Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/12990
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLawes, Michael Jen
dc.contributor.authorMidgley, Jeremy Jen
dc.contributor.authorClarke, Peter Jen
dc.date.accessioned2013-07-17T15:15:00Z-
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Ecology, 101(2), p. 517-524en
dc.identifier.issn1365-2745en
dc.identifier.issn0022-0477en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/12990-
dc.description.abstract1. In fire-prone ecosystems, bark protects the stem bud bank from fire. Absolute bark thickness is a good indicator of this protective function, but it depends on stem size as well as inherent differences between species. Relative bark thickness (i.e. relative to stem diameter) takes the latter into account. We argue that relative bark thickness is an important functional trait offering insights to the evolution of species persistence in fire-prone habitats. 2. During growth ontogeny different species can acquire absolutely thick bark through having: (i) relatively thick bark (i.e. an early commitment to thick bark) or (ii) relatively thin bark but fast stem diameter growth rates. We test the hypothesis that the most effective way of protecting tree stems from frequent fire is by having relatively thick-barked small stems. We predict that species with higher relative bark thickness are more common in fire-prone habitats. In habitats with long fire-free intervals such as rainforest, delayed investment in bark thickness results in thin bark. 3. We examined the relative bark thickness of woody congeners from Australian non-fire-prone forest and fire-prone savanna and in other tree-dominated systems world-wide. We determined the relative cost of acquiring absolute bark thickness of 0.5 cm for different rates of bark allocation. The insulating benefits of bark were considered a linear function of bark thickness. 4. Synthesis. We suggest that relatively thick bark minimizes the costs of acquiring absolutely thick bark, and it confers greater protection to smaller stems. The cost of acquiring thick bark prevents small trees from merely accumulating bark as a consequence of fast height or stem diameter growth. Accordingly, our field survey indicated that forest species had relatively thin bark and acquired thick bark only as a consequence of very large size, while fire-prone savanna species had relatively thick-barked small stems. Based on this, relative bark thickness appears to be a good predictor of local fire regimes and is a useful plant functional trait.en
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltden
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Ecologyen
dc.titleCosts and benefits of relative bark thickness in relation to fire damage: a savanna/forest contrasten
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1365-2745.12035en
dcterms.accessRightsGolden
dc.subject.keywordsConservation and Biodiversityen
dc.subject.keywordsTerrestrial Ecologyen
dc.subject.keywordsCommunity Ecology (excl Invasive Species Ecology)en
local.contributor.firstnameMichael Jen
local.contributor.firstnameJeremy Jen
local.contributor.firstnamePeter Jen
local.subject.for2008060202 Community Ecology (excl Invasive Species Ecology)en
local.subject.for2008060208 Terrestrial Ecologyen
local.subject.for2008050202 Conservation and Biodiversityen
local.subject.seo2008960505 Ecosystem Assessment and Management of Forest and Woodlands Environmentsen
local.subject.seo2008960806 Forest and Woodlands Flora, Fauna and Biodiversityen
local.subject.seo2008961306 Remnant Vegetation and Protected Conservation Areas in Forest and Woodlands Environmentsen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.emailMichael.Lawes@cdu.edu.auen
local.profile.emailpclarke1@une.edu.auen
local.output.categoryC1en
local.record.placeauen
local.record.institutionUniversity of New Englanden
local.identifier.epublicationsrecordune-20130528-152911en
local.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen
local.format.startpage517en
local.format.endpage524en
local.identifier.scopusid84874199435en
local.peerreviewedYesen
local.identifier.volume101en
local.identifier.issue2en
local.title.subtitlea savanna/forest contrasten
local.access.fulltextYesen
local.contributor.lastnameLawesen
local.contributor.lastnameMidgleyen
local.contributor.lastnameClarkeen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:pclarke1en
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.identifier.unepublicationidune:13199en
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
local.title.maintitleCosts and benefits of relative bark thickness in relation to fire damageen
local.output.categorydescriptionC1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journalen
local.search.authorLawes, Michael Jen
local.search.authorMidgley, Jeremy Jen
local.search.authorClarke, Peter Jen
local.uneassociationUnknownen
local.identifier.wosid000317923300025en
local.year.published2013en
local.subject.for2020310302 Community ecology (excl. invasive species ecology)en
local.subject.for2020310308 Terrestrial ecologyen
local.subject.for2020410401 Conservation and biodiversityen
local.subject.seo2020180301 Assessment and management of freshwater ecosystemsen
local.subject.seo2020180606 Terrestrial biodiversityen
local.subject.seo2020180604 Rehabilitation or conservation of terrestrial environmentsen
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
Files in This Item:
2 files
File Description SizeFormat 
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

110
checked on May 4, 2024

Page view(s)

1,126
checked on Jun 18, 2023
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.