| Literature DB >> 27599883 |
Xiangcheng Mi1, Nathan G Swenson2, Qi Jia3, Mide Rao3, Gang Feng1, Haibao Ren1, Daniel P Bebber4, Keping Ma1.
Abstract
Deterministic and stochastic processes jointly determine the community dynamics of forest succession. However, it has been widely held in previous studies that deterministic processes dominate forest succession. Furthermore, inference of mechanisms for community assembly may be misleading if based on a single axis of diversity alone. In this study, we evaluated the relative roles of deterministic and stochastic processes along a disturbance gradient by integrating species, functional, and phylogenetic beta diversity in a subtropical forest chronosequence in Southeastern China. We found a general pattern of increasing species turnover, but little-to-no change in phylogenetic and functional turnover over succession at two spatial scales. Meanwhile, the phylogenetic and functional beta diversity were not significantly different from random expectation. This result suggested a dominance of stochastic assembly, contrary to the general expectation that deterministic processes dominate forest succession. On the other hand, we found significant interactions of environment and disturbance and limited evidence for significant deviations of phylogenetic or functional turnover from random expectations for different size classes. This result provided weak evidence of deterministic processes over succession. Stochastic assembly of forest succession suggests that post-disturbance restoration may be largely unpredictable and difficult to control in subtropical forests.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27599883 PMCID: PMC5013490 DOI: 10.1038/srep32596
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Species, functional and phylogenetic beta diversity for all subplot pairs (black square, mean ± SE) within different disturbance regimes at within- and between-plot level and scales of 10 × 10 m and 20 × 20 m.
(a,g) are species beta diversity at within-plot level, (b,h) for functional beta diversity at within-plot level, (c,i) for phylogenetic beta diversity at within-plot level, while (d,j) are species beta diversity at between-plot level, (e,k) for functional beta diversity at between-plot level, (f,l) for phylogenetic beta diversity at between-plot level. Letters indicate significant differences (P < 0.05) between disturbance regimes which was calculated by multiple comparison. The grey-shaded area represents the 95%-confidence interval for B and τ values from the 999 random communities. B and τ values inside the interval indicate phylogenetic or functional randomness, and B and τ values outside the interval indicate the significant phylogenetic or functional clustering or dispersion. Disturbance regimes: 1. young secondary forest: clear-cutting 50 years ago and selective cutting 20 years ago, 2. old secondary forest: clear-cutting 50 years ago, 3. old growth forest: without human disturbance more than 100 years.
Figure 2Functional beta diversity of individual traits for all subplot pairs (black square, mean ± SE) within different disturbance regimes at within-plot and between-plot levels and at a scale of 20 × 20 m.
Letters indicate significant differences (P < 0.05) between disturbance regimes which was calculated by multiple comparison. The grey-shaded area represents the 95%-confidence interval for the τ values from the 999 random communities. τ values inside the interval indicate phylogenetic or functional randomness, and τ values outside the interval indicate the significant phylogenetic or functional clustering or dispersion. SLA = specific leaf area, LA = leaf area, WD = wood density, LPC = leaf phosphorus content, LNC = leaf nitrogen content, MH = maximum height. Disturbance regimes: 1. young secondary forest: clear-cutting 50 years ago and selective cutting 20 years ago, 2. old secondary forest: clear-cutting 50 years ago, 3. old growth forest: without human disturbance more than 100 years.