It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Riparian forests are structured and maintained by their hydrology. Woody riparian plants typically adapt to the local flood regime to maximise their likelihood of survival and reproductive success. Understanding how extant trees form and reproduce in response to flood disturbance is crucial for predicting vegetation changes and informing restoration. Working in a temperate evergreen riparian forest, we aimed to determine whether disturbance-based responses of plants found in other ecosystems also typify woody plants in riparian forests where disturbances are often mild or chronic, non-lethal, annual events. Using plant surveys and 20-year modelled hydrological data, we examined whether (1) the morphology (main stem diameter, height, crown width, crown extent, stem leaning) and (2) reproduction type (sexual and asexual reproduction) and extent of three dominant woody species (Eucalyptus camphora, Leptospermum lanigerum and Melaleuca squarrosa) vary with flood regime (flood frequency and flood duration); and (3) whether different morphology is associated with different reproductive strategies. Increased flooding generally resulted in increased stem numbers and greater stem leaning—morphologies associated with asexual reproduction—of our study species. More frequent flooding also reduced plant size and sexual reproduction in E. camphora. Sexual reproduction in the studied species was more common in taller plants with single, more upright stems in good condition. Flexible morphology and plastic reproductive strategy may constitute an adaptation of trees to mild or chronic disturbance in floodplains. Our findings suggest that flood regime (i.e. variable frequency and duration of flooding events) is critical to the structural integrity and self-maintenance of species-diverse riparian forests.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Burnley Campus, The University of Melbourne, School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, Richmond, Australia (GRID:grid.1008.9) (ISNI:0000 0001 2179 088X)
2 King’s College London, Department of Geography, London, UK (GRID:grid.13097.3c) (ISNI:0000 0001 2322 6764); The University of Melbourne, School of BioSciences, Parkville, Australia (GRID:grid.1008.9) (ISNI:0000 0001 2179 088X)