Competition influences tree growth, but not mortality, across environmental gradients in Amazonia and tropical Africa.
climatic water deficit
competition
forest dynamics
mortality
neighborhood effects
soil fertility
trait-based models
tree growth
tropical forest
wood density
Journal
Ecology
ISSN: 1939-9170
Titre abrégé: Ecology
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0043541
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
received:
18
05
2019
revised:
08
01
2020
accepted:
24
02
2020
pubmed:
3
4
2020
medline:
22
1
2021
entrez:
3
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Competition among trees is an important driver of community structure and dynamics in tropical forests. Neighboring trees may impact an individual tree's growth rate and probability of mortality, but large-scale geographic and environmental variation in these competitive effects has yet to be evaluated across the tropical forest biome. We quantified effects of competition on tree-level basal area growth and mortality for trees ≥10-cm diameter across 151 ~1-ha plots in mature tropical forests in Amazonia and tropical Africa by developing nonlinear models that accounted for wood density, tree size, and neighborhood crowding. Using these models, we assessed how water availability (i.e., climatic water deficit) and soil fertility influenced the predicted plot-level strength of competition (i.e., the extent to which growth is reduced, or mortality is increased, by competition across all individual trees). On both continents, tree basal area growth decreased with wood density and increased with tree size. Growth decreased with neighborhood crowding, which suggests that competition is important. Tree mortality decreased with wood density and generally increased with tree size, but was apparently unaffected by neighborhood crowding. Across plots, variation in the plot-level strength of competition was most strongly related to plot basal area (i.e., the sum of the basal area of all trees in a plot), with greater reductions in growth occurring in forests with high basal area, but in Amazonia, the strength of competition also varied with plot-level wood density. In Amazonia, the strength of competition increased with water availability because of the greater basal area of wetter forests, but was only weakly related to soil fertility. In Africa, competition was weakly related to soil fertility and invariant across the shorter water availability gradient. Overall, our results suggest that competition influences the structure and dynamics of tropical forests primarily through effects on individual tree growth rather than mortality and that the strength of competition largely depends on environment-mediated variation in basal area.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32239762
doi: 10.1002/ecy.3052
pmc: PMC7379300
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e03052Subventions
Organisme : Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
Pays : International
Organisme : Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
Pays : International
Organisme : Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico of Brazil (CNPq)
Pays : International
Organisme : ERC Advanced Grant
Pays : International
Organisme : Microsoft Research
Pays : International
Organisme : European Union's Seventh Framework Programme
Pays : International
Organisme : University of Regina
Pays : International
Organisme : Programa de Pesquisas Ecológicas de Longa Duração
Pays : International
Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Ecology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Ecological Society of America.
Références
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Apr 15;111(15):5616-21
pubmed: 24706791
New Phytol. 2006;171(2):367-78
pubmed: 16866943
Glob Chang Biol. 2014 Oct;20(10):3177-90
pubmed: 24817483
Nature. 2016 Jan 14;529(7585):204-7
pubmed: 26700807
Ecol Lett. 2005 Nov;8(11):1183-90
pubmed: 21352442
Sci Adv. 2015 Nov 20;1(10):e1500936
pubmed: 26702442
New Phytol. 2010 Aug;187(3):631-46
pubmed: 20659252
Ecol Lett. 2009 Apr;12(4):351-66
pubmed: 19243406
Nature. 2009 Feb 19;457(7232):1003-6
pubmed: 19225523
Ecology. 2008 Jul;89(7):1908-20
pubmed: 18705377
Ecol Lett. 2016 Sep;19(9):1062-70
pubmed: 27358248
Oecologia. 2008 Dec;158(3):521-34
pubmed: 18853192
Ecol Appl. 2006 Apr;16(2):540-54
pubmed: 16711043
Nat Plants. 2015 Sep 28;1:15139
pubmed: 27251391
Glob Chang Biol. 2014 Dec;20(12):3632-45
pubmed: 24771558
Glob Chang Biol. 2016 Dec;22(12):3996-4013
pubmed: 27082541
Ecology. 2020 Jul;101(7):e03052
pubmed: 32239762
Ecology. 2010 Dec;91(12):3664-74
pubmed: 21302837
Nature. 2015 Mar 19;519(7543):344-8
pubmed: 25788097
Ecology. 2014 Feb;95(2):353-63
pubmed: 24669729
Nature. 2006 Sep 28;443(7110):444-7
pubmed: 17006512
Nature. 2014 Mar 6;507(7490):90-3
pubmed: 24429523
Nat Commun. 2014 Mar 18;5:3434
pubmed: 24643258
New Phytol. 2018 Aug;219(3):851-869
pubmed: 29451313
PLoS One. 2013 Dec 06;8(12):e81787
pubmed: 24324723
Ecology. 2012 Dec;93(12):2626-36
pubmed: 23431593
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2013 Jul 22;368(1625):20120295
pubmed: 23878327
Ecology. 2015 Aug;96(8):2157-69
pubmed: 26405741
Nature. 2015 Dec 3;528(7580):119-22
pubmed: 26595275