Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T05:19:50.983Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Seed bank dynamics in five Panamanian forests

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 February 2005

D. A. Fornara
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Biologia, Sezione Botanica Ambientale e Applicata, Università Statale di Milano, via Celoria 26, Milano, Italy
J. W. Dalling
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Biology, University of Illinois, 265 Morrill Hall, 505 S Goodwin Avenue, Urbana IL 61801, USA Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Apartado 2072, Balboa, Panama

Abstract

Many tropical pioneer species depend on the presence of high seed densities in the soil for successful recruitment following canopy disturbance (Cheke et al. 1979, Dalling & Hubbell 2002, Guevara Sada & Gómez Pompa 1972, Whitmore 1983). However determinants of variation in the composition and abundance of soil seed banks remain poorly understood. Seed bank densities can be affected by rates of seed predation and pathogen infection on the surface and in the soil, by intrinsic rates of loss in viability following dispersal, and by variation in the timing and duration of fruit production (Dalling et al. 1997, Garwood 1983, Murray & Garcia 2002). Here we compare seasonal fluctuations in seed bank density in five Panamanian forests varying in elevation and seasonality of precipitation (Table 1). We predict that lowland forests should show stronger intra-annual fluctuation in seed bank densities than montane forests because seed production and loss rates should be higher under conditions of greater resource availability, and where consistent high temperatures support greater abundance or activity of seed predators and pathogens (Brühl et al. 1999). Secondly, among lowland sites, we predict greater fluctuations in seed bank densities at drier, more seasonal sites where seasonally favourable conditions for seedling recruitment may select for interspecific synchrony in fruit production (Daubenmire 1972, Garwood 1983).

Type
Brief Report
Copyright
2005 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.)