Search for: All records

Abstract Plants display a range of temporal patterns of inter‐annual reproduction, from relatively constant seed production to “mast seeding,” the synchronized and highly variable interannual seed production of plants within a population. Previous efforts have compiled global records of seed production in long‐lived plants to gain insight into seed production, forest and animal population dynamics, and the effects of global change on masting. Existing datasets focus on seed production dynamics at the population scale but are limited in their ability to examine community‐level mast seeding dynamics across different plant species at the continental scale. We harmonized decades of plant reproduction data for 141 woody plant species across nine Long‐Term Ecological Research (LTER) or long‐term ecological monitoring sites from a wide range of habitats across the United States. Plant reproduction data are reported annually between 1957 and 2021 and based on either seed traps or seed and/or cone counts on individual trees. A wide range of woody plant species including trees, shrubs, and lianas are represented within sites allowing for direct community‐level comparisons among species. We share code for filtering of data that enables the comparison of plot and individual tree data across sites. For each species, we compiled relevant life history attributes (e.g., seed mass, dispersal syndrome, seed longevity, sexual system) that may serve as important predictors of mast seeding in future analyses. To aid in phylogenetically informed analyses, we also share a phylogeny and phylogenetic distance matrix for all species in the dataset. These data can be used to investigate continent‐scale ecological properties of seed production, including individual and population variability, synchrony within and across species, and how these properties of seed production vary in relation to plant species traits and environmental conditions. In addition, these data can be used to assess how annual variability in seed production is associated with climate conditions and how that varies across populations, species, and regions. The dataset is released under a CC0 1.0 Universal public domain license. 

Abstract Biotic and abiotic factors interact with dominant plants—the locally most frequent or with the largest coverage—and nondominant plants differently, partially because dominant plants modify the environment where nondominant plants grow. For instance, if dominant plants compete strongly, they will deplete most resources, forcing nondominant plants into a narrower niche space. Conversely, if dominant plants are constrained by the environment, they might not exhaust available resources but instead may ameliorate environmental stressors that usually limit nondominants. Hence, the nature of interactions among nondominant species could be modified by dominant species. Furthermore, these differences could translate into a disparity in the phylogenetic relatedness among dominants compared to the relatedness among nondominants. By estimating phylogenetic dispersion in 78 grasslands across five continents, we found that dominant species were clustered (e.g., co‐dominant grasses), suggesting dominant species are likely organized by environmental filtering, and that nondominant species were either randomly assembled or overdispersed. Traits showed similar trends for those sites (<50%) with sufficient trait data. Furthermore, several lineages scattered in the phylogeny had more nondominant species than expected at random, suggesting that traits common in nondominants are phylogenetically conserved and have evolved multiple times. We also explored environmental drivers of the dominant/nondominant disparity. We found different assembly patterns for dominants and nondominants, consistent with asymmetries in assembly mechanisms. Among the different postulated mechanisms, our results suggest two complementary hypotheses seldom explored: (1) Nondominant species include lineages adapted to thrive in the environment generated by dominant species. (2) Even when dominant species reduce resources to nondominant ones, dominant species could have a stronger positive effect on some nondominants by ameliorating environmental stressors affecting them, than by depleting resources and increasing the environmental stress to those nondominants. These results show that the dominant/nondominant asymmetry has ecological and evolutionary consequences fundamental to understand plant communities.