Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T13:19:32.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Canopy gaps in subtropical forest in South Africa: size of the species pool and not the number of available niches limits species richness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2003

Michael J. Lawes
Affiliation:
Forest Biodiversity Programme, School of Botany and Zoology, University of Natal (Pietermaritzburg), Private Bag X01, Scottsville 3209, South Africa
John A. F. Obiri
Affiliation:
Forest Biodiversity Programme, School of Botany and Zoology, University of Natal (Pietermaritzburg), Private Bag X01, Scottsville 3209, South Africa Current address: University of Wales Bangor, School of Agricultural and Forest Science, Gwynedd LL57 2UW, UK

Abstract

We consider whether species richness in canopy gaps in coastal scarp forest (South Africa) is constrained by competition for a limited number of available niches or is a chance effect of recruitment and dispersal limitation on species derived from the surrounding species pool. In so doing we confirm findings from relatively species-poor New Zealand Nothofagus forest. We investigate the contrasting roles of determinism and chance, and the putative assembly of woody plants in gaps, using a technique in which the species richness of small, replicate local assemblages (0.25–m2 quadrats) are sampled within regions (the surrounding gap) that vary in total species richness. The form of the regression of local species richness against regional species richness indicates the extent to which community assembly is under local-ecological control (niche limited). Species richness of local assemblages was not niche limited and increased as a constant proportion of the size of the species pool in a gap. We argue that, in general, species assembly in these forest gaps is chance-driven, and discuss the management implications this has for selective pole-harvesting in these forests.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2003 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.)