(ecology) A gradual process incurred by the change in the number of individuals of each species of a community and by establishment of new species populations that may gradually replace the original inhabitants.
On this page
McGraw-Hill Science & Technology Dictionary:
ecological succession |
(ecology) A gradual process incurred by the change in the number of individuals of each species of a community and by establishment of new species populations that may gradually replace the original inhabitants.
Related Videos:
Ecological succession |
McGraw-Hill Science & Technology Encyclopedia:
Ecological succession |
A directional change in an ecological community. Populations of animals and plants are in a dynamic state. Through the continual turnover of individuals, a population may expand or decline depending on the success of its members in survival and reproduction. As a consequence, the species composition of communities typically does not remain static with time. Apart from the regular fluctuations in species abundance related to seasonal changes, a community may develop progressively with time through a recognizable sequence known as the sere. Pioneer populations are replaced by successive colonists along a more or less predictable path toward a relatively stable community. This process of succession results from interactions between different species, and between species and their environment, which govern the sequence and the rate with which species replace each other. The rate at which succession proceeds depends on the time scale of species' life histories as well as on the effects species may have on each other and on the environment which supports them. In some cases, seres may take hundreds of years to complete, and direct observation at a given site is not possible. Adjacent sites may be identified as successively older stages of the same sere, if it is assumed that conditions were similar when each seral stage was initiated. See also Ecological communities; Population ecology.
The course of ecological succession depends on initial environmental conditions. Primary succession occurs on novel areas such as volcanic ash, glacial deposits, or bare rock, areas which have not previously supported a community. In such harsh, unstable environments, pioneer colonizing organisms must have wide ranges of ecological tolerance to survive. In contrast, secondary succession is initiated by disturbance such as fire, which removes a previous community from an area. Pioneer species are here constrained not by the physical environment but by their ability to enter and exploit the vacant area rapidly.
As succession proceeds, many environmental factors may change through the influence of the community. Especially in primary succession, this leads to more stable, less severe environments. At the same time interactions between species of plant tend to intensify competition for basic resources such as water, light, space, and nutrients. Successional change results from the normal complex interactions between organism and environment which lead to changes in overall species composition. Whether succession is promoted by changing environmental factors or competitive interactions, species composition alters in response to availability of niches. Populations occurring in the community at a point in succession are those able to provide propagules (such as seeds) to invade the area, being sufficiently tolerant of current environmental conditions, and able to withstand competition from members of other populations present at the same stage. Species lacking these qualities either become locally extinct or are unable to enter and survive in the community.
Early stages of succession tend to be relatively rapid, whereas the rates of species turnover and soil changes become slower as the community matures. Eventually an approximation to the steady state is established with a relatively stable community, the nature of which has aroused considerable debate. Earlier, the so-called climax vegetation was believed to be determined ultimately by regional climate and, given sufficient time, any community in a region would attain this universal condition. This unified concept of succession, the monoclimax hypothesis, implies the ability of organisms progressively to modify their environment until it can support the climatic climax community. Although plants and animals do sometimes ameliorate environmental conditions, evidence suggests overwhelmingly that succession has a variety of stable end points. This hypothesis, known as the polyclimax hypothesis, suggests that the end point of a succession depends on a complex of environmental factors that characterize the site, such as parent material, topography, local climate, and human influences.
Actions of the community on the environment, termed autogenic, provide an important driving force promoting successional change, and are typical of primary succession where initial environments are inhospitable. Alternatively, changes in species composition of a community may result from influences external to the community called allogenic.
Whereas intrinsic factors often result in progressive successional changes, that is, changes leading from simple to more complex communities, external (allogenic) forces may induce retrogressive succession, that is, toward a less mature community. For example, if a grassland is severely overgrazed by cattle, the most palatable species will disappear. As grazing continues, the grass cover is reduced, and in the open areas weeds characteristic of initial stages of succession may become established.
In some instances of succession, the food web is based on photosynthetic organisms, and there is a slow accumulation of organic matter, both living and dead. This is termed autotrophic succession. In other instances, however, addition of organic matter to an ecosystem initiates a succession of decomposer organisms which invade and degrade it. Such a succession is called heterotrophic. See also Biologicals; Eutrophication; Food web; Productivity.
Observed changes in the structure and function of seral communities result from natural selection of individuals within their current environment. Three mechanisms by which species may replace each other have been proposed; the relative importance of each apparently depends on the nature of the sere and stage of development.
1. The facilitation hypothesis states that invasion of later species depends on conditions created by earlier colonists. Earlier species modify the environment so as to increase the competitive ability of species which are then able to displace them. Succession thus proceeds because of the effects of species on their environment.
2. The tolerance hypothesis suggests that later successional species tolerate lower levels of resources than earlier occupants and can invade and replace them by reducing resource levels below those tolerated by earlier occupants. Succession proceeds despite the resistance of earlier colonists.
3. The inhibition hypothesis is that all species resist invasion of competitors and are displaced only by death or by damage from factors other than competition. Succession proceeds toward dominance by longer-lived species.
None of these models of succession is solely applicable in all instances; indeed most examples of succession appear to show elements of all three replacement mechanisms.
Succession has traditionally been regarded as following an orderly progression of changes toward a predictable end point, the climax community, in equilibrium with the prevailing environment. This essentially deterministic view implies that succession will always follow the same course from a given starting point and will pass through a recognizable series of intermediate states. In contrast, a more recent view of succession is based on adaptations of independent species. It is argued that succession is disorderly and unpredictable, resulting from probabilistic processes such as invasion of propagules and survival of individuals which make up the community. Such a stochastic view reflects the inherent variability observed in nature and the uncertainty of environmental conditions. In particular, it allows for succession to take alternative pathways and end points dependent on the chance outcome of interactions among species and between species and their environment.
Consideration of community properties such as energy flow supports the view of succession as an orderly process. The rate of gross primary productivity typically becomes limited also by the availability of nutrients, now incorporated within the community biomass, and declines to a level sustainable by release from decomposer organisms. Species diversity tends to rise rapidly at first as successive invasions occur, but declines again with the elimination of the pioneer species by the climax community.
Stochastic aspects of succession can be represented in the form of models which allow for transitions between a series of different “states.” Such models, termed Markovian models, can apply at various levels: plant-by-plant replacement, changes in tree size categories, or transitions between whole communities. A matrix of replacement probabilities defines the direction, pathway, and likelihood of change, and the model can be used to predict the future composition of the community from its initial state.
Wikipedia on Answers.com:
Ecological succession |
Ecological succession, is the phenomenon or process by which an ecological community undergoes more or less orderly and predictable changes following disturbance or initial colonization of new habitat. Succession was among the first theories advanced in ecology and the study of succession remains at the core of ecological science. Succession may be initiated either by formation of new, unoccupied habitat (e.g., a lava flow or a severe landslide) or by some form of disturbance (e.g. fire, severe windthrow, logging) of an existing community. Succession that begins in new habitats, uninfluenced by pre-existing communities is called primary succession, whereas succession that follows disruption of a pre-existing community is called secondary succession.
|
Contents
|
Precursors of the idea of ecological succession go back to the beginning of the 19th century. The French naturalist Adolphe Dureau de la Malle was the first to make use of the word succession concerning the vegetation development after forest clear-felling. In 1859 Henry David Thoreau wrote an address called "The Succession of Forest Trees" in which he described succession in an Oak-Pine forest.
Henry Chandler Cowles, at the University of Chicago, developed a more formal concept of succession. Inspired by studies of Danish dunes by Eugen Warming, Cowles studied vegetation development on sand dunes on the shores of Lake Michigan (the Indiana Dunes). He recognized that vegetation on dunes of different ages might be interpreted as different stages of a general trend of vegetation development on dunes (an approach to the study of vegetation change later termed space-for-time substitution, or chronosequence studies). He first published this work as a paper in the Botanical Gazette in 1899 ("The ecological relations of the vegetation of the sand dunes of Lake Michigan"). In this classic publication and subsequent papers, he formulated the idea of primary succession and the notion of a sere -- a repeatable sequence of community changes specific to particular environmental circumstances.
From about 1900-1960, however, understanding of succession was dominated by the theories of Frederic Clements, a contemporary of Cowles, who held that seres were highly predictable and deterministic and converged on a climatically determined stable climax community regardless of starting conditions. Clements explicitly analogized the successional development of ecological communities with ontogenetic development of individual organisms, and his model is often referred to as the pseudo-organismic theory of community ecology. Clements and his followers developed a complex taxonomy of communities and successional pathways (see article on Frederic Clements).
Henry Gleason offered a contrasting framework as early as the 1920s. The Gleasonian model was more complex and much less deterministic than the Clementsian. It differs most fundamentally from the Clementsian view in suggesting a much greater role of chance factors and in denying the existence of coherent, sharply bounded community types. Gleason argued that species distributions responded individualistically to environmental factors, and communities were best regarded as artifacts of the juxtaposition of species distributions. Gleason's ideas, first published in 1926, were largely ignored from their initial publication until the late 1950s.
Two quotes illustrate the contrasting views of Clements and Gleason. Clements wrote in 1916:
" The developmental study of vegetation necessarily rests upon the assumption that the unit or climax formation is an organic entity. As an organism the formation arises, grows, matures, and dies... Furthermore, each climax formation is able to reproduce itself, repeating with essential fidelity its development."[1]
while Gleason, in his 1926 paper, said:
“An association is not an organism, scarcely even a vegetational unit, but merely a coincidence.”[2]
Gleason's ideas were, in fact, more consistent with Cowles' original thinking about succession. About Clements' distinction between primary succession and secondary succession, Cowles wrote (1911):
This classification seems not to be of fundamental value, since it separates such closely related phenomena as those of erosion and deposition, and it places together such unlike things as human agencies and the subsidence of land.[3]
Beginning in the 1950s and 1960s, beginning with the work of Robert Whittaker and John Curtis, more rigorous, data-driven testing of successional models and community theory generally began. Succession theory has since become less monolithic and more complex. J. Connell and R. Slatyer attempted a codification of successional processes by mechanism. Among British and North American ecologists, the notion of a stable climax vegetation has been largely abandoned, and successional processes have come to be seen as much less deterministic, with important roles for historical contingency and for alternate pathways in the actual development of communities. Debates continue as to the general predictability of successional dynamics and the relative importance of equilibrial vs. non-equilibrial processes.
The trajectory of successional change can be influenced by site conditions, by the character of the events initiating succession, by the interactions of the species present, and by more stochastic factors such as availability of colonists or seeds or weather conditions at the time of disturbance. Some of these factors contribute to predictability of succession dynamics; others add more probabilistic elements.
In general, communities in early succession will be dominated by fast-growing, well-dispersed species (opportunist, fugitive, or r-selected life-histories). As succession proceeds, these species will tend to be replaced by more competitive (k-selected) species.
Trends in ecosystem and community properties in succession have been suggested, but few appear to be general. For example, species diversity almost necessarily increases during early succession as new species arrive, but may decline in later succession as competition eliminates opportunistic species and leads to dominance by locally superior competitors. Net Primary Productivity, biomass, and trophic properties all show variable patterns over succession, depending on the particular system and site.
Ecological succession was formerly seen as having a stable end-stage called the climax (see Frederic Clements), sometimes referred to as the 'potential vegetation' of a site, and shaped primarily by the local climate. This idea has been largely abandoned by modern ecologists in favor of nonequilibrium ideas of ecosystems dynamics. Most natural ecosystems experience disturbance at a rate that makes a "climax" community unattainable. Climate change often occurs at a rate and frequency sufficient to prevent arrival at a climax state. Additions to available species pools through range expansions and introductions can also continually reshape communities.
The development of some ecosystem attributes, such as soil properties and nutrient cycles, are both influenced by community properties, and, in turn, influence further successional development. This feed-back process may occur only over centuries or millennia. Coupled with the stochastic nature of disturbance events and other long-term (e.g., climatic) changes, such dynamics make it doubtful whether the 'climax' concept ever applies or is particularly useful in considering actual vegetation.
Successional dynamics beginning with colonization of an area that has not been previously occupied by an ecological community, such as newly exposed rock or sand surfaces, lava flows, newly exposed glacial tills, etc., are referred to as primary succession.
Successional dynamics following severe disturbance or removal of a pre-existing community are called secondary succession. Dynamics in secondary succession are strongly influenced by pre-disturbance conditions, including soil development, seed banks, remaining organic matter, and residual living organisms. Because of residual fertility and pre-existing organisms, community change in early stages of secondary succession can be relatively rapid. Secondary succession is much more commonly observed and studied than primary succession. Particularly common types of secondary succession include responses to natural disturbances such as fire, flood, and severe winds, and to human-caused disturbances such as logging and agriculture.
Unlike secondary succession, these types of vegetation change are not dependent on disturbance but are periodic changes arising from fluctuating species interactions or recurring events. These models propose a modification to the climax concept towards one of dynamic states.
Autogenic succession can be brought by changes in the soil caused by the organisms there. These changes include accumulation of organic matter in litter or humic layer, alteration of soil nutrients, change in pH of soil by plants growing there. The structure of the plants themselves can also alter the community. For example, when larger species like trees mature, they produce shade on to the developing forest floor that tends to exclude light-requiring species. Shade-tolerant species will invade the area.
Allogenic succession is caused by external environmental influences and not by the vegetation. For example soil changes due to erosion, leaching or the deposition of silt and clays can alter the nutrient content and water relationships in the ecosystems. Animals also play an important role in allogenic changes as they are pollinators, seed dispersers and herbivores. They can also increase nutrient content of the soil in certain areas, or shift soil about (as termites, ants, and moles do) creating patches in the habitat. This may create regeneration sites that favor certain species.
Climatic factors may be very important, but on a much longer time-scale than any other. Changes in temperature and rainfall patterns will promote changes in communities. As the climate warmed at the end of each ice age, great successional changes took place. The tundra vegetation and bare glacial till deposits underwent succession to mixed deciduous forest. The greenhouse effect resulting in increase in temperature is likely to bring profound Allogenic changes in the next century. Geological and climatic catastrophes such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, avalanches, meteors, floods, fires, and high wind also bring allogenic changes.
F.E. Clement (1916) developed a descriptive theory of succession and advanced it as a general ecological concept. His theory of succession had a powerful influence on ecological thought. Clement's concept is usually termed classical ecological theory. According to Clement, succession is a process involving several phases:
A seral community is an intermediate stage found in an ecosystem advancing towards its climax community. In many cases more than one seral stage evolves until climax conditions are attained.[4] A prisere is a collection of seres making up the development of an area from non-vegetated surfaces to a climax community. Depending on the substratum and climate, a seral community can be one of the following:
Animal life also exhibit changes with changing communities. In lichen stage the fauna is sparse. It comprises few mites, ants and spiders living in the cracks and crevices. The fauna undergoes a qualitative increase during herb grass stage. The animals found during this stage include nematodes, insects larvae, ants, spiders, mites, etc. The animal population increases and diversifies with the development of forest climax community. The fauna consists of invertebrates like slugs, snails, worms, millipedes, centipedes, ants, bugs; and vertebrates such as squirrels, foxes, mouse, moles, snakes, various birds, salamanders and frogs.
Succession of micro-organisms like fungi, bacteria, etc occurring within a microhabitat is known as microsuccession or serule. This type of succession occurs within communities, for example in dead trees, animal droppings, etc. Microbial communities may also change due to products secreted by the bacteria present. Changes of pH in a habitat could provide ideal conditions for a new species to inhabit the area. In some cases the new species may outcompete the present ones for nutrients leading to the primary species demise. Changes can also occur by microbial succession with variations in water availability and temperature.
According to classical ecological theory, succession stops when the sere has arrived at an equilibrium or steady state with the physical and biotic environment. Barring major disturbances, it will persist indefinitely. This end point of succession is called climax.
The final or stable community in a sere is the climax community or climatic vegetation. It is self-perpetuating and in equilibrium with the physical habitat. There is no net annual accumulation of organic matter in a climax community mostly. The annual production and use of energy is balanced in such a community.
There are three schools of interpretations explaining the climax concept:
More recently another possible idea has been put forward called the theory of alternative stable states which suggests that there is not one end point but many which transition between each other over ecological time.
The forests, being an ecological system are subject to the species succession process.[5] There are "opportunistic" or "pioneer" species that produce great quantity of seeds that are disseminated by the wind, and therefore can colonize big empty extensions, and they are capable to germinate and grow under direct sun exposition. Once they have produced a closed canopy, the lack of direct sun radiation at soil makes it difficult for their own seedlings to develop. It is then the opportunity for shade "tolerant" species to get established under the protection of pioneer. When these pioneers will die, the shade tolerants will replace them. The shade tolerant species are capable of growing under the canopy, and therefore, in the absence of catastrophes, will stay. For this reason it is said than the stand has reached its climax. When an important catastrophe will arrive, the opportunity for the pioneers will be open again, provided they are not absent at a reasonable range.
An example of pioneer species, in forests of northeastern North America are Betula papyrifera (White birch) and Prunus serotina (Black cherry), that are particularly well-adapted to exploit large gaps in forest canopies, but are intolerant of shade and are eventually replaced by other (shade-tolerant) species in the absence of disturbances that create such gaps.
Things in nature are usually neither white nor black, and there are intermediates. It is therefore normal that between the two extremes light/shade there is a gradation, and there are species that may act as pioneer or tolerant, depending on circumstances. It is of paramount importance to know the tolerance of species in order to practice an effective silviculture.
|
|
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2008) |
| Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Ecological succession |
| Wikibooks has a book on the topic of |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
| heterotrophic succession (ecology) | |
| subclimax (ecology) | |
| autotrophic succession (ecology) |
| What is the final product of Ecological Succession? Read answer... | |
| Which is the final product of ecological succession? Read answer... | |
| What are two types of ecological succession? Read answer... |
| What is ecological succession and how does primary succession differ from secondary succession? | |
| What is ecological successions? | |
| What is it about ecological succession? |
Copyrights:
![]() |
![]() | McGraw-Hill Science & Technology Dictionary. McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms. Copyright © 2003, 1994, 1989, 1984, 1978, 1976, 1974 by McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
![]() |
![]() | McGraw-Hill Science & Technology Encyclopedia. McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology. Copyright © 2005 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
![]() |
![]() | Wikipedia on Answers.com. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article Ecological succession. Read more |
Mentioned in