T. and Purata, S. (2006). Demography of Bursera glabrifolia, a tropical tree used for folk woodcrafting in southern México: an evaluation of its management plan. Forest Ecology and Management 223, 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hijmans, R. J., Cameron, S. E., Parra, J. L., Jones, P. G. and Jarvis, A. (2005). Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology 25, 1965–1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, R. and Rausher, M. D. (2012). Pollinator-mediated selection on flower color allele drives reinforcement. Science 335, 1090–1092.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hubbell, S. P. (2001). The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hubbell, S. P. and Foster, R. B. (1986). Biology, chance, and history and the structure of tropical rain forest tree communities. In Diamond, J. and Case, T. J. (eds), Community Ecology. New York: Harper & Row, pp. 314–329.Google Scholar
Huff, J. T. and Zilberman, D. (2012). Regulation of biological accuracy, precision, and memory by plant chromatin organization. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development 22, 132–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutchinson, G. F. (1959). Homage to Santa Rosalia, or why are there so many kinds of animals?American Naturalist 93, 145–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jablonski, D. and Finarelli, J. A. (2009). Congruence of morphologically defined genera with molecular phylogenies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 106, 8262–8266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, E. A. and Frier, G. I. (1989). Population dynamics in lodgepole pine-Engleman spruce forests. Ecology 70, 1335–1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jump, A. S., Hunt, J. M., Martinez-Izquierdo, J. A. and Penuelas, J. (2006). Natural selection and climate change: temperature-linked spatial and temporal trends in gene frequency. Molecular Ecology 15, 3469–3480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, C. K. and Bowler, M. G. (2002). Coexistence and relative abundance in forest tree species. Nature 417, 437–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, C. K. and Bowler, M. G. (2005). A new application of storage dynamics: differential sensitivity, diffuse competition and temporal niches. Ecology 86, 1012–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, C. K. and Bowler, M. G. (2009a). Temporal niche dynamics, relative abundance and phylogenetic signal in coexisting species. Theoretical Ecology 2, 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, C. K. and Bowler, M. G. (2009b). Investigating the role of enemies in temporal niche dynamics: differential sensitivity, competition, and stable coexistence. Theoretical Population Biology 76, 278–284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, C. K. and Hanley, M. E. (2005). Juvenile growth and palatability in congeneric British herbs. American Journal of Botany 92, 1586–1589.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, C. K., Banyard Smith, H., Buckley, Y. M. et al. (2001). Investigations in commonness and rarity: a comparative analysis of co-occurring, congeneric Mexican trees. Ecology Letters 4, 618–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, C. K., Blundell, S. J., Bowler, M. G. et al. (2011). The statistical mechanics of community assembly and species distribution. New Phytologist 191, 819–827.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, C. K., Bowler, M. G. and Breden, F. M. (2006). An analytical model assessing the potential threat to natural habitats from insect resistance transgenes: continuous transgene input. Biology Letters 2, 293–297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, C. K., Bowler, M. G., Breden, F. M., Fenner, M. and Poppy, G. M. (2005). An analytical model assessing the potential threat to natural habitats from insect resistance transgenes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 272, 1759–1767.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, C. K., Bowler, M. G., Joy, J. B. and Williams, J. N. (2010). Fractional abundance and the ecology of community structure. ArXiv1008.2527v1.
Kelly, C. K., Bowler, M. G., Pybus, O. G. and Harvey, P. H. (2008). Phylogeny, niches and relative abundance in natural communities. Ecology 89, 962–970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, C. K., Chase, M., Fay, M. F., de Bruijn, A. and Woodward, F. I. (2003). Temperature-based population segregation in birch. Ecology Letters 6, 87–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleidon, A. and Mooney, H. A. (2000). A global distribution of biodiversity inferred from climatic constraints: results from a process-based modelling study. Global Change Biology 6, 507–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibold, M. A. and McPeek, M. A. (2006). Coexistence of the niche and neutral perspectives in community ecology. Ecology 87, 1399–1410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lopez, O. R., Farris-Lopez, K., Montgomery, R. A. and Givnish, T. J. (2008). Leaf phenology in relation to canopy closure in southern Appalachian trees. American Journal of Botany 95, 1395–1407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Losos, J. B. (2010). Adaptive radiation, ecological opportunity and evolutionary determinism. American Naturalist 175, 623–639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mabberley, D. J. (2008). Mabberley’s Plant Book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacArthur, R. H. (1957). On the relative abundance of bird species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 43, 293–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Magnuson-Ford, K., Mooers, A. Ø., Paquette, S. R. and Steel, M. (2010). Comparing strategies to preserve evolutionary diversity. Journal of Theoretical Biology 266, 107–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, S. (2005). Reproduction and recruitment in native ash and its invasive competitor sycamore. MS Thesis, University of Southampton, Southampton.
Mayfield, M. M. and Levine, J. M. (2010). Opposing effects of competitive exclusion on the phylogenetic structure of communities. Ecology Letters 13, 1085–1093.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayrose, M., Kane, N. C., Mayrose, I., Dlugosch, K. M. and Rieseberg, L. H. (2011). Increased growth in sunflower correlates with reduced defences and altered gene expression in response to biotic and abiotic stress. Molecular Ecology 20, 4683–4694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluney, K. E., Belnap, J., Collins, S. L. et al. (2012). Shifting species interactions in terrestrial dryland ecosystems under altered water availability and climate change. Biological Reviews 87, 563–582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nee, S. and May, R. M. (1992). Dynamics of metapopulations: habitat destruction and competitive coexistence. Journal of Animal Ecology 61, 37–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nee, S., Harvey, P. H. and May, R. M. (1991). Lifting the veil on abundance patterns. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 243, 161–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, D. M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E. D. et al. (2001). Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. Bioscience 51, 933–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pacala, S. W. and Tilman, D. (1994). Limiting similarity in mechanistic and spatial models of plant competition in heterogeneous environments. American Naturalist 143, 222–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Packer, A. and Clay, K. (2000). Soil pathogens and spatial patterns of seedling mortality in a temperate tree. Nature 404, 278–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Packer, A. and Clay, K. (2003). Soil pathogens and Prunus serotina seedling and sapling growth near conspecific trees. Ecology 84, 108–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pake, C. E. and Venable, D. L. (1995). Is coexistence of Sonoran Desert annuals mediated by temporal variability in reproductive success?Ecology 76, 246–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pake, C. E. and Venable, D. L. (1996). Seed banks in desert annuals: implications for persistence and coexistence in variable environments. Ecology 77, 1427–1435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, K. C., Parker, A. J., Beaty, R. M., Fuller, M. M. and Faust, T. D. (1997). Population structure and spatial pattern of two coastal populations of Ocala sand pine (Pinus clausa (Chapm. ex Englem.) Vasey ex Sarg. var. clausa D. B. Ward). Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 124, 22–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penuelas, J., Terradas, J. and Lloret, F. (2011). Solving the conundrum of plant species coexistence: water in space and time matters most. New Phytologist 189, 5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pielou, E. C. (1977). Mathematical Ecology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Pimentel, D., Feinberg, E. H., Wood, P. W. and Hayes, J. T. (1965). Selection, spatial distribution, and coexistence of competing fly species. American Naturalist 99, 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pirie, C. D., Walmsley, S., Ingle, R. et al. (2000). Investigations in commonness and rarity: a comparison of seed dispersal in the common Jatropha standleyi and the rare and endangered J. chamelensis (Euphorbiaceae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 71, 501–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, F. W. (1962a). The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity: Part I. Ecology 43, 185–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, F. W. (1962b). The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity: Part II. Ecology 43, 410–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puertolas, J., Gil, L. and Pardos, J. A. (2003). Effects of nutritional status and seedling size on field performance of Pinus halepensis planted on former arable land in the Mediterranean basin. Forestry 76, 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pueyo, S. (2006). Diversity: between neutrality and structure. Oikos 112, 392–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pueyo, S., He, F. and Zillio, T. (2007). The maximum entropy formalism and the idiosyncratic theory of biodiversity. Ecology Letters 10, 1017–1028.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rafferty, C. M., Lamont, B. B. and Hanley, M. E. (2010). Herbivore feeding preferences in captive and wild populations. Austral Ecology 35, 257–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, K. O., Packer, A., Van der Putten, W. H. and Clay, K. (2003). Plant–soil biota interactions and spatial distribution of black cherry in its native and invasive ranges. Ecology Letters 6, 1046–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, K. J. and Menke, J. W. (1985). Competitive reversals and environment-dependent resource partitioning in Erodium. Oecologia 67, 430–434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rzedowski, J. (1978). Vegetación de México. México, D. F.: Limusa.Google Scholar
Schluter, D. (2001). Ecology and the origin of species. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16, 372–380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwinning, S. and Fox, G. A. (1995). Population dynamic consequences of competitive symmetry in annual plants. Oikos 72, 422–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwinning, S. and Weiner, J. (1998). Mechanisms determining the degree of size asymmetry in competition among plants. Oecologia 113, 447–455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Segura, G., Balvanera, P., Duran, E. and Perez, A. (2003). Tree community structure and stem mortality along a water availability gradient in a Mexican tropical dry forest. Plant Ecology 169, 259–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegal, S. and Castellan, N. J. (1988). Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Sugihara, G. (1980). Minimal community structure: an explanation of species abundance patterns. American Naturalist 116, 770–787.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sugihara, G., Bersier, L.-F., Southwood, T. R. E., Pimm, S. L. and May, R. M. (2003). Predicted correspondence between species abundances and dendrograms of niche similarities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 100, 5246–5251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tapper, P.-G. (1996). Long-term patterns of mast fruiting in Fraxinus excelsior. Ecology 77, 2567–2572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilman, D. (1988). Plant Strategies and the Dynamics and Structure of Plant Communities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Toledo, M. C. A. (1982). El genero Bursera (Burseraceae) en el estado de Guerrero (México). Unpublished BS thesis, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México, D. F.
Turelli, M. (1981). Niche overlap and invasion of competitors in random environments. 1. Models without demographic stochasticity. Theoretical Population Biology 20, 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Usinowicz, J., Wright, S. J. and Ives, A. R. (2012). Coexistence in tropical forests through asynchronous variation in annual seed production. Ecology 93, 2073–2084.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vane-Wright, R. I., Humphries, C. J. and Williams, P. H. (1991). What to protect? Systematics and the agony of choice. Biological Conservation 55, 235–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veblen, T. T. (1989). Tree regeneration responses to gaps along a trans-Andean gradient. Ecology 70, 541–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veblen, T. T. (1992). Regeneration dynamics. In Glenn-Lewin, D. C., Peet, R. K. and Veblen, T.T. (eds), Plant Succession: Theory and Prediction. London, UK: Chapman and Hall, pp. 152–187.Google Scholar
Via, S. (2002). The ecological genetics of speciation. American Naturalist 159, S1–S7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Villalba, R. and Veblen, T. T. (1998). Influences of large scale climatic variability on episodic tree mortality in northern Patagonia. Ecology 79, 2624–2640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villar-Salvador, P., Puertolas, J., Cuesta, B. et al. (2012). Increase in size and nitrogen concentration enhances seedling survival in Mediterranean plantations. Insights from an ecophysiological conceptual model of plant survival. New Forests 43, 755–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, R. R. and Chesson, P. L. (1985). Coexistence mediated by recruitment fluctuations: a field guide to the storage effect. American Naturalist 125, 769–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waters, T. L. and Savill, P. S. (1992). Ash and sycamore regeneration and the phenomenon of their alternation. Forestry 65, 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, C. O. (2000). Exploring the phylogenetic structure of ecological communities: an example for rain forest trees. American Naturalist 156, 145–155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weeks, A. and Simpson, B. B. (2004). Molecular genetic evidence for interspecific hybridization among endemic Hispaniolan Bursera (Burseraceae). American Journal of Botany 91, 976–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weis, A. E. (2005). Direct and indirect assortative mating: a multivariate approach to plant flowering schedules. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 18, 536–546.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, J. N. and Kelly, C. K. (2013). Deconstructing the signal: phylogenetic structure, elevation change and the implications for species coexistence. Evolutionary Ecology Research Published online 8 August 2013.
Williams, J. N., Viers, J. H. and Schwartz, M. W. (2010). Tropical dry forest trees and the relationship between local abundance and geographic range. Journal of Biogeography 37, 951–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, F. I. and Diament, A. D. (1991). Functional approaches to predicting the ecological effects of global change. Functional Ecology 5, 202–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. J., Muller-Landau, H. C., Calderon, O. and Hernandez, A. (2005). Annual and spatial variation in seedfall and seedling recruitment in a neotropical forest. Ecology 86, 848–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanez-Espinosa, L., Terrazas, T. and Lopez-Mata, L. (2010). Phenology and radial stem growth periodicity in evergreen subtropical rainforest trees. IAWA Journal 31, 293–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book 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 saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please 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 account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please 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 account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×