The New Zealand Epiphyte Network
  • NZ Epiphyte Network
  • Field Guide
  • 2013 Epiphyte Workshop
    • 2013 Presentations
  • 2016 Epiphyte Workshop
    • 2016 Presentations
    • Discussion Summary
  • Epiphytes, vines & mistletoes explained
  • NZ epiphyte survey programme
  • Publications and links
  • Blog
  • Gallery
  • Contact us!

Facilitation cascades 4 - application in New Zealand

27/11/2013

1 Comment

 
A new article about facilitation cascades has been published by Christine Angelini and Brian Silliman from the University of Florida. It is such an interesting contribution to our understanding of epiphyte ecology that I'm going to dedicate four blogs to it. This week: application in New Zealand.

The application of this model to the Tillandsia of Georgia worked really well, now I want to see if it will work for temperate New Zealand forests.
Picture
The primary foundation species is the host tree because epiphyte species mostly rely on host trees for access to light. Let's say we have a tawa (Beilschmiedia tawa) host tree. The bare branches will support minimal flora and fauna communities but as it grows away from the shady forest floor it will become the first step in a facilitation cascade.
Picture
A foundation species, tawa (Beilschmiedia tawa). Photo: Akos Kokai.
Our secondary foundation species is often moss. Moss provides substrate and moisture that facilitates the arrival of invertebrates and other epiphytes such as orchids and ferns. It therefore increases both the diversity and abundance of plants and animals that can establish (type C cascade). 
Picture
Moss providing substrate for ferns and small shurbs. Photo: C. Kirby.
But that isn't the end of the story! If a nest epiphyte species such as kahakaha (Collospermum hastatum) arrives on the moss, it will again significantly increase the diversity and abundance of flora and fauna communities (still type C). These large plants can host many plants and invertebrates as well as the occasional bird and reptile. If nest epiphytes do not establish the community will generally be smaller and less diverse. There are even species that depend on nest epiphytes, for example: tawhiri karo (Pittosporum cornifolium). Therefore we might consider nest epiphytes to be tertiary foundation species, adding another step to Angelini and Silliman's process:
Picture
I suppose it all depends on your interpretation! If you consider the moss to be the foundation species it works more like the Georgia example but then the moss requires the host tree... what are your thoughts? 

To finish, here is a photo illustrating the significant habitat that nest epiphytes can create for many other species.
Nest epiphytes
Nest epiphytes in the Waitakere Ranges. Photo: C. Kirby.
1 Comment

Facilitation cascades 3 - a model

21/11/2013

0 Comments

 
A new article about facilitation cascades has been published by Christine Angelini and Brian Silliman from the University of Florida. It is such an interesting contribution to our understanding of epiphyte ecology that I'm going to dedicate four blogs to it. This week: a model to explain the application.

To understand and predict species assemblages and interactions in different facilitation cascades we can use the Foundation Species-Biodiversity model: 
Picture
Foundation Species-Biodiversity Model from Angelini and Silliman (In Press).
According to this model, facilitation cascades can be described using three categories based on the difference that secondary foundation species make to the community:

Type A: 
Secondary foundation species support more individuals of species that are already in the community (increased abundance) by providing functional traits that are similar to those of the foundation species.

Type B: 
Secondary foundation species provide habitat for different individuals (increased diversity) by providing different functional traits than the foundation species.

Type C: 
Secondary foundation species support more individuals of the existing species AND individuals of new species (increased abundance AND diversity) through the provision of a range of traits. 

Notes: some secondary species may not significantly increase either abundance or diversity, and facilitation cascades can switch if environmental conditions change.
Picture
Manatee grass. Photo: Project Noah.
Examples of each facilitation cascade. Simplified from Angelini & Silliman:

Type A: 

Foundation species: shoal grass
Secondary foundation species: manatee grass

Manatee grass facilitates an increase in the abundance of resident invertebrates and fish by providing more habitat of a similar nature. In other words, more of the same services.

Type B:

Foundation species: turtle grass
Secondary foundation species: pen shells

Pen shells facilitate increased diversity by providing places for fish to lay eggs. In other words, new and different services.

Type C:

Foundation species: mangroves
Secondary foundation species: oysters

Oysters facilitate both an increase in diversity and abundance. They provide more habitat for species that already inhabit mangrove roots but also provide habitat for species that are oyster-dependant.
Picture
Oysters on mangrove roots. Photo: Ji-Elle.
Next week: application of all of this theory to New Zealand epiphytes!
0 Comments

Faciliation cascades 2 - an epiphyte study

14/11/2013

0 Comments

 
An exciting new article about facilitation cascades has been published by Christine Angelini and Brian Silliman from the University of Florida. It is such an interesting contribution to our understanding of epiphyte ecology that I'm going to dedicate four blogs to it. This week: an epiphyte study.

Angelini & Silliman (In Press) conducted a range of experiments in Southern USA to investigate the relationships between Southern live oak trees (Quercus virginiana) and Spanish moss (Tillandsia usneiodes) a common epiphyte that is infact in the bromeliad, not moss, family. I'll briefly run through some of the interesting things that they discovered.
Picture
Spanish moss (Tillandsia usneoides) on a Sothern live oak (Quercus virginiana). Photo: Doug DuCap.
Oak-Tillandisa-insect facilitation cascade:
  • Oak trees are a foundation species that provide habitat for Tillandsia 
  • Tillandsia is a secondary foundation species that provides habitat for a diverse and abundant community of invertebrates

Key evidence:
Tillandsia relies on oak trees to provide conditions that it can establish and survive in. In this part of the world the conditions on the ground are hot and dry and very unfavourable for Tillandsia.

Within an oak tree, clumps of Tillandsia (called festoons) increase the structure, or physical space, available for insect habitat as well as stabilising temperature and humidity. This increases not only the abundance of invertebrates already present in the tree, but also in the number of species, the different types of feeding guilds (e.g. decomposers, herbivores), and the life stages (e.g. juveniles, adults). These invertebrates cannot survive on the tree without the epiphytic Tillandsia.

One example of the Tillandsia providing for invertebrates also happens to be my favourite part of this study: 
The researchers found that Tillandsia acts as a nursery by protecting juvenile crickets from spider predation. This experiment involved releasing baby crickets onto A) a branch with no epiphytes and B) a branch with Tillandsia, then letting the spiders loose! After 12 hours they counted live crickets and inspected dead crickets to find that the branch with Tillandsia had a 95 % cricket survival rate while the bare branch had only 60 % and all dead crickets had spider wounds... can't argue with that!
Picture
Gladicosa pulchra - the spider that couldn't find its crickety prey amongst Tillandsia. Photo: bugguide.net
To sum up this epiphyte example of facilitation cascades: 

"secondary foundation species can complement and magnify the facilitative effects of primary foundation species. In attracting novel species, life stages, and feeding guilds, secondary foundation species can increase the number and complexity of species interactions that occur and likely increase the diversity of ecosystem services that the associated community can provide (e.g. pollination, nutrient cycling, pest control) to affect overall ecosystem functioning." Angelini & Silliman (In Press).
Picture
The complex habitat of Tillandsia usneoides. Photo: Cornelius Bartke.
Next week: a model to understand the roles that different species play in facilitation cascades.
0 Comments

Facilitation cascades 1, the theory

7/11/2013

1 Comment

 
A great new article about facilitation cascades has been published by Christine Angelini and Brian Silliman from the University of Florida. It is such an interesting contribution to our understanding of epiphyte ecology that I'm going to dedicate a few blogs to it. This week: the theory.

A facilitation cascade describes the order of species arrival in a given environment AND the interactions between these species. The example I’ll use does not involve epiphytes but is adapted from one of the original articles on this idea by Andrew Altieri, Brian Silliman, and Mark Bertness (2007).
Picture
Facilitation cascade. Adapted from Angelini & Silliman (In Press).
Facilitation cascade theory applies when harsh environmental conditions are improved by the arrival of a foundation species. An example is the establishment of seagrass on rocky coastlines which stabilises rocks, softens the impact of breaking waves, and provides shade.

The foundation species provides habitat for a secondary foundation species. Seagrass provides stable substrate for the establishment of mussels that cannot successfully establish on bare rocks.

The combination of foundation and secondary foundation species provides the necessary conditions for many other species to establish and interact. In a coastal system the seagrass and mussels provide substrate and refuge for a diverse and abundant community that includes barnacles, snails and amphipods. 
Picture
Facilitation cascade examples. Adapted from Altieri et al. (2007).
The key concepts here are that the seagrass does not require the presence of other species to establish but the mussels need the seagrass, and the other species need BOTH the mussels and seagrass. 

The positive interactions between these species occur in a hierarchical order and, unlike successional theory, the foundation species is not replaced by subsequent species.
Picture
A diverse community that has been facilitated by both the seagrass and mussels. Photo: A. Altieri.
Picture
The difference in community abudance and diversity with (left side) and without (right side) seagrass & mussels. Photo: Altieri et al. (2007).
Next week: an example of a facilitation cascade in the canopy!
1 Comment

    Subscribe to NZ Epiphyte Blog:

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    Like us on Facebook!
    Picture

    Catherine Kirby

    I work with NZ's native vascular epiphytes at the University of Waikato. I completed an MSc on epiphyte ecology and the shrub epiphyte Griselinia lucida and have recently published the Field Guide to NZ's Epiphytes, Vines & Mistletoes. 


    For me, the highlights of epiphyte research are the many unknowns, the amazing way that these plants survive in the canopy, and of course tree climbing!

    Subscribe to receive the weekly posts and join our facebook page to get interesting updates :)


    Categories

    All
    Canopy Research
    Epiphyte Classification
    International Epiphytes
    NZ Epiphyte Network
    NZ's Epiphytes


    Archives

    August 2016
    May 2016
    February 2016
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.