Sign in
EcologyPlant Species Biology
Peer-reviewed journal article

Clonal expansion accounts for most post-disturbance proliferation of a dominant temperate liana, Wisteria floribunda, across a fragmented forest landscape

Hideki MoriiD, Takashi KamijoiD

Abstract

Large-scale anthropogenic disturbances, including forest fragmentation, are increasing worldwide. Lianas often proliferate after such events, yet the mechanisms underlying these increases-- particularly their demographic sources--remain unclear. Here, we quantify the extent to which clonal expansion, rather than seed recruitment, accounts for post-disturbance proliferation of Wisteria floribunda (Fabaceae), the dominant liana in the study area. In a 21.6-ha fragmented forest landscape in Japan, we divided the study area into 20 x 20 m grid cells and randomly sampled up to one W. floribunda ramet per cell, and genotyped 273 ramets at 10 microsatellite loci to assign ramets to genets and quantify genet areas and their spatial distribution. Genotyping revealed a substantial contribution of extensive clonal reproduction: 94% of ramets were clonal, resolving into 47 genets. These genets collectively occupied 58% of the 21.6-ha study area, and expansion produced extensive genets--the largest covered 9.5 ha. Several genets spanned multiple forest patches; three multi-patch genets accounted for 43% of all ramets, including one spanning seven patches. Multi-patch genets were concentrated within areas covered by forests prior to fragmentation (odds ratio = 6.83; P < 0.001). These observations indicate that clonal expansion accounts for most post-disturbance proliferation, that some genets attain landscape-scale coverage in a fragmented forest, and that part of this dominance likely reflects legacy effects of genets established prior to fragmentation. Explicitly accounting for clonal contributions and genet spatial scale is critical for accurate prediction of disturbance-driven liana dynamics.

PDFDOI

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers
Citations
0
FWCI
0.00
Field percentile
top 46%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.