Abstract
In plants, negative reproductive interaction among closely related species (i.e., reproductive interference) is known to hamper the coexistence of congeneric species while facilitation can increase species persistence. Since reproductive interference in plants may occur through interspecific pollination, the effective range of reproductive interference may reflects the spatial range of interspecific pollination. Therefore, we hypothesized that the coexistence of congeners on a small spatial scale would be less likely to occur by chance but that such coexistence would be likely to occur on a scale larger than interspecific pollination frequently occur. In the present study, we tested this hypothesis using spatially explicit woody plant survey data. Contrary to our prediction, congeneric tree species often coexisted at the finest spatial scale and significant exclusive distribution was not detected. Our results suggest that cooccurrence of congeneric tree species is not structured by reproductive interference, and they indicate the need for further research to explore the factors that mitigate the effects of reproductive interference.
Highlights
Understanding how biotic interaction affects species composition and distribution is a major ongoing challenge in community ecology
Our results show that, at least in our study area, closely related tree species often coexist even at the finest spatial scale and that statistically significant exclusive distribution of species from the same was not observed
These results suggest that co-occurrence of congeneric tree species is not prevented by reproductive interference
Summary
Understanding how biotic interaction affects species composition and distribution is a major ongoing challenge in community ecology. Competition is the most important and well-studied interaction (Goldberg & Barton, 1992) facilitation plays a major role in supporting biodiversity and shaping community structure (Losapio et al, 2021). A common hypothesis related to the role of competition in community assembly, termed the competition-relatedness hypothesis (CRH; Cahill et al, 2008), states that closely related species compete more intensely than distantly related species, which hypothetically limits the ability of closely related species to coexist (Webb et al, 2002; Slingsby & Verboom, 2006; Prinzing et al, 2008; reviewed by Mayfield & Levine, 2010; HilleRisLambers et al, 2012).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
