| Literature DB >> 25340462 |
Marta Rodríguez1, Miguel Delibes1, José M Fedriani2.
Abstract
Seed predators can limit plant recruitment and thus profoundly impinge the dynamics of plant populations, especially when diverse seed predators (e.g., native and introduced) attack particular plant populations. Surprisingly, however, we know little concerning the potential hierarchy of spatial scales (e.g., region, population, patch) and coupled ecological correlates governing variation in the overall impact that native and introduced seed predators have on plant populations. We investigated several spatial scales and ecological correlates of pre-dispersal seed predation by invasive borer beetles in Chamaerops humilis (Arecaceae), a charismatic endemic palm of the Mediteranean basin. To this end, we considered 13 palm populations (115 palms) within four geographical regions of the Iberian Peninsula. The observed interregional differences in percentages of seed predation by invasive beetles were not significant likely because of considerable variation among populations within regions. Among population variation in seed predation was largely related to level of human impact. In general, levels of seed predation were several folds higher in human-altered populations than in natural populations. Within populations, seed predation declined significantly with the increase in amount of persisting fruit pulp, which acted as a barrier against seed predators. Our results revealed that a native species (a palm) is affected by the introduction of related species because of the concurrent introduction of seed predators that feed on both the introduced and native palms. We also show how the impact of invasive seed predators on plants can vary across a hierarchy of levels ranging from variation among individuals within local populations to large scale regional divergences.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25340462 PMCID: PMC4207678 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109867
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Distribution of C. humilis and location of sampled populations.
a) Map showing the approximate distribution of C. humilis in the Iberian Peninsula as well as the percentages of seed predation in different regions using sector charts for each sampled population. b) Small inset showing C. humilis distribution in the Mediterranean basin (modified from Merlo et al. 1993). Populations: 1: Hinojos I; 2: Hinojos II; 3: Hato Ratón; 4: Matasgordas; 5: Chalet/Palacio; 6: Rocina; 7: Alamillo; 8: La Cantina; 9: Matallana; 10: Garganta Verde; 11: Fuengirola; 12: Saler; 13: Viveros.
Summary table showing the number of C. humilis individuals and number of fruits sampled in each population, the habitat type, geographical region, type of population (i.e., human-altered [H] vs. natural [N]), and the percent predation and average number of holes per predated seed.
| Region | Population | Coor (N; W) | Type | Habitat | #palms | #fruits | %predation | #holes |
| Valencia | Saler | 39.39; 0.33 | N | Mediterranean scrub dominated by | 7 | 138 | 15.0±6.5 | 2.11±0.5 |
| Viveros | 39.48; 0.36 | H | Urban park. | 10 | 179 | 53.8±6.9 | 6.12±0.9 | |
|
|
|
| ||||||
| Sevilla | Alamillo | 37.42; 5.99 | H | Urban park. | 5 | 78 | 69.4±7.1 | 4.6±0.9 |
| La Cantina | 37.64; 6.07 | N | Mediterranean scrub. | 3 | 24 | 25.8±14.4 | 1±0.0 | |
| Matallana | 37.66; 5.57 | N |
| 9 | 139 | 59.0±8.6 | 3.3±0.5 | |
|
|
|
| ||||||
| Cádiz-Málaga | Fuengirola | 36.52; 4.64 | H | Mediterranean scrub. | 10 | 147 | 6.3±3.6 | 3.9±1.7 |
| Garganta verde | 36.48; 5.24 | N | Mediterranean scrub dominated by | 9 | 136 | 61.6±12.2 | 2.5±0.2 | |
|
|
|
| ||||||
| Huelva | Hinojos I | 37.21; 6.41 | N | Mediterranean scrub dominated by | 8 | 101 | 26.2±9.0 | 2.0±0.3 |
| Hinojos II | 37.26; 6.39 | N | Mediterranean scrub dominated by | 10 | 171 | 23.5±11.4 | 3.2±1.0 | |
| Hato Ratón | 37.17; 6.33 | N | Mediterranean scrub dominated by | 10 | 96 | 24.4±9.3 | 2.4±0.4 | |
| Matasgordas | 37.13; 6.44 | N | Mediterranean scrub | 10 | 86 | 39.3±10.9 | 2.7±0.8 | |
| Chalet/Palacio | 37.07; 6.51 | H | Mediterranean scrub dominated by | 11 | 129 | 66.1±9.6 | 4.4±0.6 | |
| Rocina | 37.13; 6.52 | N | Mediterranean scrub dominated by | 13 | 138 | 34.4±6.9 | 2.9±0.5 | |
|
|
|
|
Main results of our generalized mixed linear models testing the effect of region (Valencia, Sevilla, Huelva, Cádiz-Malaga,), type of population (human-altered, natural) and amount of persisting fruit pulp on C. humilis seed predation and the average number of invertebrate holes per preyed seed.
| Seed predation | Mean hole number | |||||
| d.f. | F |
| d.f. | F |
| |
|
| 3, 6 | 0.54 | 0.670 | 3, 6 | 1.07 | 0.428 |
|
| 1, 93 | 1.34 | 0.249 | 1, 70 | 0.08 | 0.781 |
|
| 1, 93 | 0.91 | 0.342 | 1, 70 | 13.82 |
|
|
| 3, 93 | 12.31 |
| 3, 70 | 1.66 | 0.183 |
|
| 3, 93 | 6.92 |
| 3, 70 | 2.12 | 0.105 |
|
| 1, 93 | 1.24 | 0.268 | - | ||
|
| 3, 93 | 2.10 | 0.106 | - | ||
Significant differences (P<0.05) are marked in bold.
Figure 2Factors explaining variation in C. humilis seed predation in the Iberian Peninsula.
a) Model-adjusted mean percent seed predation in each geographical region for human-altered and natural populations. b) Model-adjusted mean number of beetle holes for human-altered and natural populations. Error bars represent standard errors.
Figure 3Negative linear relationships between percentage of seed predation and amount of persisting fruit pulp in each of the four target regions.