4 results
7 - Diversity and floristic composition of neotropical dry forests
- Edited by Stephen H. Bullock, Harold A. Mooney, Stanford University, California, Ernesto Medina
-
- Book:
- Seasonally Dry Tropical Forests
- Published online:
- 07 September 2010
- Print publication:
- 24 November 1995, pp 146-194
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Many studies of neotropical dry forest have tended to treat them in a very broad context, typically focusing on how they relate to or are different from moist or wet forests (e.g. Holdridge et al., 1971; Rzedowski, 1978; Gentry, 1982a, 1988; Hartshorn, 1983). Others have taken them as a relatively tractable surrogate for the more diverse moist or wet forests (e.g. Janzen, 1983, 1984, 1988; Hubbell, 1979) where taxonomy often poses severe limitations for the resolution of biologically interesting questions. Other authors have concentrated on the interesting physiological adaptations of dry forest organisms to seasonal water stress (e.g. Medina, Chapter 9; Holbrook, Whitbeck & Mooney, Chapter 10 and included references) or on various aspects of nutrient flow and biomass (e.g. Lugo et al. 1978; Murphy & Lugo 1986a, b). In addition there have been floristic and community ecological studies of individual dry forests (e.g. Troth, 1979; Valverde et al., 1979; Thien et al., 1982; Hartshorn, 1983; Heybrock, 1984; Lott, Bullock & Solís, 1987; Kelly et al, 1988; Rico-Gray et al., 1988; Arriaga & León, 1989; Cuadros, 1990; Saldias, 1991; Dodson & Gentry, 1992; see also summaries for México in Rzedowski, 1991a, b, and for the chaco in Prado, 1993). However, there have been remarkably few attempts to focus on the distinctive floristic composition of dry forests as a whole or on how different dry forest plant communities differ from each other.
15 - Breeding and dispersal systems of lianas
-
- By Alwyn H. Gentry, Missouri Botanical Garden
- Edited by Francis E. Putz, University of Florida, Harold A. Mooney, Stanford University, California
-
- Book:
- The Biology of Vines
- Published online:
- 05 November 2011
- Print publication:
- 31 January 1992, pp 393-424
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The organization and floristic composition of tropical plant communities is strongly and intricately influenced by interactions with pollinators and dispersers (Ashton, 1969; Frankie, 1975; Stiles, 1977, 1978; Gentry, 1982a, 1983; Frankie et al., 1983; Feinsinger, 1983; Bawa, Perry & Beach, 1985b). Data on tropical pollination and dispersal systems have begun to accumulate rapidly only in the last few years, but many of the available data have specifically excluded climbers. In this chapter I summarize what is known of climber reproductive biology from the literature, supplemented by my own observations and those of colleagues.
This chapter is a summary largely based on the liana subset of the data of Gentry (1982a, 1988, Chapter 1). These data are for plants > 2.5 cm dbh (2.5 cm greatest diameter for lianas) in 0.1 ha. The first half of the chapter summarizes pollination systems for the lianas and liana communities represented in these samples and compares them with pollination systems for other habit groups. The second half focuses on the dispersal strategies of these lianas and liana communities.
Tropical pollination systems are known to be highly diverse, with hummingbirds, perching birds, bees, hawkmoths, settling moths, bats, butterflies, wasps, flies, and beetles all known to play a role (Faegri & van der Pijl, 1966; Baker, 1973; Bawa et al., 1985a). Knowledge of the diversity of tropical pollination systems continues to increase, most recently with nonflying mammals (Lumer, 1980; Janson, Terborgh & Emmons, 1981; Steiner, 1981) and thrips (Ashton, 1979; Thien, 1980; Appanah & Chan, 1981) discovered to play significant roles.
1 - The distribution and evolution of climbing plants
-
- By Alwyn H. Gentry, Missouri Botanical Garden
- Edited by Francis E. Putz, University of Florida, Harold A. Mooney, Stanford University, California
-
- Book:
- The Biology of Vines
- Published online:
- 05 November 2011
- Print publication:
- 31 January 1992, pp 3-50
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
The classic work on climbers by Schenck (1892, 1893), is focused especially on anatomical features of lianas, but also includes a taxonomic and geographic survey of the occurrence of climbing plants. Such 19th century luminaries as Charles Darwin (1867) were fascinated by the peculiarities of climbing plants. However, despite their obvious importance in the world's flora, especially in tropical forests, climbers have subsequently been generally neglected. As summarized by Jacobs (1976), ‘The ecology of lianas is virtually a blank’. Indeed the significant ecological role played by lianas in tropical forests has only very recently begun to be investigated (e.g. Putz, 1984, 1985; Putz & Chai, 1987). Lianas have been no less neglected by plant collectors: quite probably lianas are the most undercollected of any major habit group of plants.
This overview of climbing plants is based largely on 0.1 ha data sets for plants >2.5 cm in diameter at breast height (dbh). The sampling protocol under which these data were gathered was originally set up specifically to facilitate ecological sampling of lianas, which are notorious for clumped distributions related to rampant vegetative reproduction (Peñalosa, 1984; Putz, 1984; Gentry, 1985). Each sample consists of ten 2 × 50 m narrowly rectangular plots set up end to end or separated by c. (10-)20 m, thus covering a relatively large area of forest that exceeds in scale the frequent ‘patches’ of single liana species that presumably derive from vegetative reproduction.
10 - Secondary compounds in vines with an emphasis on those with defensive functions
-
- By Mervyn P. Hegarty, Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures, Elwyn E. Hegarty, University of Queensland, Alwyn H. Gentry, Missouri Botanical Garden
- Edited by Francis E. Putz, University of Florida, Harold A. Mooney, Stanford University, California
-
- Book:
- The Biology of Vines
- Published online:
- 05 November 2011
- Print publication:
- 31 January 1992, pp 287-310
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Although the distinction between primary and secondary compounds in plants is imprecise and may on occasions appear arbitrary., the two terms effectively group compounds by both structure and role in plant biochemistry. Primary compounds include sugars, fats, protein amino acids, purines and pyrimidines, which are involved in essential cellular biochemical processes. However, plants also contain many thousand so-called secondary compounds which do not appear to be involved in these processes. The detailed structure and function of many of these is still uncertain, but it is generally accepted that their main roles are the selective deterrence or attraction of various classes of herbivore or pollinator (Bate-Smith, 1972; Rhoades, 1983). Such roles are often suggested, in the absence of other evidence, by a distinctive taste or smell. Other compounds such as the phytoalexins are involved in defenses induced by trauma, still others are precursors for biochemical processes within plants. The development of current theories of secondary metabolism in plants is lucidly reviewed by Haslam (1986). Even when a particular compound is known to be present, there may be large quantitive variations, depending on the part or individual sampled, location, age, season, climate, recent herbivory, and even time of day (McKey, 1974; Swain, 1977; Kingsbury, 1980).
After a brief introduction to the role of secondary compounds in plant defence, we will give examples of the more abundant and well-documented classes of secondary compounds found in vines, particularly those which are known to deter herbivores, comparing where possible their distribution in vines and other life forms.