Hemiepiphytes in a moist lowland forest were studied to ascertain their relative abundance, host specificity, growth habits, and spatial patterning. Ten percent of the trees support hemiepiphytes which translates to a density of 11.1 hemiepiphyte individuals per hectare. Host tree microhabitats, hemiepiphyte establishment requirements and the behavior of dispersal agents may influence spatial patterning and host specificity. Two classes of hemiepiphytes are recognized: strangling hemiepiphytes which can become free-standing, and permanent hemiepiphytes which cannot. HEMIEPIPHYTES ARE PLANTS THAT GERMINATE ON BRANCHES or trunks of trees and with age send roots to the ground. Though not parasitic, they are dependent on host trees for establishment and support. Some species eventually form extensive coalescing root systems that are capable of self-support. Although these plants are conspicuous components of both lowland and montane forests throughout the tropics (Richards 1952, Dobzhansky & Murca-Pires, 1954), little is known about their density, spatial patterning, or host specificity. To date, only two brief descriptive studies on host specificity of hemiepiphytes exist (Guy 1977, Troth 1979). This paper attempts to answer the following questions: 1) what is the relative abundance of woody hemiepiphytes in a particular moist lowland tropical forest? 2) do hemiepiphytes preferentially grow on different parts of their host trees or on different species of host trees, which have particular morphological characteristics or dispersal mechanisms? 3) do hemiepiphytes which become freestanding differ in habit from those that do not? STUDY AREA AND METHODS Field work was conducted during February and March, 1980, on Barro Colorado Island (BCI), a 15 km2 biological preserve located in Gatun Lake, Republic of Panama, Central America. In the Holdridge Life Zone System (Holdridge et al. 1971), the forest is classified as a tropical moist forest. Mean annual rainfall is approximately 2600 mm with a sharp dry season, usually from mid-December to May, during which the total rainfall is only 18-26 cm (Croat 1978). Due to past disturbances, the forest of Barro Colorado Island is composed of two areas of different ages. The younger forest is between 50 and 80 years old, while the older is at least twice that age (Knight 1975). Further description of the vegetation and climate of BCI is provided in Croat (1978) and Foster and Brokaw (1982). In this study two different sampling regimes were used. At the center of the island in the old forest plots 150 contiguous quadrats (each 20 x 20 m) totalling six hectares were used to answer questions concerning hemiepiphyte abundance and host preferences. Additionally, all hemiepiphytes on an eight meter wide path along both sides of the 37 km trail system on the island were sampled. In analyzing for differences in growth habit and spatial patterning among the various hemiepiphyte species, the two samples were pooled. The present study focused on 20 species of woody hemiepiphytes: Coussapoa magnifolia Trec., C. panamensis Pitt., Ficus bullenei I. M. Johnston, F. citriifolia P. Mill., F. colubrinae Standl., F. costaricana (Liebm.) Miq., F. dugandii Standl., F. nymphizfolia P. Mill., F. obtusifolia HBK, F. paraensis (Miq.) Miq., F. perforata L., F. pertusa L., F. popenoei Standl., F. trigonata L., Clusia odorata Seem., Havetiopsis flexilis Spruce ex Planch. and Tr., Topobea praecox Gleason, Cosmibuena skinneri (Oerst.) Hemsl., Oreopanax capitatus (Jacq.) Decne. and Planch., and Souroubea sympetala. All individuals greater than 25 cm in height were examined from the ground with binoculars (7 x 35). Hemiepiphytic species in the Araceae and Cyclanthaceae were excluded from this survey because they are not woody and because they often lose connection with the ground. Data collected for each hemiepiphyte individual induded species of the host tree, position on host tree, DBH of each individual root, and estimate of the percent of the host canopy shaded by the hemiepiphyte. To determine possible host preferences, the most common tree species were censused within the old forest plots: Hura crepitans L. (Euphorbiaceae), Quararibea asterolepis Pitt. (Bombacaceae), Apeiba membranacea Benth. (Tiliaceae), Platypodium elegans J. Vogel (Leguminosae), and Trichilia cipo (Adr. Juss.) C.DC (Meliaceae). Among these species there is a range of morphologies, from smooth to I Received 24 May 1984, revision accepted 11 October 1984. 22 BIOTROPICA 18(1): 22-27 1986 This content downloaded from 157.55.39.127 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 07:16:33 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms TABLE 1. Relative abundance and density of hemiepiphyte species on BC!. Mean no. of No. of % of total individuals/ Capable of Species individuals individualsa hectareb independence
Read full abstract