<%BANNER%>

Seedling Carbohydrate Storage, Survival, and Stress Tolerance in a Neotropical Forest

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110320_AAAADG INGEST_TIME 2011-03-20T19:14:12Z PACKAGE UFE0009262_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 14719 DFID F20110320_AABXDZ ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH myers_j_Page_58.QC.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
0cf97beffd1675d2531b0c0def563f7c
SHA-1
2f151dd9925869081cda22e4565e47a28ab556c0
44795 F20110320_AABWPG myers_j_Page_28.jpg
d8cdf0c7f26bedaf2281e1468056b954
dab90b23f21ecd9185626c8f974cfe07ddd459c7
1876 F20110320_AABWZB myers_j_Page_18.txt
df1c9febe4667524b7208213a40d999c
87b4259b7fef6a5d07c1574ff1129deabe0d36a3
6903 F20110320_AABXBB myers_j_Page_70thm.jpg
79b4548604f1134537900ba4a57a7450
5edb762589ab65490c289fe3b1c2289a53ee6557
1053954 F20110320_AABWUE myers_j_Page_25.tif
da60c0deac61594e078d7e7b3d78406a
beb592e61ac35dd5c95d0b4a90f18f8683266266
22920 F20110320_AABWPH myers_j_Page_29.jpg
222031f946503bc5f38ab5e4ca01810f
8bf809338446c274849d89df2de9f0ac51af28d6
1878 F20110320_AABWZC myers_j_Page_19.txt
60a5b85a3277a76e549907cb8ac4d014
d8f668c4b595fd114cf5e734b3e042ade472d5cf
9180 F20110320_AABXBC myers_j_Page_57.QC.jpg
f5f84f862a885b4eba6e93f2484ab8d4
f5424e85415c145d73e11157985aa725b9077c83
2721 F20110320_AABXGA myers_j_Page_72thm.jpg
5f54babecbbf9c6bc2e742c92f65071b
1d2d7781196a169d4f284bca3a4a1bf39739d31c
30393 F20110320_AABWPI myers_j_Page_30.jpg
ad9904b4eaf56abb44294573a7a06793
d02f5d535dbbc0d935c17b233243a568cdbd9da0
2027 F20110320_AABWZD myers_j_Page_20.txt
afadc803e62ecbb29e9d7a4b81dcdcc9
433689a96a582b190e12a53b83e529c9dd10c352
3395 F20110320_AABXBD myers_j_Page_57thm.jpg
21831f040d4982fdd03a5c736c9e7ab8
247f8c5e3555be6fe264fbed3cc3ff016e1840d5
F20110320_AABWUF myers_j_Page_26.tif
34179f63d93370610aa3d78337997ed2
88fc1ba0a2ca06b32f36e40d75c26270a4470733
5912 F20110320_AABXGB myers_j_Page_73thm.jpg
be61cc73992ccaea1a9076508f763bd2
4367474a10dbb8375750d0750bdddbe6187877d6
46843 F20110320_AABWPJ myers_j_Page_31.jpg
5bd5e21ddcd1cc7660028db933243d37
034a883250fb336f5c0983605603efc91d15036c
2032 F20110320_AABWZE myers_j_Page_21.txt
2f3c71fd678cacb63cb35a2357824cf7
e0dee57a07def41626ced5b52a386ec82027a12e
24078 F20110320_AABXBE myers_j_Page_22.QC.jpg
8a846433a7e01b496681555c6410bdba
287bdd9d7817e88b7a7b307503af5ce482e5d681
1054428 F20110320_AABWUG myers_j_Page_27.tif
18ffb5519f649cf87f9aecb90a259acf
6f79a60318dc3fb67ed6928d4c18beb063f9edcb
2675 F20110320_AABXGC myers_j_Page_74thm.jpg
9bf790d820ff0ec25515c8fb9680fb7b
c0c6d635d4b2c73614a7bbdffd28b59c773b4112
31733 F20110320_AABWPK myers_j_Page_32.jpg
7db29389fe6fcf7003b5d1a5d300d370
de4c489a4f37e7f4d6a724a9d142be3d95c9096f
2080 F20110320_AABWZF myers_j_Page_22.txt
efc3b8e356e1c662fc5a4e9efd8e6612
3a249749e723bfc15b96339e14c61b298db0098a
6358 F20110320_AABXBF myers_j_Page_10thm.jpg
a52229b3c155538e6fca17492cb43fa6
098980d95b14e3f24ea514db67da34e3400e0670
F20110320_AABWUH myers_j_Page_28.tif
38c11ca7b1f8e3993fbecd62edee9c01
1b721c68f327fac2bdd40456c5f9a9a1e15245de
65111 F20110320_AABWPL myers_j_Page_34.jpg
fdec0f10563849ad4c50b1a20bee384b
9b07155a2e0a3514c0ac09d55ed5652ce4bcc626
2062 F20110320_AABWZG myers_j_Page_23.txt
0b2c08fb3cef0068e229f4a11f63fac8
997ec62c6ac945926a290e4d5cadd55480278d6c
21263 F20110320_AABXBG myers_j_Page_19.QC.jpg
95d0bfe18ad7bbcfcc7595a6e1bd49a5
4af95806beb1a08cb98680e44b7aadd0d6056e85
F20110320_AABWUI myers_j_Page_29.tif
0b379fa7a2d8d138bc72ac8171881464
fcf71a444621a844aac434473c289cce3914ac75
74261 F20110320_AABWPM myers_j_Page_35.jpg
6ac0a31370d8a442d8441dec815c7104
14d8c0499b6ff315e833b5617fcdad4217eec8eb
F20110320_AABWZH myers_j_Page_24.txt
fd145af67aedae07dc78088422c703f7
9944cd054166838d93520cc079f133f10fb5b78d
6419 F20110320_AABXBH myers_j_Page_49thm.jpg
763b38920df8b6912d7eddf0dbceb970
66ca0789bdee357dce7c5938fe584aafd6f46f3b
8423998 F20110320_AABWUJ myers_j_Page_30.tif
31f896b1e1643d92ea723d9657817d9b
457cfb92c7067ecb98068093f802bca5c3e44a51
74937 F20110320_AABWPN myers_j_Page_36.jpg
3694d8ec28889626c5ca94da48aee3c3
3d213e44728c04e4b0ed7a5af07c7182a50e21a7
1935 F20110320_AABWZI myers_j_Page_25.txt
b26233c6a4bef416815874b1c9d59a1c
1f93161fcfaba92ec3aa644ed5394afe649c0323
24132 F20110320_AABXBI myers_j_Page_21.QC.jpg
55c2055bf70c48a4266421e1f92f602a
bf7999a75501f76bc3fa086bf42464f0c8fb9858
F20110320_AABWUK myers_j_Page_31.tif
f4ba5e83d98e4877e99e87a254f1cc52
0a1db90ce491f4139e7d432b4226f9cd6be9d14b
70191 F20110320_AABWPO myers_j_Page_37.jpg
0a1b63d1b993f3adfedeca66d81953ac
85d42a00eeb74bccd6d1e2816748b5d858e2704f
201 F20110320_AABWZJ myers_j_Page_26.txt
64fd541bc38d5393d36771805b819089
9298ac33a4266ed2363869987d8ec9d87b0289a8
6079 F20110320_AABXBJ myers_j_Page_11thm.jpg
46aebd32f9bfd529e98879530c8f5169
2a1f7b0e839490a6477cc3e885f34da43a607748
F20110320_AABWUL myers_j_Page_32.tif
23af5a25bf61d0f11eb84ef6135a1464
93da3ce42308b3b249c72dfe7997316e9747b333
75699 F20110320_AABWPP myers_j_Page_38.jpg
6211b60964c94cda1dde28b4432f8be1
1a7f5c40681daaf7943fc35f7c648feb6ca9ad29
2969 F20110320_AABXBK myers_j_Page_33thm.jpg
e7748305827cf6607815999f5c0c5b30
550285eef90e21aecd8d817dbacc52be18e9c8f8
F20110320_AABWUM myers_j_Page_34.tif
c88b641b443a380696323e18aa017340
792a2f3f433d71348e5c3bbe31b730e92702dd47
67407 F20110320_AABWPQ myers_j_Page_39.jpg
79e8331adc026c2a5b1abcedb67fe33a
09263e4d8ee9abf375a2b772c29c8504b0fb7687
1306 F20110320_AABWZK myers_j_Page_27.txt
6f520e979a329482687d6d953248bb84
bfc71af3e1141c15a8b20fa60ffb9a81c739b786
6306 F20110320_AABXBL myers_j_Page_16thm.jpg
113a6050d6f4650b47de48dd4a844ebf
f0fd81e787f9977f9d097ed60426eb2788390eac
F20110320_AABWUN myers_j_Page_35.tif
b2b8f42bb62295a8bc7574b3c2896e3f
d2184303c862d3c43d6fd515ab54cfeac21c5452
21222 F20110320_AABXBM myers_j_Page_34.QC.jpg
69a52c5371a99ac070b5f1108ec1f9e1
e7bb13c208f4a2c959b6781f957316eaa5314816
72060 F20110320_AABWPR myers_j_Page_40.jpg
a4e2dc1e409322fd64131c19ae668c40
1e7ee29356b850d547c3292f5dce69e80014d2d9
1477 F20110320_AABWZL myers_j_Page_28.txt
1f5badada9b410eebedecff6317a6afe
96f00d364733a13e1fefb4f6982ae239bd49a8f5
F20110320_AABWUO myers_j_Page_36.tif
fe261bcb3f13f12a2bbeca425574ce64
11d652e3c3df7e7ac8e01ce770fa5d0f91f55f60
12104 F20110320_AABXBN myers_j_Page_06.QC.jpg
1171444f0b2718d0d1875462c52d9742
4371ce96aea36c440de388970b05e7c0409925c8
74704 F20110320_AABWPS myers_j_Page_41.jpg
fcddeef0142f14f3b0a82804fdb27536
4c7c5e9e591d85658d30b4f2c7882abe3c9b6ee2
932 F20110320_AABWZM myers_j_Page_29.txt
b8460196ec72ab50e8e87f0539939e9e
842c1e6ced5f35e093171dc3c4824480c3e08d2b
F20110320_AABWUP myers_j_Page_37.tif
eb2a18af80fe3ef7de0fe181047f1cc7
672a7d50072b3b9fa9a74ef3301c464fadbc5484
6736 F20110320_AABXBO myers_j_Page_54.QC.jpg
56a72f05d11d8e9a2b12b43ce544d971
6e661d7f35778e54dd6307adcb713fd40386ad85
69456 F20110320_AABWPT myers_j_Page_42.jpg
103cfdd9845ec276a7809dfec8fbed7f
dae5eaf1b7c41f108c7ead99bae594b4abf6c484
701 F20110320_AABWZN myers_j_Page_30.txt
7a29761f04606bb6d365d71bd2444a5d
b97a36db4fdf4759ae96e8fa2183c4bb2da273d6
F20110320_AABWUQ myers_j_Page_38.tif
d6fa3f0ea164a5b5abc759cf1da47d2d
333b7166eeed05244831f2c4a2b84948365fafa0
3521 F20110320_AABXBP myers_j_Page_64thm.jpg
49d1971b16c0a8ae6d69293b5097fc36
63a9044ec494fd526b5e30f3ee3119305270c531
70998 F20110320_AABWPU myers_j_Page_43.jpg
663c670a937ac1f9610e464d8dfbfb94
364618c533f9e8ca23f017d6099853ec64c0e74b
799 F20110320_AABWZO myers_j_Page_32.txt
e6f0a104553628b9f5e0ab9c55c2c99c
9cea00d659b3e82e71f48b24b7f7234e880148f0
F20110320_AABWUR myers_j_Page_39.tif
38e26d55a93004ad5bae33447f55098b
8c853a6e7f2de0e94afbd2e2e62d7e232ecf58e9
2475 F20110320_AABXBQ myers_j_Page_53thm.jpg
2ade255013d17a9240c071e2fcc967c3
77d2aa7478bb7f3233ff6ae6eb54c7abaa11249f
67652 F20110320_AABWPV myers_j_Page_44.jpg
117f3d7c0fff261dffd937b0969b97b8
07dc5e4c5ebdbe8855e048ab012b0ec453dcbcab
553 F20110320_AABWZP myers_j_Page_33.txt
5e6425e8433a5c3c806c959fc7c1be0f
5b4da2b79e77798aa7844521408f99a3e35e4a97
F20110320_AABWUS myers_j_Page_40.tif
a5fb1bb8008af073bf1a91c4ddf8ca8b
d0564b5d791e6b532a6731a70c51253f17065f3c
74000 F20110320_AABWPW myers_j_Page_45.jpg
8ed95def0b5b48ff91ac13768ec4baf3
f169181334f3e8bca46866eb8c65eb496b5dafc2
1811 F20110320_AABWZQ myers_j_Page_34.txt
605e89ac45f46a460506451b61702c90
4a260d019567361cddb9c1974bb683c74fbf1c2d
F20110320_AABWUT myers_j_Page_41.tif
413c18d34fae6e25c89790631337a41d
6fde78229475e63f4e091afca79da25ab6325978
3556 F20110320_AABXBR myers_j_Page_61thm.jpg
bb880d37ce656caf146f9010e1b987d6
dda472f9f78e6bd8101b5b74781fc41eb632b29b
73857 F20110320_AABWPX myers_j_Page_46.jpg
39382a7c4f494c88e744f5f09028d81b
c78d68e05c9b8d17bf8900d5584932a232a4a23c
2049 F20110320_AABWZR myers_j_Page_36.txt
6a2a4b0c7ce87434a462435e2303e99f
325c742e1b314a6247086e085d0f24398b556db0
F20110320_AABWUU myers_j_Page_42.tif
021a03f43bb36652c55a806ed3b6258f
297143489ed4c05de02a74e1f793c73c4970c2da
6018 F20110320_AABXBS myers_j_Page_67thm.jpg
100e404595b8af1b4a7848121fd881a8
fc4c97d8222653790196da50cfa4e3211fcae87a
73756 F20110320_AABWPY myers_j_Page_47.jpg
ff70b7bdfb533cf862daea3cf32b392b
c639350543e64c664df00f569da6cf1d2b70b963
1968 F20110320_AABWZS myers_j_Page_37.txt
bc3d944f93610be3dda4fdfcecfac865
3063cfe2764842142eea45f22746c079f192e6c0
F20110320_AABWUV myers_j_Page_43.tif
a03f6cc2ba766ae228292000f8d4b75d
dadb692654434c61f8be526aee975b328f622185
6801 F20110320_AABXBT myers_j_Page_56.QC.jpg
3172ccdcd9e3261952f115c6e516e8f0
603e28f1290c215fc6639e2805afbd55b4ccab94
74164 F20110320_AABWPZ myers_j_Page_48.jpg
5fb96a60fb36e771b07d2e245008002a
c4df02c1e563dbc64c6826aac4ea1d266ac03637
2112 F20110320_AABWZT myers_j_Page_38.txt
f886ea0be1068f176d91383d40ed2ed3
d134d80dc355c47b60ecc10a8b70962b55c32e75
F20110320_AABWUW myers_j_Page_45.tif
6d21c1676f369de779e0cc361d328830
4fd55257a46db3177c0c28244c891875b1e736e0
23638 F20110320_AABWNA myers_j_Page_15.QC.jpg
be156fd5d89afd2e2eae096ebcd1ee00
b1ed079e9db70219d58ec0d35799481f69251191
22908 F20110320_AABXBU myers_j_Page_43.QC.jpg
a59c10b5755aa953ab498ba9f1872ce6
b9956d8cd995d839ce3f5c7658d0a9201c4394ed
1852 F20110320_AABWZU myers_j_Page_39.txt
f89293664f09cacbc5fb32ad6a01b877
f0482f3fdca918f7a5d63455d671874ef5c6470b
F20110320_AABWUX myers_j_Page_46.tif
7f41e9c1ac04b8e0dfc86dfe764376e7
faa472eab1bfd5cb8a402217a8681bca03f35823
227 F20110320_AABWNB myers_j_Page_57.txt
8a29e70f24f261a061d48fe329e9ac39
9d2f64d5d2d254dc7cb3d41a3c1fbace634e2982
25296 F20110320_AABXBV myers_j_Page_68.QC.jpg
eb51dfa96b4a315bb88557afc00f07c0
6f6c0fe08e7e5219e44ee23c8a90d4ccb54dc85f
1953 F20110320_AABWZV myers_j_Page_40.txt
8f3007bde35befd0a84f15a0195f9603
83b22a0d9a0ca2a5ca6a590bbc3aa95ccf82eefb
367075 F20110320_AABWSA myers_j_Page_32.jp2
abdb539318b7fd3447c86ac1b106d0b3
6e02a1bac750499ded2db39fd16c9a8e70fff214
F20110320_AABWUY myers_j_Page_47.tif
83f333cbfb0d2f4336d201ec4b724f4c
c83d4e6de98f1256677408171925b10f7a86b7bb
46896 F20110320_AABWNC myers_j_Page_44.pro
1f4f58b26b456f6bb28eb1c0bb0e05f8
e65ca0bff3df999856c3ec372e401840719516c8
15302 F20110320_AABXBW myers_j_Page_55.QC.jpg
ef3d717e28cfef955fd5e48198cd8001
1420606572c6649c3dd08c902fbc9ad7099b47f4
2036 F20110320_AABWZW myers_j_Page_41.txt
a9f333ec7ae0db043b88faec84d9f8c9
d3c8373cb7c1173551c7afa4a45b9a45182f35d8
333883 F20110320_AABWSB myers_j_Page_33.jp2
9780082e2d5482d4752d0b6225ceda3c
6712d7ab1d1b57fe41d48a342437672e612ea66f
F20110320_AABWUZ myers_j_Page_48.tif
ad2bce695389cfcd4937a51c0a4237fb
51aab773a7b42b0a938963d19d3e80d6958ef067
9800 F20110320_AABWND myers_j_Page_33.QC.jpg
099daeba98a0ee7f5f7095332aa6a0ec
e0472779e28974a478f38fbaa3ac12e4810c0e53
23008 F20110320_AABXBX myers_j_Page_10.QC.jpg
129c31be24a8ea1cdf39528da62f6d0b
1d4ec9075a0bae3ef13f6791743ff135cdfbda95
1886 F20110320_AABWZX myers_j_Page_42.txt
139c2b64df996c2abed2dc6388c8eb33
527541c7b8dfd3598ec8a6b4260ec0373822463f
96524 F20110320_AABWSC myers_j_Page_34.jp2
b1e1c75d11c64c64d16dd500007d5b61
7b5a5697639079e3213bbada3d70cb64d386de9a
23354 F20110320_AABWNE myers_j_Page_49.QC.jpg
55ec1049b96a1f2a1c269b9572ebf3ad
585ca51bdd92d961f0c3c053277908d2ff2456ae
24382 F20110320_AABXBY myers_j_Page_36.QC.jpg
7ba91062146042f13db5a9d43e3289f5
d54103203dc100d733a945fc6529ddf5a533dfa2
1955 F20110320_AABWZY myers_j_Page_43.txt
fbffcb2f15f53591535ebd17327512b6
73868baa10eacf843cac62c3da07453d2b30cf1f
F20110320_AABWNF myers_j_Page_01.tif
28a055010299cebb6b3a49e99c1cca7f
e07fda4a54cab688ece02352bdf6cedcec0cd9b1
11478 F20110320_AABWXA myers_j_Page_33.pro
ea94f1a56f0138ef0213e304c39f4cc9
37dac86736de5d8bf1990db5c16c5c0e4926fe08
2695 F20110320_AABXBZ myers_j_Page_59thm.jpg
84891b629d3d06cdbaf962ec6f4313a0
8865a6e3365e34c2be3a0ce61e2e70b641c04ab4
1897 F20110320_AABWZZ myers_j_Page_44.txt
2a332872bd9dac120f860c10feda7fbd
82fe31c9b2fe08f6bf561918c98f6760b71f731b
114471 F20110320_AABWSD myers_j_Page_35.jp2
516797ae056047e64d6549681e72c8c2
18aae22fa9b99e1b7385c04df18406ae5796b4a6
22906 F20110320_AABWNG myers_j_Page_37.QC.jpg
c287bcd36fee951fd4485388f1fc4451
33dee4dc78648b9e885a5b355ff5dfc0aed93b32
43756 F20110320_AABWXB myers_j_Page_34.pro
e3ada5a565a4675c893eb971c78e3b41
93a2d1c5937cc9536e97c549fa69326c267fe9b6
114394 F20110320_AABWSE myers_j_Page_36.jp2
fda1df92570e6ae4b1aedfb6e66b838a
6e250f06c2b4ea266b7c35f715bed0ce1aff7442
823 F20110320_AABWNH myers_j_Page_56.txt
5e34ae00bae68b8a43263b4bc4f7b6ca
ec722b3e68a4dd6d1a75abf9b786f0db87461620
51925 F20110320_AABWXC myers_j_Page_35.pro
c47cd4a93e9e0661cc0bad064368f845
38afcbf5c733b11b2303d2ba2edfbcf5bc6e674d
9647 F20110320_AABXEA myers_j_Page_60.QC.jpg
ee92942b978eb549636141c894ca90f3
76f727393427bf152882d7c572221fc2332c9432
107140 F20110320_AABWSF myers_j_Page_37.jp2
a2783a1d534091e724ad70b235e1eb5b
840a4d102d39fc095f5c4c0045e0049ba9aba6f0
577709 F20110320_AABWNI myers_j_Page_31.jp2
f732dc15ed412be8cb36ed7346fbfc97
39da4708381fc28c291f4f6a1cf35dc43f4558b5
52249 F20110320_AABWXD myers_j_Page_36.pro
55019149780efbd0336953e0b56f27f8
96d4fc1476416efaa91526b329089df157017ba5
12461 F20110320_AABXEB myers_j_Page_61.QC.jpg
ae66d1c981a9b90a6149570e0041b290
3b9cf7d756af4d84a1438f1691302014e35b3948
118644 F20110320_AABWSG myers_j_Page_38.jp2
9a6540bbdfa12be90eb604a4675518b6
06fd9231f8da0432c63f02e401319cce54aca129
1677 F20110320_AABWNJ myers_j_Page_63.txt
e1df6175cc166924d63a4a852dc8c464
ce317e06093865a81a7a619e130d3119ee9ed4ed
48896 F20110320_AABWXE myers_j_Page_37.pro
5cbc7f2c01c4ce9902854c2517accb46
c883cf6189c4e8c0888c48278abd917508f908ae
17238 F20110320_AABXEC myers_j_Page_63.QC.jpg
16b5c28b949a718a117f1e9604f2b3af
2948fc5b4335a12688e098256b26ec9e5d50b7b6
102429 F20110320_AABWSH myers_j_Page_39.jp2
ed9d8128a6f380b40fc1bf69c9e042f5
14fa24251d99b39003c11bca03d6418ed74d3e55
F20110320_AABWNK myers_j_Page_33.tif
1bdfc3121bd28309efcd5d1aa71476b7
1abffc6d2defcf3a21586293a18d587cb2b500f0
53860 F20110320_AABWXF myers_j_Page_38.pro
fb5820664fa47631757b4f89f6dbc4aa
0fc8c207689069e2a364aef73dc6a5dabef732a1
11713 F20110320_AABXED myers_j_Page_64.QC.jpg
220aff2505aa9f7a8040b4f503394c9a
bea1780d909be06779fbb5871032f4d8f78468a9
109774 F20110320_AABWSI myers_j_Page_40.jp2
6c7878833db7e834911bcfc85da813ba
4dc22f8ec68b455947a9fe2e1bdf1a9833c08112
F20110320_AABWNL myers_j_Page_14.tif
1ca47244618e0979bc1ae30be53865a6
6ce25de099244ec00bf0bd7c2dcd544f7c7c4187
46807 F20110320_AABWXG myers_j_Page_39.pro
9e40ad93732dd17acd6887be7ead97d7
a7da981794f7ee4cd4b76e09996cff4b0dbc374f
19405 F20110320_AABXEE myers_j_Page_65.QC.jpg
2fd2780b899296d2286a8ea396bda0f3
83f217386bd18abdcebe16e54ba0b904427bcb7a
113076 F20110320_AABWSJ myers_j_Page_41.jp2
6f346fce3fd144925b8f1c620bc63823
6e2b798f552a70b9bb647cd431675dc4166ed261
F20110320_AABWNM myers_j_Page_17.tif
f9725248d53d867acca15c757e43a8cc
e9f9a91935efe101659136d11cb089605a91c3fb
49532 F20110320_AABWXH myers_j_Page_40.pro
f8f8d5eee572c2686cca45cdf6f3e97a
9d65f72a1675314fc75b37d859b7179deb890aa0
13262 F20110320_AABXEF myers_j_Page_66.QC.jpg
0c7c2419b32ea1b99bfded097eafab09
01810684f69b18605d611bd654dc5b1895a1deec
107448 F20110320_AABWSK myers_j_Page_43.jp2
d5426e28a2cafd010e7f1be1cb1db800
611bc6c5d0c42f7e11afc8c48a14cd4706f7b136
1695 F20110320_AABWNN myers_j_Page_09.txt
bf7707b7e1e24e1f8f0b0473d26e9af7
b63710c83e55843b587b5f9615b3ac1a7c3c0272
22250 F20110320_AABXEG myers_j_Page_67.QC.jpg
6dd0c333d94309ada81230cba5966880
2fe27122328efb459518e1df640949bcf3938592
103633 F20110320_AABWSL myers_j_Page_44.jp2
c0050a17e87d9f1c2e57800d265c61a3
a0da36be7b026096fe0adc1237a42ce92776526d
9699 F20110320_AABWNO myers_j_Page_59.QC.jpg
6524c38b2acb5dab2361e2082022e71e
b3d639b9f82ce04342c42eb763026e0e94cc013b
51821 F20110320_AABWXI myers_j_Page_41.pro
a13385bdb6d84898f1ba92c6776a007c
7474014fd0e285e219ac4c4a734cfcee696c1fef
25413 F20110320_AABXEH myers_j_Page_69.QC.jpg
ab2c46bafd40024580018ed45c1c62fb
512befdeac71a281088f331e78399a1380fa87cf
113711 F20110320_AABWSM myers_j_Page_45.jp2
86c03dae9f4d95b1ea8ed23968af9cfe
99b568eab3563c78496a115c1b95686893a8e032
111051 F20110320_AABWNP myers_j_Page_47.jp2
6cb47c58a6059fec2f1417aa9923798e
7ca219669a1212e22096bf9a60d874d96af20b56
49492 F20110320_AABWXJ myers_j_Page_43.pro
52fb7abb639e047cede336b787d317b9
68ca18a54857027540e637af3feef11e3f48cdf0
26803 F20110320_AABXEI myers_j_Page_70.QC.jpg
62d7868ee21562c3400fb549a7d611ae
56be603e23afa10142b58ec4a3ca40ed996f1af5
112173 F20110320_AABWSN myers_j_Page_46.jp2
5075e75199b1412d9338ba195815c71a
59e9f440f58c89b1321ebc08ca4a9b90c7a69a84
113642 F20110320_AABWNQ myers_j_Page_23.jp2
505bef557f4d21102400cc2048f60328
7972b12167cc2962c181826114dc4946518df9ff
52070 F20110320_AABWXK myers_j_Page_45.pro
4cbe404dfc3e8b061ccd4e9bfe624cee
034412476cd03c5d3c5e811ca550f9b4c7c7d427
26104 F20110320_AABXEJ myers_j_Page_71.QC.jpg
1f390a6b5ffe6e29a079ec836e54f2ab
8c4f8320651fdb388675db23f46d90ec58903eda
112100 F20110320_AABWSO myers_j_Page_48.jp2
5edde8e25508660de63bc7104d5bfcdc
945037a99b8ae6f5dea32650a7ee936f3c6cf3f5
2037 F20110320_AABWNR myers_j_Page_35.txt
e7683cf4d4b392b3f32ccbc2a04f0c2e
6e090540ee72878bfaa58b09d26539f450f36451
51245 F20110320_AABWXL myers_j_Page_46.pro
31e9b4dabd0dbb6e36d2b8a170a262c2
c45a78a73cfbd24f65cf669d5b37c2574160c10c
8462 F20110320_AABXEK myers_j_Page_72.QC.jpg
d2acb2c224cc38f87ee99d36fa477dd7
b8234356745e167d95187f03b9cc7997e408a127
111409 F20110320_AABWSP myers_j_Page_50.jp2
1ec49cfca7db508f5a704bf8110431bf
d1f98abb7879fb24c77116a3c321a7f591966820
105119 F20110320_AABWNS myers_j_Page_42.jp2
e1d19d752cabc9f67b48f2d5380c902b
53207d03b7161224e31bfee0cfc421e12aeac097
51138 F20110320_AABWXM myers_j_Page_48.pro
5275fad6faedfb75b59c8d58da6ecf3f
10fd5abd108c78aabb889cfdc82688463d669a39
21298 F20110320_AABXEL myers_j_Page_73.QC.jpg
82f71088bd0ddf7d1fb8e8d2403e7dcb
ac45447ad022d387d84c9a372df785c9e1a9878b
116255 F20110320_AABWSQ myers_j_Page_51.jp2
9ea4cf2b42d1eb26b43f53cea14f6add
5b8736d542a0c14f500f0c004cbd10d3f65871cc
137636 F20110320_AABWNT myers_j_Page_70.jp2
14cb066d0839a527146fba4659e74f7d
51860935e1a189c00b798f716dbe5eb9c8c4feb2
50789 F20110320_AABWXN myers_j_Page_49.pro
d9dd673711d78ae686925c9b547132b5
6b9b055d26de0aba5965cba332b44f3c42498233
1401 F20110320_AABXEM myers_j_Page_02thm.jpg
ec604daa1b2eafc59d346e6c87fa6436
b3c5d38dfde613d628e7cbb15d218035e78fcea0
57079 F20110320_AABWSR myers_j_Page_52.jp2
ee119145df557ee2bbcf79fdd8ace1d5
da6622d8e2337b8218588de3ff16b2a9b9c4b755
5250 F20110320_AABWNU myers_j_Page_65thm.jpg
c55190383c6c32228ae1a7408cf151bf
1e0227f7cadcdc641396056652e4131b2d588edd
50618 F20110320_AABWXO myers_j_Page_50.pro
11dd9d9f29d2b4f634f59d2e031870de
58f685548fce290e91bc33185b56b7c9852c5969
5817 F20110320_AABXEN myers_j_Page_04thm.jpg
ffc5a64d8ed68d3b07a701b97456fd09
d5b3a64545f13e34c6d21cb6444362bd04b5508d
24016 F20110320_AABWSS myers_j_Page_53.jp2
857beec71159fbe70da4c2ec0b467e37
34eb9bfc6235562729139fe6d648825252b99e0e
F20110320_AABWNV myers_j_Page_02.tif
eb225e3a0e7870e9f70fc61d8995f6c6
74968e22273a853aa6c22e08dd44857968f5be83
53353 F20110320_AABWXP myers_j_Page_51.pro
bc6f7ec42773503af00bc24a22b055ea
c4149293aa71cd01a747f952509a2c97d9ef42a2
4616 F20110320_AABXEO myers_j_Page_05thm.jpg
b1a27663a8d509b4b4400064a314284f
7d6745efdf623a556b9c4949fb2dadad14458340
33759 F20110320_AABWST myers_j_Page_54.jp2
e84881eedc79f962e673285f99c8676a
c0a0fd9434c8ff87b85053a743ff461be9f8bf29
F20110320_AABWNW myers_j_Page_70.tif
71aab93d69828e0697de00d3348684f0
4106dfb22d95434e33243a29f36f82af9d73c0f0
25140 F20110320_AABWXQ myers_j_Page_52.pro
6730e31f5d3c8fc46dc8653d0067f739
0771541174fdae11ada41b14b224b8c265bc7f37
3226 F20110320_AABXEP myers_j_Page_07thm.jpg
14238925d6f3be36c9909ea18c70be62
e56d28edd1f1c98103ecaebe342b89ca2c4e6901
53848 F20110320_AABWSU myers_j_Page_55.jp2
aee781cbc334e0f8d32071d88d241f12
d4fe9bbc7bf3aafcea19d363bda3da738898d3c3
F20110320_AABWNX myers_j_Page_50.tif
f722d1996dbc2a931bcb4732c3b8eeb8
36c759e098c6811c5657ad37bc8a4d4242909515
11110 F20110320_AABWXR myers_j_Page_53.pro
c9cb92460b182364887c56e8f5dfcf8c
74862797254f187c0a76712a1625bfaff61c05bc
6269 F20110320_AABXEQ myers_j_Page_12thm.jpg
c0c1b36e3f53e2cb42baeed5be6b6503
4032d4cf04160a726a28fabb34c6f3aee4019305
38994 F20110320_AABWSV myers_j_Page_56.jp2
ec78d690fc608566756d304f86b5466c
16e6069da03d8c16f011fc9b18ba2adcb959bd9b
24097 F20110320_AABWNY myers_j_Page_64.pro
b3b0c8d533c375f62f471c4813d7f60b
d7660154e9ad76206031ba66d979b89847503c54
16285 F20110320_AABWXS myers_j_Page_54.pro
5ca3db26871eb5b3d7565deed40b3bdd
3d54a9739b32b64e3886e86c1247db4cd3d1f527
6215 F20110320_AABXER myers_j_Page_13thm.jpg
e436cf5f2529cda913dc1d53f6791fcd
a4b7afc44264587fe195d503e3e0226b7bcec1a8
22738 F20110320_AABWSW myers_j_Page_57.jp2
ee8c6d73a22980a223887f6b2f1a0ca5
cb8586c5a8af3202fd4dcd1a4dfcd86622cfbd32
6567 F20110320_AABWNZ myers_j_Page_48thm.jpg
198129917d4ec2f0eed4f943ceae9e85
e35ad7321b5c7ee0a11858ff0120d3a9ffda7d58
19846 F20110320_AABWXT myers_j_Page_55.pro
0b54cfe8edcbe2ab8e5c0dd45259c09f
55883d8a1cca2cb4cfa3db9ace503e40d0ba42f1
6783 F20110320_AABXES myers_j_Page_14thm.jpg
74d44dbd209efcd6f2f8730dd9fa43b1
5c138866a777086cf6421530817e6514152b0519
18094 F20110320_AABWXU myers_j_Page_56.pro
f3b72a3ddc410eea733a2a9afcdd3c32
dcea2641341a38c7c2907c21cf71fe74c552aa3b
544148 F20110320_AABWSX myers_j_Page_58.jp2
d7a4879c0b27c3860f80648c34b7d35f
e8a13e1ff60ab2ae10254879b2a6e0d2522d5174
6463 F20110320_AABXET myers_j_Page_15thm.jpg
4a84aa495e7380a460ebf32526c89527
6b23e2d4855d9729a322b74c86e05be2f61302cf
4763 F20110320_AABWXV myers_j_Page_57.pro
571fe00a1c7635f23f47e806092c5fa1
550c165bc2f112eae46df912e0242812d3c74684
71890 F20110320_AABWQA myers_j_Page_49.jpg
94c9499b6fcbf0bac0db5f69a1ceec2b
080b4a216a0b25cfdbc04fc21e0870900f42f831
31902 F20110320_AABWSY myers_j_Page_60.jp2
3371703ae0aec318e469cc75c4376f20
7649cffcd2c9218a5ac41c4b09b17b71e12546c3
17349 F20110320_AABWXW myers_j_Page_58.pro
f1326f8a36a9ac2d1c9e99e788311c86
00334c13132cee3495650dc72d7c14138332008d
520033 F20110320_AABWSZ myers_j_Page_61.jp2
c17530babbad20b246294b5dad1333ae
dd1d4e70e0d2fafcb9d25b36e4349e4a2f7fe964
6369 F20110320_AABXEU myers_j_Page_17thm.jpg
2e0edf24596cee993ef53b8b9a47114f
ab42616627e52e9d35d09264ce04a229c63cf7d4
15083 F20110320_AABWXX myers_j_Page_59.pro
391d81ebbdcc893deb1333a1a7e30939
6bd9c832d9052126bd186572d44007d5f613d607
71611 F20110320_AABWQB myers_j_Page_50.jpg
86c28f7c0d7b3e358d19cb7285f3de95
979611d1f62da70bab4cf1d8539f15ad8ca4ea92
6410 F20110320_AABXEV myers_j_Page_19thm.jpg
6e77c8946b7763f02b722183134bf4d6
5120f114338c1a4853d1355723a111dec1778230
F20110320_AABWVA myers_j_Page_49.tif
f988191639fc3dcacef55a77a254c6a0
305310ff84451109b2bd578e9e75ed027eac3dd7
11848 F20110320_AABWXY myers_j_Page_60.pro
624b531a0819e8b90518de9686a072a7
7d9c0bbd457ec4394c1b855e8387143f325c4974
75607 F20110320_AABWQC myers_j_Page_51.jpg
b6e551a6c67d89da1834d01149d5d428
4e69176feee525c5daa195ce9fbcb48a098011a5
6599 F20110320_AABXEW myers_j_Page_21thm.jpg
99379c5efe82a95b6840d2633f64dfc9
41fc26167e394876cc9a89b5f683f301d0f892f7
F20110320_AABWVB myers_j_Page_52.tif
e14a65bf319ad5fdb9742992ed9cd42c
fa0cef3104cca28648517db499257b2fc6386dc6
20311 F20110320_AABWXZ myers_j_Page_61.pro
e9853548e36375ed9cd799c3bf480001
bbc0fff4272a97316d6d0dba6607c291b6693f9c
39361 F20110320_AABWQD myers_j_Page_52.jpg
5aed9f2cd284d1c4f2b370932c8f00f2
cb7d3212f67237b37674da7e158c113cec6f550e
6715 F20110320_AABXEX myers_j_Page_23thm.jpg
2dd0024dedb595eda4f56ec4e7d3352f
a647a4445fb360529d8905651168cbcf88e44570
F20110320_AABWVC myers_j_Page_53.tif
8b6a320cdbfd2a312dbc3e746e0a7bfc
0d36e7d4e00c89900e12b1d2cd983830a1cefe12
22123 F20110320_AABWQE myers_j_Page_53.jpg
6d2a06251f2a284398fdd2bc61dcb768
e0a1c86564d01322c539354250263fe11e0dbbad
6712 F20110320_AABXEY myers_j_Page_24thm.jpg
903c7a3ee61118a64a7a49e90a186ee3
017f212276aceb6435632fffdaf8c519088e61fd
6660 F20110320_AABXCA myers_j_Page_22thm.jpg
c1a1c063eafe12e031d291879eb14d8f
6f9a19ee627f781d80a89ed37c61399fe4362166
F20110320_AABWVD myers_j_Page_54.tif
fb92c85d148a2f549bf0b7a88f9f8fc2
11c87eb36c50cbda334a4bb8a8dae673f6251a1c
21095 F20110320_AABWQF myers_j_Page_54.jpg
0820fffc3e55517c353596aba1a7433c
1933b34d282120b49b9d2f8477cd947937029270
6470 F20110320_AABXEZ myers_j_Page_25thm.jpg
3610751c264882eaa6e54c1f99ec3710
e6f27478961fbebb55d423eb22581a757ccfc9ad
22410 F20110320_AABXCB myers_j_Page_44.QC.jpg
34d9739b5d98eeb44f0993dfad3e461d
ba38e325bb6f81fb40595f3c76e4a5457c3bb465
F20110320_AABWVE myers_j_Page_55.tif
13f28d3219c77cc611530966a205b6fb
b304ff7b4e1d8e8cac6671fac8360010076381db
47120 F20110320_AABWQG myers_j_Page_55.jpg
3d84391245559bea7e253d8cf0115e09
b88e0c046e5d98f1d3a2239cfb4d1a1fdb8057da
6804 F20110320_AABXCC myers_j_Page_20thm.jpg
012398deb75f2708e4d910e8d87006d1
d6b73d59e395933ca6a930df337a6f7326f38007
F20110320_AABWVF myers_j_Page_56.tif
a1f0adbb662274416448fad57349823c
98a8d3288341c719dfee4b809bee7371152759e5
21768 F20110320_AABWQH myers_j_Page_56.jpg
572514b3bf9c00fe1c58de9e2af60973
9265b040b33ea4277db133658941be428fb44cee
24177 F20110320_AABXCD myers_j_Page_24.QC.jpg
13c2d1f2912306f5ed62b4d31603698d
bfb21ab9ba84ab41bf41a54ceaecffe6e7567ad6
25838 F20110320_AABWQI myers_j_Page_57.jpg
2209f19377980e47335632019b8a9bf4
361c60fc8f038094cb70c2e60dce2e399c9991b9
4645 F20110320_AABXCE myers_j_Page_08thm.jpg
629f578c094491c7e5bcb85a7144da67
beb0eb3b4cb0f676af7b9dc754bb978de8d55378
F20110320_AABWVG myers_j_Page_57.tif
5c876549ebb04ce95b55c930bac35a20
a6047cfd4e3c55baab55544f01a3bd5f784b7ba4
46819 F20110320_AABWQJ myers_j_Page_58.jpg
c3802c19671549a93c79b86293c1c99a
f1b09b2d2b7a6b005c7d10f718d8888cc3bb2bf1
3534 F20110320_AABXCF myers_j_Page_06thm.jpg
059d13610974d36f9340d6d90650dc16
60b9ba0c74cc1f3c4516c6dbf38827d450b05988
F20110320_AABWVH myers_j_Page_58.tif
f4b3e6dfc5f165f341ab941d651ca0ed
2e3a56a190c4693237b6a27d8db3ccc4b56d4db4
31802 F20110320_AABWQK myers_j_Page_59.jpg
011cfd5f11c55f9eb9488b7790478968
221c6542ea80811061dd33909fc098a62f43bab6
24068 F20110320_AABXCG myers_j_Page_17.QC.jpg
acd0edfe1c1a44b914cc8ca65f9f97ba
2041c82e0beeb1f99b0d5ed1f9b5c55e69a0a667
F20110320_AABWVI myers_j_Page_59.tif
a8b5c51b6faba9139aef520126505b6a
27b91358902c4777542dac4e6e8866b84ea2b0fe
27154 F20110320_AABWQL myers_j_Page_60.jpg
6a506918f47867589897eddaa8f93811
5eafafaeacd07aacc780de9bee545d19a1e4ce3c
6507 F20110320_AABXCH myers_j_Page_42thm.jpg
bdb0694fd5f2bace789b51272a67de11
1244c878143129d34cd09db466335fe9c26a17da
F20110320_AABWVJ myers_j_Page_60.tif
acca3e86ebc0045dfa5462a3fd6f4265
0902b75f3a6ae3eaa25692a409ca633c928762d3
42604 F20110320_AABWQM myers_j_Page_61.jpg
eaef6cea92aceeedc25ecf4b79f67665
15b2fff0526fabaeca6bc5e71479baf4c22e13a3
10957 F20110320_AABXCI myers_j_Page_07.QC.jpg
15fa05748575687669e224791c7618a7
c3a28fc8e5e24a80fbc334a4c1afcfcb4d000afb
F20110320_AABWVK myers_j_Page_61.tif
280cc27aea3aeeb8e0102514c0865216
fbca104e8ec4dc2b9aaaf335d9e6d6936d643c08
45377 F20110320_AABWQN myers_j_Page_62.jpg
16a6b124a4f77425654a78720251784e
04baf305332e546ce8b3c03ee085208b6d28867f
6652 F20110320_AABXCJ myers_j_Page_46thm.jpg
670d9614375dd07b8ddbac8a5f9f00c8
d0a68de5fa2322981eb0cccc47e63bd339ecd8df
F20110320_AABWVL myers_j_Page_62.tif
131cbf7f8c6ea1d8d04bcd3096324203
17e3609ad9857240fe5c0f50b398f5917aa0f34d
54791 F20110320_AABWQO myers_j_Page_63.jpg
c0e31ee036138786afffaf09a5fe9a67
c139d16deea16014f902cf9c11021b0b6432d9dc
8715 F20110320_AABXCK myers_j_Page_74.QC.jpg
3f01c717b9688d0aecc85dd57e4d72bc
43cd8734eab25b836ad63a0fb94a5bc31b685576
F20110320_AABWVM myers_j_Page_63.tif
99dde854ac2125ccf4585b1c8acfa37c
2f2bd366d1db6eaa837a8acc375ef2a977a2a325
37815 F20110320_AABWQP myers_j_Page_64.jpg
14dd8ea70f660b2402fff48970f618f5
214f7dfbe863b9487e5f5854085118b47130b7ac
6103 F20110320_AABXCL myers_j_Page_44thm.jpg
e2930f448dbdc412444c208acd05f74d
f36fabf5c889c4cfed35b937430ed1186c9839f9
F20110320_AABWVN myers_j_Page_64.tif
cd2becb92e162c3ad32122ba216ecd01
605118b75428baa5640ad37f14512a2e33fddb27
61822 F20110320_AABWQQ myers_j_Page_65.jpg
1766317ca1f204fe7a519badef2dd418
ff48e4749870e9a1145423a2409a3d2013beee80
22968 F20110320_AABXCM myers_j_Page_42.QC.jpg
bc4c75df8d704b51d3aeba8f4d3a54cc
d9dcd65cb766fe07571a2064338c585c57e86024
F20110320_AABWVO myers_j_Page_65.tif
a673d2c1715e9c64f70e572dfb8e34bb
3aa8dc2257d2332ea0b2146f97b05ebb1691fb0c
42944 F20110320_AABWQR myers_j_Page_66.jpg
b2a84888bce257f222c12e51c94107ed
cf48d46b9aff531657978edffd6b7a21a4f6df46
6721 F20110320_AABXCN myers_j_Page_50thm.jpg
01ca68445c8f9b37bac550ab48024f44
47d5985e1891bbe7c771d6fc85ef9e9cf0c6d905
F20110320_AABWVP myers_j_Page_66.tif
71a25d2a8ab600702e7fb0a7306b40b9
cca4c54ee30ab5dce0c3d1d42b3b5b2d1f1721fb
89806 F20110320_AABWQS myers_j_Page_68.jpg
b58b050d35617bd6b694b8502436e1d0
b43c07f271b1f88ea88590e8818b37bf5b1623cd
23020 F20110320_AABXCO myers_j_Page_13.QC.jpg
496704d619bb484a3f24840e0ee23ed5
0950eab1674dd949251d06a0c67bb2fe2dc623ff
F20110320_AABWVQ myers_j_Page_67.tif
145cb4c6ab6618ad63d834b85aada478
9b671fb232a47bde8204c2d968d16558a6057c42
85777 F20110320_AABWQT myers_j_Page_69.jpg
6fd14418149c29d3fe0f14ca1ce365b7
ef67c3ae581ac470ccff9f2ff2b3204d25d1560f
7122 F20110320_AABXCP myers_j_Page_69thm.jpg
d16dbd80e77523c944a515d231822f9a
05be722a8261e27741decf4bf253085ace684aa7
F20110320_AABWVR myers_j_Page_68.tif
43482bb06057b56cfa2d11a031cc2df3
84706d4a9712582f6638c62ceee096a81b463531
95034 F20110320_AABWQU myers_j_Page_70.jpg
b099c61e04cc612b9120dfcf64608cc3
c3b32e4632cdeb476599aac4dce27d0490065158
1659 F20110320_AABXCQ myers_j_Page_03thm.jpg
ace2e35c3d92a7591a14f9d7ec68667b
765e332ecbf4f55e0a97f1a2f3d3a61df83ed427
F20110320_AABWVS myers_j_Page_69.tif
63e6f566af9017ea0f9b4907e964f2cf
7a4be51d6eff4065d59e4f9eb5cdd55c6f6d6fb3
91013 F20110320_AABWQV myers_j_Page_71.jpg
1970c931eb397a8e33293f118ec6f84a
ed3f73fb60890e1ee23b73b6048e8573597871d2
20975 F20110320_AABXCR myers_j_Page_04.QC.jpg
f5cf2b0c758e1913ad2de89c9c4d3872
6c9eb562f8b64bdad42c435c754716bfc8945b6b
28333 F20110320_AABWQW myers_j_Page_72.jpg
506c917be559cfb4c9535b203ee76bb4
5037fb339d23db29d22f23ab3f46aff12f654018
F20110320_AABWVT myers_j_Page_72.tif
bb40ff8bcf7ba691f8e85f6652abf3dd
a0d9214d4e6fa6a9451f1ae2cfb6884810e8e7d4
65264 F20110320_AABWQX myers_j_Page_73.jpg
96a76e2210c2b31c5c9bc3bcf4bcf9f9
610f997fa57790fba4f56124994b735c164021ac
F20110320_AABWVU myers_j_Page_73.tif
a8a1b88602e1f8c7d06b543693b72b4b
210c6d76779b52bd382569fb72e45352e28e0297
3871 F20110320_AABXCS myers_j_Page_31thm.jpg
fd7f65608a6f9a25a9e16e6751f96bce
5535980493ff3e39fc5a87d99bc7e5825df34d89
26003 F20110320_AABWQY myers_j_Page_74.jpg
a1e42bcce6b0634d575c0baf80a2e88e
ed51200d5f410809696ab3139702280db376b14d
F20110320_AABWVV myers_j_Page_74.tif
7c74a62fb40507cf8c579f4f9595bcaf
e170416bdc864b649d0687262c64d24cddd8caf1
120087 F20110320_AABXCT UFE0009262_00001.xml FULL
5fff256f2d19950aae434848c492b2ea
dd94829d07df1fe707fe52997cafe456954dbf03
371391 F20110320_AABWOA myers_j_Page_59.jp2
425f3ae4f905168ded651e68f6c74204
a927865fde1668b223b3ecb79e6dcfbd198e0510
25162 F20110320_AABWQZ myers_j_Page_01.jp2
4c1fccfff2fd13ba14aecc8cbb6fc385
da85fd7e7f2d80558b036955475a219fc0c82ce8
8374 F20110320_AABWVW myers_j_Page_01.pro
6b5460089dc9079aee71f32747666ffc
9c2fdc94721ba99bd3d0670097b2ad4dfc15331e
3387 F20110320_AABXCU myers_j_Page_02.QC.jpg
b279c38bde025f5cb96927f7c18108a1
61b947e418058fc6f06185822355b09998338f29
3902 F20110320_AABWOB myers_j_Page_66thm.jpg
96fba9fb8e7a45ccfe883d5c7e817ffc
e8d67bedc3a6dc757a682e5e97cc6795f6c07268
1329 F20110320_AABWVX myers_j_Page_02.pro
6e6bfdfe2bb7bc5098c460c03622dc45
7dc7a0167a0214ae811173d83f0c957ef4e4f47d
4012 F20110320_AABXCV myers_j_Page_03.QC.jpg
c7e54c43e2ab2266906af3f97e0e15c5
bf06d30e22b380d10f9b5c5e0975a4bce08d615e
F20110320_AABWOC myers_j_Page_44.tif
020c4732015e6de259d15a987774b119
a87dfacb901f7428570738944c8fd21d407d8f2d
58834 F20110320_AABWTA myers_j_Page_62.jp2
f78100241e5c4a3de3e7a995080eff19
ea59485cc2470a32d87b3e72a9841dc8ef6787fb
3732 F20110320_AABWVY myers_j_Page_03.pro
564b4d79469030c49475b002a5bd34ff
3aa1575af9bbe8e559e78d2a274f9798c46003af
18771 F20110320_AABXCW myers_j_Page_05.QC.jpg
8755b882872489d85743ec279364efd9
caa0b934b556819914df771b769895756872f095
38229 F20110320_AABWOD myers_j_Page_09.pro
c5dfff740b165a6bac462f7698fb7689
59d4fbd75a0b114302b5b5f57416ac45977829ef
70933 F20110320_AABWTB myers_j_Page_63.jp2
1fa3bc406e8feccb804fa0f968e46e34
9dc173a5bb039cf8012d049c0a6e6d835a000282
43314 F20110320_AABWVZ myers_j_Page_04.pro
5899ecaa5df6511d2c66a17a3c84068d
c4c85434c59eefdee248b6e34c3e0828f49a58e9
16953 F20110320_AABXCX myers_j_Page_08.QC.jpg
6c95cedc5eb8cbfdb7738e75b9df8484
381afbfced8d824884ee8ec7fffdb2848b1d98c5
23448 F20110320_AABWOE myers_j_Page_01.jpg
2eb9919ba92fa67ee7484e596c672b13
68c9dfefd12d64cfe4688228110ef148652836e3
46788 F20110320_AABWTC myers_j_Page_64.jp2
7eb3601f2945bbd53f4019f3870fa476
d433426fabff92af61b37c4e79f31bd05a3b590b
18337 F20110320_AABXCY myers_j_Page_09.QC.jpg
6482127d5ab6ca3fcd5bf765abbb897a
b7b0eebdf35331765a16a72e7397f8867d0d9058
86538 F20110320_AABWOF UFE0009262_00001.mets
fc7ecd3a753edf5f3f38a0933ca9cf49
09ade40a118bae7033c94900f428cf37d4e041ec
29544 F20110320_AABWYA myers_j_Page_62.pro
7ef8ba3406d121774a1cf8974ad04df8
920d4d87117467c5461b19c20dbfc77268d07073
2050 F20110320_AABXAA myers_j_Page_45.txt
2eacea2a4e2923f1cff8dc5f039222ef
bd4f77c1a9bcd1cce8c7c5bd49b310d38f9ef53a
82641 F20110320_AABWTD myers_j_Page_65.jp2
b66255a4936805d721084e703663d6a5
6f2e0c18a8c20980d8e6bd9537566c6689f73198
21376 F20110320_AABXCZ myers_j_Page_11.QC.jpg
7fa064091417566e553b420bfa46ead5
3b1f8b40c1368918d85e18ed56ebebb6e7d90a96
36683 F20110320_AABWYB myers_j_Page_63.pro
ac3719122caddce7f4e180478a25ee68
e908208b14d45afd38db2361ce348c07fa9e253b
2024 F20110320_AABXAB myers_j_Page_46.txt
a494ab245f0068e50b6afcb1ff62ae06
6fbefb8acb8b8784da9ed52609aa377fcbfc86b1
35471 F20110320_AABWYC myers_j_Page_65.pro
660ba3ea970848e258f15cbca663cb7a
726ea02db42f3209234dfd91ebbc31258876d9d3
F20110320_AABXAC myers_j_Page_47.txt
9780a4c86aad0a3fa43abca1d4ad8c1f
f1f265dafb29b1366555b344b7dbdb602190c853
52254 F20110320_AABWTE myers_j_Page_66.jp2
265143301febdb46f4ce6a26bcff5c95
c9b17d9cff970eef28f308e4c137ccc02a37a0be
1652 F20110320_AABXFA myers_j_Page_26thm.jpg
e9ddfe94ac774e1b508ccd848a62b676
4e2846c06d33e9f8dbe5df127a90704f5a6f599f
23057 F20110320_AABWYD myers_j_Page_66.pro
3a56ba31f0af1b5575486e13eb7a143e
e5d5393ed61f0dd1acd5199b42766cf6216ba06c
2046 F20110320_AABXAD myers_j_Page_48.txt
548f7338186e4895645d8dd5fc2854c9
40066c4bfc0c83190b452f3a0ba6863e046c4b85
117292 F20110320_AABWTF myers_j_Page_67.jp2
b60230a4f65f95525a50dad24bbe04d2
74617096e4a2afd822f503a274274cda77b30940
10595 F20110320_AABWOI myers_j_Page_02.jpg
500d84f3165d19f1b712fc9628701732
73be9cd2fe6fef8cc0a0dee0c427fab3ba9e50ab
2436 F20110320_AABXFB myers_j_Page_27thm.jpg
9ef106c7c06dadcd76acc7ec4afacc03
72dba5c4d0f89634b92a81560b961a3311ff98d8
54434 F20110320_AABWYE myers_j_Page_67.pro
8f12c4ddec7b712b11520f2ee73a2875
ef307ba3b549cc72fcf8ca9a8121a7a5dd009ff4
2000 F20110320_AABXAE myers_j_Page_49.txt
dadad34090e4648b30ec19da53653e99
f852ae78fc300f873b65e498936ee8ba1e3d7b4a
134192 F20110320_AABWTG myers_j_Page_68.jp2
e6a7c7d15da5a063758cad1eb66ed173
4519edde8c9a6d479291aeb8752a5e8b80745bc6
13992 F20110320_AABWOJ myers_j_Page_03.jpg
5d5f283abfdf7e70264f18877c5b2077
8cedc5905c534c8fe8f84174c4c2ea2eb1e07f62
4053 F20110320_AABXFC myers_j_Page_28thm.jpg
7e3f6e8a077115304cd0be4e05f4b278
4b734473953801164a6a2b5902bbe8912c76bb53
63148 F20110320_AABWYF myers_j_Page_68.pro
3e67b081c970ab31e8a672daea5ba27a
af557da971e2655b3de78aed70650d94b20c4251
1989 F20110320_AABXAF myers_j_Page_50.txt
ffda0cb16e042ac7ca3218b723c5254a
4131856de7f0c48b182e02528db99aa2131024a0
135988 F20110320_AABWTH myers_j_Page_69.jp2
938a101d05b059147d835e8618d99546
a91d1e1c60e7797a8fc84a34df321c798da5287d
63396 F20110320_AABWOK myers_j_Page_04.jpg
6093be1ebf8be01ff081c6017ff1efce
e6bb8be595905b5ce436532ef3073f92b846faad
2950 F20110320_AABXFD myers_j_Page_30thm.jpg
d3a93d34d69f526372bc25657e920077
f146aa65a76ef27383a34a9f61cad2425fd217de
65001 F20110320_AABWYG myers_j_Page_70.pro
e4ffdbd8264d139990d079c45bdd06df
8dc3c5e97f15b3d5e1a6e030146ee2ef8520aee6
2096 F20110320_AABXAG myers_j_Page_51.txt
b7de531798d633593bd584504603a327
36f18aa259a53b19abde18dae5a17a30b1dfd31a
138856 F20110320_AABWTI myers_j_Page_71.jp2
9581f86dfeedda2b6edd8923ff212dcc
0bacc1f0c40b9579666b9f599b3845c6a203b06c
72820 F20110320_AABWOL myers_j_Page_05.jpg
b65b2e0888d00eb9cd2bf25795c792dd
d07ce1c059ef89f5798c96941f06016a8003efab
2934 F20110320_AABXFE myers_j_Page_32thm.jpg
a293d9e8170aa04a79429ef8166fd9a7
6901bbf08672b899ccbaf2e2e9efc7d6f1d2fa25
65157 F20110320_AABWYH myers_j_Page_71.pro
5eb1f01e7884cc04878c634c3eac0765
a05d68ff990757000d40d70cd769f3c855e8ff32
1008 F20110320_AABXAH myers_j_Page_52.txt
71bc326f0da1b50e349ba3c4abdb5e2d
b7133448e1150d57bfcee092f6e8c4982e182c90
35839 F20110320_AABWTJ myers_j_Page_72.jp2
c43fcb39b00ea89a5bf21d6b7fe7c9d9
03565941cda4a09ca25ec3494cf0d1ccd95b826b
46261 F20110320_AABWOM myers_j_Page_06.jpg
b46b765f6964b0350c649fd21d353744
45436157c7dd4a3a312e111de8373525d89d2833
5982 F20110320_AABXFF myers_j_Page_34thm.jpg
924b18fb123b73a0c65e4cb88016e81c
1c350cd40966108360373bf67203e356d3ed219a
15286 F20110320_AABWYI myers_j_Page_72.pro
88c1e87afef8ec8043a23bdfda7e7620
742f3ca2b1c61c62b93bb1ae8672ae033b45b32b
595 F20110320_AABXAI myers_j_Page_53.txt
551364942db032fabb314b902292028c
fa50ecdfb279b9bb758138623e9130a9eaeaf97f
96923 F20110320_AABWTK myers_j_Page_73.jp2
4cce71654668fb8bf6fb92a516101080
71802bcec272b1585ca191759d8cdc64c549c258
35254 F20110320_AABWON myers_j_Page_07.jpg
a5cffec051108b09b4239fe25eddfe0b
c96d63ffd6ec465f9d65672ef53c0bf21fcdfbd1
6541 F20110320_AABXFG myers_j_Page_35thm.jpg
3340e3200d118ff455066cbf92b789e0
1839fac2eaa3114ae77c282ffbd6d99a93f6e684
858 F20110320_AABXAJ myers_j_Page_54.txt
992da9d1c99543ba162da21b5d2aa124
ab0bb06490bc3ac44a7ea1bdb0594e54ff3a32e1
33351 F20110320_AABWTL myers_j_Page_74.jp2
56f26ea38c14d2d4f625669920fe750d
13558f08762dcd585404358c2de2c5814b0037f6
55966 F20110320_AABWOO myers_j_Page_08.jpg
96eed9cc73c599d1916b721388b201fc
ca25af78b9d4053631a1c44f51c9d5b281ce29ad
6657 F20110320_AABXFH myers_j_Page_36thm.jpg
7f95849ca09e0a1ca23e1fe3893c14e5
4623dba4479fd39f1a7fcb7c7178a187db79f5ec
44369 F20110320_AABWYJ myers_j_Page_73.pro
9d1a9eb48f8581121ca13895ba8dbab8
9c38d40b48e2e5451808bd21dabad216dafd4bbb
873 F20110320_AABXAK myers_j_Page_55.txt
1123c9795ecc627c128fa731cde9e687
5b9d171ae8625b607313252e410b26fe8a06e905
F20110320_AABWTM myers_j_Page_03.tif
fde918c3a9e184fe045484dcd62e9069
bba8251dac86140e461345efc1b8692855219e48
71109 F20110320_AABWOP myers_j_Page_10.jpg
661a53eb27974d4578885d63fd4bbf09
c3133ba2f0939ea39d08c0b6a2803ec12d16da8c
6538 F20110320_AABXFI myers_j_Page_37thm.jpg
40b2c8d309229d686688631f32e403fc
55c53e4d5ffd06214457802b1e3de837b18e2911
14007 F20110320_AABWYK myers_j_Page_74.pro
84a608ae8052e016829773fbe1c0fce5
63e6d3755affb8efff53b4794a5c18aa831b4f16
778 F20110320_AABXAL myers_j_Page_58.txt
dea25378bda8e5cf46a063643d25f550
002dfce157e787cb59d3c7f3ea0f354093d1676e
F20110320_AABWTN myers_j_Page_04.tif
399fc38844de538bfdb720c4c5cbd292
6019300eb9aaeb9691358c710bddc2fbe7d4f04d
66466 F20110320_AABWOQ myers_j_Page_11.jpg
365f1ba77ed04f580a4f85237ad036eb
dac6503679262fe44171ff71c43a2bc8a928f86a
6848 F20110320_AABXFJ myers_j_Page_38thm.jpg
2a50b9f0f9ee777818f03daeeced9d68
a2c85c0c2d21cfc1f2add536ce3b8f38a5a7dbab
454 F20110320_AABWYL myers_j_Page_01.txt
1e6d031e14366da9a6054e2066dbb71a
57fc40beff32b46ab03f33dcafb24e704164f6fc
770 F20110320_AABXAM myers_j_Page_59.txt
339b75b3c919d47b34121220d06217fa
9641df2f393d5f3b99e0fc19b755205b50b160dc
25271604 F20110320_AABWTO myers_j_Page_05.tif
eb0ab0be8545b7a1dc4f9f4339de9fec
8f163daee2deeaee2842987c5bc6393019899ae1
69558 F20110320_AABWOR myers_j_Page_12.jpg
e741a09ee60d008b5cf692c2d710e022
eb9664efc9f58ff32c96c92f6fd2a87c108dc4a9
6235 F20110320_AABXFK myers_j_Page_39thm.jpg
0b077988b2f6cc429c1d48d06c835c8f
b257a05d9f65c226a4d6f6b646cb7f52db1d19a5
123 F20110320_AABWYM myers_j_Page_02.txt
bb8ca4801d9dffb5ed196f3bc2fd5812
439f6d017d4836876c1f9506e6a440e3c1d162c7
710 F20110320_AABXAN myers_j_Page_60.txt
2857f98408f309e2b9c79bd2af807bc5
f6293448b8469a3dc8da05c385d56ef25e63783d
F20110320_AABWTP myers_j_Page_06.tif
c399f1bc6e7bcddaf0e52dd516c2a1d6
2661fd97ad2c84470aa38fdfba4eabc8ccee93f8
69567 F20110320_AABWOS myers_j_Page_13.jpg
c5a18cb995df98562fc6a2ab60434f8d
f873e144ae4da5fdc2d1233792d164f8d7973cbe
6488 F20110320_AABXFL myers_j_Page_40thm.jpg
b8299434bb6d7d62214cbdd59ccb2e6a
de5360a52994da38dd23bb4d991831b693dbbf89
206 F20110320_AABWYN myers_j_Page_03.txt
39ea3a2f67537bf5b7308631b9ac8b11
c97c9bc63ae87b5620e534b3e309a3161902e63d
970 F20110320_AABXAO myers_j_Page_61.txt
2c4e013bfc0574abfb9e75f1ba903bfe
de045c69f701f50d10646f8eb425d787e300edb9
F20110320_AABWTQ myers_j_Page_08.tif
092c60eb4145d9920913b146e31ba562
0dfa9858e4b0d7c5fe43c3abf8da9d6e2d5b619d
74334 F20110320_AABWOT myers_j_Page_14.jpg
7ba46432150d823ba29e502d0a5c1c79
5715b6180a4a58b4b98cbecda80b66d818c38ba5
6811 F20110320_AABXFM myers_j_Page_41thm.jpg
652c2f627ccf10f230262740d0e7b66e
a775ae9fa6c3af6208ebe59c9d09c9887bbadd0e
1755 F20110320_AABWYO myers_j_Page_04.txt
d7460c7213452f750da714abad876d74
79c17a24ff590120493c494b01859f68938693b9
1174 F20110320_AABXAP myers_j_Page_64.txt
3abed9a0789306e9c1c7b737df0c8bb0
266a79e29f7ca228d2d9a49372ec7d7b291255c6
F20110320_AABWTR myers_j_Page_09.tif
9a61dfde6f649df95761965a6303c1c2
aba74ec67a930768f883d3d479708b5a0431ef78
70970 F20110320_AABWOU myers_j_Page_15.jpg
f27727d1aaec164e7fe67d05dade5832
03a1934bf2a464d49ad397c08e64a1caf44111bb
6477 F20110320_AABXFN myers_j_Page_43thm.jpg
bb03f6b6590ac41b1bb8a5a281b964f5
db2a26e2a92582bc3bb79a71e1bdcc16ce222ca4
F20110320_AABWTS myers_j_Page_10.tif
9c588d038173159179eb984f368accc7
b9dfd48aa8971a75fca96295a0f6f80f4ade0456
70255 F20110320_AABWOV myers_j_Page_16.jpg
b6553685e715b250e2b278f9691ff96b
b0cbe609da6909fe2dd655ad9dde0812904538a3
2804 F20110320_AABWYP myers_j_Page_05.txt
65f250ab4d8573f64e923166aaed35cb
fdfd34bc3c9a580b2973276b59fd93b4db5f9314
6918 F20110320_AABXFO myers_j_Page_45thm.jpg
3735d9a20fc0714a6e3a04af85350793
49bc8a6fafbc4f3b2c2e99265dffc3b85cf53a17
1610 F20110320_AABXAQ myers_j_Page_65.txt
765df4d6c908188e0add1852c7968c81
fbd2a804aa7d39002c56e1bbe2c6b3004a65d3cd
F20110320_AABWTT myers_j_Page_11.tif
51f229c4f61dc70781b8100eb653efdd
eb5d33167cfa0f384fdb36bd4d6d234e9dc25ca8
72170 F20110320_AABWOW myers_j_Page_17.jpg
57c1de68874b273cc07ac150d3a22c23
6c0bcf38d4a2220c269a5326ec84f2fc608eca9f
1377 F20110320_AABWYQ myers_j_Page_06.txt
3fdd4c6184ff209dad13a64bd40acdef
13a60d20fb98a74d917b75f2109567f2d01d69de
6641 F20110320_AABXFP myers_j_Page_47thm.jpg
631cf938dc030a22f71fc6403f5aa168
ebb3a7bfee8c24d3c299ecf05ff4cf90704c311f
1058 F20110320_AABXAR myers_j_Page_66.txt
d5cc4559d547e0510ea74bd0d12bcea4
181a58a745f778bccbc5dd7b7f2778faf514c06a
F20110320_AABWTU myers_j_Page_12.tif
a33681b4d5e2b956886ec923def21854
d819e4d8c8f16515194e42d51e1ab5ed6fa3e03a
67951 F20110320_AABWOX myers_j_Page_18.jpg
7973c047dcfd11eb6248119dad9d2bfc
f28298ffd8794b472d79af6fa29d061d33c3eee3
1063 F20110320_AABWYR myers_j_Page_07.txt
e7fc1631099134e503afa08fab799fda
990279640a6e4235c18b401468288a4a418bd3f9
6865 F20110320_AABXFQ myers_j_Page_51thm.jpg
81060ce169465a26bca72a172735162f
720efecac36bd7f6bb9d40bb55d7231bb341bdef
2220 F20110320_AABXAS myers_j_Page_67.txt
b4a320c832a708c401800b8b04da4f98
bcd8d782f5e6b97d8079705cb3b52e854ad45848
F20110320_AABWTV myers_j_Page_13.tif
484989fa3236f53c5e07ba7579ceb0f0
0253c25f886a53c71fb00cdc92497ac596c0735e
65970 F20110320_AABWOY myers_j_Page_19.jpg
0ac3c85f135b58d039480e02d3e62f74
0f7678250f383775d1f536ca34318d60cb18db31
1947 F20110320_AABWYS myers_j_Page_08.txt
677f6d52f2b516c5acdf237fd0575365
cfec912a4deb05ddb753eac8a35e78ae84186c62
3972 F20110320_AABXFR myers_j_Page_52thm.jpg
9506b27ea93ede14ae2f9c227d750893
0e782e9dfcf6e7b747184409c0a52a7b51c1fe70
2566 F20110320_AABXAT myers_j_Page_68.txt
233842c9a37943f72ab71d56155b13d6
ee38b93ebc43a0dc59e4fc3d83f7c52fb088b194
F20110320_AABWTW myers_j_Page_15.tif
46b4d639c0ac1b9e59c080d441ae3854
23bdfe53a9d17fdea62bdd6f1db9dbc1765859c2
4943 F20110320_AABWMA myers_j_Page_63thm.jpg
cd500f02bf940e77977ebb2bf2455eb7
bfe61f532c5840906b61a7e9f42dc42576cffa33
72535 F20110320_AABWOZ myers_j_Page_20.jpg
c61106399e785b59e705fc1a493e4958
8c17ac3e760c400cc4eac0d8ea99047775d7da03
F20110320_AABWYT myers_j_Page_10.txt
68fc27fe273ca1fe204b5f8981633869
2f65e5f3a185f39661bd0173c9a0e965d4a31371
2325 F20110320_AABXFS myers_j_Page_54thm.jpg
ae023095eb7a7d7aa1e4bacce157a7cb
57f17dd46647639888f0a9c51e5152056fd633ae
2601 F20110320_AABXAU myers_j_Page_69.txt
a763456c1dc6e6653fa91c7eb1adcdf6
dcc44f7d6eb54abc93dec6711070177e6b26beaa
F20110320_AABWTX myers_j_Page_16.tif
5ea1b658f70c500b43011f97ec2cf6c4
d667e0e6243a8ff403570619c6c6d6947ec5ab66
2450 F20110320_AABWMB myers_j_Page_01thm.jpg
2d30482d81773455e0eb8d0323875ce5
3177053be6418353a82ee46e40b9ea506b88f1c0
1821 F20110320_AABWYU myers_j_Page_11.txt
880897ff9b2787dadd3d88699abb2519
206420ee39d5b5d04191ece502ef7dfce9fdadea
4794 F20110320_AABXFT myers_j_Page_55thm.jpg
974aa8c046a887fc89b257bf5f5d11ac
468894a1f40363f68e7995b237f1ba679a37ac3a
2635 F20110320_AABXAV myers_j_Page_70.txt
1dc5c7f27eb53600980e47a31ab2deae
8d0aa906922911aa3231ad9e0c21355d2953b9eb
6125 F20110320_AABWRA myers_j_Page_02.jp2
a94b688d22a8a74c5bbdae19f600dcbb
124c330379a342ae02d372e38280f0bdf5f7f83b
F20110320_AABWTY myers_j_Page_18.tif
07ad81d885ac36343b401dfb307105df
33800811723d16975cc23620e7f9291794ec0b65
9811 F20110320_AABWMC myers_j_Page_30.QC.jpg
21f0c49da858aba4588ba3ad5bb0f649
091cafa8a13eb6eea15d8fbf158b7863e291bfd4
F20110320_AABWYV myers_j_Page_12.txt
130abc8234a40112e9d4961fb1533afc
f8bb8be479dd64a1a4079e81a62fd4ef8eeaa879
2310 F20110320_AABXFU myers_j_Page_56thm.jpg
d8dd022fc944acdf3ef35dd4f2aafe86
9958c35dbfc78e74605ed94151217c3cfa42147d
11085 F20110320_AABWRB myers_j_Page_03.jp2
0a1b3d86706d6c47f12f54ba171f888a
3751005fa530f285e61489dc2badbcedee8cfe30
F20110320_AABWTZ myers_j_Page_19.tif
8b79c1c76669f3898f77d8a8be77fb8d
c8899e13033f7adc4f9ec13132140f97499ca262
F20110320_AABWMD myers_j_Page_22.tif
9cb866e819afe4a9b2fcb2cdd5268b89
007859e67c44c03f831e401ce6f45a11a6c362aa
1964 F20110320_AABWYW myers_j_Page_13.txt
57e680d0ebd1acfb3c4e79762cb2014e
3fc3a9951dbc65da8b1cce86caa07b3ef90f8396
2649 F20110320_AABXAW myers_j_Page_71.txt
5b4016ad5334b8dfb29b608d03c0c6be
ee7f82fc42451c683b867bcb7a888c0480dadff1
F20110320_AABWME myers_j_Page_51.tif
524ad13d88bed1f9ac131ead91cea8c4
e18b21363a65e0c2e4a6c0bd042ce3c2d99ec964
2070 F20110320_AABWYX myers_j_Page_14.txt
d7dc34b89209af7609e621593dfc6583
346966e8f30701c25490cd654a15ec39e55ee91c
666 F20110320_AABXAX myers_j_Page_72.txt
c0e6c8f794bec66cfc574b91e5478dd2
70825eb916541e6fd03d4fd0e33efd32703fe6b0
4247 F20110320_AABXFV myers_j_Page_58thm.jpg
bf804ec9729ba3d5befe199506250111
26f7e150427e9cc37a3009d35dbd3a18cbf026d4
6290 F20110320_AABWMF myers_j_Page_18thm.jpg
6643ebc5a918ae35324da7fbdd29a734
8bdb9d962cd3105be4ebe433f26175ba134e0e78
67480 F20110320_AABWWA myers_j_Page_05.pro
b6ed5f239d223229e5cba82fb99a378f
86681c304debe5bc9cc9ef4d5d1ee800ce454333
1980 F20110320_AABWYY myers_j_Page_15.txt
8a7c86d423c714267eea034816a13d12
53c101cc1550ee39fe90cea9a47d340979386d94
1783 F20110320_AABXAY myers_j_Page_73.txt
30b44182c0ba43a845badebe6abc9d1a
349328188b449e395b98b226111e48d69f9e24e0
94453 F20110320_AABWRC myers_j_Page_04.jp2
3c492437986cd4f2d984a3327f90b7b4
5408838772b777ed2e6ef8c6f657f1950c649cfb
3107 F20110320_AABXFW myers_j_Page_60thm.jpg
43bdec47d1528399eb2532ec62b9e1c1
d7243c39c3a879372f2d778988341261390f4482
111412 F20110320_AABWMG myers_j_Page_17.jp2
2368f96827cc4f60a675994479e02552
0e9aafe89a8c1d91f44163584960c960a0fb4911
33608 F20110320_AABWWB myers_j_Page_06.pro
0f6fbab4f8f58c36e016b444238b893d
fc42f2778bccdd1dd8ee4a5d297f361e7a30609d
1925 F20110320_AABWYZ myers_j_Page_16.txt
0f1a1b7324a7a817dc40a6efbd014cfe
8c57f3731c4c5a68c1002a20946f20ff9761b1a0
599 F20110320_AABXAZ myers_j_Page_74.txt
9e90aabb3234ec5a208df715f6a577a4
bb96912adbbe0f76dacdb7f52aa5a9558b9466d0
1051969 F20110320_AABWRD myers_j_Page_05.jp2
ca95e12a72d1c58db70ee1cacb515ccb
4c727501e460105360ce7e4f7c35458acb0fc1ab
4353 F20110320_AABXFX myers_j_Page_62thm.jpg
576e5557b279f4a63b308d41e97e368b
c1d0e40f26a49cf4ca4b4f239e44e0d156271d8f
109108 F20110320_AABWMH myers_j_Page_15.jp2
0f8c272bb9acccc7d42a2ce0fe14107a
bd7b9f27d5f0754ac84658c5fab020dab24845ef
25399 F20110320_AABWWC myers_j_Page_07.pro
c0981b0db571abf60af8853948f4f3be
c795d0f2202d4c8db2ee7bb8bf1f729367d6cd62
1051973 F20110320_AABWRE myers_j_Page_06.jp2
cc1a242a32b9ea9e17494d5721b4c53c
ddf9e464c26f3ba4e1e94b1854a6e1507b712cd2
7055 F20110320_AABXFY myers_j_Page_68thm.jpg
554a1a007e397094f3c32edeca055f28
4154a208be63fc009b5a35fad05e79bf24494725
22233 F20110320_AABXDA myers_j_Page_12.QC.jpg
9caeb2455421448fb806b8fc28cea3df
e86cb7e8f480b0db9c5f93acd7c301907807e220
14977 F20110320_AABWMI myers_j_Page_62.QC.jpg
cd52cb75e802d549cebf7f0a5c192a1e
874484c3c8324dcbcc959b4e7b87bbefe9f5b6ba
47194 F20110320_AABWWD myers_j_Page_08.pro
6f2af3263f288234f7d48c4b19f09aae
c0be0425648a7d1282057c1706dcb77a31f6098c
893830 F20110320_AABWRF myers_j_Page_07.jp2
ef2293fba2eea11b95859a044ea43fd3
88f443f37d79e0374a765213ba4b73fe9dfc3f28
6961 F20110320_AABXFZ myers_j_Page_71thm.jpg
d1459d29bc53a9c1c63805977ecb0b41
23262521fe574a3dd5d599e59ffd63e3b39d069e
24332 F20110320_AABXDB myers_j_Page_14.QC.jpg
16fc0a80d7a183fa257bdc61638a301a
230408060b73f5130baa8dc48946bd0655f6186a
2414 F20110320_AABWMJ myers_j_Page_29thm.jpg
9fa1df5725ddcb3001456418f3a8db65
b288304957bcafb64b13fe480982919e66941654
49686 F20110320_AABWWE myers_j_Page_10.pro
d8f20411be04329427c8218baeb1202c
984182db23831d38d0aa0bd6e4168456cb20bc23
1051975 F20110320_AABWRG myers_j_Page_08.jp2
f4fd50e2309cebae2c8d64a7f16d4319
9406eeef45a6c1d03b99cec57712795520643a54
22814 F20110320_AABXDC myers_j_Page_16.QC.jpg
df4fef1e101557f38c6ff8742b52ab69
1bc922e32220cecda963f2f207294569bf0bd090
F20110320_AABWMK myers_j_Page_07.tif
fc83071e0e76c52a1ce301427305fb33
1eac724f294c7c55e9410a53b72a76ad3ddbd770
44140 F20110320_AABWWF myers_j_Page_11.pro
3784996f3188bea684cf551560cb39d4
2a058d24d784f7b986c746664a78a048c7f530ae
87696 F20110320_AABWRH myers_j_Page_09.jp2
4c8b12e8c0e57b2b6878ba9e95083b29
9c1b721d749d042a660b5d9870189adab0f853b6
22331 F20110320_AABXDD myers_j_Page_18.QC.jpg
f0f9531125e63e2d978db02f6d49007d
e1d0b866e6ed8c46a4cf77f997d038bb4cd50a44
110188 F20110320_AABWML myers_j_Page_49.jp2
70507d681227e140adde2318f6703fc0
8a4267254b041d4b5c60d6dfa9d38b7e36435f00
47922 F20110320_AABWWG myers_j_Page_12.pro
08e5fae72bbb2c9a8e5c0be18fc01807
0100712b985c4caa1fae5a8e38d5015a8a84520f
108971 F20110320_AABWRI myers_j_Page_10.jp2
325c7339559a677511894b4b7b647067
4ed8ab2b7c940ed2dafe5550be01bf760952fbbf
24029 F20110320_AABXDE myers_j_Page_20.QC.jpg
de8c1128de18daca6c00d022cb101cd9
d7acad199a059fa6f3be64feb525344272df1a3c
F20110320_AABWMM myers_j_Page_71.tif
5296392132e6e1ea18bd2f9394075596
79d2e449e50095039598146ef8d5c56b5135961c
98550 F20110320_AABWRJ myers_j_Page_11.jp2
4bc82e35b4436b1b422f23c0609c47e9
001aee4ca69494c28b3f059acc5cb72396e8faea
24346 F20110320_AABXDF myers_j_Page_23.QC.jpg
b39a6114d77fef3b2256ffcf5d9df8ec
d553772b48a50dab289faf8c9f72c0255b2f0327
22677 F20110320_AABWMN myers_j_Page_25.QC.jpg
13c3d554ae002ad44e1144248d98638e
d3ac642257eb934e838b9e795ba91b043bf3bbfc
52607 F20110320_AABWWH myers_j_Page_14.pro
a3f6bfa59c0663b8853e7b26b8eaf1dd
120ef6de5706b9bc0c688de30e52fbdc9dbe48be
105563 F20110320_AABWRK myers_j_Page_12.jp2
3141ca811cdc67fa6caf00f3a5482062
fc0ba1660ecfb1afe07f5f0acda3dcaead789e44
4425 F20110320_AABXDG myers_j_Page_26.QC.jpg
1f54d0dbfb4c417d78f1eeafab2d3ad0
57140f0a1a11290ace571877a2ab4095a008239f
7422 F20110320_AABWMO myers_j_Page_01.QC.jpg
21985666401169cf49253590a7412f8b
72712a5980a254ddb0e07a40a2c7bb0db8ece5c6
50298 F20110320_AABWWI myers_j_Page_15.pro
8d6a6f6dc32ade0ed48d7150bc5d75d6
fb03f91c7a2efe37990f008184282e6ed10c2845
106020 F20110320_AABWRL myers_j_Page_13.jp2
90f9cff7a04f9db4288aaf152549e5af
115cce751bd19049e7f67d5da99c850c0a0d2ed2
7792 F20110320_AABXDH myers_j_Page_27.QC.jpg
5a2d6d4c1f5b2477392ce5b478438276
2cb3c33dade5dc135962c716462a120942e62e9b
31736 F20110320_AABWMP myers_j_Page_33.jpg
16f9f3f3ee96e88344c8e5093d385d88
52e5fbbb9559d72c37df13267aa86a7ba02bf288
48730 F20110320_AABWWJ myers_j_Page_16.pro
cfc183759320bbd89eec5ca69f3183d0
f6c35b3c86c2231bd9c018ae2f214e0694fd2f8a
F20110320_AABWRM myers_j_Page_14.jp2
80d7aa05eb53669cf6345dfffe191ef4
2a047dda6b869449d4c9ca0e8106b20067c485cf
13871 F20110320_AABXDI myers_j_Page_28.QC.jpg
204f55286dfa2d5d18cadf29e58ad40d
c25e72df1d265f5837cce61af63437a664274722
1177 F20110320_AABWMQ myers_j_Page_31.txt
b3d5cba00036174b0e1aebb9fac7a98b
4b76954c7224d302bb1c35bf2ff7d2983bcedb67
50525 F20110320_AABWWK myers_j_Page_17.pro
c539bcc7d75fd59caea28c8d6cab3507
f58aee9505552b6d25e09fe2d69bb58a117d996e
107699 F20110320_AABWRN myers_j_Page_16.jp2
16de3192cb55516003275925e59ce428
99c825e9075abf4e5f382ca77b085b7177ba4afe
7127 F20110320_AABXDJ myers_j_Page_29.QC.jpg
3c8b0b2135efd5889d85e31600a3006b
e611373a28683e5d33125bc78661f038de71c2aa
51898 F20110320_AABWMR myers_j_Page_47.pro
d42d85b2031882d91f7e30e7ef11d162
eef8de04a2ff2f4b24ca5933c11a1107dcbe9b5d
47258 F20110320_AABWWL myers_j_Page_18.pro
8fcfb8a23067575056dbc44e6e9cca0b
a2b07b94689c6c5794ffb569e64dd8c25c50e863
103319 F20110320_AABWRO myers_j_Page_18.jp2
cb795be8cca60e0cedaf82514ec2351e
1eacbb2fa155f8762fc2e37b79aa1ce79b58f44b
13271 F20110320_AABXDK myers_j_Page_31.QC.jpg
ff6e00b21b8b10ee2ce262296a1d196d
229c2d7e9b0786fe6b9135afcc3adda9810a1ce8
5176 F20110320_AABWMS myers_j_Page_09thm.jpg
759cc87af84bce417640438dc77a7e41
a29de43906206a9d79f69a293fc2257b836cfd46
46348 F20110320_AABWWM myers_j_Page_19.pro
d579a255bdf5747679a185cfadbc7a70
bbd3d47538eaf2ac2606deb95f0d99720ff73fb0
99659 F20110320_AABWRP myers_j_Page_19.jp2
bb558c5e4b158ffddad4a6f32b58ba8d
b6af18101ea1387f448a7d6261f6609e6820e2fe
9727 F20110320_AABXDL myers_j_Page_32.QC.jpg
71a67a45e13cc4a27ad56a698cb18fc2
b3b946758818e28a3e6c8ac015bd5981bb042d6b
47807 F20110320_AABWMT myers_j_Page_42.pro
5b88203c56526e9642c9e1d48b7de042
1c458b70814dc1b6b0bb17526a60551da3f371b7
51617 F20110320_AABWWN myers_j_Page_20.pro
b030c474355f894ea5bba4b4c789e274
a36c652f3fab4e9865d5cb44a1f564bef23d137e
112445 F20110320_AABWRQ myers_j_Page_20.jp2
1db46ff2779d90556eb9ef00998ee49e
fa86d72fe9a96c427369249d7007ca9d85a8bab8
24025 F20110320_AABXDM myers_j_Page_35.QC.jpg
d823ca6027a90db9b494c49222d017fc
13b44fa68a5132f14b7f01b80043b97152ec8e44
73570 F20110320_AABWMU myers_j_Page_22.jpg
9739a37e8d82824d52674fc99120e9d1
cdd5c6f79ffabf82a8f56c205fa0ded2d8347072
51655 F20110320_AABWWO myers_j_Page_21.pro
2563b7f90b8e15fef7f9c5a504ec3732
cb6be7d40bf081f4c317e5a395c065e0dad0fadb
111406 F20110320_AABWRR myers_j_Page_21.jp2
13148140411b1595ace681822a60dc33
6cd43ae4653c847949f21a88fca73b768863d802
24653 F20110320_AABXDN myers_j_Page_38.QC.jpg
f007bc5129126f5641f51778dc43b918
c814a1fd5c69c176bf31a229e17fbaf06b7d84ad
59299 F20110320_AABWMV myers_j_Page_09.jpg
c38693976a1d76ab44c54a0a8ea1f999
53278840162a269659497c33232b0c92d6b0f141
52012 F20110320_AABWWP myers_j_Page_22.pro
44910c2626a48b625fa7b2a36fa7ac77
5e1c6c7016a4d47184e4660ad385aed5cbd8432f
112517 F20110320_AABWRS myers_j_Page_22.jp2
f2e5afbff82d6ff9443524e32e29b059
157f37cb7d3fc13c0cba3be49e68aba5e027ecbc
22033 F20110320_AABXDO myers_j_Page_39.QC.jpg
16ece483d34352704d5f7db2df7a677f
77a9ffdb7bc99bca310ed15e92af2002e53e7cc2
63943 F20110320_AABWMW myers_j_Page_69.pro
ed45a52badc1f9d08cb548b4372b56d2
76196bb909ff9f986b6fcd0ee70cfb11496e6544
52544 F20110320_AABWWQ myers_j_Page_23.pro
05ae0e53ea8b84caeda111fc9eddb5dc
a5617ec825c99270203faa02a3446d2878dcbe1e
114392 F20110320_AABWRT myers_j_Page_24.jp2
f1cc777f32e1957ec028bdbe88d15823
d2c6dbe90a658d2b0995c1089ece86c61e295330
23622 F20110320_AABXDP myers_j_Page_40.QC.jpg
92eff111a59429eea69e0dadf3d22af5
69f6bea8d8194edf5404f026fd61188c8ec3cc75
74749 F20110320_AABWMX myers_j_Page_67.jpg
fb8224cdf28555e97eaec153c0a4b01a
efa16fc728d9e747e7eb042813942462789ca849
52495 F20110320_AABWWR myers_j_Page_24.pro
409b3e4add98ecbaf753edc109ea715e
a63867c06e82f4de39cf61d75280ab0a37669da4
107514 F20110320_AABWRU myers_j_Page_25.jp2
8881eee6c7646ecaf63f6e7d8b963b2f
e71ac5715954ba8e874da2b77debb6950304375a
24253 F20110320_AABXDQ myers_j_Page_41.QC.jpg
ee5fb8dabb068b7c0c1b2bb984e2a14d
a34d97c43b8259602f603d785c2ed7873076f18b
1441 F20110320_AABWMY myers_j_Page_62.txt
e151619b7d7885ad1533adb191cd6d6b
9590457ba8cc6138a717a337424e75afaa788e41
49180 F20110320_AABWWS myers_j_Page_25.pro
f092a1e567b8149d7a9d5c25b23ac19b
53b939104f0a44e67fca9caa14795988ce0ddc32
11322 F20110320_AABWRV myers_j_Page_26.jp2
2d8ad5d45643d43b4e627bb372bb8b2a
9f025b9f4743f43c81c2647648cd429bca834a20
24494 F20110320_AABXDR myers_j_Page_45.QC.jpg
43170dbd4ec159ba14c42b3ac709f0f2
38adb1e162597e3d31dda54a0e04a6229b68e8b2
48677 F20110320_AABWMZ myers_j_Page_13.pro
f56000954207da5c3de8ccc03e0d578f
bfa9a51575a3712350628f0fb407d03cb9b94ada
3870 F20110320_AABWWT myers_j_Page_26.pro
9de30c16a98637b1de71dd1b987feeb3
1a25734bff482792a79c75bacfe5256973158962
58285 F20110320_AABWRW myers_j_Page_27.jp2
8e8c86b9fd7c9a0df4e81ca090b06f9c
a76e76260efa794d55afdec8ea10e170fd2c54d6
23954 F20110320_AABXDS myers_j_Page_46.QC.jpg
bafea7d7e2971f9892a144b6502fff00
1376003101165158559d3ffa8569ad1f69185786
26991 F20110320_AABWWU myers_j_Page_27.pro
5c2d3b6d0a3957919094def67f929e18
5f1bfe7e37ff1f48b2798113078a4db5b86af88e
59041 F20110320_AABWRX myers_j_Page_28.jp2
60355cc8d5256c235c8c0bb101832afd
10d2c688fb70039d78ab8e55494052fb858e202c
29988 F20110320_AABWWV myers_j_Page_28.pro
d09310623dd1ed3576b5e24839569524
220484607e00eadae6725596fe9ca09e2d2a7cb2
46889 F20110320_AABWRY myers_j_Page_29.jp2
a841299360d3fc35da5836bf1ef8bb97
7a008377dd3d0b43ab9147f1e56a1c8f0ec44603
24217 F20110320_AABXDT myers_j_Page_47.QC.jpg
f9bd9fb7446300b3ac2c105386c0fa04
f7cf00575b278f096a45adcdb258aa77d24888e7
17922 F20110320_AABWWW myers_j_Page_29.pro
8f493bb8dbcaecc1fddb2ffdabc639f6
e1d52b763980f8b292fb67742468407130c56f1d
73027 F20110320_AABWPA myers_j_Page_21.jpg
ee6c16e3cb4d71da47c6cc2a465960c4
b455bb712698f453a0387a95d96d75ec64afb8c3
376813 F20110320_AABWRZ myers_j_Page_30.jp2
a95e0e8291d118a39cd3bd19eff34e72
d3716026bd6e612ca275bbc121051583aa7f5064
23815 F20110320_AABXDU myers_j_Page_48.QC.jpg
7368fb95d61455f6f257ef309828c595
c287958796e7d70df0143ada13ea7bff62a2e717
13671 F20110320_AABWWX myers_j_Page_30.pro
ce9b75e9ff49255993e58210edca2b31
e4de94a8651f7cd721def1e267221c975f7c40f4
73991 F20110320_AABWPB myers_j_Page_23.jpg
b0a4ffd8d40e15a7a17f74a50d8ca242
f49d635b284b37cdb469a458ae7ef6515295e16a
23711 F20110320_AABXDV myers_j_Page_50.QC.jpg
f090f19a2e849af5418b4e5eb58a1943
4999831c25980a2436ae02ba619df4f1ef749c7c
24448 F20110320_AABWWY myers_j_Page_31.pro
d6932d163ba472ab437fa5a9816d3e42
be83a10e4ac19c4ca4d7e543c3e542a214ba76f9
75221 F20110320_AABWPC myers_j_Page_24.jpg
5980b60d5f79cdce0ef07809884a6c4a
7841f931b12ef87c4086b63f93a526f991ec2df3
F20110320_AABWUA myers_j_Page_20.tif
9d28de8bbc9c4f5b62a030925f6b1945
4e72b5cd5e56d82f597bae64af76877f3645158d
24708 F20110320_AABXDW myers_j_Page_51.QC.jpg
13df19b6d1b87a41ec1480bae8f497c5
5241512b45f77db8af9fb7ea99ed6aa0c5268799
15108 F20110320_AABWWZ myers_j_Page_32.pro
cb32b9ed6008fb397b3cf088be75d0d7
8f3aeaff4f1d2b6770e8ebee59e41ab599365794
71281 F20110320_AABWPD myers_j_Page_25.jpg
fc289e5de1bbf219f0e02a48141efe73
fb336fec965b0f3e56a8327944ebbd378f2acfd0
F20110320_AABWUB myers_j_Page_21.tif
e886b25afcf435abc20b76bddc861be7
42594290d90e3330af2a7acffa505419fadbefb7
12743 F20110320_AABXDX myers_j_Page_52.QC.jpg
c9f35eb379451d41c985fb1d052356da
c8ec524f8e6a85ef2b8bf23c3a700eac0b049fb8
13042 F20110320_AABWPE myers_j_Page_26.jpg
7b8688473530e34581f584e0b7aafadc
3d516138c706e1758d8e5a28a1fadceaba59d81a
F20110320_AABWUC myers_j_Page_23.tif
9d0befb0a3485df41b627f90e6fb7666
5d8eaa2b268b8cfde0ada0e10b0274a5404e1cd5
7233 F20110320_AABXDY myers_j_Page_53.QC.jpg
e0bccb87d6c1209f5190746689d083db
af2f1111d39868f7cb97572653573c3f172d6854
26282 F20110320_AABWPF myers_j_Page_27.jpg
c2f2caf0d86ee0f017f5099cee46e2d8
f5f54764be39ec594ff9eda6dbddaf08de426548
1991 F20110320_AABWZA myers_j_Page_17.txt
c9a482e483b3a0fb5933d1498a58103b
0498becfc4dba980436b48b69a508c797b1d6d55
538294 F20110320_AABXBA myers_j.pdf
d0f8806cd84ff9b1ba4b365452063ebb
1998de6dfdbf6f3e2008145c6e8fade00fc28468
F20110320_AABWUD myers_j_Page_24.tif
167e0b3db509667d89c5df84314d9119
c7031330e019248aefebb6dd7f4ac1ced51626f6



PAGE 1

SEEDLING CARBOHYDRATE STORAGE, SURVIVAL, AND STRESS TOLERANCE IN A NEOTROPICAL FOREST By JONATHAN ANDREW MYERS A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2005

PAGE 2

Copyright 2005 by Jonathan Andrew Myers

PAGE 3

I dedicate this thesis to my parents, Roy and Susan Myers, whose support and encouragement of my pursuits in ecology know no bounds.

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank my advisor, Kaoru Kitajima, for her unwavering mentorship in both academia and field research. Her passion for seedling ecology and dedication to strong work ethic is constantly inspiring. I would also like to thank my committee member, Jack Putz, for his critical and insightful suggestions on all aspects of the thesis and for his overall guidance in my development as an ecologist. Numerous individuals have generously contributed field and laboratory assistance. I would like to thank Marta Vargas for her assistance with data collection throughout the entirety of the project, Roberto Cordero for his help and advice during the early stages of project development, Sebastian Bernal for his spirited assistance in the field and laboratory (and for keeping us dry and motivated in even the heaviest of rains), and Momoka Yao for her help with many of the laboratory measurements and analyses. I would also like to thank the following undergraduate students for assistance with data collection: Sarah Tarrant, Lisa Cowart, and Sergio Montes. Laboratory assistance was also provided by Zachary Tyser, who participated in the project through the 46th Annual Pre-collegiate Summer Science Training Program at the University of Florida. Finally, I would like to thank the many friends and colleagues who made my time at the University of Florida more than memorable. I would especially like to thank Teresa Kurtz, Silvia Alvarez, Camila Pizano, Jennifer Schaefer, Joseph Veldman, and Eddie Watkins for constantly reminding me that the beauty of life extends well beyond science. iv

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................vii LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................viii ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1 STRESS TOLERANCE ENHANCES SEEDLING SURVIVAL IN THE UNDERSTORY OF A TROPICAL FOREST: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE.......1 Introduction...................................................................................................................1 Methods........................................................................................................................3 Study Site and Species...........................................................................................3 Field and Laboratory Methods..............................................................................4 Statistical Analyses................................................................................................7 Results...........................................................................................................................9 Seedling Survival...................................................................................................9 Effects of Defoliation and Light Reduction on Seedling Biomass and Growth..10 Discussion...................................................................................................................12 Stress Tolerance as a Component of Seedling Survival in Shade.......................12 Seedling Tolerance to Defoliation: The Importance of Storage Reserves..........13 Seedling Tolerance to Temporal Variation in Understory Light Availability....14 2 CARBON ALLOCATION TO STORAGE IN TROPICAL FOREST SEEDLINGS: EFFECTS ON GROWTH, SURVIVAL AND STRESS TOLERANCE..................24 Introduction.................................................................................................................24 Methods......................................................................................................................27 Study Site and Species.........................................................................................27 Field and Laboratory Methods............................................................................28 Quantification of TNC in Stems and Roots.........................................................31 Statistical Analyses..............................................................................................32 v

PAGE 6

Results.........................................................................................................................34 Variation in Pretreatment Biomass and TNC Reserves......................................34 Effects of Defoliation and Deep Shade on Biomass and TNC Reserves............35 Influence of Seedling Size, Growth, and TNC Reserves on Seedling Survival..36 Discussion...................................................................................................................38 Role of TNC Reserves in Seedling Survival and Stress Tolerance.....................38 Tradeoffs between Seedling Growth and Storage...............................................40 TNC Allocation, Seed Size, and Seedling Functional Morphology....................41 Conclusion...........................................................................................................42 APPENDIX A SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SEEDLING BIOMASS AND LEAF AREA........52 B SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR TOTAL NONSTRUCTURAL CARBOHYDRATE (TNC) RESERVES IN STEMS AND ROOTS........................55 LIST OF REFERENCES...................................................................................................57 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.............................................................................................63 vi

PAGE 7

LIST OF TABLES Table page 1-1 Seed and seedling characteristics of the study species.............................................17 1-2 Proportional hazards (Cox regression) survival time analysis of seedling survival over 1 year..................................................................................................18 1-3 Analysis of variance for total seedling biomass.......................................................18 2-1 Analysis of variance for stem and root biomass......................................................43 2-2 Analysis of variance for TNC concentrations and pool sizes..................................44 A-1 Statistics for preand post-treatment biomass and leaf area....................................52 A-2 Statistics for total seedling biomass and leaf area 1 year after treatment.................54 B-1 Statistics for preand post-treatment TNC concentrations and pool sizes...............55 vii

PAGE 8

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1-1 Effects of light reduction and defoliation on 1 st -year seedling survival...................19 1-2 Two-month survival of stress treatment seedlings plotted against 1 st -year survival of control treatment seedlings....................................................................20 1-3 Effects of light reduction and defoliation on seedling size and growth 2 months after treatment..........................................................................................................21 1-4 Leaf area recovery 2 months after defoliation.........................................................22 1-5 Effects of light reduction and defoliation on relative growth rate (RGR) from 2 months to 1 year.......................................................................................................23 2-1 Pretreatment biomass and TNC concentrations.......................................................45 2-2 Three potential correlates of interspecific variation in 1 st -year control seedling survival.....................................................................................................................46 2-3 Pretreatment TNC pool sizes in stems and roots......................................................47 2-4 Post-treatment biomass and TNC in stems and roots...............................................48 2-5 Post-treatment cotyledon biomass............................................................................49 2-6 Two-month relative growth rate (RGR) of control seedlings plotted against pretreatment TNC pool size.....................................................................................50 2-7 Survival of stressed seedlings plotted against total TNC pool size and total seedling biomass......................................................................................................51 viii

PAGE 9

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science SEEDLING CARBOHYDRATE STORAGE, SURVIVAL, AND STRESS TOLERANCE IN A NEOTROPICAL FOREST By Jonathan Andrew Myers May 2005 Chair: Kaoru Kitajima Major Department: Botany I investigated the role of stem and root total nonstructural carbohydrate (TNC) reserves in seedling growth, survival, and stress tolerance in the shaded understory of a tropical moist forest in central Panama. Seven woody species that ranged widely in seedling shade tolerance were selected for study: Aspidosperma cruenta and Lacmelia panamensis (Apocynaceae), Coussarea curvigemnia (Rubiaceae), Callichlamys latifolia and Tabebuia rosea (Bignoniaceae), Castilla elastica (Moraceae), and Platypodium elegans (Fabaceae). Seedlings of each species were raised from seed in a shade house, transferred to common-gardens enclosed by wire fencing in the shaded forest understory (ca. 1% full sun), and then randomly assigned to one of three experimental treatments: extreme light reduction (ca. 0.06% of full sun for 2 months), complete defoliation at 0 months, and control (no manipulation). The goal of the light-reduction and defoliation stress treatments was to force seedlings into negative carbon balance, to determine the role of TNC reserves for seedling survival over the period of 1 year. ix

PAGE 10

First-year survival of control seedlingswhich I used as a quantitative index of shade tolerancevaried significantly among species, ranging from 96% in Aspidosperma to 19% in Tabebuia. The light-reduction and defoliation treatments caused significant decreases in seedling survival. Two-month survival after the stress treatments was positively correlated with 1 st -year control seedling survival among species. Seedlings of the two species with lowest 1 st -year control seedling survival (Tabebuia and Platypodium) were unable to survive either stress treatment past 60 days. Pretreatment TNC concentrations and pool sizes in stems and roots differed significantly among species. Stem concentrations were higher than root concentrations in all species, and comprised between 6 to 25% of the total stem biomass. Variation in 1 st -year control seedling survival was positively related to pretreatment TNC pool size (combined stem and root pools) among species; but not to pretreatment stem or root TNC concentrations, total seedling biomass, or cotyledon biomass. Survival of the stress treatment seedlings during the first 2 months (and from 2 months to 1 year) was also positively related to interspecific variation in TNC pool size. Relative growth rates of control seedlings from 0 to 2 months were negatively related to TNC pool size among species, suggesting a tradeoff between carbon allocation to growth versus storage. My results highlight the importance of TNC reserves for seedling survival and stress tolerance in the shaded understory of tropical forests. Allocation-based tradeoffs between seedling growth and storage provide a mechanistic basis for species differences in shade tolerance; and have likely played important roles in the evolution of life-history diversity and maintenance of tree-species diversity in species-rich tropical tree communities. x

PAGE 11

CHAPTER 1 STRESS TOLERANCE ENHANCES SEEDLING SURVIVAL IN THE UNDERSTORY OF A TROPICAL FOREST: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE Introduction Differential seedling survival among coexisting species has long been considered to play important roles in determining tree-species composition and diversity in tropical forests (Janzen 1970; Connell 1971; Hubbell 1979; Harms et al. 2000; Wright 2002). Seedling mortality is especially high in the shaded forest understory (Augspurger 1984a,b; Osunkoya et al. 1992; Li et al. 1996) where light availability is low (ca. 1% of full sun) and variable in time and space (Chazdon and Fetcher 1984; Montgomery and Chazdon 2002; Montgomery 2004). Under these conditions, low potential for photosynthetic carbon gain limits the ability of seedlings to maintain positive carbon balance, a prerequisite for survival in shade. Diurnal and seasonal fluctuations in understory light availability (Chazdon and Fetcher 1984; Chazdon and Pearcy 1986) and/or deep shading of seedlings by fallen litter or understory foliage (Vzquez-Ynes et al. 1990; Wang and Augspurger 2004; Farris-Lopez et al. 2004; Montgomery 2004) further constrain carbon balance by forcing seedlings to cope with stressful periods, when light levels drops below the photosynthetic compensation point. In addition to light-limitation, seedlings risk mortality when tissues are lost or damaged by disease (Augspurger 1984a), herbivores (Osunkoya et al. 1992; Asquith et al. 1997; Kitajima 2004), and physical disturbance (Clark and Clark 1989; Scariot 2000). Identifying the extent and factors that contribute to species differences in their ability to cope with 1

PAGE 12

2 stresses due to light limitation and tissue loss is essential for predicting and evaluating community-level patterns of seedling recruitment and relative species abundance. Survival in light-limited habitats (shade tolerance) is contingent on the ability of seedlings to maintain positive carbon balance. Some researchers have hypothesized that shade tolerance is achieved by morphological and physiological traits that maximize the rate of carbon capture in low light at the whole-plant level (Loach 1967; Givnish 1988; Woodward 1990; Walters and Reich 1996). According to this hypothesis, fast rates of net carbon gain facilitate both high seedling growth rates and enhanced survival in shade, by allowing seedlings to quickly increase in size and out-compete slower growing neighbors (Walters and Reich 2000). In contrast, others researchers have hypothesized that fast growth in shade could have deleterious consequences on survival, because high carbon allocation to growth must occur at the expense of allocation to storage and defense (Kitajima 1994, 1996; Coley et al. 1985; Kobe et al. 1995; Kobe 1997; Veneklaas and Poorter 1999), thereby reducing seedling tolerance and/or resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses. However, few studies have directly tested whether interspecific variation in seedling survival and growth in the shaded forest understory is linked to species-specific differences in seedling stress tolerance (e.g., Augspurger 1984a). Quantifying the degree to which different species are able to tolerate and recover from abiotic and biotic stresses (especially those posed by light-limitation and tissue loss) could help to clarify the functional traits underlying seedling shade tolerance and life history diversity in the seedling community of species-rich tropical forests.

PAGE 13

3 In this study, I examined seedling stress tolerance, growth, and survival among seven coexisting woody species in a tropical moist forest in central Panama. The overarching goal of my study was to test whether interspecific variation in seedling shade tolerance, measured quantitatively as 1 st -year seedling survival in the shaded understory (see also Augspurger 1984a,b; Kitajima 1994; Boot 1996), was linked to variation in survival and growth responses to stresses caused from light limitation and tissue loss. I tested the following two hypotheses: (1) interspecific variation in 1 st -year seedling survival in the shaded understory is positively correlated with the ability to survive stress due to light limitation and tissue loss; and (2) seedling growth is less affected by stress in species with higher 1 st -year seedling survival. To test these hypotheses, I conducted a 1-year common-garden field experiment in the shaded understory (~ 1% full sun), using transplanted seedlings of an equivalent ontogenetic stage, defined by expansion of the first photosynthetic organs (leaves or cotyledons). Growth and survival were monitored on seedlings assigned to one of three treatments: (1) extreme light reduction; (2) complete defoliation; (3) control (no manipulation). The goal of the light-reduction treatment was to expose seedlings to light levels below those required for whole-plant carbon balance, while the purpose of the defoliation treatment was to force seedlings to rely on storage reserves after removal of photosynthetic leaves and cotyledons. Methods Study Site and Species The study was conducted on Buena Vista peninsula, an area of ca. 60-year-old secondary lowland tropical forest, located in the Barro Colorado Nature Monument (BCNM), Panama (910 N, 7951 W). The BCNM forest is semi-deciduous, with a

PAGE 14

4 pronounced 4-month dry season that usually lasts from mid-December to mid-April. Annual rainfall on the BCNM averages 2,700 mm (Rand and Rand 1982). Seven woody species with sufficient seed availability were chosen for study (Table 1-1). All of the species are canopy trees as adults, except for Callichlamys latifolia (Bignoniaceae), which is a woody liana. Species were selected to span a range of shade tolerance, which was quantified by estimating the percentage of seedlings surviving for 1 year in experimental plots located in the shaded understory (Table 1-1). Small-seeded, pioneer species that are generally unable to establish seedling populations in the shaded forest understory were deliberately excluded from the study. The seven species differ in seed mass (24 to 453 mg) and cotyledon functional morphology (Table 1-1). Aspidosperma cruenta, Lacmelia panamensis, Castilla elastica, and Platypodium elegans have hypogeal cotyledons that remain below or just above the soil surface, and that function primarily for storage of seed reserves. The three other species have epigeal cotyledons that become elevated above the ground after germination; Coussarea curvigemnia and Tabebuia rosea have foliaceous photosynthetic cotyledons, and Callichlamys latifolia has thick green cotyledons that function primarily for storage (Kitajima 2002). For brevity, species are henceforth referred to by genus. Field and Laboratory Methods Depending on seed availability, 200 to 400 seedlings per species were raised from seed in a shade house on the BCNM, under a light level similar to that found in the forest understory (1.5% full sun, based on total daily photon flux density). When possible, seeds were collected from at least 3 nonadjacent parent trees, to increase genetic diversity within each species. Seedlings were raised in plastic trays containing a 1:1 mixture of forest soil and sand, until all seedlings reached an equivalent ontogenetic stage, defined

PAGE 15

5 by the full expansion of the first photosynthetic organs (leaves or cotyledons, depending on the species; Table 1-1), at which time they were transplanted into the forest (described below). Seedlings were transplanted at a standardized ontogenetic stage, rather than at a common chronological age, so that all species had initiated autotrophic growth by the onset of the study. Because of interspecific variability in timing of seed dispersal, germination, and development, seedlings were transplanted over a 3-month period during the early-mid rainy season (May to July). Seedlings of all species were transplanted into four 7 x 7 m 2 common-gardens located in the shaded forest understory on Buena Vista Peninsula. Each garden was separated by at least 50 m from the nearest adjacent garden, and enclosed by 1 m tall fencing to exclude large herbivores. For each species, equal numbers of seedlings were transplanted into 1 x 1 m 2 cells in four equally sized, stratified sections in each garden (50 to 100 total seedlings garden -1 species -1 ). All vegetation < 1.5 m tall was removed from each garden before seedling transplantation, and all seedlings were positioned a minimum of 25 cm apart. When necessary, leaf litter was also removed to avoid burial of seedlings. Seedlings dying within the first 2 weeks after transplantation were replaced (< 10 seedlings total). Seedlings were randomly assigned to one of three treatments 2 weeks after transplantation: (1) defoliation; (2) light reduction; (3) control (no manipulation). For the defoliation treatment, all leaves and photosynthetic cotyledons (if present) were clipped at the base of the petiole; cotyledons were retained on all of the species with hypogeal storage cotyledons (Table 1-1). For the light-reduction treatment, cylindrical wire cages covered with 90% shade cloth were placed over individual seedlings. Shade cage

PAGE 16

6 dimensions ranged from 6 x 12 cm (height x diameter) to 15 x 30 cm (depending on initial seedling size); and were constructed to be large enough so as not to hinder growth over a 2-month period, after which the shade cages were removed. Light transmission was measured inside and outside of the shade cages with Li-Cor quantum sensors during the early-mid rainy season. Percent light transmission underneath the cages, and within each common-garden, was determined using both instantaneous and continuous total daily photon flux density (PFD) measurements. Instantaneous PFD measurements were taken inside and outside of shade cages at 8 to 15 stratified positions in each garden under mid-day, cloudy sky conditions. Continuous PFD was measured by placing a single censor in the middle of each common-garden for 2 days. To calculate % light transmission, measurements within the forest were referenced to a sensor placed in completely open sky on a laboratory rooftop. Mean light reduction ( + 1 SD) by the shade cages was 89 ( + 2)%. Mean light levels outside of the shade cages, as determined from the instantaneous PFD measurements, ranged among gardens from 0.38 to 0.68% (overall mean = 0.55%); mean light levels from the continuous PFD measurements taken over 2 full days in each garden were higher, and ranged among gardens from 0.68 to 1.44% of full sun (overall mean = 1%). Seedlings inside the shade cages thus experienced only ca. 0.06% of full sun over the 2-month light-reduction treatment. To estimate preand post-treatment biomass, I harvested randomly selected sub-samples of seedlings from each common-garden. For the pretreatment samples, 6 to 12 seedlings per species were harvested from each common-garden just prior to treatment. Post-treatment samples were harvested 2 months (coinciding with the end of

PAGE 17

7 the light-reduction treatment) and 1 year after treatment; samples sizes at these harvests ranged from 2 to 32 total seedlings per species x treatment combination, depending on species-specific differences in survival. Seedlings were harvested by carefully excavating the root system with a small trowel. Roots, stems, leaves, and cotyledons were separated within 12 hours after harvesting, and then oven dried at 100C for 1 hour. All samples were then dried for an additional 48 hours at 60C before weighing. Leaf and cotyledon area (for epigeal cotyledons only) were measured before drying using a Li-Cor leaf area meter. Seedling survival was measured by conducting censuses every week for the first 2 months, and then every 2 weeks from 2 months to 1 year. Missing seedlings were treated as dead. Seedlings killed by branch fall and locally heavy herbivory (e.g., outbreak of stem cutting insects in one common-garden) were excluded from the study. Statistical Analyses Differences in survival among species and treatments were analyzed using semi-parametric proportional hazards modeling (i.e., Cox regression; Fox 2001). Cox regression was selected over alternative parametric tests because it does not assume a particular probability distribution for survival times (the non-parametric component of the model; Fox 2001), which varied widely among species and treatments. Seedlings harvested for biomass measurements and those that survived beyond the final survival census were right-censored in the analysis. I then used the Kaplan-Meier approach to estimate the proportion of seedlings surviving over time for each species x treatment combination. Differences between Kaplan-Meier estimates among species and among treatments within species were analyzed using log-rank tests, which tests for heterogeneity in survival times among groups by comparing observed versus expected

PAGE 18

8 number of deaths between each mortality event (Fox 2001). Percent survival was estimated from 0 to 2 months (i.e., the time of shade cage removal), 2 months to 1 year (stress treatments only), and from 0 to 1 year (control treatment only) from the Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Survival data were pooled across common-gardens for all analyses and garden was included as a main factor in the Cox regression model. Differences among species and treatments in total seedling biomass at 2 months and 1 year were analyzed using ANOVA. In both analyses, common-garden means were used as replicates for each species x treatment combination (n = 1 per species x treatment combination; Appendix A). Because all seedlings had died before the 2-month harvest for some species x treatment combinations, I used two separate ANOVA models to analyze seedling biomass. In the first model (saturated model), I tested for species, treatment, and species x treatment interaction effects on biomass, but only included data for the species that had living seedlings present in all treatments at the time of harvest (n = 5 species at 2 months; n = 4 species at 1 year). In the second model (Reduced main factor model), I included data for all 7 species and tested for the main effects of species and treatment on biomass, but excluded species x interaction terms. Data from the 1-year harvest were log 10 -transformed before analysis to improve normality and homogeneity of variance. Simple least squares linear regression was used to test for correlations between interspecific variation in seedling survival, growth, and size. Relative growth rates (RGR) of total seedling biomass, stem height, and leaf area were estimated using the following formula: RGR (wk -1 ) = [ln (X2) ln (X1)] / time

PAGE 19

9 where X 2 = mean size at time 2; X 1 = mean size at time 1; and time = number of weeks between times 1 and 2. RGR for LACP from 0 to 2 months could not be calculated due to missing pretreatment biomass samples. Leaf and cotyledon mass were included in all RGR calculations. Cotyledon area was included in all leaf area calculations for species with photosynthetic cotyledons (Coussarea and Tabebuia). All statistical analyses were performed using JMP software (SAS Institute, 1997). Results Seedling Survival Seedling survival differed substantially among species and treatments (Table 1-2; Figure 1-1). First-year survival of control seedlings differed significantly among species (P < 0.0001 for log-rank test of survival time distributions), and ranged from 19 to 96% at the end of one year (Figure 1-1; Table 1-1). For control seedlings, survival from 0 to 1 year was positively correlated with survival from 0 to 2 months among species (P < 0.0001, r 2 = 0.96, n = 7), when mortality was generally highest for most species. Thus, species maintained their survival ranks from 2 months to 1 year. Survival also differed significantly among common-gardens (Table 1-2), and was generally higher in gardens with higher light levels, even though the range in light levels among gardens was small (0.6.4% full sun). Defoliation and light reduction significantly reduced survival in all species (Figure 1-1; P < 0.0001 for log rank tests), and there was a significant interaction between species and treatment on survival times (Table 1-2). Species that had high survival in the light-reduction treatment also had high survival in the defoliation treatment (P = 0.0001, r 2 = 0.94, n = 7 for proportional survival from 0 2 months). For

PAGE 20

10 some species (Aspidosperma, Coussarea, Callichlamys) defoliation had a larger overall impact on survival than light reduction, while others showed similar survival in the two stress treatments (Figure 1-1). The impact of the stress treatments on seedling survival varied widely among species (Figure 1-1). Survival in the stress treatments from 0 to 2 months was positively correlated with 1 st -year control seedling survival among species (Figure 1-2). Two-month survival for the three species with highest 1 st -year survival exceeded 85% in both stress treatments. In contrast, of the four species with the lowest 1 st -year survival of control seedlings, three had reached 100% seedling mortality in one or both of the stress treatments before 60 days. There were no significant relationships between seedling survival and seed mass or pretreatment cotyledon mass among species for any treatment (P > 0.2 for all regressions), even though the species with the largest seed size (Aspidosperma) had the highest survival in all treatments at 2 months, and the smallest-seeded species (Tabebuia) the lowest survival after defoliation and the second lowest survival after light reduction. Effects of Defoliation and Light Reduction on Seedling Biomass and Growth Total seedling biomass at 2 months differed significantly among species and treatments (Figure 1-3a; Table 1-3). The effect of the stress treatments on seedling biomass varied widely among species (Figure 1-3a) and there was a significant interaction between species and treatment on biomass at 2 months, but not at 1 year (Table 1-3). Whole-seedling relative growth rate (RGR) from 0 to 2 months also varied widely among species and treatments (Figure 1-3b). Control seedling RGR ranged 2.5 fold between species and was highest for Tabebuia (which had the lowest 1 st -year control seedling survival) and lowest for Aspidosperma (highest 1 st -year survival), but there was

PAGE 21

11 no significant correlation between control seedling survival and RGR among species (P > 0.4, r 2 = 0.16, n = 6). Two-month survival of control seedlings was, however, negatively correlated to both stem height and leaf area RGR among species (P = 0.01, r 2 = 0.77 for stem height; P = 0.03, r 2 = 0.68 for log 10 leaf area). Light reduction had a noticeable effect on RGR, which varied 5.5 fold among species at the end of 2-month treatment (Figure 1-3b). RGR in the light-reduction treatment was less affected (relative to the control treatment) for species with higher 1 st -year control seedling survival: RGR was reduced by 0.013 to 0.015 wk -1 for the two species with higher 1 st -year survival (Aspidosperma and Coussarea) compared to 0.042 to 0.050 wk -1 in the three species with lower 1 st -year survival (Callichlamys, Castilla, and Tabebuia; no Platypodium seedlings survived the light-reduction treatment). As with control seedlings, whole-seedling RGR was not a good correlate of survival among species in the light-reduction treatment (P > 0.7, r 2 = 0.04, n = 5). However, the three species with the lowest survival exhibited the highest whole-seedling RGR in the control treatment, and among species, survival in the light-reduction treatment was negatively correlated to height RGR of control seedlings (P = 0.06, r 2 = 0.59, n = 6). Whole-seedling RGR during the light-reduction treatment was highest for the three smallest-seeded species, all of which had epigeal cotyledons (Figure 1-3b; Table 1-1). RGR following defoliation was greater for species that were able to produce new leaves (Figure 1-3b,c). Four of the seven species, including the three species with highest 1 st -year control seedling survival, were able to develop new and fully expanded leaves within 2 months (Figure 1-3c). Furthermore, species with relatively higher 1 st -year survival produced more new leaf area following defoliation than was produced by control

PAGE 22

12 seedlings over the same 2-month period (Figure 1-5): leaf production for Aspidosperma, the species with the highest 1 st -year survival, was six times greater than in controls. In contrast, leaf production in Castilla, which had the lowest 1 st -year survival among the species that produced new leaves, was lower relative to controls. It is also worth noting that leaf production following defoliation was not restricted to species with relatively large seed mass or hypogeal storage cotyledons. Coussarea, despite having the second smallest seed mass and photosynthetic epigeal cotyledons (Table 1-1), was able to recover more leaf area relative to control seedlings following defoliation than Castilla (Figure 1-5), which had three-fold higher seed mass and hypogeal cotyledons. Stress treatments had significant negative effects on total seedling biomass at 1 year (Table 1-3). RGR from 2 months to 1 year varied widely among species and treatments (Figure 1-6). The three species with the highest 1 st -year control seedling survival (Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, Coussarea) experienced greater reduction in RGR by stress relative to controls, while the species with the lowest 1 st -year survival (Callichlamys, Castilla) showed overcompensation of RGR. Discussion Stress Tolerance as a Component of Seedling Survival in Shade My results support the hypothesis that enhanced seedling survival in the shaded understory is related to the ability of species to tolerate stress. Among species, survival in both the defoliation and light-reduction treatments was strongly related to interspecific variation in 1 st -year control seedlings survival (i.e., shade tolerance). The ability to tolerate stress also varied widely among species: the two species with the lowest 1 st -year survival reached 100% mortality in both stress treatments before 60 days, while the three species with the highest 1 st -year survival showed substantial tolerance to both treatments

PAGE 23

13 (> 85% survival). The stress tolerance of the latter three species was considerable given the severity of the experimental stresses imposed upon them: only 0.06% of full sun for 2 months or complete defoliation. These results support the notion that shade tolerance is dependent upon functional traits that both allow seedlings to maintain a positive carbon balance in low light, and to survive through and recover from periods when they experience negative carbon balance due to stress. Survival following the defoliation and light-reduction treatments was highly correlated among species, indicating that the most stress tolerant species are able to cope with a wide range of biotic and abiotic hazards. Earlier studies have also shown negative interspecific correlations between 1 st -year survival of tropical tree seedlings and susceptibility to pathogens in shade (Augspurger and Kelly 1983; Augspurger 1984a,b). In concert, these results suggest that the traits conferring stress tolerance may be broad spectrum, potentially allowing seedlings to cope with other stresses caused by drought (Engelbrecht and Kursar 2003; Khurana and Singh 2004), nutrient limitation (Gunatilleke et al. 1997), and physical/mechanical damage due to litterfall (Clark and Clark 1989; Scariot 2000). Seedling Tolerance to Defoliation: The Importance of Storage Reserves The goal of the defoliation treatment was to force seedlings to temporarily rely on storage reserves for maintenance of a positive carbon balance and subsequent leaf tissue recovery. My results show that post-defoliation seedling survival was dependent on both the capacity of a species to develop and fully expand new leaves, and the relative degree of leaf area recovery among species. Total leaf area and relative leaf area recovery was most impacted in species with lower 1 st -year control seedling survival, confirming my initial hypothesis. The three species that were unable to develop new leaves did not

PAGE 24

14 survive past 60 days, while survival among the other four species was highest for species with greater leaf area recovery. For example, leaf area production in Aspidosperma, the species with the highest post-defoliation survival over the first 2 months, was 64 times greater than in Castilla (relative to leaf production in control seedlings), which had 50% lower survival. Recovery of photosynthetic tissue lost to herbivores, disease, or disturbance is ultimately dependent on the amount of carbon reserves within remaining vegetative tissues and storage cotyledons at the time of tissue loss. In this study, three of the four species that were able to develop new leaves following defoliation had hypogeal storage cotyledons, consistent with the idea that large seed reserves may enhance seedling recovery following tissue damage (Harms and Dalling 1997; Green and Juniper 2004). Leaf area recovery, however, was not restricted to species with this particular cotyledon functional morphology. Coussarea, which had epigeal photosynthetic cotyledons, as well as other epigeal-photosynthetic species in this forest, are also capable of substantial leaf area recovery following complete defoliation (Kitajima 2004). For species with epigeal cotyledons, storage reserves within stem and roots in the form of total nonstructural carbohydrate (TNC), provide the carbon source necessary for tissue recovery following damage (McPherson and Williams 1998; Canham et al. 1999; Hoffman et al. 2004). TNC reserves in stems and roots may play particularly important roles in seedling survival after seedlings have depleted seed reserves, or when storage cotyledons are prematurely lost to herbivores or disease (Kitajima 2004; Chapter 2). Seedling Tolerance to Temporal Variation in Understory Light Availability The seven species varied widely in their ability to survive through drastic reductions in light availability in the shaded understory. Three of the species showed

PAGE 25

15 substantial tolerance to light reduction, with > 92% survival during the 2-month treatment. Platypodium suffered the highest mortality during the first 2 months (all seedlings died before 55 days). The low survival of this species was influenced by damping-off disease (Augspurger 1983, 1984a,b), confirming the idea that fungal attack can limit seedling establishment in deeply shaded habitats (e.g., Grime 1965). Reduction in light availability also increased variability among species in seedling growth rates. These results support the notion that small-scale heterogeneity in light availability, even in the closed forest understory, can have dramatic impacts on seedling growth, survival, and recruitment processes in tropical forests (Montgomery and Chazdon 2002; Wang and Augspurger 2004; Montgomery 2004). Interspecific variation in 2-month seedling survival in both the light-reduction and control treatments was not related to whole-seedling RGR. However, species that maintained high RGR in the control treatment also tended to have the lowest survival in the light-reduction treatment, suggesting that the overall carbon balance of species that normally exhibit fast growth rates may be most affected by temporal reductions in light availability in the shaded understory. Post-light reduction RGR from 2 months to 1 year, following removal of the shade cages at 2-months, was higher relative to control seedlings for species with lower 1 st -year control seedling survival. This result suggests that overcompensation of RGR during seedling recovery from stress can have negative consequences on survival, potentially because increased allocation to traits that maximize growth rates come at the cost of allocation to traits such as defense and storage that enhance survival (Kitajima 1994; 1996; Kobe 1997). The functional mechanisms that

PAGE 26

16 allow seedlings to acclimate to short-term deficits and increases in light availability in the shaded understory deserve future study.

PAGE 27

Table 1-1. Seed and seedling characteristics of the study species. SpeciesFamilyCodeCotyledon function Seed mass(position)nMean (%)SE(mg)2Aspidosperma cruentaApocynaceaeASPCStorage (hypogeal)11196.61.9453Lacmelia panamensisApocynaceaeLACPStorage (hypogeal)7891.83.5244Cousarrea curvigemniaRubiaceaeCOUCPhotosynthesis (epigeal)10789.13.497Callichlamys latifoliaBignoniaceaeCALLStorage (epigeal)5579.96.1198Castilla elasticaMoraceaeCASEStorage (hypogeal)10157.65.6314Platypodium elegansFabaceaePLAEStorage (hypogeal)4637.98.7332Tabebuia roseaBignoniaceaeTAB R Photosynthesis (epigeal)7119.35.9241Survival data from this study (= 1 year survival of control treatment seedlings in the shaded forest understory)2Estimated from 6 to 37 dried seeds per species, after removing seed coats1st-year survival in shade1 17

PAGE 28

18 Table 1-2. Proportional hazards (Cox regression) survival time analysis of seedling survival over 1 year. P = significance from Walds 2 test statistic. able 1-3. Analysis of variance for total seedling biomass 2 months and 1 year after Variable VariabledfWal d 2 PSpecies6806.9<0.0001Treatment2389.3<0.0001Species x Treatment1273.2<0.0001Garde n 393.7<0.0001 T treatment. 2-month biomass1-year biomass dfF P dfF P Saturated model1 Species496.1<0.0001365.2<0.0001 Treatment223.9<0.0001215.3<0.0001 Species x Treatment82.20.0460.70.62 Error5745Reduced main factor mode l Species665.3<0.0001648.4<0.0001 Treatment224.9<0.0001216.4<0.0001 Error67561The following species were removed from the saturated models because of 100% mortality in some treatments (see Methods): Platypodiumand Tabebuia (2-month analysis); Platypodium, Tabebuia, Callichlamys(1-year analysis).

PAGE 29

Aspidosperma cruentum Proportion surviving 0.00.20.40.60.81.0 Control Light reduction Defoliation Lacmelia panamensis Coussarea curvigemnia Callichlamys latifolia 04080120160200240280320360 Castilla elasticaTime (days) 04080120160200240280320360 0.00.20.40.60.81.0 Platypodium elegans 04080120160200240280320360 Tabebuia rosea 04080120160200240280320360 19 Figure 1-1. Effects of light reduction and defoliation on 1 st -year seedling survival. The proportion of seedlings surviving was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Species are shown in order of 1 st -year survival of control seedlings as summarized in Table 1-1.

PAGE 30

20 1st-year control seedling survival (%) 020406080100 Stress treatment survival (%) 020406080100 Defoliation: r2 = 0.67, P = 0.02 Light reduction: r2 = 0.75, P < 0.01 Figure 1-2. Two-month survival of stress treatment seedlings plotted against 1 st -year survival of control treatment seedlings. Each point is a species mean. Dashed and solid lines show the best-fit linear regressions for the light-reduction and defoliation treatments, respectively.

PAGE 31

21 CSpecies ASPCLACPCOUCCALLCASEPLAETABR Leaf area (cm2) 0102030405060 A Biomass (mg) 0100200300400 Control Light reduction Defoliation HighestsurvivalLowestsurvival B RGR (wk-1) -0.20-0.15-0.10-0.050.000.05 Figure 1-3. Effects of light reduction and defoliation on seedling size and growth 2 months after treatment. A) Total seedling biomass. B) Relative growth rate (RGR) from 0 to 2 months. C) Leaf area. Vertical bars = +1 SD; n = 1 common-garden replicates per bar (see Methods; Table A-1). Species are ordered from highest to lowest 1 st -year control seedling survival (Table 1-1). Arrows in C) indicate complete lack of new leaf growth. RGR was not calculated for LACP due to missing pretreatment biomass data; otherwise, a missing bar indicates that no seedlings survived a treatment past 2 months.

PAGE 32

22 Species ASPCCOUCCASE Leaf area recovery index -2024681012 Figure 1-4. Leaf area recovery 2 months after defoliation. Data are shown for 3 of the 4 species that developed new leaves following defoliation; leaf area recovery was not calculated for LACP due to missing pretreatment data. Vertical bars = +1 SD; n = 4 common-garden replicates for each species. Leaf area recovery index = (A H A C )/A C where A H = leaf area of defoliated seedlings at 2 months, and A C = leaf area production in control seedlings from 0 to 2 months.

PAGE 33

23 LowestsurvivalHighestsurvival Species ASPCLACPCOUCCALLCASEPLAETABR RGR (wk-1) 0.000.010.020.030.04 Control Light reduction Defoliation Figure 1-5. Effects of light reduction and defoliation on relative growth rate (RGR) from 2 months to 1 year. Shade cages for the light-reduction treatment were removed at 2 months. Vertical bars = +1 SD; n = 2 replicates per bar (Appendix A).

PAGE 34

CHAPTER 2 CARBON ALLOCATION TO STORAGE IN TROPICAL FOREST SEEDLINGS: EFFECTS ON GROWTH, SURVIVAL AND STRESS TOLERANCE Introduction For many tropical trees, successful recruitment into the canopy hinges on survival and long-term persistence of seedlings in the shaded forest understory (e.g., Welden et al. 1991; Connell and Green 2000). Survival in the understory is dependent on the ability of seedlings to both maintain positive net carbon balance under light-limited conditions and cope with a host of additional biotic and abiotic stresses (reviewed in Moles and Westoby 2004; Chapter 1). The capacity of coexisting species to cope with light-limitation and other stresses during seedling establishment ultimately influences patterns of adult tree distributions, species composition, and coexistence (Janzen 1970; Connell 1971; Hubbell 1979; Harms et al. 2000). What are the mechanisms that allow seedlings to maintain carbon balance and tolerate stresses in the shaded understory? Some have hypothesized that enhanced survival in shade (shade tolerance) is characterized by morphological and physiological traits that maximize the rate of net carbon capture in low light at the whole-plant level (Loach 1967; Givnish 1988), thereby increasing seedling size and competitive ability under low light conditions. However, maintenance of a positive carbon balance is not necessarily dependent on maximization of carbon gain, especially if seedlings experience stress caused from tissue loss or temporal fluctuations in resource availability, both of which may severely constrain seedling establishment in tropical forests (Augspurger 24

PAGE 35

25 1984b; Clark and Clark 1989; Asquith et al. 1997; Scariot 2000; Montgomery and Chazdon 2002; Engelbrecht and Kursar 2003; Khurana and Singh 2004; Kitajima 2004; Wang and Augspurger 2004). An alternative hypothesis is that high survival is achieved through traits that allow seedlings to maintain a positive carbon balance necessary for long-term persistence in the understory, and which allow seedlings to cope with and recover from biotic and abiotic stress (Kitajima 1994, 1996). Several studies from both temperate and tropical forests provide strong support for this latter hypothesis, by showing that: (1) interspecific variation in low light seedling and sapling survival can be explained through tradeoffs between fast growth rates and high survival (Kitajima 1994; Kobe et al. 1995; Pacala et al. 1996; Veneklaas and Poorter 1998; Walters and Reich 1999; Kobe 1999); (2) species with seedlings that grow quickly in low light also do so in high light (Osunkoya et al. 1994; Grubb et al. 1996; Poorter 1999), suggesting that fast growth rate is not necessarily an adaptive strategy for increased survival in shade. Collectively, these studies suggest that species do not change growth ranks between low and high light environments and that ecological tradeoffs between growth and survival may contribute to niche partitioning across the forest light gradient. Functional traits that enhance seedling tolerance to stress and that contribute to growth-survival tradeoffs may therefore constitute an important, but previously little-explored aspect of seedling regeneration and diversity in tropical forests. Carbon allocation to storage has been proposed as one mechanism that allows species to tolerate low light and other stresses in the shaded forest understory (Kitajima 1994, 1996; Kobe et al. 1995; Kobe 1997). Energy reserves, in the form of total nonstructural carbohydrate (TNC, total of starch and soluble sugars), enhance recovery of

PAGE 36

26 tissue lost to consumers and disturbance (McPherson and Williams 1998; Canham et al. 1999; Kabeya and Sakai 2003). TNC reserves can also aid in the maintenance of positive carbon balance during periods when light is limited (Bloom et al. 1985) and may be especially important for seedling survival in the shaded understory of tropical forests where light availability can be both extremely low (0.2% full sun) and highly dynamic in time and space (Chazdon and Pearcy 1986; Montgomery and Chazdon 2002; Montgomery 2004). In the tropics, TNC reserves have previously been shown to vary as a function of seasonality and light availability in adult trees (Bullock 1992; Marenco et al. 2001; Newell et al. 2002), aid in seasonal leaf flush and reproduction of understory shrubs and palms (Tissue and Wright 1995; Cunningham 1997; Marquis et al. 1997), and facilitate tissue resprouting of woody plants after fire disturbance in savanna-forest ecosystems (Hoffman et al. 2003, 2004). Despite the many important roles of TNC, apparently no study has quantified interspecific variation in seedling TNC storage in the understory of a tropical forest, and the ecological role of TNC in determining species-specific susceptibility to stress-induced mortality and the associated consequences for community-level patterns of seedling establishment remains unknown. In this study, I examine the role of TNC reserves in the growth, survival, and stress tolerance of seven coexisting woody species in a tropical moist forest in central Panama. I chose species that spanned a wide range of seedling shade tolerance, which as in previous studies (Augspurger 1984a,b; Kitajima 1994; Boot 1996), was measured as 1 st -year seedling survival in the shaded understory. To quantify interspecific variation in TNC storage, I measured TNC concentrations and pool sizes in both stems and roots at standardized ontogenetic stages the time at which all species fully expanded their first

PAGE 37

27 photosynthetic organ (cotyledons or leaves) and 2 months after leaf or cotyledon expansion. I focused on TNC in stems and roots, and not in cotyledons and leaves, because stem and root reserves function as more permanent and stable sites for long-term carbohydrate storage; cotyledon reserves tend to be short-lived and most important for seedlings before they have initiated autotrophic growth, while reserves in leaf tissue represent both short-term and temporally dynamic storage sites for carbohydrates. I tested three hypotheses: (1) 1 st -year seedling survival is higher in species with greater allocation to TNC reserves in stems and roots; (2) species with high allocation to TNC storage exhibit slow growth rates (i.e., a tradeoff between growth and storage); and, (3) interspecific variation in tolerance to tissue loss and temporal reduction in light availability are linked to species differences in TNC storage. Finally, given the hypothesized importance of seedling size (a strong correlate of seed size in tropical forests; Rose and Poorter 2000) in seedling survival, I also examined the relative importance of total seedling biomass versus TNC reserve size as predictors of seedling survival and stress tolerance among the seven species. Methods Study Site and Species The study was conducted on Buena Vista peninsula, an area of ca. 60-year-old secondary lowland tropical forest, located in the Barro Colorado Nature Monument (BCNM), Panama (910 N, 7951 W). The BCNM forest is semi-deciduous, with a pronounced 4-month dry season that usually lasts from mid-December to mid-April. Annual rainfall on the BCNM averages 2,700 mm (Rand and Rand 1982). Seven woody species with sufficient seed availability were chosen for study (Table 1-1). All of the species are canopy trees as adults, except for Callichlamys

PAGE 38

28 latifolia (Bignoniaceae), which is a woody liana. Species were selected to span a range of shade tolerance, which was quantified by estimating the percentage of seedlings surviving for 1 year in experimental plots located in the shaded understory (Table 1-1). Small-seeded, pioneer species that are generally unable to establish seedling populations in the shaded forest understory were deliberately excluded from the study. The seven species differ in seed mass (24 to 453 mg) and cotyledon functional morphology (Table 1-1). Aspidosperma cruenta, Lacmelia panamensis, Castilla elastica, and Platypodium elegans have hypogeal cotyledons that remain below or just above the soil surface, and that function primarily for storage of seed reserves. The three other species have epigeal cotyledons that become elevated above the ground after germination; Coussarea curvigemnia and Tabebuia rosea have foliaceous photosynthetic cotyledons, and Callichlamys latifolia has thick green cotyledons that function primarily for storage (Kitajima 2002). For brevity, species are henceforth referred to by genus. Field and Laboratory Methods Depending on seed availability, 200 to 400 seedlings per species were raised from seed in a shade house on the BCNM under a light level similar to that found in the forest understory (1.5% full sun, based on total daily photon flux density). When possible, seeds were collected from at least 3 nonadjacent parent trees, to increase genetic diversity within each species. Seedlings were raised in plastic trays containing a 1:1 mixture of forest soil and sand, until all seedlings reached an equivalent ontogenetic stage, defined by the full expansion of the first photosynthetic organs (leaves or cotyledons, depending on the species; Table 1-1), at which time they were transplanted into the forest (described below). Seedlings were transplanted at a standardized ontogenetic stage, rather than at a common chronological age, so that all species had initiated autotrophic growth by the

PAGE 39

29 onset of the study. Because of interspecific variability in timing of seed dispersal, germination, and development, seedlings were transplanted over a 3-month period during the early-mid rainy season (May to July). Seedlings of all species were transplanted into four 7 x 7 m 2 common-gardens located in the shaded forest understory on Buena Vista Peninsula. Each garden was separated by at least 50 m from the nearest adjacent garden, and enclosed by 1 m tall fencing to exclude large herbivores. For each species, equal numbers of seedlings were transplanted into 1 x 1 m 2 cells in four equally sized, stratified sections in each garden (50 to 100 total seedlings garden -1 species -1 ). All vegetation < 1.5 m tall was removed from each garden before seedling transplantation, and all seedlings were positioned a minimum of 25 cm apart. When necessary, leaf litter was also removed to avoid burial of seedlings. Seedlings dying in the first 2 weeks after transplantation were replaced (< 10 seedlings total). Seedlings were randomly assigned to one of three treatments 2 weeks after transplantation: (1) defoliation; (2) light reduction; (3) control (no manipulation). For the defoliation treatment, all leaves and photosynthetic cotyledons (if present) were clipped at the base of the petiole; cotyledons were retained on all of the species with hypogeal storage cotyledons (Table 1-1). For the light-reduction treatment, cylindrical wire cages covered with 90% shade cloth were placed over individual seedlings. Shade cage dimensions ranged from 6 x 12 cm (height x diameter) to 15 x 30 cm (depending on initial seedling size); and were constructed to be large enough so as not to hinder growth over a 2-month period, after which the shade cages were removed.

PAGE 40

30 Light transmission was measured inside and outside of the shade cages with Li-Cor quantum sensors during the early-mid rainy season. Percent light transmission underneath the cages, and in each common-garden, was determined using both instantaneous and continuous total daily photon flux density (PFD) measurements. Instantaneous PFD measurements were taken inside and outside of shade cages at 8 15 stratified positions in each garden under mid-day, cloudy sky conditions. Continuous PFD was measured by placing a single censor in the middle of each common-garden for 2 days. To calculate % light transmission, measurements in the forest were referenced to a sensor placed in completely open sky on a laboratory rooftop. Mean light reduction ( + 1 SD) by the shade cages was 89 ( + 2)%. Mean light levels outside of the shade cages, as determined from the instantaneous PFD measurements, ranged among gardens from 0.38 to 0.68% (overall mean = 0.55%); mean light levels from the continuous PFD measurements taken over two full days in each garden were higher, and ranged among gardens from 0.68 to 1.44% of full sun (overall mean = 1%). Seedlings inside the shade cages thus experienced only ca. 0.06% of full sun over the 2-month light-reduction treatment. To estimate preand post-treatment biomass, I harvested randomly selected sub-samples of seedlings from each common-garden at two stages: (1) 2-weeks after seedlings were transplanted to the gardens and just before treatment (pretreatment harvest); and, (2) 2-months after treatment, coinciding with the end of the light-reduction treatment (post-treatment harvest). For the pretreatment harvest, 6 seedlings per species were harvested from each common-garden, depending on initial seed availability. Total samples sizes for the post-treatment harvest ranged from 2 to 32 total seedlings per

PAGE 41

31 species x treatment combination, depending on species-specific differences in survival. Seedlings were harvested by carefully excavating the root system with a small trowel. Samples were then placed in polyethylene bags and packed inside a cooler with ice for transport to the laboratory, where bags were stored at 4C in a refrigerator until they were processed for biomass measurements. Roots, stems, leaves, and cotyledons were separated within 12 hours after harvesting, than oven dried at 100C for 1 hour. All samples were then dried for an additional 48 hours at 60C before weighing. Leaf and cotyledon area (for epigeal cotyledons only) were measured before drying using a Li-Cor leaf area meter. All samples were stored in sealed polyethylene bags until samples were ground for TNC analysis. Quantification of TNC in Stems and Roots TNC was analyzed separately in stems and roots by determining the concentration of soluble sugars and starch, measured as glucose equivalents, with a colorimetric assay (Dubois et al. 1956; modified by Ashwell 1966). Due to the small initial sizes of the seedlings, tissue samples had to be pooled from multiple individuals to obtain adequate tissue biomass for TNC analysis (min. of 10 mg per sample). For the pretreatment analyses, tissues samples were pooled from 6 individuals per species in each common-garden (n = 1 pooled replicates species -1 garden -1 ). For the post-treatment analyses, tissue samples were pooled from 2 to 6 individuals per species x treatment combination. The pooled tissue samples were ground using either a Wig-L-Bug bead pulverizer or a Specs-Mill, and a 10 to 16 mg subsample was used for TNC analysis. Starch and soluble sugars were extracted using the method of Marquis et al. (1997), with slight modifications. Soluble sugars were first extracted by adding 1.5 mL of 80% ethanol to the dry samples in microcentrifuge tubes, which were then placed in a shaking

PAGE 42

32 water bath overnight at 27C. After shaking, tubes were centrifuged at 10,000 RPM for 10 minutes and the supernatant was decanted into 10 mL volumetric flasks. This process was repeated for two additional, 2-hour shaking baths. The final combined solution was diluted to 10 mL with deionized water and then stored in a refrigerator at 4C until colorimetric analysis. Starch content was determined from the pellet after the ethanol extractions of simple sugars. The pellets were transferred to 15 mL test tubes and incubated with 2.5 mL of sodium acetate buffer (0.2 M; pH 4.5) in a boiling water bath for 1 hr. After cooling, 2 mL of sodium acetate buffer and 0.5 mL of amyglucosidase solution were added and starch was digested overnight at 55C. Solutions were filtered and then diluted with deionized water to 25 mL in volumetric flasks. The phenol-sulfuric acid colorimetric assay (Dubois et al. 1956; modified by Ashwell 1966) was used to determine glucose concentrations using a spectrophotometer set at 487 nm. Glucose concentrations were calculated from standard curves using appropriate standards and blanks. The TNC concentration of each tissue was estimated as the sum of the glucose concentrations from the soluble sugar and starch extractions. TNC pool sizes were calculated by multiplying the average biomass of the pooled tissues by the sample concentrations, and then dividing by the number of individuals in the pooled sample. Statistical Analyses Differences among species and treatments in biomass and TNC were analyzed using ANOVA. Separate analyses were conducted for the pretreatment and post-treatment (2-month) harvest, using species means from the four common-gardens as replicates in both analyses (n = 4 replicates per species for the pretreatment analysis; n =

PAGE 43

33 1 per species x treatment combination for the post-treatment harvest; Table A-1, B-1). Due to lost samples, pretreatment biomass and TNC data for LACP had to be estimated from samples collected in a separate, concurrent study in the same understory site (K. Kitajima, unpublished data); mean stem and root biomass from this study were calculated from 9 individuals, which were then pooled into a single sample for TNC measurements. Due to the lack of replication for TNC, and differences in sample size for biomass from the other 6 species, LACP was excluded from the pretreatment ANOVA. Because all seedlings had died for some species x treatment combinations in the first 2 months, I used 2 separate ANOVA models to analyze post-treatment biomass and TNC. In the first model, I tested for species, treatment, and species x treatment interaction effects on biomass and TNC response variables, but only included data for the species that had living seedlings present in all treatments at the time of harvest (n = 5 species). The results from this model indicated that interactions had no significant effect (P > 0.12) on any of the response variables. I therefore conducted a second analysis using a model that contained data from all 7 species and that tested for the main effects of species and treatment on biomass and TNC, but excluded species x interaction terms. For brevity, I present only the results from the second model. All data except pretreatment stem and total (stem + root) TNC pool sizes were log 10 -transformed before analysis to improve normality and homogeneity of variance. Simple least squares linear regression was used to test for relationships between seedling biomass, growth, survival, and TNC storage. Relative growth rates (RGR) of total seedling biomass and leaf area from 0 to 2 months was estimated using the following formula:

PAGE 44

34 RGR (wk -1 ) = [ln (size at 2 months) ln (size at 0 months)]/8 Leaf and cotyledon mass was included in all RGR calculations of total seedling biomass. Survival estimates for control seedlings over the full year (Table 1), and for stress-treated seedling from 0 to 2 months and 2 months to 1 year, were taken from a separate study (Chapter 1). All statistical analyses were performed using JMP software (SAS Institute, 1997). Results Variation in Pretreatment Biomass and TNC Reserves Pretreatment stem and root biomass varied widely and significantly among species (Figure 2-1a; Table 2-1). Biomass was higher in stems relative to roots in all species. Pretreatment cotyledon biomass also varied widely, ranging from 18 to 209 mg among species (Figure 2-1a). In four of the seven species (Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, Castilla, and Tabebuia), biomass was higher in cotyledons than in stems or roots combined. Pretreatment TNC concentrations also differed significantly among species (Table 2-2). TNC concentrations varied more widely in stems relative to roots among species (Figure 2-1b). TNC concentrations were also substantially higher in stems than in roots. TNC comprised between 6 to 25% of the total stem biomass (mean = 15% for all species combined), whereas root concentrations ranged from 4 to 21% (mean = 8%). There were no significant correlations between 1 st -year control seedling survival (Table 1-1) and total pretreatment biomass (Figure 2-2a) or TNC concentration among species (Figure 2-2b), despite high interspecific variation in both these variables. First year survival was also not related to pretreatment cotyledon biomass, stem biomass, root biomass, or root:shoot ratio among species (P > 0.3 for all regressions using species means).

PAGE 45

35 Pretreatment TNC pool sizes also differed significantly among species, especially in stems, which were the dominant storage location for TNC in all species (Figure 2-3; Table 2-2). Total TNC pool size (stem + root pools combined) was a better correlate of 1 st -year control seedling survival among species (Figure 2-2c) than was total pretreatment biomass or TNC concentration (Figure 2-2a,b): Aspidosperma and Lacmelia, the two species with the highest 1 st -year survival, had the largest total TNC pools (12.9 and 15 mg, respectively), while Tabebuia, the species with lowest 1 st -year survival, had the smallest pool size (1.7 mg). The other 4 species had similar, intermediate levels of TNC ranging between 4.1 and 6.5 mg (Figure 2-3). Seedling size had a stronger effect on TNC pool size than on concentration. The four species with the largest total seedling biomass (Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, Castilla, Platypodium), all of which had hypogeal storage cotyledons, had greater TNC pool sizes than species the two smallest species (Coussarea, Tabebuia) with epigeal photosynthetic cotyledons (Figure 2-3; Table 1-1). In contrast, there were no clear trends between stem or root TNC concentrations and total seedling biomass among species. Coussarea and Tabebuia, the species with the lowest total seedling biomass, had two of the highest stem TNC concentrations. Effects of Defoliation and Deep Shade on Biomass and TNC Reserves There were significant species and treatment effects on post-treatment stem and root biomass at 2 months (Figure 2-4a,b; Table 2-1). For most species, both defoliation and light reduction caused a decrease in stem and root biomass relative to controls. The combined biomass of stems and roots (not including leaf or cotyledon biomass) was reduced more substantially by defoliation in species with lower 1 st -year control seedling survival (Figure 9a,b): biomass reductions (relative to control treatment biomass) ranged

PAGE 46

36 from 5 to 16% in the three species with highest 1 st -year survival (Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, Coussarea), compared to 19% in the three species with lower 1 st -year survival (Callichlamys, Castilla, Platypodium). Species with lower 1 st -year survival also suffered greater reductions in biomass in the light-reduction treatment (range = 11% for Callichlamys, Castilla, and Tabebuia) relative to species with higher 1 st -year survival (range = 116% for Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, and Coussarea). Stress treatments had significant negative effects on both TNC pools and concentrations (Table 2-2). TNC concentrations were reduced proportionally less by the stress treatments than TNC pools in all species (Figure 2-4c-f). Reductions in TNC pool sizes (Figure 2-2e,f) generally mirrored reductions in biomass (Figure 2-2a,b) among species. However, total TNC pool size was reduced more substantially than was total biomass: TNC reductions in the three species with the lowest 1 st -year control seedling survival ranged from 47 to 64% and 23 to 54% for the defoliation and light-reduction treatments, respectively. Tabebuia, the species with lowest 1 st -year survival and the smallest TNC pools, suffered the highest mortality after defoliation. Post-treatment cotyledon biomass differed among species and treatments (Figure 2-5). Two of the species (Platypodium and Callichlamys) had exhausted all cotyledon reserves in all treatments in the first 2 months. Control treatment values among the other five species ranged from 0.61 to 28 mg. Cotyledon biomass of stressed seedlings was either higher or only slightly reduced relative to control seedlings in all species (Figure 2-5). Influence of Seedling Size, Growth, and TNC Reserves on Seedling Survival Interspecific variation in TNC pool size was a better correlate of seedling survival than seedling size for both control and stress-treated seedlings. For control seedlings,

PAGE 47

37 1 st -year survival was more strongly correlated with TNC pool size than to TNC concentration (Figure 2-2). Furthermore, whole-seedling RGR from 0 to 2 months was negatively correlated with pretreatment TNC pool size among species (Figure 2-6). RGR, however, was not significantly correlated with either pretreatment TNC concentrations or total seedling biomass (P > 0.8, r 2 = 0.01, n = 6 for stem and root TNC concentrations; P = 0.11, r 2 = 0.50 for total seedling biomass). Two-month RGR of total structural biomass (seedling biomass TNC pools), as well as absolute total biomass growth, were also negatively, and more significantly, correlated with pretreatment TNC pool size among species (P = 0.03, r 2 = 0.69 for RGR of structural biomass; P = 0.01, r 2 = 0.80 for absolute biomass growth). RGR of leaf area growth from 0 to 2 months was also negatively, but less strongly, correlated with pretreatment TNC pool size among species (P = 0.08, r 2 = 0.56). Thus, large initial investments in TNC storage pools enhanced 1 st -year seedling survival, but at the cost of lower seedling growth rates. Survival of stressed seedlings was also significantly correlated with TNC pool size, but not with total seedling biomass (Figure 2-7). TNC pools had the greatest influence on survival during the first 2 months, when seedlings were most impacted by the stress treatments (Figure 2-7a); 2-month survival was also related, though less strongly, to stem TNC concentration among species (P = 0.01, r 2 = 0.41, n = 14). Five of the seven species had seedlings that survived the stress treatments past 2 months. Survival of these species from 2 months to 1 year, when species were presumably recovering from the stress treatments, was also significantly related to TNC pool size at the end of 2 months (Figure 2-7c). Seedling survival was not significantly related to total seedling biomass during the first 2 months or from 2 months to 1 year (Figure 2-7b,d).

PAGE 48

38 Discussion My results support the hypotheses that TNC storage enhances seedling survival and stress tolerance in the shaded forest understory. Overall, the seven species displayed wide variation in their carbon allocation strategies to seedling growth and storage. Most importantly, interspecific variation in TNC pool size, but not seedling size, was a good predictor of both 1 st -year seedling survival in the shaded understory, and seedling tolerance to stress caused from both tissue loss and temporary reduction in light availability. TNC concentrations in stems and roots ranged widely among species (4.5 %) and generally varied independently of seedling size, cotyledon type, and seedling shade tolerance. Finally, my study provides evidence for a tradeoff between allocation to growth and carbohydrate storage among coexisting species in a tropical forest. These results provide a mechanistic explanation for why species with high seedling survival in the shaded forest understory also tend to exhibit slow growth rates (Kitajima 1994, 2002; Osunkoya et al. 1994), and support the notion that tradeoffs between growth and survival may play an important role in maintaining high tree species diversity in tropical forests (Kitajima 1994; Kobe 1999). Role of TNC Reserves in Seedling Survival and Stress Tolerance My results show a strong linkage between interspecific variation in TNC storage and survival of stressed seedlings. TNC reserves had the greatest impact on seedling survival during the first 2 months after the stress treatments. During this time, both TNC concentrations and pools were reduced in all species, underscoring the importance of storage reserves for survival when seedlings experience negative carbon balance during the early seedling establishment. However, even after TNC levels were reduced experimentally, TNC pool size continued to be a significant predictor of variation in

PAGE 49

39 seedling survival through the year. TNC reserves therefore played an important role in both stress tolerance and post-stress recovery. TNC reserves may allow tropical tree seedlings to cope with and recover from a host of biotic and abiotic stresses. Several of my study species showed substantial tolerance to defoliation, confirming previous results from seedling defoliation experiments conducted in temperate (Canham et al. 1999) and tropical (Becker 1983; Kitajima 2004) forests. The ability to survive defoliation was dependent on the relative capacity of a species to develop new and fully expanded leaves, and species with greater leaf recovery exhibited higher survival (Chapter 1). These results indicate that large TNC reserves may be essential for seedling recovery from tissue loss due to herbivores and pathogens, or shoot damage from falling canopy debris, all of which are major causes of seedling mortality in tropical forests (Augspurger 1984a,b; Osunkoya et al. 1992; Asquith et al. 1997; Clark and Clark 1989; Scariot 2000). The results of my study also demonstrate that TNC reserves play a critical role in maintaining carbon balance when seedlings experience short-term reductions in light availability. The aim of the light-reduction treatment was to expose seedlings to irradiance levels well below their light compensation point, thereby forcing seedlings into a negative carbon balance. My results indicate that species can vary widely in their survival and growth responses to extreme temporal reductions in light availability in the shaded understory. The most shade-tolerant species in my study exhibited extremely high tolerance to experimental light levels of ca. 0.06% of full sun for 2 months, a level far below what has been used in most previous experimental studies and 1/10 of the average understory values typically reported for tropical forests. While the degree of

PAGE 50

40 light reduction in this experiment was extreme, it is probably representative of the light limitations imposed on seedlings during periods of intensive cloud cover (daily and seasonally) and when seedlings establish in microsites deeply shaded by litter accumulation or understory foliage. Tradeoffs between Seedling Growth and Storage The results supported the prediction of a tradeoff between seedling growth rate and allocation to carbohydrate storage reserves. Across species, TNC pool size was negatively correlated with RGR of total seedling biomass, RGR of total structural seedling biomass, and absolute seedling growth during the first 2 months of study. TNC pool size was also positively correlated with 1 st -year seedling survival, explaining approximately half of the variation in survival among species. These results support the hypothesis that seedling survival in the shaded understory of tropical forests is achieved through a balance between allocation to growth and carbohydrate storage (Kitajima 1994, 1996), rather than by maximizing net carbon gain for fast seedling growth rates (e.g., Givnish 1988). TNC pool size was a better correlate of seedling RGR and survival than either TNC concentration or seedling size. Furthermore, TNC pools were generally more reduced by the stress treatments than were TNC concentrations and total biomass. These results suggest that the total pool of TNC, irrespective of seedling size per se, may serve as the best quantitative indicator of interspecific variation in seedling survival and stress tolerance in the shaded forest understory. For example, TNC pools in Aspidosperma, the species with highest total seedling biomass and lowest RGR, were seven times higher than in Tabebuia, the species with lowest seedling biomass and highest RGR. In contrast, TNC concentrations differed only slightly between these species. These results

PAGE 51

41 emphasize the importance of distinguishing between structural versus nonstructural biomass when linking morphological traits to seedling growth, biomass allocation, and survival (e.g., Canham et al. 1999). TNC Allocation, Seed Size, and Seedling Functional Morphology My results suggest that stems may be the dominant storage location for TNC in understory tropical forest seedlings. Both TNC concentrations and pool sizes were higher in stems than in roots in all of the 7 species. Higher TNC storage in stems could reflect physiological constraints related to the relatively small size of seedling root systems in the shaded understory. TNC allocation to stems versus roots might also be related to the relative susceptibility of these tissues to damage from herbivory or disturbance during development. In forested ecosystems that experience large-scale disturbance such as fire, or where seedlings must survive though winter dormancy, storage reserves are typically concentrated in roots rather than stems (Canham et al. 1999; Hoffman et al. 2004). Variation in TNC storage was linked to species differences in both seed size and cotyledon functional morphology. The four largest-seeded species, all of which had hypogeal storage cotyledons, had the largest seedlings and TNC pools in stems and roots (but not necessarily the higher TNC concentrations). Total TNC pools in these species undoubtedly represent conservative estimates, as cotyledon reserves were not measured in this study. In contrast, the two smallest seeded species, both of which had epigeal photosynthetic cotyledons, had small seedlings and lower TNC pool sizes, but two of the highest TNC concentrations. These results show that large-seeded tropical tree species, in addition to having high amounts of energy reserves in seeds to enhance short-term survival, also maintain large pools of longer-term storage reserves in stems and roots. However, because all species had become dependent on autotrophic carbon gain before

PAGE 52

42 my TNC measurements, it is unknown to what degree initial seed reserves contributed to the more permanent stem and root TNC pools in these species. Future experiments that quantify how seed reserves contribute to long-term TNC storage in seedlings will likely shed further light on the evolutionary and ecological role of seed size variation in tropical forest tree communities. Conclusion In this paper, I highlight the importance of TNC reserves for seedling survival and stress tolerance in the shaded understory of a tropical forest. Tradeoffs between traits such as storage that enhance seedling stress tolerance versus those that maximize growth have likely contributed to the evolution of life history diversity and the maintenance of species coexistence in species-rich tropical forests. Interspecific variability in TNC storage constitutes a central component of seedling recruitment dynamics in this and likely many other tropical forests.

PAGE 53

43 Table 2-1. Analysis of variance for stem and root biomass. VariabledfF P F P Pre-treatment1 Species5260.7<0.000136.7<0.0001 Error18Post-treatment (2 months) Species6125.8<0.0001127.3<0.0001 Treatment27.70.00116.8<0.0001 Error59 1 LACP excluded from the analysis (see Methods)Stem biomassRoot biomass

PAGE 54

Table 2-2. Analysis of variance for TNC concentrations and pool sizes. VariabledfF P F P F P F P F P Pre-treatment Species5115.0<0.000114.4<0.0001116.1<0.000127.0<0.0001113.2<0.0001 Error18Post-treatment Species649.0<0.000141.9<0.000143.8<0.000137.0<0.000152.1<0.0001 Treatment212.3<0.00016.80.00220.0<0.000116.1<0.000123.8<0.0001 Error57 59(stem + root)Total TNC pool sizeTNC concentrationTNC pool sizeStemRootStemRoot 44

PAGE 55

45 A Biomass (mg) 050100210220230 Cotyledon Stem Root B ASPCLACPCOUCCALLCASEPLAETABR TNC concentration (%) 0510152025 Species LowestsurvivalHighestsurvival ***** Figure 2-1. Pretreatment biomass and TNC concentrations. A) Cotyledon, stem, and root biomass. B) Stem and root TNC concentrations. Species are ordered from highest to lowest 1 st -year survival of control seedlings (Table 1-1). Stars in (A) indicate species with storage cotyledons. Vertical bars = + 1 SD; n = 4 common-garden replicates for each species (see Methods); values for LACP were estimated from another experiment (n = 9 for biomass, pooled into a single sample for TNC analysis).

PAGE 56

ATotal biomass (mg) 0100200300400500 1-year survival (%) 020406080100 BStem TNC concentration (%) 0510152025 CTotal TNC pool size (mg) 0246810121416 P > 0.3r2 = 0.16P = 0.09r2 = 0.46P > 0.4r2 = 0.13ASPC LACP COUC CALL CASE PLAE TABR Figure 2-2. Three potential correlates of interspecific variation in 1 st -year control seedling survival. A) Pretreatment total seedling biomass (stems, roots, cotyledons, and leaves). B) Pretreatment stem TNC concentration. C) Pretreatment total TNC pool size (stem + root pools combined). 46

PAGE 57

47 ASPCLACPCOUCCALLCASEPLAETABR TNC pool size (mg) 0246810121416 Root Stem Species LowestsurvivalHighestsurvival Figure 2-3. Pretreatment TNC pool sizes in stems and roots.

PAGE 58

48 B 010203040506070 A Biomass (mg) 020406080100120 Control Light reduction Defoliation D 05101520 C TNC concentration (%) 0510152025 ESpecies ASPCLACPCOUCCALLCASEPLAETABR TNC pool size (mg) 0246810121416 FSpecies ASPCLACPCOUCCALLCASEPLAETABR 01234567 StemsRoots Figure 2-4. Post-treatment biomass and TNC in stems and roots. A,B) Total biomass. C,D) TNC concentrations. E,F) TNC pool sizes. TNC for TABR in both stress treatments and for PLAE in the light-reduction treatment could not be analyzed due to low survival. Vertical bars = + 1 SD; n = 1 common-garden replicates per bar (Table A-1, B-1).

PAGE 59

49 Species ASPCLACPCOUCCALLCASEPLAETABR Cotyledon biomass (mg) 020406080100 Control Light reduction Defoliation Figure 2-5. Post-treatment cotyledon biomass. Cotyledons in COUC, CALL and TABR were removed as part of the defoliation treatment. All cotyledon reserves in PLAE and for the control and light-reduction treatments in CALL were exhausted before the post-treatment harvest at 2 months. Vertical bars = + 1 SD; n = 2 common-garden replicates per bar (Table A-1).

PAGE 60

50 P = 0.03r2 = 0.70TNC pool size (mg) 0246810121 4 RGR (wk-1) -0.05-0.04-0.03-0.02-0.010.000.010.020.03 ASPC COUC CALL CASE PLAE TABR Figure 2-6. Two-month relative growth rate (RGR) of control seedlings plotted against pretreatment TNC pool size. Data are shown for the 6 species in which complete biomass data were available.

PAGE 61

51 A 0246810121416 Survival (0 2 mo) (%) 020406080100 P = 0.002r2 = 0.54 CTotal TNC pool size (mg) 02468101214 Survival (2 mo 1 yr) (%) 020406080100 P = 0.05r2 = 0.39 B 050100150200250300350400450 P = 0.20r2 = 0.12 DTotal seedling biomass (mg) 050100150200250300 P = 0.14r2 = 0.24 Figure 2-7. Survival of stressed seedlings plotted against total TNC pool size and total seedling biomass. A,B) Survival from 0 to 2 months as a function of pretreatment total TNC pool size and total seedling biomass. C,D) Survival from 2 months to 1 year as a function of post-treatment (2-month) total TNC pool size and total seedling biomass. Each point is a species mean; white circles = defoliation treatment, dark circles = light-reduction treatment.

PAGE 62

APPENDIX A SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SEEDLING BIOMASS AND LEAF AREA Table A-1. Statistics for preand post-treatment biomass and leaf area. Speciesnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDCotyledon mass(mg) ASPC4209.216.9428.625.5459.633.0439.230.2 CALL422.416.940.00.020.00.040.00.0 CASE491.423.940.61.2412.08.443.93.3 COUC418.11.2416.31.640.00.0416.42.5 LACP964.465.5420.920.8437.629.5439.339.4 PLAE433.912.540.00.010.00 TAB R 418.62.8317.92.40216.60.3Root mass (mg) ASPC448.13.4457.75.7450.34.5447.84.4 CALL420.94.5425.67.2216.02.8415.45.0 CASE420.45.2420.32.6414.41.1416.55.1 COUC48.10.848.51.246.20.846.70.6 LACP1914.75.8417.23.1414.73.3415.31.5 PLAE426.611.0427.19.5110.00 TAB R 45.50.735.80.9024.71.1Pre-treatmentControlDefoliationPost-treatment (2 months)Light reduction 52

PAGE 63

53 Table A-1. Continued Speciesnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDStem mass (mg) ASPC470.24.7484.58.1484.53.0475.23.7 CALL438.35.1457.310.8230.83.5443.012.3 CASE444.93.8464.011.9453.425.1458.17.6 COUC422.01.4420.31.6418.02.3417.41.3 LACP946.84.1446.59.0444.36.4447.25.4 PLAE479.97.1499.45.9157.40 TAB R 48.51.2311.93.2027.70.4Total mass (mg) ASPC4442.712.24331.320.44221.334.64297.548.1 CALL4146.828.54171.928.4246.70.74117.219.8 CASE4219.834.24171.723.9499.336.74115.734.3 COUC448.21.5445.71.6425.41.7440.63.7 LACP9185.379.14156.139.04122.648.14157.446.4 PLAE4213.39.94234.024.6167.40 TAB R 433.55.7339.69.60230.00.1Leaf area (cm2) ASPC428.12.1429.81.847.31.7428.73.5 CALL437.22.0443.85.120.00.0432.97.5 CASE432.93.0447.27.6411.64.7422.813.2 COUC44.50.545.00.440.60.144.90.6 LACP932.47.3429.85.2411.65.1427.12.4 PLAE432.88.0439.76.710.00 TAB R 46.50.939.73.0027.61.6Pre-treatmentPost-treatment (2 months)ControlDefoliationLight reduction

PAGE 64

54 Table A-2. Statistics for total seedling biomass and leaf area 1 year after treatment. Speciesnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDTotal mass (mg) ASPC4536.8143.94.0248.158.94466.294.8 CALL4519.6190.80.02404.649.7 CASE4272.474.03.0179.885.33243.7154.7 COUC496.029.14.038.59.9477.916.8 LACP4313.899.74.0200.952.94263.6120.0 PLAE3371.6122.00.00 TAB R 241.420.20.00Leaf area (cm2) ASPC444.512.24.013.65.7438.84.8 CALL489.424.20.0261.67.6 CASE452.613.93.032.617.1337.138.4 COUC411.83.74.03.31.549.42.2 LACP446.812.34.029.06.9440.517.8 PLAE343.237.50.00 TAB R 25.98.30.00Post-treatment (1 year)ControlDefoliationLight reduction

PAGE 65

APPENDIX B SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR TOTAL NONSTRUCTURAL CARBOHYDRATE (TNC) RESERVES IN STEMS AND ROOTS Table B-1. Statistics for preand post-treatment TNC concentrations and pool sizes. Speciesnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDRoot (%) ASPC46.200.4948.221.8546.281.7645.921.58 CALL44.600.6649.223.2826.251.5636.851.94 CASE45.260.9744.041.4843.990.5542.950.44 COUC410.421.47413.051.2349.930.63410.210.67 LACP121.91417.101.84412.023.28415.674.25 PLAE44.380.8547.291.8617.150 TAB R 46.111.2549.351.6600Root (mg) ASPC42.950.3844.801.5343.191.0842.800.72 CALL40.970.3042.521.6921.020.4331.060.19 CASE41.040.1640.890.4140.570.0940.500.26 COUC40.850.1941.120.2540.600.0640.690.03 LACP13.2342.840.6541.740.6842.350.65 PLAE41.110.3742.030.9210.710 TAB R 40.340.0940.730.3800Stem (%) ASPC414.200.34413.083.25410.912.42411.531.45 CALL48.190.56412.094.4327.732.9839.481.20 CASE412.310.6048.122.2845.240.4747.081.23 COUC421.062.00421.794.41416.845.68416.841.12 LACP125.12421.511.37416.893.62420.842.20 PLAE46.100.5447.250.6715.110 TAB R 417.382.42412.631.8400Pre-treatmentControlDefoliationPost-treatment (2 months)Light reduction 55

PAGE 66

56 Table B-1. Continued Speciesnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDnmea n SDStem (mg) ASPC49.990.88411.183.7749.252.2748.711.25 CALL43.150.5846.862.8722.320.6433.550.47 CASE45.500.5645.511.9242.811.2344.421.49 COUC44.630.4544.350.5842.620.4442.940.30 LACP111.77410.282.6047.772.61410.101.83 PLAE44.850.2447.190.6612.930 TAB R 41.450.1241.580.3200Total (mg) ASPC412.941.24415.985.28412.443.15411.511.62 CALL44.110.8749.384.5423.341.0744.730.47 CASE46.550.6646.402.3243.371.3244.921.66 COUC45.490.4045.470.8243.220.4043.620.31 LACP115.00413.123.2249.513.29412.452.43 PLAE45.960.1849.221.2013.640 TAB R 41.790.1842.310.60011.06Pre-treatmentPost-treatment (2 months)ControlDefoliationLight reduction

PAGE 67

LIST OF REFERENCES Ashwell, G. (1966) New colorimetric methods of sugar analysis. VII. The phenol-sulfuric acid reaction for carbohydrates. Methods in Enzymology, 8, 93-95. Asquith, N.M., Wright, S.J. & Clauss, M.J. (1997) Does mammal community composition control recruitment in neotropical forests? Evidence from Panama. Ecology, 78, 941-946. Augspurger, C.K. (1984a) Seedling survival of tropical tree species: Interactions of dispersal distance, light-gaps, and pathogens. Ecology, 65, 1705-1712. Augspurger, C.K. (1984b) Light requirements of neotropical tree seedlings: A comparative study of growth and survival. Journal of Ecology, 72, 777-795. Augspurger, C.K. (1983) Seed dispersal of the tropical tree, Platypodium elegans, and the escape of its seedlings from fungal pathogens. Journal of Ecology, 71, 759-771. Augspurger, C.K. & Kelly, C.K. (1983) Pathogen mortality of tropical tree seedlings: Experimental studies of the effects of dispersal distance, seedling density, and light conditions. Oecologia, 61, 211-217. Becker, P. (1983) Effects of insect herbivory and artificial defoliation on survival of Shorea seedlings. Tropical Rain Forest: Ecology and Management (eds. S.L. Sutton, T.C. Whitmore, & A.C. Chadwick), pp. 241-252. Blackwell Scientific Publishers, Oxford. Bloom, A.J., Chapin, F.S. III & Mooney, H.A. (1985) Resource limitation in plants: An economic analogy. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 16, 363-392. Boot, R.G.A. (1996) The significance of seedling size and growth rate of tropical rain forest tree seedlings for regeneration in canopy openings. The Ecology of Tropical Forest Tree Seedlings (ed M.D. Swaine), pp. 267-282. UNESCO, Paris. Bullock, S.H. (1992) Seasonal differences in nonstructural carbohydrates in two dioecious monsoon-climate trees. Biotropica, 24, 140-145. Canham, C.D., Kobe, R.K., Latty, E.F. & Chazdon, R.L. (1999) Interspecific and intraspecific variation in tree seedling survival: effects of allocation to roots versus carbohydrate reserves. Oecologia, 121, 1-11. 57

PAGE 68

58 Chazdon, R.L. & Fetcher, N. (1984) Photosynthetic light environments in a lowland tropical rain forest in Costa Rica. Journal of Ecology, 72, 553-564. Chazdon, R.L. & Pearcy, R.W. (1986) Photosynthetic responses to light variation in rainforest species. II. Carbon gain and photosynthetic efficiency during lightflecks. Oecologia, 69, 524-531. Clark, D.B. & Clark, D.A. (1989) The role of physical damage in the seedling mortality regime of a neotropical rainforest. Oikos, 55, 225-230. Coley, P.D., Bryant, J.P., & Chapin, F.S. III (1985) Resource availability and plant antiherbivore defense. Science, 230, 895-899. Connell, J.H. (1971) On the role of natural enemies in preventing competitive exclusion in some marine animals and in rain forest trees. Dynamics of Populations (eds P.J. den Boer & G.R. Gradwell), pp. 298-312. Center for Agricultural Publication and Documentation, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Connell, J.H. & Green, P.T. (2000) Seedling dynamics over thirty-two years in a tropical rain forest tree. Ecology, 81, 568-584. Cunningham, S.A. (1997) The effect of light environment, leaf area, and stored carbohydrates on inflorescence production by a rain forest understory palm. Oecologia, 111, 36-44. Dubois, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton, J.K., Rebers, P.A. & Smith, F. (1956) Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry, 28, 350-356. Engelbrecht, M.J. & Kursar, T.A. (2003) Comparative drought-resistance of seedlings of 28 species of co-occurring tropical woody plants. Oecologia, 136, 383-393. Farris-Lopez, K., Denslow, J.S., Moser, B. & Passmore, H. (2004) Influence of a common palm, Oenocarpus mapora, on seedling establishment in a tropical moist forest in Panama. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 20, 429-438. Fox, G.A. (2001) Failure-time analysis: Studying times to events and rates at which events occur. Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments (eds S.M. Scheiner & J. Gurevitch), pp.235-266. Oxford University Press, Inc., New York. Givnish, T.J. (1988) Adaptation to sun and shade: A whole-plant perspective. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 15, 63-92. Green, P.T. & Juniper, P.A. (2004) Seed mass, seedling herbivory and the reserve effect in tropical rainforest seedlings. Functional Ecology, 18, 539-547. Grime, J.P. (1965) Shade tolerance in flowering plants. Nature, 208, 161-163.

PAGE 69

59 Grubb, P.J., Lee, W.G., Kollmann, J. & Wilson, J.B. (1996) Interaction of irradiance and soil nutrient supply on growth of seedlings of ten European tall-shrub species and Fagus sylvatica. Journal of Ecology, 84, 827-840. Gunatilleke, C.V.S., Gunatilleke, I.A.U.N., Perera, G.A.D., Burslem, D.F.R.P., Ashton, P.M.S. & Ashton, P.S. (1997) Responses to nutrient addition among seedlings of eight closely related species of Shorea in Sri Lanka. Journal of Ecology, 85, 301-311. Harms, K.E. & Dalling, J.W. (1997) Damage and herbivory tolerance through resprouting as an advantage of large seed size in tropical trees and lianas. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 13, 617-621. Harms, K.E., Wright, S.J., Caldern, O., Hernndez, A. & Herre, E.A. (2000) Pervasive density-dependent recruitment enhances seedling diversity in a tropical forest. Nature, 404, 493-495. Hoffman, W.A., Orthen, B. & Franco, A.C. (2004) Constraints to seedling success of savanna and forest trees across the savanna-forest boundary. Oecologia, 140, 252-260. Hoffman, W.A., Orthen, B. & Nascimento, P.K.V. (2003) Comparative fire ecology of tropical savanna and forest trees. Functional Ecology, 17, 720-726. Hubbell, S.P. (1979) Tree dispersion, abundance, and diversity in a tropical dry forest. Science, 203, 1299-1309. Janzen, D.H. (1970) Herbivores and the number of tree species in tropical forests. American Naturalist, 104, 501-528. Kabeya, D. & Sakai, S. (2003) The role of roots and cotyledons as storage organs in early stages of establishment in Quercus crispula: A quantitative analysis of the nonstructural carbohydrate in cotyledons and roots. Annals of Botany, 92, 537-545. Khurana, E. & Singh, J.S. (2004) Germination and seedling growth of five tree species from tropical dry forest in relation to water stress: Impact of seed size. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 20, 385-396. Kitajima, K. (2004) Impact of cotyedon and leaf removal on seedling survival in three tree species with contrasting cotyledon functions. Biotropica, 35, 429-434. Kitajima, K. (2002) Do shade-tolerant tropical tree seedlings depend longer on seed reserves? Functional growth analysis of three Bignoniaceae species. Functional Ecology, 16, 433-444. Kitajima, K. (1996) Ecophysiology of tropical tree seedlings. Tropical Forest Plant Ecophysiology (eds S.S. Mulkey, R.L. Chazdon, & A.P. Smith), pp. 559-596. Chapman and Hall, New York, NY.

PAGE 70

60 Kitajima, K. (1994) Relative importance of photosynthetic traits and allocation patterns as correlates of seedling shade tolerance of 13 tropical trees. Oecologia, 98, 419-428. Kobe, R.K. (1999) Light gradient partitioning among tropical tree species through differential seedling mortality and growth. Ecology, 80, 187-201. Kobe, R.K. (1997) Carbohydrate allocation to storage as a basis of interspecific variation in sapling survivorship and growth. Oikos, 80, 226-233. Kobe, R.K., Pacala, S.W., Silander, J.A., Jr. & Canham, C.D. (1995) Juvenile tree survivorship as a component of shade tolerance. Ecological Applications, 5, 517-532. Li, M., Leiberman, M. & Leiberman, D. (1996) Seedling demography in undisturbed tropical wet forest in Costa Rica. The Ecology of Tropical Forest Tree Seedlings (ed M.D. Swaine), pp. 285-314. UNESCO, Paris. Loach, K. (1967) Shade tolerance in tree seedlings. I. Leaf photosynthesis and respiration in plants raised under artificial shade. New Phytologist, 66, 607-621. Marenco, R.A, de C. Gonalves, J.F. & Vieira, G. (2001) Leaf gas exchange and carbohydrates in tropical trees differing in successional status in two light environments in central Amazonia. Tree Physiology, 21, 1311-1318. Marquis, R.J., Newell, E.A. & Villegas, A.C. (1997) Non-structural carbohydrate accumulation and use in an understory rain-forest shrub and the relevance for the impact of leaf herbivory. Functional Ecology, 11, 636-643. McPherson, K. & Williams, K. (1998) The role of cabbage palm seedlings in the growth, resilience, and persistence of cabbage palm seedlings (Sabal palmetto). Oecologia, 117, 460-468. Moles, A.T. & Westoby, M. (2004) What do seedlings die from and what are the implication for the evolution of seed size? Oikos, 106, 193-199. Montgomery, R.A. (2004) Effects of understory foliage on patterns of light attenuation near the forest floor. Biotropica, 36, 33-39. Montgomery, R.A. & Chazdon, R.L. (2002) Light gradient partitioning by tropical tree seedlings in the absence of canopy gaps. Oecologia, 131, 165-174. Newell, E.A., Mulkey, S.S., & Wright, S.J. (2002) Seasonal patterns of carbohydrate storage in four tropical tree species. Oecologia, 131, 333-342. Osunkoya, O.O., Ash, J.E., Hopkins, M.S. & Graham, A.W. (1994) Influence of seed size and seedling ecological attributes on shade-tolerance of rain-forest tree species in northern Queensland. Journal of Ecology, 82, 149-163.

PAGE 71

61 Osunkoya, O.O., Ash, J.E., Hopkins, M.S., & Graham, A.W. (1992) Factors affecting survival of tree seedlings in North Queensland rainforests. Oecologia, 91, 569-578. Pacala, S.W., Canham, C.D., Saponara, J., Silander, J.A., Kobe, R.K. & Ribbens, E. (1996) Forest models defined by field measurements: Estimation, error analysis and dynamics. Ecological Monographs, 66, 1-43. Poorter, L. (1999) Growth responses of 15 rain-forest trees to a light gradient: The relative importance of morphological and physiological traits. Functional Ecology, 13, 396-410. Rand, A.S. & Rand, W.M. (1982) Variation in rainfall on Barro Colorado Island. The Ecology of a Tropical Forest (eds E.G. Leigh, Jr., A.S. Rand & D.M. Windsor), pp. 47-66. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Rose, S.A. & Poorter, L (2002) The importance of seed mass for early regeneration in tropical forest: A review. Long term changes in Composition and Diversity: case studies from the Guyana Shield, Africa, Borneo and Melanesia (ed H. ter Steege), pp. 5-19. Tropenbos Foundation, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Scariot, A. (2000) Seedling mortality by litterfall in Amazonian forest fragments. Biotropica, 32, 662-669. Tissue, D.T. & Wright, S.J. (1995) Effects of seasonal water availability on phenology and the annual shoot carbohydrate cycle of tropical forest shrubs. Functional Ecology, 9, 518-527. Vzquez-Ynes, C., Orozco-Segovia, A., Rincon, E., Sanchez-Coronado, M.E., Huante, P., Toledo, J.R., & Barradas, V.L. (1990) Light beneath the litter in a tropical forest: Effect on seed germination. Ecology, 71, 1952-1958. Veneklaas, E.J. & Poorter, L. (1998) Growth and carbon partitioning of tropical tree seedlings in contrasting light environments. Inherent Variation in Plant Growth. Physiological Mechanisms and Ecological Consequences (eds H. Lambers, H. Poorter & M.M.I. Van Vuuren), pp.337-361. Backkhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands. Walter, M.B. & Reich, P.B. (2000) Seed size, nitrogen supply, and growth rate effect tree seedling survival in deep shade. Ecology, 81, 1887-1901. Walters, M.B. & Reich, P.B. (1999) Low-light carbon balance and shade tolerance in the seedlings of woody plants: Do winter deciduous and broad-leaved evergreen species differ? New Phytologist, 143, 143-154. Walters, M.B. & Reich, P.B. (1996) Are shade tolerance, survival, and growth linked? Low light and nitrogen effects on hardwood seedlings. Ecology, 77, 841-853.

PAGE 72

62 Wang, Y.H. & Augspurger, C.K. (2004) Dwarf palms and cyclanths strongly reduce Neotropical seedling recruitment. Oikos, 107, 619-633. Welden, C.W., Hewett, S.W., Hubbell, S.P. & Foster, R.B. (1991) Sapling survival, growth, and recruitment: Relationship to canopy height in a neotropical forest. Ecology, 72, 35-50. Woodward, F.I. (1990) From genes to ecosystems: The importance of shade tolerance. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 111-115. Wright, S.J. (2002) Plant diversity in tropical forests: A review of mechanisms of species coexistence. Oecologia, 130, 1-14.

PAGE 73

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Jonathans interest in the natural world began when he was a boy growing up in the forests and fields of western New York State. His formal education in the natural sciences began during his junior year in high school, where he enrolled in and completed a 2-year vocational program in natural resources conservation. Jonathan went on to pursue a 2-year degree in forestry from Paul Smiths College, Paul Smiths, New York, graduating in May of 1999. As part of his Paul Smiths education, he participated in a tropical biology field course in Belize, which sparked his interest in both tropical ecosystems and a professional career in ecology. He continued his undergraduate education at Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, majoring in biological sciences, with a concentration in ecology and evolutionary biology. He graduated with a B.S. degree in May of 2002 and was awarded high honors for an undergraduate thesis on seed dispersal by white-tailed deer, later published in Oecologia (2004). Jonathan spent the following summer working as research assistant for the Institute of Ecosystem Studies, studying hurricane effects on seedling regeneration at the Luquillo Experimental Forest in Puerto Rico. Jonathan began his graduate work in the fall of 2002 in the Department of Botany at the University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, studying tropical rainforest seedling ecology and ecophysiology. During his second semester, he participated in an 8-week tropical ecology field course in Costa Rica, hosted through the Organization for Tropical Studies at Duke University. He then traveled northwest to Panama to begin the field 63

PAGE 74

64 research for his M.S. thesis, which focused on the role of nonstructural carbohydrate reserves in seedling growth, survival, and stress tolerance in a tropical wet forest. He received his M.S. degree in interdisciplinary ecology, with a concentration in botany, in May of 2005. Jonathan is currently working towards a Ph.D. in tropical forest community ecology in the Department of Biological Sciences at Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and plans to pursue an academic career in research and teaching.


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0009262/00001

Material Information

Title: Seedling Carbohydrate Storage, Survival, and Stress Tolerance in a Neotropical Forest
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0009262:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0009262/00001

Material Information

Title: Seedling Carbohydrate Storage, Survival, and Stress Tolerance in a Neotropical Forest
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0009262:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












SEEDLING CARBOHYDRATE STORAGE, SURVIVAL, AND STRESS
TOLERANCE IN A NEOTROPICAL FOREST
















By

JONATHAN ANDREW MYERS


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2005

































Copyright 2005

by

Jonathan Andrew Myers

































I dedicate this thesis to my parents, Roy and Susan Myers, whose support and
encouragement of my pursuits in ecology know no bounds.















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would first like to thank my advisor, Kaoru Kitajima, for her unwavering

mentorship in both academia and field research. Her passion for seedling ecology

and dedication to strong work ethic is constantly inspiring. I would also like to thank my

committee member, Jack Putz, for his critical and insightful suggestions on all aspects of

the thesis and for his overall guidance in my development as an ecologist.

Numerous individuals have generously contributed field and laboratory assistance.

I would like to thank Marta Vargas for her assistance with data collection throughout the

entirety of the project, Roberto Cordero for his help and advice during the early stages of

project development, Sebastian Bernal for his spirited assistance in the field and

laboratory (and for keeping us dry and motivated in even the heaviest of rains), and

Momoka Yao for her help with many of the laboratory measurements and analyses. I

would also like to thank the following undergraduate students for assistance with data

collection: Sarah Tarrant, Lisa Cowart, and Sergio Montes. Laboratory assistance was

also provided by Zachary Tyser, who participated in the project through the 46th Annual

Pre-collegiate Summer Science Training Program at the University of Florida.

Finally, I would like to thank the many friends and colleagues who made my time

at the University of Florida more than memorable. I would especially like to thank

Teresa Kurtz, Silvia Alvarez, Camila Pizano, Jennifer Schaefer, Joseph Veldman, and

Eddie Watkins for constantly reminding me that the beauty of life extends well beyond

science.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ................................................................................................. iv

LIST OF TABLES ....................................................... ............ .............. .. vii

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................... .......... ................ viii

ABSTRACT ........ .............. ............. ...... ...................... ix

CHAPTER

1 STRESS TOLERANCE ENHANCES SEEDLING SURVIVAL IN THE
UNDERSTORY OF A TROPICAL FOREST: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE .......1

In tro du ctio n ...................................... ............................. ..... ......... ...... .
M eth od s ......................................................................... . 3
Study Site and Species................ ............. ...... ...... .............. ........... .. 3
Field and Laboratory M ethods ........................................ ......................... 4
Statistical A n aly ses........... ............................................................ ........ .. ....
R e su lts ........................................................................ ........................ 9
Seedling Survival .................. .................. .... ...... ........ ................ 9
Effects of Defoliation and Light Reduction on Seedling Biomass and Growth..10
D iscu ssion .......................................... .. .... .. .............. ......................... 12
Stress Tolerance as a Component of Seedling Survival in Shade....................12
Seedling Tolerance to Defoliation: The Importance of Storage Reserves ..........13
Seedling Tolerance to Temporal Variation in Understory Light Availability ....14

2 CARBON ALLOCATION TO STORAGE IN TROPICAL FOREST SEEDLINGS:
EFFECTS ON GROWTH, SURVIVAL AND STRESS TOLERANCE ..................24

Introdu action ...................................... ................................................. 24
M eth o d s ..............................................................2 7
Study Site and Species............ .... ........................................ .... .. ........... 27
Field and Laboratory M ethods ........................................ ........................ 28
Quantification of TNC in Stems and Roots...................................................31
Statistical A n aly ses........... ................................................ .......... ..... .... .... 32









R e su lts ............... ...... .. .... ...... ... ...... ......................................... 3 4
Variation in Pretreatment Biomass and TNC Reserves ......................................34
Effects of Defoliation and Deep Shade on Biomass and TNC Reserves ............35
Influence of Seedling Size, Growth, and TNC Reserves on Seedling Survival..36
D iscu ssion ........................................ ........... ..... .... ................................. .38
Role of TNC Reserves in Seedling Survival and Stress Tolerance...................38
Tradeoffs between Seedling Growth and Storage.............................................40
TNC Allocation, Seed Size, and Seedling Functional Morphology ..................41
C o n clu sio n .................................................. ................ 4 2

APPENDIX

A SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SEEDLING BIOMASS AND LEAF AREA........ 52

B SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR TOTAL NONSTRUCTURAL
CARBOHYDRATE (TNC) RESERVES IN STEMS AND ROOTS......................55

L IST O F R E F E R E N C E S ........................................................................ .....................57

BIO GRAPH ICAL SK ETCH .................................................. ............................... 63
















LIST OF TABLES


Table pge

1-1 Seed and seedling characteristics of the study species...........................................17

1-2 Proportional hazards (Cox regression) survival time analysis of seedling
survival over 1 year................... ............................ .. ........ .. ............ 18

1-3 Analysis of variance for total seedling biomass................... ................... ...............18

2-1 Analysis of variance for stem and root biomass. ................ ................ ..............43

2-2 Analysis of variance for TNC concentrations and pool sizes ...............................44

A-i Statistics for pre- and post-treatment biomass and leaf area..................................52

A-2 Statistics for total seedling biomass and leaf area 1 year after treatment ................54

B-l Statistics for pre- and post-treatment TNC concentrations and pool sizes..............55
















LIST OF FIGURES


Figure pge

1-1 Effects of light reduction and defoliation on 1st-year seedling survival ................. 19

1-2 Two-month survival of stress treatment seedlings plotted against 1st-year
survival of control treatm ent seedlings.. ....................................... ............... 20

1-3 Effects of light reduction and defoliation on seedling size and growth 2 months
after treatm ent.. ........................................................................2 1

1-4 Leaf area recovery 2 m months after defoliation.. ........................................ ............22

1-5 Effects of light reduction and defoliation on relative growth rate (RGR) from 2
months to 1 year. ............. .. ............ ............................. ....... 23

2-1 Pretreatment biomass and TNC concentrations......................................................45

2-2 Three potential correlates of interspecific variation in lst-year control seedling
survival .................................. .................................... ........... 46

2-3 Pretreatment TNC pool sizes in stems and roots.................... ........................... 47

2-4 Post-treatment biomass and TNC in stems and roots.............................................48

2-5 Post-treatment cotyledon biomass.................................................. ............... 49

2-6 Two-month relative growth rate (RGR) of control seedlings plotted against
pretreatm ent TN C pool size.. ............................. ..............................................50

2-7 Survival of stressed seedlings plotted against total TNC pool size and total
seedling biom ass.. ...................................................................... 5 1















Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science

SEEDLING CARBOHYDRATE STORAGE, SURVIVAL, AND STRESS
TOLERANCE IN A NEOTROPICAL FOREST

By

Jonathan Andrew Myers

May 2005

Chair: Kaoru Kitajima
Major Department: Botany

I investigated the role of stem and root total nonstructural carbohydrate (TNC)

reserves in seedling growth, survival, and stress tolerance in the shaded understory of a

tropical moist forest in central Panama. Seven woody species that ranged widely in

seedling shade tolerance were selected for study: Aspidosperma cruenta and Lacmelia

panamensis (Apocynaceae), Coussarea curvigemnia (Rubiaceae), Callichlamys latifolia

and Tabebuia rosea (Bignoniaceae), Castilla elastica (Moraceae), and Platypodium

elegans (Fabaceae). Seedlings of each species were raised from seed in a shade house,

transferred to common-gardens enclosed by wire fencing in the shaded forest understory

(ca. 1% full sun), and then randomly assigned to one of three experimental treatments:

extreme light reduction (ca. 0.06% of full sun for 2 months), complete defoliation at 0

months, and control (no manipulation). The goal of the light-reduction and defoliation

stress treatments was to force seedlings into negative carbon balance, to determine the

role of TNC reserves for seedling survival over the period of 1 year.









First-year survival of control seedlings-which I used as a quantitative index of

shade tolerance-varied significantly among species, ranging from 96% in Aspidosperma

to 19% in Tabebuia. The light-reduction and defoliation treatments caused significant

decreases in seedling survival. Two-month survival after the stress treatments was

positively correlated with 1st-year control seedling survival among species. Seedlings of

the two species with lowest 1st-year control seedling survival (Tabebuia and

Platypodium) were unable to survive either stress treatment past 60 days.

Pretreatment TNC concentrations and pool sizes in stems and roots differed

significantly among species. Stem concentrations were higher than root concentrations in

all species, and comprised between 6 to 25% of the total stem biomass. Variation in

1st-year control seedling survival was positively related to pretreatment TNC pool size

(combined stem and root pools) among species; but not to pretreatment stem or root TNC

concentrations, total seedling biomass, or cotyledon biomass. Survival of the stress

treatment seedlings during the first 2 months (and from 2 months to 1 year) was also

positively related to interspecific variation in TNC pool size. Relative growth rates of

control seedlings from 0 to 2 months were negatively related to TNC pool size among

species, suggesting a tradeoff between carbon allocation to growth versus storage.

My results highlight the importance of TNC reserves for seedling survival and

stress tolerance in the shaded understory of tropical forests. Allocation-based tradeoffs

between seedling growth and storage provide a mechanistic basis for species differences

in shade tolerance; and have likely played important roles in the evolution of life-history

diversity and maintenance of tree-species diversity in species-rich tropical tree

communities.














CHAPTER 1
STRESS TOLERANCE ENHANCES SEEDLING SURVIVAL IN THE
UNDERSTORY OF A TROPICAL FOREST: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE

Introduction

Differential seedling survival among coexisting species has long been considered to

play important roles in determining tree-species composition and diversity in tropical

forests (Janzen 1970; Connell 1971; Hubbell 1979; Harms et al. 2000; Wright 2002).

Seedling mortality is especially high in the shaded forest understory (Augspurger

1984a,b; Osunkoya et al. 1992; Li et al. 1996) where light availability is low (ca. 1% of

full sun) and variable in time and space (Chazdon and Fetcher 1984; Montgomery and

Chazdon 2002; Montgomery 2004). Under these conditions, low potential for

photosynthetic carbon gain limits the ability of seedlings to maintain positive carbon

balance, a prerequisite for survival in shade. Diurnal and seasonal fluctuations in

understory light availability (Chazdon and Fetcher 1984; Chazdon and Pearcy 1986)

and/or deep shading of seedlings by fallen litter or understory foliage (Vazquez-Yanes et

al. 1990; Wang and Augspurger 2004; Farris-Lopez et al. 2004; Montgomery 2004)

further constrain carbon balance by forcing seedlings to cope with stressful periods, when

light levels drops below the photosynthetic compensation point. In addition to

light-limitation, seedlings risk mortality when tissues are lost or damaged by disease

(Augspurger 1984a), herbivores (Osunkoya et al. 1992; Asquith et al. 1997; Kitajima

2004), and physical disturbance (Clark and Clark 1989; Scariot 2000). Identifying the

extent and factors that contribute to species differences in their ability to cope with









stresses due to light limitation and tissue loss is essential for predicting and evaluating

community-level patterns of seedling recruitment and relative species abundance.

Survival in light-limited habitats (shade tolerance) is contingent on the ability of

seedlings to maintain positive carbon balance. Some researchers have hypothesized that

shade tolerance is achieved by morphological and physiological traits that maximize the

rate of carbon capture in low light at the whole-plant level (Loach 1967; Givnish 1988;

Woodward 1990; Walters and Reich 1996). According to this hypothesis, fast rates of

net carbon gain facilitate both high seedling growth rates and enhanced survival in shade,

by allowing seedlings to quickly increase in size and out-compete slower growing

neighbors (Walters and Reich 2000).

In contrast, others researchers have hypothesized that fast growth in shade could

have deleterious consequences on survival, because high carbon allocation to growth

must occur at the expense of allocation to storage and defense (Kitajima 1994, 1996;

Coley et al. 1985; Kobe et al. 1995; Kobe 1997; Veneklaas and Poorter 1999), thereby

reducing seedling tolerance and/or resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses. However, few

studies have directly tested whether interspecific variation in seedling survival and

growth in the shaded forest understory is linked to species-specific differences in seedling

stress tolerance (e.g., Augspurger 1984a). Quantifying the degree to which different

species are able to tolerate and recover from abiotic and biotic stresses (especially those

posed by light-limitation and tissue loss) could help to clarify the functional traits

underlying seedling shade tolerance and life history diversity in the seedling community

of species-rich tropical forests.









In this study, I examined seedling stress tolerance, growth, and survival among

seven coexisting woody species in a tropical moist forest in central Panama. The

overarching goal of my study was to test whether interspecific variation in seedling shade

tolerance, measured quantitatively as 1st-year seedling survival in the shaded understory

(see also Augspurger 1984a,b; Kitajima 1994; Boot 1996), was linked to variation in

survival and growth responses to stresses caused from light limitation and tissue loss. I

tested the following two hypotheses: (1) interspecific variation in lst-year seedling

survival in the shaded understory is positively correlated with the ability to survive stress

due to light limitation and tissue loss; and (2) seedling growth is less affected by stress in

species with higher lst-year seedling survival. To test these hypotheses, I conducted a

1-year common-garden field experiment in the shaded understory (- 1% full sun), using

transplanted seedlings of an equivalent ontogenetic stage, defined by expansion of the

first photosynthetic organs (leaves or cotyledons). Growth and survival were monitored

on seedlings assigned to one of three treatments: (1) extreme light reduction; (2)

complete defoliation; (3) control (no manipulation). The goal of the light-reduction

treatment was to expose seedlings to light levels below those required for whole-plant

carbon balance, while the purpose of the defoliation treatment was to force seedlings to

rely on storage reserves after removal of photosynthetic leaves and cotyledons.

Methods

Study Site and Species

The study was conducted on Buena Vista peninsula, an area of ca. 60-year-old

secondary lowland tropical forest, located in the Barro Colorado Nature Monument

(BCNM), Panama (9010' N, 7951' W). The BCNM forest is semi-deciduous, with a









pronounced 4-month dry season that usually lasts from mid-December to mid-April.

Annual rainfall on the BCNM averages 2,700 mm (Rand and Rand 1982).

Seven woody species with sufficient seed availability were chosen for study (Table

1-1). All of the species are canopy trees as adults, except for Callichlamys latifolia

(Bignoniaceae), which is a woody liana. Species were selected to span a range of shade

tolerance, which was quantified by estimating the percentage of seedlings surviving for 1

year in experimental plots located in the shaded understory (Table 1-1). Small-seeded,

pioneer species that are generally unable to establish seedling populations in the shaded

forest understory were deliberately excluded from the study.

The seven species differ in seed mass (24 to 453 mg) and cotyledon functional

morphology (Table 1-1). Aspidosperma cruenta, Lacmeliapanamensis, Castilla elastica,

and Platypodium elegans have hypogeal cotyledons that remain below or just above the

soil surface, and that function primarily for storage of seed reserves. The three other

species have epigeal cotyledons that become elevated above the ground after

germination; Coussarea curvigemnia and Tabebuia rosea have foliaceous photosynthetic

cotyledons, and Callichlamys latifolia has thick green cotyledons that function primarily

for storage (Kitajima 2002). For brevity, species are henceforth referred to by genus.

Field and Laboratory Methods

Depending on seed availability, 200 to 400 seedlings per species were raised from

seed in a shade house on the BCNM, under a light level similar to that found in the forest

understory (1.5% full sun, based on total daily photon flux density). When possible,

seeds were collected from at least 3 nonadjacent parent trees, to increase genetic diversity

within each species. Seedlings were raised in plastic trays containing a 1:1 mixture of

forest soil and sand, until all seedlings reached an equivalent ontogenetic stage, defined









by the full expansion of the first photosynthetic organs (leaves or cotyledons, depending

on the species; Table 1-1), at which time they were transplanted into the forest (described

below). Seedlings were transplanted at a standardized ontogenetic stage, rather than at a

common chronological age, so that all species had initiated autotrophic growth by the

onset of the study. Because of interspecific variability in timing of seed dispersal,

germination, and development, seedlings were transplanted over a 3-month period during

the early-mid rainy season (May to July).

Seedlings of all species were transplanted into four 7 x 7 m2 common-gardens

located in the shaded forest understory on Buena Vista Peninsula. Each garden was

separated by at least 50 m from the nearest adjacent garden, and enclosed by 1 m tall

fencing to exclude large herbivores. For each species, equal numbers of seedlings were

transplanted into 1 x 1 m2 cells in four equally sized, stratified sections in each garden

(50 to 100 total seedlings garden-1 species-1). All vegetation < 1.5 m tall was removed

from each garden before seedling transplantation, and all seedlings were positioned a

minimum of 25 cm apart. When necessary, leaf litter was also removed to avoid burial of

seedlings. Seedlings dying within the first 2 weeks after transplantation were replaced

(< 10 seedlings total).

Seedlings were randomly assigned to one of three treatments 2 weeks after

transplantation: (1) defoliation; (2) light reduction; (3) control (no manipulation). For the

defoliation treatment, all leaves and photosynthetic cotyledons (if present) were clipped

at the base of the petiole; cotyledons were retained on all of the species with hypogeal

storage cotyledons (Table 1-1). For the light-reduction treatment, cylindrical wire cages

covered with 90% shade cloth were placed over individual seedlings. Shade cage









dimensions ranged from 6 x 12 cm (height x diameter) to 15 x 30 cm (depending on

initial seedling size); and were constructed to be large enough so as not to hinder growth

over a 2-month period, after which the shade cages were removed.

Light transmission was measured inside and outside of the shade cages with Li-Cor

quantum sensors during the early-mid rainy season. Percent light transmission

underneath the cages, and within each common-garden, was determined using both

instantaneous and continuous total daily photon flux density (PFD) measurements.

Instantaneous PFD measurements were taken inside and outside of shade cages at 8 to 15

stratified positions in each garden under mid-day, cloudy sky conditions. Continuous

PFD was measured by placing a single censor in the middle of each common-garden for

2 days. To calculate % light transmission, measurements within the forest were

referenced to a sensor placed in completely open sky on a laboratory rooftop. Mean light

reduction ( 1 SD) by the shade cages was 89 ( 2)%. Mean light levels outside of the

shade cages, as determined from the instantaneous PFD measurements, ranged among

gardens from 0.38 to 0.68% (overall mean = 0.55%); mean light levels from the

continuous PFD measurements taken over 2 full days in each garden were higher, and

ranged among gardens from 0.68 to 1.44% of full sun (overall mean = 1%). Seedlings

inside the shade cages thus experienced only ca. 0.06% of full sun over the 2-month

light-reduction treatment.

To estimate pre- and post-treatment biomass, I harvested randomly selected

sub-samples of seedlings from each common-garden. For the pretreatment samples, 6 to

12 seedlings per species were harvested from each common-garden just prior to

treatment. Post-treatment samples were harvested 2 months (coinciding with the end of









the light-reduction treatment) and 1 year after treatment; samples sizes at these harvests

ranged from 2 to 32 total seedlings per species x treatment combination, depending on

species-specific differences in survival. Seedlings were harvested by carefully

excavating the root system with a small trowel. Roots, stems, leaves, and cotyledons

were separated within 12 hours after harvesting, and then oven dried at 100C for 1 hour.

All samples were then dried for an additional 48 hours at 60C before weighing. Leaf

and cotyledon area (for epigeal cotyledons only) were measured before drying using a

Li-Cor leaf area meter.

Seedling survival was measured by conducting censuses every week for the first 2

months, and then every 2 weeks from 2 months to 1 year. Missing seedlings were treated

as dead. Seedlings killed by branch fall and locally heavy herbivory (e.g., outbreak of

stem cutting insects in one common-garden) were excluded from the study.

Statistical Analyses

Differences in survival among species and treatments were analyzed using

semi-parametric proportional hazards modeling (i.e., Cox regression; Fox 2001). Cox

regression was selected over alternative parametric tests because it does not assume

a particular probability distribution for survival times (the non-parametric component of

the model; Fox 2001), which varied widely among species and treatments. Seedlings

harvested for biomass measurements and those that survived beyond the final survival

census were 'right-censored' in the analysis. I then used the Kaplan-Meier approach to

estimate the proportion of seedlings surviving over time for each species x treatment

combination. Differences between Kaplan-Meier estimates among species and among

treatments within species were analyzed using log-rank tests, which tests for

heterogeneity in survival times among groups by comparing observed versus expected









number of deaths between each mortality event (Fox 2001). Percent survival was

estimated from 0 to 2 months (i.e., the time of shade cage removal), 2 months to 1 year

(stress treatments only), and from 0 to 1 year (control treatment only) from the Kaplan-

Meier survival curves. Survival data were pooled across common-gardens for all

analyses and garden was included as a main factor in the Cox regression model.

Differences among species and treatments in total seedling biomass at 2 months

and 1 year were analyzed using ANOVA. In both analyses, common-garden means were

used as replicates for each species x treatment combination (n = 1-4 per species x

treatment combination; Appendix A). Because all seedlings had died before the

2-month harvest for some species x treatment combinations, I used two separate ANOVA

models to analyze seedling biomass. In the first model ("saturated model"), I tested for

species, treatment, and species x treatment interaction effects on biomass, but only

included data for the species that had living seedlings present in all treatments at the time

of harvest (n = 5 species at 2 months; n = 4 species at 1 year). In the second model

("Reduced main factor model"), I included data for all 7 species and tested for the main

effects of species and treatment on biomass, but excluded species x interaction terms.

Data from the 1-year harvest were loglo-transformed before analysis to improve

normality and homogeneity of variance.

Simple least squares linear regression was used to test for correlations between

interspecific variation in seedling survival, growth, and size. Relative growth rates

(RGR) of total seedling biomass, stem height, and leaf area were estimated using the

following formula:

RGR (wk-1) = [ln (X2) In (Xl)] / time









where X2 = mean size at time 2; X1 = mean size at time 1; and time = number of
weeks between times 1 and 2.

RGR for LACP from 0 to 2 months could not be calculated due to missing pretreatment

biomass samples. Leaf and cotyledon mass were included in all RGR calculations.

Cotyledon area was included in all leaf area calculations for species with photosynthetic

cotyledons (Coussarea and Tabebuia). All statistical analyses were performed using

JMP software (SAS Institute, 1997).

Results

Seedling Survival

Seedling survival differed substantially among species and treatments (Table 1-2;

Figure 1-1). First-year survival of control seedlings differed significantly among species

(P < 0.0001 for log-rank test of survival time distributions), and ranged from 19 to 96%

at the end of one year (Figure 1-1; Table 1-1). For control seedlings, survival from 0 to 1

year was positively correlated with survival from 0 to 2 months among species

(P < 0.0001, r2 = 0.96, n = 7), when mortality was generally highest for most species.

Thus, species maintained their survival ranks from 2 months to 1 year. Survival also

differed significantly among common-gardens (Table 1-2), and was generally higher in

gardens with higher light levels, even though the range in light levels among gardens was

small (0.6-1.4% full sun).

Defoliation and light reduction significantly reduced survival in all species

(Figure 1-1; P < 0.0001 for log rank tests), and there was a significant interaction

between species and treatment on survival times (Table 1-2). Species that had high

survival in the light-reduction treatment also had high survival in the defoliation

treatment (P = 0.0001, r2 = 0.94, n = 7 for proportional survival from 0 2 months). For









some species (Aspidosperma, Coussarea, Callichlamys) defoliation had a larger overall

impact on survival than light reduction, while others showed similar survival in the two

stress treatments (Figure 1-1).

The impact of the stress treatments on seedling survival varied widely among

species (Figure 1-1). Survival in the stress treatments from 0 to 2 months was positively

correlated with 1st-year control seedling survival among species (Figure 1-2). Two-

month survival for the three species with highest 1st-year survival exceeded 85% in both

stress treatments. In contrast, of the four species with the lowest 1st-year survival of

control seedlings, three had reached 100% seedling mortality in one or both of the stress

treatments before 60 days. There were no significant relationships between seedling

survival and seed mass or pretreatment cotyledon mass among species for any treatment

(P > 0.2 for all regressions), even though the species with the largest seed size

(Aspidosperma) had the highest survival in all treatments at 2 months, and the smallest-

seeded species (Tabebuia) the lowest survival after defoliation and the second lowest

survival after light reduction.

Effects of Defoliation and Light Reduction on Seedling Biomass and Growth

Total seedling biomass at 2 months differed significantly among species and

treatments (Figure 1-3a; Table 1-3). The effect of the stress treatments on seedling

biomass varied widely among species (Figure 1-3a) and there was a significant

interaction between species and treatment on biomass at 2 months, but not at 1 year

(Table 1-3). Whole-seedling relative growth rate (RGR) from 0 to 2 months also varied

widely among species and treatments (Figure 1-3b). Control seedling RGR ranged 2.5

fold between species and was highest for Tabebuia (which had the lowest 1st-year control

seedling survival) and lowest for Aspidosperma (highest 1 t-year survival), but there was









no significant correlation between control seedling survival and RGR among species (P >

0.4, r2 = 0.16, n = 6). Two-month survival of control seedlings was, however, negatively

correlated to both stem height and leaf area RGR among species (P = 0.01, r2 = 0.77 for

stem height; P = 0.03, r2 = 0.68 for logo leaf area).

Light reduction had a noticeable effect on RGR, which varied 5.5 fold among

species at the end of 2-month treatment (Figure 1-3b). RGR in the light-reduction

treatment was less affected (relative to the control treatment) for species with higher

1st-year control seedling survival: RGR was reduced by 0.013 to 0.015 wk-1 for the two

species with higher 1st-year survival (Aspidosperma and Coussarea) compared to 0.042

to 0.050 wk-1 in the three species with lower 1st-year survival (Callichlamys, Castilla, and

Tabebuia; no Platypodium seedlings survived the light-reduction treatment). As with

control seedlings, whole-seedling RGR was not a good correlate of survival among

species in the light-reduction treatment (P > 0.7, r2 = 0.04, n = 5). However, the three

species with the lowest survival exhibited the highest whole-seedling RGR in the control

treatment, and among species, survival in the light-reduction treatment was negatively

correlated to height RGR of control seedlings (P = 0.06, r2 = 0.59, n = 6). Whole-

seedling RGR during the light-reduction treatment was highest for the three smallest-

seeded species, all of which had epigeal cotyledons (Figure 1-3b; Table 1-1).

RGR following defoliation was greater for species that were able to produce new

leaves (Figure 1-3b,c). Four of the seven species, including the three species with highest

1st-year control seedling survival, were able to develop new and fully expanded leaves

within 2 months (Figure 1-3c). Furthermore, species with relatively higher 1st-year

survival produced more new leaf area following defoliation than was produced by control









seedlings over the same 2-month period (Figure 1-5): leaf production for Aspidosperma,

the species with the highest 1st-year survival, was six times greater than in controls. In

contrast, leaf production in Castilla, which had the lowest 1st-year survival among the

species that produced new leaves, was lower relative to controls. It is also worth noting

that leaf production following defoliation was not restricted to species with relatively

large seed mass or hypogeal storage cotyledons. Coussarea, despite having the second

smallest seed mass and photosynthetic epigeal cotyledons (Table 1-1), was able to

recover more leaf area relative to control seedlings following defoliation than Castilla

(Figure 1-5), which had three-fold higher seed mass and hypogeal cotyledons.

Stress treatments had significant negative effects on total seedling biomass at 1

year (Table 1-3). RGR from 2 months to 1 year varied widely among species and

treatments (Figure 1-6). The three species with the highest lst-year control seedling

survival (Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, Coussarea) experienced greater reduction in RGR by

stress relative to controls, while the species with the lowest lst-year survival

(Callichlamys, Castilla) showed overcompensation of RGR.

Discussion

Stress Tolerance as a Component of Seedling Survival in Shade

My results support the hypothesis that enhanced seedling survival in the shaded

understory is related to the ability of species to tolerate stress. Among species, survival

in both the defoliation and light-reduction treatments was strongly related to interspecific

variation in lst-year control seedlings survival (i.e., shade tolerance). The ability to

tolerate stress also varied widely among species: the two species with the lowest lst-year

survival reached 100% mortality in both stress treatments before 60 days, while the three

species with the highest 1st-year survival showed substantial tolerance to both treatments









(> 85% survival). The stress tolerance of the latter three species was considerable given

the severity of the experimental stresses imposed upon them: only 0.06% of full sun for 2

months or complete defoliation. These results support the notion that shade tolerance is

dependent upon functional traits that both allow seedlings to maintain a positive carbon

balance in low light, and to survive through and recover from periods when they

experience negative carbon balance due to stress.

Survival following the defoliation and light-reduction treatments was highly

correlated among species, indicating that the most stress tolerant species are able to cope

with a wide range of biotic and abiotic hazards. Earlier studies have also shown negative

interspecific correlations between 1st-year survival of tropical tree seedlings and

susceptibility to pathogens in shade (Augspurger and Kelly 1983; Augspurger 1984a,b).

In concert, these results suggest that the traits conferring stress tolerance may be broad

spectrum, potentially allowing seedlings to cope with other stresses caused by drought

(Engelbrecht and Kursar 2003; Khurana and Singh 2004), nutrient limitation (Gunatilleke

et al. 1997), and physical/mechanical damage due to litterfall (Clark and Clark 1989;

Scariot 2000).

Seedling Tolerance to Defoliation: The Importance of Storage Reserves

The goal of the defoliation treatment was to force seedlings to temporarily rely on

storage reserves for maintenance of a positive carbon balance and subsequent leaf tissue

recovery. My results show that post-defoliation seedling survival was dependent on both

the capacity of a species to develop and fully expand new leaves, and the relative degree

of leaf area recovery among species. Total leaf area and relative leaf area recovery was

most impacted in species with lower 1st-year control seedling survival, confirming my

initial hypothesis. The three species that were unable to develop new leaves did not









survive past 60 days, while survival among the other four species was highest for species

with greater leaf area recovery. For example, leaf area production in Aspidosperma, the

species with the highest post-defoliation survival over the first 2 months, was 64 times

greater than in Castilla (relative to leaf production in control seedlings), which had 50%

lower survival.

Recovery of photosynthetic tissue lost to herbivores, disease, or disturbance is

ultimately dependent on the amount of carbon reserves within remaining vegetative

tissues and storage cotyledons at the time of tissue loss. In this study, three of the four

species that were able to develop new leaves following defoliation had hypogeal storage

cotyledons, consistent with the idea that large seed reserves may enhance seedling

recovery following tissue damage (Harms and Dalling 1997; Green and Juniper 2004).

Leaf area recovery, however, was not restricted to species with this particular cotyledon

functional morphology. Coussarea, which had epigeal photosynthetic cotyledons, as

well as other epigeal-photosynthetic species in this forest, are also capable of substantial

leaf area recovery following complete defoliation (Kitajima 2004). For species with

epigeal cotyledons, storage reserves within stem and roots in the form of total

nonstructural carbohydrate (TNC), provide the carbon source necessary for tissue

recovery following damage (McPherson and Williams 1998; Canham et al. 1999;

Hoffman et al. 2004). TNC reserves in stems and roots may play particularly important

roles in seedling survival after seedlings have depleted seed reserves, or when storage

cotyledons are prematurely lost to herbivores or disease (Kitajima 2004; Chapter 2).

Seedling Tolerance to Temporal Variation in Understory Light Availability

The seven species varied widely in their ability to survive through drastic

reductions in light availability in the shaded understory. Three of the species showed









substantial tolerance to light reduction, with > 92% survival during the 2-month

treatment. Platypodium suffered the highest mortality during the first 2 months (all

seedlings died before 55 days). The low survival of this species was influenced by

damping-off disease (Augspurger 1983, 1984a,b), confirming the idea that fungal attack

can limit seedling establishment in deeply shaded habitats (e.g., Grime 1965). Reduction

in light availability also increased variability among species in seedling growth rates.

These results support the notion that small-scale heterogeneity in light availability, even

in the closed forest understory, can have dramatic impacts on seedling growth, survival,

and recruitment processes in tropical forests (Montgomery and Chazdon 2002; Wang and

Augspurger 2004; Montgomery 2004).

Interspecific variation in 2-month seedling survival in both the light-reduction and

control treatments was not related to whole-seedling RGR. However, species that

maintained high RGR in the control treatment also tended to have the lowest survival in

the light-reduction treatment, suggesting that the overall carbon balance of species that

normally exhibit fast growth rates may be most affected by temporal reductions in light

availability in the shaded understory. Post-light reduction RGR from 2 months to 1 year,

following removal of the shade cages at 2-months, was higher relative to control

seedlings for species with lower 1st-year control seedling survival. This result suggests

that overcompensation of RGR during seedling recovery from stress can have negative

consequences on survival, potentially because increased allocation to traits that maximize

growth rates come at the cost of allocation to traits such as defense and storage that

enhance survival (Kitajima 1994; 1996; Kobe 1997). The functional mechanisms that






16


allow seedlings to acclimate to short-term deficits and increases in light availability in the

shaded understory deserve future study.












Table 1-1. Seed and seedling characteristics of the study species.
Species Family Code Cotyledon function 1st-year survival in shade Seed mass
(position) n Mean (%) SE (mg)2
Aspidosperma cruenta Apocynaceae ASPC Storage (hypogeal) 111 96.6 1.9 453
Lacmelia panamensis Apocynaceae LACP Storage (hypogeal) 78 91.8 3.5 244
Cousarrea curvigemnia Rubiaceae COUC Photosynthesis (epigeal) 107 89.1 3.4 97
Callichlamys latifolia Bignoniaceae CALL Storage (epigeal) 55 79.9 6.1 198
Castilla elastica Moraceae CASE Storage (hypogeal) 101 57.6 5.6 314
Platypodium elegans Fabaceae PLAE Storage (hypogeal) 46 37.9 8.7 332
Tabebuia rosea Bignoniaceae TABR Photosynthesis (epigeal) 71 19.3 5.9 24
1Survival data from this study (= 1 year survival of control treatment seedlings in the shaded forest understory)
2Estimated from 6 to 37 dried seeds per species, after removing seed coats









Table 1-2. Proportional hazards (Cox regression) survival time analysis of seedling
survival over 1 year. P = significance from Wald's x2 test statistic.
Variable df Wald X p P
Species 6 806.9 <0.0001
Treatment 2 389.3 <0.0001
Species x Treatment 12 73.2 <0.0001
Garden 3 93.7 <0.0001


Table 1-3. Analysis of variance for total seedling biomass 2 months and 1 year after
treatment.
Variable 2-month biomass 1-year biomass
df F P df F P
Saturated model1
Species 4 96.1 <0.0001 3 65.2 <0.0001
Treatment 2 23.9 <0.0001 2 15.3 <0.0001
Species x Treatment 8 2.2 0.04 6 0.7 0.62
Error 57 45

Reduced main factor model
Species 6 65.3 <0.0001 6 48.4 <0.0001
Treatment 2 24.9 <0.0001 2 16.4 <0.0001
Error 67 56
The following species were removed from the saturated models because of 100%
mortality in some treatments (see Methods): Platypodium and Tabebuia
(2-month analysis); Platypodium, Tabebuia, Callichlamys (1-year analysis).






















0.4

0.2


Aspidosperma cruentum


0.0
1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2
Castilla elastica
0.0
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360


Lacmelia panamensis










SPlatypodium elegans


Coussarea curvigemnia


Callichlamys latifolia
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360



Control
Light reduction
Defoliation


Tabebuia rose


0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360


Time (days)


Figure 1-1. Effects of light reduction and defoliation on 1st-year seedling survival. The proportion of seedlings surviving was
estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Species are shown in order of 1st-year survival of control seedlings as summarized
in Table 1-1.


0l
01

0










S1 0 Defoliation: r2 = 0.67, P = 0.02
100 Light reduction: r2 = 0.75, P < 0.01

C. 80


60

60 //

20 -
4o
20


0 20 40 60 80 100

1st-year control seedling survival (%)

Figure 1-2. Two-month survival of stress treatment seedlings plotted against 1st-year
survival of control treatment seedlings. Each point is a species mean. Dashed
and solid lines show the best-fit linear regressions for the light-reduction and
defoliation treatments, respectively.













400


^ 300


S200


100


0
0.05


0.00


-0.05


-0.10
0 -o.lo

-0.15


-0.20
60


o 40

30

S20o

10
^L


- Control
Light reduction
Defoliation


u r----------
ASPC LACP COUC CALL CASE PLAE TABR
Highest Species Lowest
survival survival


Figure 1-3. Effects of light reduction and defoliation on seedling size and growth 2
months after treatment. A) Total seedling biomass. B) Relative growth rate
(RGR) from 0 to 2 months. C) Leaf area. Vertical bars = +1 SD; n = 1-4
common-garden replicates per bar (see Methods; Table A-i). Species are
ordered from highest to lowest 1st-year control seedling survival (Table 1-1).
Arrows in C) indicate complete lack of new leaf growth. RGR was not
calculated for LACP due to missing pretreatment biomass data; otherwise, a
missing bar indicates that no seedlings survived a treatment past 2 months.


* *











12

10

^ 8

0 6



S0


-2
-2 I I

ASPC COUC CASE

Species

Figure 1-4. Leaf area recovery 2 months after defoliation. Data are shown for 3 of the 4
species that developed new leaves following defoliation; leaf area recovery
was not calculated for LACP due to missing pretreatment data. Vertical
bars = +1 SD; n = 4 common-garden replicates for each species. Leaf area
recovery index = (AH Ac)/Ac, where AH = leaf area of defoliated seedlings at
2 months, and Ac = leaf area production in control seedlings from 0 to 2
months.










0.04 -



0.03 -



0.02 -



0.01 -



0.00


Highest
survival


< Species


Lowest
survival


Figure 1-5. Effects of light reduction and defoliation on relative growth rate (RGR) from
2 months to 1 year. Shade cages for the light-reduction treatment were
removed at 2 months. Vertical bars = +1 SD; n = 2-4 replicates per bar
(Appendix A).


SControl
II Light reduction
II Defoliation














ASPC LACP COUC CALL CASE PLAE TABR


CL














CHAPTER 2
CARBON ALLOCATION TO STORAGE IN TROPICAL FOREST SEEDLINGS:
EFFECTS ON GROWTH, SURVIVAL AND STRESS TOLERANCE

Introduction

For many tropical trees, successful recruitment into the canopy hinges on survival

and long-term persistence of seedlings in the shaded forest understory (e.g., Welden et al.

1991; Connell and Green 2000). Survival in the understory is dependent on the ability of

seedlings to both maintain positive net carbon balance under light-limited conditions and

cope with a host of additional biotic and abiotic stresses (reviewed in Moles and Westoby

2004; Chapter 1). The capacity of coexisting species to cope with light-limitation and

other stresses during seedling establishment ultimately influences patterns of adult tree

distributions, species composition, and coexistence (Janzen 1970; Connell 1971; Hubbell

1979; Harms et al. 2000).

What are the mechanisms that allow seedlings to maintain carbon balance and

tolerate stresses in the shaded understory? Some have hypothesized that enhanced

survival in shade (shade tolerance) is characterized by morphological and physiological

traits that maximize the rate of net carbon capture in low light at the whole-plant level

(Loach 1967; Givnish 1988), thereby increasing seedling size and competitive ability

under low light conditions. However, maintenance of a positive carbon balance is not

necessarily dependent on maximization of carbon gain, especially if seedlings experience

stress caused from tissue loss or temporal fluctuations in resource availability, both of

which may severely constrain seedling establishment in tropical forests (Augspurger









1984b; Clark and Clark 1989; Asquith et al. 1997; Scariot 2000; Montgomery and

Chazdon 2002; Engelbrecht and Kursar 2003; Khurana and Singh 2004; Kitajima 2004;

Wang and Augspurger 2004). An alternative hypothesis is that high survival is achieved

through traits that allow seedlings to maintain a positive carbon balance necessary for

long-term persistence in the understory, and which allow seedlings to cope with and

recover from biotic and abiotic stress (Kitajima 1994, 1996). Several studies from both

temperate and tropical forests provide strong support for this latter hypothesis, by

showing that: (1) interspecific variation in low light seedling and sapling survival can be

explained through tradeoffs between fast growth rates and high survival (Kitajima 1994;

Kobe et al. 1995; Pacala et al. 1996; Veneklaas and Poorter 1998; Walters and Reich

1999; Kobe 1999); (2) species with seedlings that grow quickly in low light also do so in

high light (Osunkoya et al. 1994; Grubb et al. 1996; Poorter 1999), suggesting that fast

growth rate is not necessarily an adaptive strategy for increased survival in shade.

Collectively, these studies suggest that species do not change growth ranks between low

and high light environments and that ecological tradeoffs between growth and survival

may contribute to niche partitioning across the forest light gradient. Functional traits that

enhance seedling tolerance to stress and that contribute to growth-survival tradeoffs may

therefore constitute an important, but previously little-explored aspect of seedling

regeneration and diversity in tropical forests.

Carbon allocation to storage has been proposed as one mechanism that allows

species to tolerate low light and other stresses in the shaded forest understory (Kitajima

1994, 1996; Kobe et al. 1995; Kobe 1997). Energy reserves, in the form of total

nonstructural carbohydrate (TNC, total of starch and soluble sugars), enhance recovery of









tissue lost to consumers and disturbance (McPherson and Williams 1998; Canham et al.

1999; Kabeya and Sakai 2003). TNC reserves can also aid in the maintenance of positive

carbon balance during periods when light is limited (Bloom et al. 1985) and may be

especially important for seedling survival in the shaded understory of tropical forests

where light availability can be both extremely low (0.2% full sun) and highly dynamic in

time and space (Chazdon and Pearcy 1986; Montgomery and Chazdon 2002;

Montgomery 2004). In the tropics, TNC reserves have previously been shown to vary as

a function of seasonality and light availability in adult trees (Bullock 1992; Marenco et

al. 2001; Newell et al. 2002), aid in seasonal leaf flush and reproduction of understory

shrubs and palms (Tissue and Wright 1995; Cunningham 1997; Marquis et al. 1997), and

facilitate tissue resprouting of woody plants after fire disturbance in savanna-forest

ecosystems (Hoffman et al. 2003, 2004). Despite the many important roles of TNC,

apparently no study has quantified interspecific variation in seedling TNC storage in the

understory of a tropical forest, and the ecological role of TNC in determining species-

specific susceptibility to stress-induced mortality and the associated consequences for

community-level patterns of seedling establishment remains unknown.

In this study, I examine the role of TNC reserves in the growth, survival, and stress

tolerance of seven coexisting woody species in a tropical moist forest in central Panama.

I chose species that spanned a wide range of seedling shade tolerance, which as in

previous studies (Augspurger 1984a,b; Kitajima 1994; Boot 1996), was measured as

1st-year seedling survival in the shaded understory. To quantify interspecific variation in

TNC storage, I measured TNC concentrations and pool sizes in both stems and roots at

standardized ontogenetic stages the time at which all species fully expanded their first









photosynthetic organ cotyledonss or leaves) and 2 months after leaf or cotyledon

expansion. I focused on TNC in stems and roots, and not in cotyledons and leaves,

because stem and root reserves function as more permanent and stable sites for long-term

carbohydrate storage; cotyledon reserves tend to be short-lived and most important for

seedlings before they have initiated autotrophic growth, while reserves in leaf tissue

represent both short-term and temporally dynamic storage sites for carbohydrates. I

tested three hypotheses: (1) lst-year seedling survival is higher in species with greater

allocation to TNC reserves in stems and roots; (2) species with high allocation to TNC

storage exhibit slow growth rates (i.e., a tradeoff between growth and storage); and, (3)

interspecific variation in tolerance to tissue loss and temporal reduction in light

availability are linked to species differences in TNC storage. Finally, given the

hypothesized importance of seedling size (a strong correlate of seed size in tropical

forests; Rose and Poorter 2000) in seedling survival, I also examined the relative

importance of total seedling biomass versus TNC reserve size as predictors of seedling

survival and stress tolerance among the seven species.

Methods

Study Site and Species

The study was conducted on Buena Vista peninsula, an area of ca. 60-year-old

secondary lowland tropical forest, located in the Barro Colorado Nature Monument

(BCNM), Panama (9010' N, 7951' W). The BCNM forest is semi-deciduous, with a

pronounced 4-month dry season that usually lasts from mid-December to mid-April.

Annual rainfall on the BCNM averages 2,700 mm (Rand and Rand 1982).

Seven woody species with sufficient seed availability were chosen for study

(Table 1-1). All of the species are canopy trees as adults, except for Callichlamys









latifolia (Bignoniaceae), which is a woody liana. Species were selected to span a range

of shade tolerance, which was quantified by estimating the percentage of seedlings

surviving for 1 year in experimental plots located in the shaded understory (Table 1-1).

Small-seeded, pioneer species that are generally unable to establish seedling populations

in the shaded forest understory were deliberately excluded from the study.

The seven species differ in seed mass (24 to 453 mg) and cotyledon functional

morphology (Table 1-1). Aspidosperma cruenta, Lacmeliapanamensis, Castilla elastica,

and Platypodium elegans have hypogeal cotyledons that remain below or just above the

soil surface, and that function primarily for storage of seed reserves. The three other

species have epigeal cotyledons that become elevated above the ground after

germination; Coussarea curvigemnia and Tabebuia rosea have foliaceous photosynthetic

cotyledons, and Callichlamys latifolia has thick green cotyledons that function primarily

for storage (Kitajima 2002). For brevity, species are henceforth referred to by genus.

Field and Laboratory Methods

Depending on seed availability, 200 to 400 seedlings per species were raised from

seed in a shade house on the BCNM under a light level similar to that found in the forest

understory (1.5% full sun, based on total daily photon flux density). When possible,

seeds were collected from at least 3 nonadjacent parent trees, to increase genetic diversity

within each species. Seedlings were raised in plastic trays containing a 1:1 mixture of

forest soil and sand, until all seedlings reached an equivalent ontogenetic stage, defined

by the full expansion of the first photosynthetic organs (leaves or cotyledons, depending

on the species; Table 1-1), at which time they were transplanted into the forest (described

below). Seedlings were transplanted at a standardized ontogenetic stage, rather than at a

common chronological age, so that all species had initiated autotrophic growth by the









onset of the study. Because of interspecific variability in timing of seed dispersal,

germination, and development, seedlings were transplanted over a 3-month period during

the early-mid rainy season (May to July).

Seedlings of all species were transplanted into four 7 x 7 m2 common-gardens

located in the shaded forest understory on Buena Vista Peninsula. Each garden was

separated by at least 50 m from the nearest adjacent garden, and enclosed by 1 m tall

fencing to exclude large herbivores. For each species, equal numbers of seedlings were

transplanted into 1 x 1 m2 cells in four equally sized, stratified sections in each garden

(50 to 100 total seedlings garden-1 species-1). All vegetation < 1.5 m tall was removed

from each garden before seedling transplantation, and all seedlings were positioned a

minimum of 25 cm apart. When necessary, leaf litter was also removed to avoid burial of

seedlings. Seedlings dying in the first 2 weeks after transplantation were replaced (< 10

seedlings total).

Seedlings were randomly assigned to one of three treatments 2 weeks after

transplantation: (1) defoliation; (2) light reduction; (3) control (no manipulation). For the

defoliation treatment, all leaves and photosynthetic cotyledons (if present) were clipped

at the base of the petiole; cotyledons were retained on all of the species with hypogeal

storage cotyledons (Table 1-1). For the light-reduction treatment, cylindrical wire cages

covered with 90% shade cloth were placed over individual seedlings. Shade cage

dimensions ranged from 6 x 12 cm (height x diameter) to 15 x 30 cm (depending on

initial seedling size); and were constructed to be large enough so as not to hinder growth

over a 2-month period, after which the shade cages were removed.









Light transmission was measured inside and outside of the shade cages with

Li-Cor quantum sensors during the early-mid rainy season. Percent light transmission

underneath the cages, and in each common-garden, was determined using both

instantaneous and continuous total daily photon flux density (PFD) measurements.

Instantaneous PFD measurements were taken inside and outside of shade cages at 8 15

stratified positions in each garden under mid-day, cloudy sky conditions. Continuous

PFD was measured by placing a single censor in the middle of each common-garden for

2 days. To calculate % light transmission, measurements in the forest were referenced to

a sensor placed in completely open sky on a laboratory rooftop. Mean light reduction (

1 SD) by the shade cages was 89 (+ 2)%. Mean light levels outside of the shade cages, as

determined from the instantaneous PFD measurements, ranged among gardens from 0.38

to 0.68% (overall mean = 0.55%); mean light levels from the continuous PFD

measurements taken over two full days in each garden were higher, and ranged among

gardens from 0.68 to 1.44% of full sun (overall mean = 1%). Seedlings inside the shade

cages thus experienced only ca. 0.06% of full sun over the 2-month light-reduction

treatment.

To estimate pre- and post-treatment biomass, I harvested randomly selected sub-

samples of seedlings from each common-garden at two stages: (1) 2-weeks after

seedlings were transplanted to the gardens and just before treatment (pretreatment

harvest); and, (2) 2-months after treatment, coinciding with the end of the light-reduction

treatment (post-treatment harvest). For the pretreatment harvest, 6-12 seedlings per

species were harvested from each common-garden, depending on initial seed availability.

Total samples sizes for the post-treatment harvest ranged from 2 to 32 total seedlings per









species x treatment combination, depending on species-specific differences in survival.

Seedlings were harvested by carefully excavating the root system with a small trowel.

Samples were then placed in polyethylene bags and packed inside a cooler with ice for

transport to the laboratory, where bags were stored at 40C in a refrigerator until they were

processed for biomass measurements. Roots, stems, leaves, and cotyledons were

separated within 12 hours after harvesting, than oven dried at 1000C for 1 hour. All

samples were then dried for an additional 48 hours at 600C before weighing. Leaf and

cotyledon area (for epigeal cotyledons only) were measured before drying using a

Li-Cor leaf area meter. All samples were stored in sealed polyethylene bags until

samples were ground for TNC analysis.

Quantification of TNC in Stems and Roots

TNC was analyzed separately in stems and roots by determining the concentration

of soluble sugars and starch, measured as glucose equivalents, with a colorimetric assay

(Dubois et al. 1956; modified by Ashwell 1966). Due to the small initial sizes of the

seedlings, tissue samples had to be pooled from multiple individuals to obtain adequate

tissue biomass for TNC analysis (min. of 10 mg per sample). For the pretreatment

analyses, tissues samples were pooled from 6 individuals per species in each common-

garden (n = 1-2 pooled replicates species-1 garden-'). For the post-treatment analyses,

tissue samples were pooled from 2 to 6 individuals per species x treatment combination.

The pooled tissue samples were ground using either a Wig-L-Bug bead pulverizer or a

Specs-Mill, and a 10 to 16 mg subsample was used for TNC analysis.

Starch and soluble sugars were extracted using the method of Marquis et al. (1997),

with slight modifications. Soluble sugars were first extracted by adding 1.5 mL of 80%

ethanol to the dry samples in microcentrifuge tubes, which were then placed in a shaking









water bath overnight at 270C. After shaking, tubes were centrifuged at 10,000 RPM for

10 minutes and the supernatant was decanted into 10 mL volumetric flasks. This process

was repeated for two additional, 2-hour shaking baths. The final combined solution was

diluted to 10 mL with deionized water and then stored in a refrigerator at 40C until

colorimetric analysis.

Starch content was determined from the pellet after the ethanol extractions of

simple sugars. The pellets were transferred to 15 mL test tubes and incubated with 2.5

mL of sodium acetate buffer (0.2 M; pH 4.5) in a boiling water bath for 1 hr. After

cooling, 2 mL of sodium acetate buffer and 0.5 mL of amyglucosidase solution were

added and starch was digested overnight at 550C. Solutions were filtered and then

diluted with deionized water to 25 mL in volumetric flasks. The phenol-sulfuric acid

colorimetric assay (Dubois et al. 1956; modified by Ashwell 1966) was used to determine

glucose concentrations using a spectrophotometer set at 487 nm. Glucose concentrations

were calculated from standard curves using appropriate standards and blanks. The TNC

concentration of each tissue was estimated as the sum of the glucose concentrations from

the soluble sugar and starch extractions. TNC pool sizes were calculated by multiplying

the average biomass of the pooled tissues by the sample concentrations, and then dividing

by the number of individuals in the pooled sample.

Statistical Analyses

Differences among species and treatments in biomass and TNC were analyzed

using ANOVA. Separate analyses were conducted for the pretreatment and post-

treatment (2-month) harvest, using species means from the four common-gardens as

replicates in both analyses (n = 4 replicates per species for the pretreatment analysis; n =









1-4 per species x treatment combination for the post-treatment harvest; Table A-i, B-l).

Due to lost samples, pretreatment biomass and TNC data for LACP had to be estimated

from samples collected in a separate, concurrent study in the same understory site

(K. Kitajima, unpublished data); mean stem and root biomass from this study were

calculated from 9 individuals, which were then pooled into a single sample for TNC

measurements. Due to the lack of replication for TNC, and differences in sample size for

biomass from the other 6 species, LACP was excluded from the pretreatment ANOVA.

Because all seedlings had died for some species x treatment combinations in the

first 2 months, I used 2 separate ANOVA models to analyze post-treatment biomass and

TNC. In the first model, I tested for species, treatment, and species x treatment

interaction effects on biomass and TNC response variables, but only included data for the

species that had living seedlings present in all treatments at the time of harvest (n = 5

species). The results from this model indicated that interactions had no significant effect

(P > 0.12) on any of the response variables. I therefore conducted a second analysis

using a model that contained data from all 7 species and that tested for the main effects of

species and treatment on biomass and TNC, but excluded species x interaction terms. For

brevity, I present only the results from the second model. All data except pretreatment

stem and total (stem + root) TNC pool sizes were logio-transformed before analysis to

improve normality and homogeneity of variance.

Simple least squares linear regression was used to test for relationships between

seedling biomass, growth, survival, and TNC storage. Relative growth rates (RGR) of

total seedling biomass and leaf area from 0 to 2 months was estimated using the

following formula:









RGR (wk1) = [In (size at 2 months) In (size at 0 months)]/8

Leaf and cotyledon mass was included in all RGR calculations of total seedling biomass.

Survival estimates for control seedlings over the full year (Table 1), and for stress-treated

seedling from 0 to 2 months and 2 months to 1 year, were taken from a separate study

(Chapter 1). All statistical analyses were performed using JMP software (SAS Institute,

1997).

Results

Variation in Pretreatment Biomass and TNC Reserves

Pretreatment stem and root biomass varied widely and significantly among species

(Figure 2-la; Table 2-1). Biomass was higher in stems relative to roots in all species.

Pretreatment cotyledon biomass also varied widely, ranging from 18 to 209 mg among

species (Figure 2-la). In four of the seven species (Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, Castilla,

and Tabebuia), biomass was higher in cotyledons than in stems or roots combined.

Pretreatment TNC concentrations also differed significantly among species

(Table 2-2). TNC concentrations varied more widely in stems relative to roots among

species (Figure 2-1b). TNC concentrations were also substantially higher in stems than

in roots. TNC comprised between 6 to 25% of the total stem biomass (mean = 15% for all

species combined), whereas root concentrations ranged from 4 to 21% (mean = 8%).

There were no significant correlations between 1st-year control seedling survival

(Table 1-1) and total pretreatment biomass (Figure 2-2a) or TNC concentration among

species (Figure 2-2b), despite high interspecific variation in both these variables. First

year survival was also not related to pretreatment cotyledon biomass, stem biomass, root

biomass, or root:shoot ratio among species (P > 0.3 for all regressions using species

means).









Pretreatment TNC pool sizes also differed significantly among species, especially

in stems, which were the dominant storage location for TNC in all species (Figure 2-3;

Table 2-2). Total TNC pool size (stem + root pools combined) was a better correlate of

1st-year control seedling survival among species (Figure 2-2c) than was total pretreatment

biomass or TNC concentration (Figure 2-2a,b): Aspidosperma and Lacmelia, the two

species with the highest 1st-year survival, had the largest total TNC pools (12.9 and 15

mg, respectively), while Tabebuia, the species with lowest 1st-year survival, had the

smallest pool size (1.7 mg). The other 4 species had similar, intermediate levels of TNC

ranging between 4.1 and 6.5 mg (Figure 2-3).

Seedling size had a stronger effect on TNC pool size than on concentration. The

four species with the largest total seedling biomass (Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, Castilla,

Platypodium), all of which had hypogeal storage cotyledons, had greater TNC pool sizes

than species the two smallest species (Coussarea, Tabebuia) with epigeal photosynthetic

cotyledons (Figure 2-3; Table 1-1). In contrast, there were no clear trends between stem

or root TNC concentrations and total seedling biomass among species. Coussarea and

Tabebuia, the species with the lowest total seedling biomass, had two of the highest stem

TNC concentrations.

Effects of Defoliation and Deep Shade on Biomass and TNC Reserves

There were significant species and treatment effects on post-treatment stem and

root biomass at 2 months (Figure 2-4a,b; Table 2-1). For most species, both defoliation

and light reduction caused a decrease in stem and root biomass relative to controls. The

combined biomass of stems and roots (not including leaf or cotyledon biomass) was

reduced more substantially by defoliation in species with lower 1st-year control seedling

survival (Figure 9a,b): biomass reductions (relative to control treatment biomass) ranged









from 5 to 16% in the three species with highest 1st-year survival (Aspidosperma,

Lacmelia, Coussarea), compared to 19-46% in the three species with lower 1st-year

survival (Callichlamys, Castilla, Platypodium). Species with lower 1st-year survival also

suffered greater reductions in biomass in the light-reduction treatment (range = 11-29%

for Callichlamys, Castilla, and Tabebuia) relative to species with higher l1t-year survival

(range = 1-16% for Aspidosperma, Lacmelia, and Coussarea).

Stress treatments had significant negative effects on both TNC pools and

concentrations (Table 2-2). TNC concentrations were reduced proportionally less by the

stress treatments than TNC pools in all species (Figure 2-4c-f). Reductions in TNC pool

sizes (Figure 2-2e,f) generally mirrored reductions in biomass (Figure 2-2a,b) among

species. However, total TNC pool size was reduced more substantially than was total

biomass: TNC reductions in the three species with the lowest lst-year control seedling

survival ranged from 47 to 64% and 23 to 54% for the defoliation and light-reduction

treatments, respectively. Tabebuia, the species with lowest 1st-year survival and the

smallest TNC pools, suffered the highest mortality after defoliation.

Post-treatment cotyledon biomass differed among species and treatments

(Figure 2-5). Two of the species (Platypodium and Callichlamys) had exhausted all

cotyledon reserves in all treatments in the first 2 months. Control treatment values

among the other five species ranged from 0.61 to 28 mg. Cotyledon biomass of stressed

seedlings was either higher or only slightly reduced relative to control seedlings in all

species (Figure 2-5).

Influence of Seedling Size, Growth, and TNC Reserves on Seedling Survival

Interspecific variation in TNC pool size was a better correlate of seedling survival

than seedling size for both control and stress-treated seedlings. For control seedlings,









1st-year survival was more strongly correlated with TNC pool size than to TNC

concentration (Figure 2-2). Furthermore, whole-seedling RGR from 0 to 2 months was

negatively correlated with pretreatment TNC pool size among species (Figure 2-6).

RGR, however, was not significantly correlated with either pretreatment TNC

concentrations or total seedling biomass (P > 0.8, r2 = 0.01, n = 6 for stem and root TNC

concentrations; P = 0.11, r2 = 0.50 for total seedling biomass). Two-month RGR of total

structural biomass (seedling biomass TNC pools), as well as absolute total biomass

growth, were also negatively, and more significantly, correlated with pretreatment TNC

pool size among species (P = 0.03, r2 = 0.69 for RGR of structural biomass; P = 0.01,

r2 = 0.80 for absolute biomass growth). RGR of leaf area growth from 0 to 2 months was

also negatively, but less strongly, correlated with pretreatment TNC pool size among

species (P = 0.08, r2 = 0.56). Thus, large initial investments in TNC storage pools

enhanced 1st-year seedling survival, but at the cost of lower seedling growth rates.

Survival of stressed seedlings was also significantly correlated with TNC pool size,

but not with total seedling biomass (Figure 2-7). TNC pools had the greatest influence on

survival during the first 2 months, when seedlings were most impacted by the stress

treatments (Figure 2-7a); 2-month survival was also related, though less strongly, to stem

TNC concentration among species (P = 0.01, r2 = 0.41, n = 14). Five of the seven species

had seedlings that survived the stress treatments past 2 months. Survival of these species

from 2 months to 1 year, when species were presumably recovering from the stress

treatments, was also significantly related to TNC pool size at the end of 2 months (Figure

2-7c). Seedling survival was not significantly related to total seedling biomass during the

first 2 months or from 2 months to 1 year (Figure 2-7b,d).









Discussion

My results support the hypotheses that TNC storage enhances seedling survival and

stress tolerance in the shaded forest understory. Overall, the seven species displayed

wide variation in their carbon allocation strategies to seedling growth and storage. Most

importantly, interspecific variation in TNC pool size, but not seedling size, was a good

predictor of both 1st-year seedling survival in the shaded understory, and seedling

tolerance to stress caused from both tissue loss and temporary reduction in light

availability. TNC concentrations in stems and roots ranged widely among species

(4.5-25 %) and generally varied independently of seedling size, cotyledon type, and

seedling shade tolerance. Finally, my study provides evidence for a tradeoff between

allocation to growth and carbohydrate storage among coexisting species in a tropical

forest. These results provide a mechanistic explanation for why species with high

seedling survival in the shaded forest understory also tend to exhibit slow growth rates

(Kitajima 1994, 2002; Osunkoya et al. 1994), and support the notion that tradeoffs

between growth and survival may play an important role in maintaining high tree species

diversity in tropical forests (Kitajima 1994; Kobe 1999).

Role of TNC Reserves in Seedling Survival and Stress Tolerance

My results show a strong linkage between interspecific variation in TNC storage

and survival of stressed seedlings. TNC reserves had the greatest impact on seedling

survival during the first 2 months after the stress treatments. During this time, both TNC

concentrations and pools were reduced in all species, underscoring the importance of

storage reserves for survival when seedlings experience negative carbon balance during

the early seedling establishment. However, even after TNC levels were reduced

experimentally, TNC pool size continued to be a significant predictor of variation in









seedling survival through the year. TNC reserves therefore played an important role in

both stress tolerance and post-stress recovery.

TNC reserves may allow tropical tree seedlings to cope with and recover from a

host of biotic and abiotic stresses. Several of my study species showed substantial

tolerance to defoliation, confirming previous results from seedling defoliation

experiments conducted in temperate (Canham et al. 1999) and tropical (Becker 1983;

Kitajima 2004) forests. The ability to survive defoliation was dependent on the relative

capacity of a species to develop new and fully expanded leaves, and species with greater

leaf recovery exhibited higher survival (Chapter 1). These results indicate that large TNC

reserves may be essential for seedling recovery from tissue loss due to herbivores and

pathogens, or shoot damage from falling canopy debris, all of which are major causes of

seedling mortality in tropical forests (Augspurger 1984a,b; Osunkoya et al. 1992;

Asquith et al. 1997; Clark and Clark 1989; Scariot 2000).

The results of my study also demonstrate that TNC reserves play a critical role

in maintaining carbon balance when seedlings experience short-term reductions in light

availability. The aim of the light-reduction treatment was to expose seedlings to

irradiance levels well below their light compensation point, thereby forcing seedlings into

a negative carbon balance. My results indicate that species can vary widely in their

survival and growth responses to extreme temporal reductions in light availability in the

shaded understory. The most shade-tolerant species in my study exhibited extremely

high tolerance to experimental light levels of ca. 0.06% of full sun for 2 months, a level

far below what has been used in most previous experimental studies and 1/10 of the

average understory values typically reported for tropical forests. While the degree of









light reduction in this experiment was extreme, it is probably representative of the light

limitations imposed on seedlings during periods of intensive cloud cover (daily and

seasonally) and when seedlings establish in microsites deeply shaded by litter

accumulation or understory foliage.

Tradeoffs between Seedling Growth and Storage

The results supported the prediction of a tradeoff between seedling growth rate and

allocation to carbohydrate storage reserves. Across species, TNC pool size was

negatively correlated with RGR of total seedling biomass, RGR of total structural

seedling biomass, and absolute seedling growth during the first 2 months of study. TNC

pool size was also positively correlated with 1st-year seedling survival, explaining

approximately half of the variation in survival among species. These results support the

hypothesis that seedling survival in the shaded understory of tropical forests is achieved

through a balance between allocation to growth and carbohydrate storage (Kitajima 1994,

1996), rather than by maximizing net carbon gain for fast seedling growth rates (e.g.,

Givnish 1988).

TNC pool size was a better correlate of seedling RGR and survival than either TNC

concentration or seedling size. Furthermore, TNC pools were generally more reduced by

the stress treatments than were TNC concentrations and total biomass. These results

suggest that the total pool of TNC, irrespective of seedling size per se, may serve as the

best quantitative indicator of interspecific variation in seedling survival and stress

tolerance in the shaded forest understory. For example, TNC pools in Aspidosperma, the

species with highest total seedling biomass and lowest RGR, were seven times higher

than in Tabebuia, the species with lowest seedling biomass and highest RGR. In

contrast, TNC concentrations differed only slightly between these species. These results









emphasize the importance of distinguishing between structural versus nonstructural

biomass when linking morphological traits to seedling growth, biomass allocation, and

survival (e.g., Canham et al. 1999).

TNC Allocation, Seed Size, and Seedling Functional Morphology

My results suggest that stems may be the dominant storage location for TNC in

understory tropical forest seedlings. Both TNC concentrations and pool sizes were higher

in stems than in roots in all of the 7 species. Higher TNC storage in stems could reflect

physiological constraints related to the relatively small size of seedling root systems in

the shaded understory. TNC allocation to stems versus roots might also be related to the

relative susceptibility of these tissues to damage from herbivory or disturbance during

development. In forested ecosystems that experience large-scale disturbance such as fire,

or where seedlings must survive though winter dormancy, storage reserves are typically

concentrated in roots rather than stems (Canham et al. 1999; Hoffman et al. 2004).

Variation in TNC storage was linked to species differences in both seed size and

cotyledon functional morphology. The four largest-seeded species, all of which had

hypogeal storage cotyledons, had the largest seedlings and TNC pools in stems and roots

(but not necessarily the higher TNC concentrations). Total TNC pools in these species

undoubtedly represent conservative estimates, as cotyledon reserves were not measured

in this study. In contrast, the two smallest seeded species, both of which had epigeal

photosynthetic cotyledons, had small seedlings and lower TNC pool sizes, but two of the

highest TNC concentrations. These results show that large-seeded tropical tree species,

in addition to having high amounts of energy reserves in seeds to enhance short-term

survival, also maintain large pools of longer-term storage reserves in stems and roots.

However, because all species had become dependent on autotrophic carbon gain before









my TNC measurements, it is unknown to what degree initial seed reserves contributed to

the more permanent stem and root TNC pools in these species. Future experiments that

quantify how seed reserves contribute to long-term TNC storage in seedlings will likely

shed further light on the evolutionary and ecological role of seed size variation in tropical

forest tree communities.

Conclusion

In this paper, I highlight the importance of TNC reserves for seedling survival and

stress tolerance in the shaded understory of a tropical forest. Tradeoffs between traits

such as storage that enhance seedling stress tolerance versus those that maximize growth

have likely contributed to the evolution of life history diversity and the maintenance of

species coexistence in species-rich tropical forests. Interspecific variability in TNC

storage constitutes a central component of seedling recruitment dynamics in this and

likely many other tropical forests.






43


Table 2-1. Analysis of variance for stem and root biomass.
Variable Stem biomass Root biomass
df F P F P
Pre-treatment'
Species 5 260.7 <0.0001 36.7 <0.0001
Error 18

Post-treatment (2 months)
Species 6 125.8 <0.0001 127.3 <0.0001
Treatment 2 7.7 0.001 16.8 <0.0001
Error 59
'LACP excluded from the analysis (see Methods)












Table 2-2. Analysis of variance for TNC concentrations and pool sizes.
Variable TNC concentration TNC pool size Total TNC pool size
Stem Root Stem Root (stem + root)
df F P F P F P F P F P
Pre-treatment
Species 5 115.0 <0.0001 14.4 <0.0001 116.1 <0.0001 27.0 <0.0001 113.2 <0.0001
Error 18

Post-treatment
Species 6 49.0 <0.0001 41.9 <0.0001 43.8 <0.0001 37.0 <0.0001 52.1 <0.0001
Treatment 2 12.3 <0.0001 6.8 0.002 20.0 <0.0001 16.1 <0.0001 23.8 <0.0001
Error 57 59










Z/// Cotyledon
SStem
I Root


A


ASPC
Highest
survival


230 -

220 -

210 -
c /

100 -

50

0


LACP COUC CALL CASE PLAE
< Species >


TABR
Lowest
survival


Figure 2-1. Pretreatment biomass and TNC concentrations. A) Cotyledon, stem, and
root biomass. B) Stem and root TNC concentrations. Species are ordered
from highest to lowest 1st-year survival of control seedlings (Table 1-1). Stars
in (A) indicate species with storage cotyledons. Vertical bars = + 1 SD; n = 4
common-garden replicates for each species (see Methods); values for LACP
were estimated from another experiment (n = 9 for biomass, pooled into a
single sample for TNC analysis).


*e




In I?~ flI


in S


I I I I I I I

















100 E C

80

60 -


P>0.3
r 0.16


A P>0.4
r =0.13


0
Ea Z


P= 0.09
r2 = 0.46


0 100 200 300 400 500 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16


Total biomass (mg)


Stem TNC concentration (%)


Total TNC pool size (mg)


Figure 2-2. Three potential correlates of interspecific variation in 1st-year control seedling survival. A) Pretreatment total seedling
biomass (stems, roots, cotyledons, and leaves). B) Pretreatment stem TNC concentration. C) Pretreatment total TNC pool
size (stem + root pools combined).


0

iuj


40

20


* 0^^


O ASPC
A LACP
E COUC
* CALL
* CASE
* PLAE
A TABR

















N

O
O
r/s


ASPC LACP COUC CALL CASE PLAE TABR


Highest
survival


< Species ->


Lowest
survival


Figure 2-3. Pretreatment TNC pool sizes in stems and roots.







Roots


in


ILIr


hn ii


At


- Control
Light reduction
Defoliation


i I Ih


B in


7- F
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
ASPC LACP COUC CALL CASE PLACE TABR


Species


Figure 2-4. Post-treatment biomass and TNC in stems and roots. A,B) Total biomass.
C,D) TNC concentrations. E,F) TNC pool sizes. TNC for TABR in both
stress treatments and for PLAE in the light-reduction treatment could not be
analyzed due to low survival. Vertical bars = + 1 SD; n = 1-4 common-
garden replicates per bar (Table A-i, B-l).


120 A


IT


g 25 C
.2 20
15
10
5


16 E
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0


IFFI


ASPC LACP COUC CALL CASE PLAE TABR


Species


Stems












100
Control
0I I I Light reduction
8 I Defoliation
80

ct
E 60


o 40


0 20



ASPC LACP COUC CALL CASE PLAE TABR

Species

Figure 2-5. Post-treatment cotyledon biomass. Cotyledons in COUC, CALL and TABR
were removed as part of the defoliation treatment. All cotyledon reserves in
PLAE and for the control and light-reduction treatments in CALL were
exhausted before the post-treatment harvest at 2 months. Vertical bars =
+ 1 SD; n = 2-4 common-garden replicates per bar (Table A-i).











0.03 A P = 0.03

0.02 r2 = 0.70

0.01 -

0.00 -

-0.01

-0.02 0 ASPC
E COUC
-0.03 CALL
CASE
-0.04 U PLAE
A TABR
-0.05 -
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

TNC pool size (mg)

Figure 2-6. Two-month relative growth rate (RGR) of control seedlings plotted against
pretreatment TNC pool size. Data are shown for the 6 species in which
complete biomass data were available.













100 A


S/

0


0.002
0.54


P= 0.20
r = 0.12


0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450


100 C


0 0
S o





P= 0.05
Sr2 = 0.39


P= 0.14
r = 0.24


0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0

Total TNC pool size (mg)


50 100 150 200 250 300

Total seedling biomass (mg)


Figure 2-7. Survival of stressed seedlings plotted against total TNC pool size and total
seedling biomass. A,B) Survival from 0 to 2 months as a function of
pretreatment total TNC pool size and total seedling biomass. C,D) Survival
from 2 months to 1 year as a function of post-treatment (2-month) total TNC
pool size and total seedling biomass. Each point is a species mean; white
circles = defoliation treatment, dark circles = light-reduction treatment.


o















APPENDIX A
SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SEEDLING BIOMASS AND LEAF AREA

Table A-i. Statistics for pre- and post-treatment biomass and leaf area.
Species Pre-treatment Post-treatment (2 months)
Control Defoliation Light reduction
n mean SD n mean SD n mean SD n mean SD
Cotyledon mass
(mg)
ASPC 4 209.2 16.9 4 28.6 25.5 4 59.6 33.0 4 39.2 30.2
CALL 4 22.4 16.9 4 0.0 0.0 2 0.0 0.0 4 0.0 0.0
CASE 4 91.4 23.9 4 0.6 1.2 4 12.0 8.4 4 3.9 3.3
COUC 4 18.1 1.2 4 16.3 1.6 4 0.0 0.0 4 16.4 2.5
LACP 9 64.4 65.5 4 20.9 20.8 4 37.6 29.5 4 39.3 39.4
PLAE 4 33.9 12.5 4 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 0 -
TABR 4 18.6 2.8 3 17.9 2.4 0 2 16.6 0.3

Root mass (mg)
ASPC 4 48.1 3.4 4 57.7 5.7 4 50.3 4.5 4 47.8 4.4
CALL 4 20.9 4.5 4 25.6 7.2 2 16.0 2.8 4 15.4 5.0
CASE 4 20.4 5.2 4 20.3 2.6 4 14.4 1.1 4 16.5 5.1
COUC 4 8.1 0.8 4 8.5 1.2 4 6.2 0.8 4 6.7 0.6
LACP1 9 14.7 5.8 4 17.2 3.1 4 14.7 3.3 4 15.3 1.5
PLAE 4 26.6 11.0 4 27.1 9.5 1 10.0 0 -
TABR 4 5.5 0.7 3 5.8 0.9 0 2 4.7 1.1









Table A-1. Continued
Species Pre-treatment Post-treatment (2 months)
Control Defoliation Light reduction
n mean SD n mean SD n mean SD n mean SD


Stem mass (mg)
ASPC
CALL
CASE
COUC
LACP
PLAE
TABR

Total mass (mg)
ASPC
CALL
CASE
COUC
LACP
PLAE
TABR

Leaf area (cm2)
ASPC
CALL
CASE
COUC
LACP
PLAE
TABR


4 70.2 4.7 4 84.5 8.1 4 84.5 3.0 4 75.2 3.7
4 38.3 5.1 4 57.3 10.8 2 30.8 3.5 4 43.0 12.3
4 44.9 3.8 4 64.0 11.9 4 53.4 25.1 4 58.1 7.6
4 22.0 1.4 4 20.3 1.6 4 18.0 2.3 4 17.4 1.3
9 46.8 4.1 4 46.5 9.0 4 44.3 6.4 4 47.2 5.4
4 79.9 7.1 4 99.4 5.9 1 57.4 0 -
4 8.5 1.2 3 11.9 3.2 0 2 7.7 0.4



4 442.7 12.2 4 331.3 20.4 4 221.3 34.6 4 297.5 48.1
4 146.8 28.5 4 171.9 28.4 2 46.7 0.7 4 117.2 19.8
4 219.8 34.2 4 171.7 23.9 4 99.3 36.7 4 115.7 34.3
4 48.2 1.5 4 45.7 1.6 4 25.4 1.7 4 40.6 3.7
9 185.3 79.1 4 156.1 39.0 4 122.6 48.1 4 157.4 46.4
4 213.3 9.9 4 234.0 24.6 1 67.4 0 -
4 33.5 5.7 3 39.6 9.6 0 2 30.0 0.1



4 28.1 2.1 4 29.8 1.8 4 7.3 1.7 4 28.7 3.5
4 37.2 2.0 4 43.8 5.1 2 0.0 0.0 4 32.9 7.5
4 32.9 3.0 4 47.2 7.6 4 11.6 4.7 4 22.8 13.2
4 4.5 0.5 4 5.0 0.4 4 0.6 0.1 4 4.9 0.6
9 32.4 7.3 4 29.8 5.2 4 11.6 5.1 4 27.1 2.4
4 32.8 8.0 4 39.7 6.7 1 0.0 0 -
4 6.5 0.9 3 9.7 3.0 0 2 7.6 1.6









Table A-2. Statistics for total seedling biomass and leaf area 1 year after treatment.
Species Post-treatment (1 year)
Control Defoliation Light reduction
n mean SD n mean SD n mean SD
Total mass (mg)
ASPC 4 536.8 143.9 4.0 248.1 58.9 4 466.2 94.8
CALL 4 519.6 190.8 0.0 2 404.6 49.7
CASE 4 272.4 74.0 3.0 179.8 85.3 3 243.7 154.7
COUC 4 96.0 29.1 4.0 38.5 9.9 4 77.9 16.8
LACP 4 313.8 99.7 4.0 200.9 52.9 4 263.6 120.0
PLAE 3 371.6 122.0 0.0 0 -
TABR 2 41.4 20.2 0.0 0 -

Leaf area (cm2)
ASPC 4 44.5 12.2 4.0 13.6 5.7 4 38.8 4.8
CALL 4 89.4 24.2 0.0 2 61.6 7.6
CASE 4 52.6 13.9 3.0 32.6 17.1 3 37.1 38.4
COUC 4 11.8 3.7 4.0 3.3 1.5 4 9.4 2.2
LACP 4 46.8 12.3 4.0 29.0 6.9 4 40.5 17.8
PLAE 3 43.2 37.5 0.0 0 -
TABR 2 5.9 8.3 0.0 0 -















APPENDIX B
SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR TOTAL NONSTRUCTURAL CARBOHYDRATE
(TNC) RESERVES IN STEMS AND ROOTS

Table B-1. Statistics for pre- and post-treatment TNC concentrations and pool sizes.
Species Pre-treatment Post-treatment (2 months)


Control


n mean SD


6.20 0.49
4.60 0.66
5.26 0.97
10.42 1.47
21.91 -
4.38 0.85
6.11 1.25


2.95 0.38
0.97 0.30
1.04 0.16
0.85 0.19
3.23 -
1.11 0.37
0.34 0.09


14.20 0.34
8.19 0.56
12.31 0.60
21.06 2.00
25.12 -
6.10 0.54
17.38 2.42


Defoliation


n mean SD n mean SD


8.22
9.22
4.04
13.05
17.10
7.29
9.35


4.80
2.52
0.89
1.12
2.84
2.03
0.73


13.08
12.09
8.12
21.79
21.51
7.25
12.63


1.85
3.28
1.48
1.23
1.84
1.86
1.66


1.53
1.69
0.41
0.25
0.65
0.92
0.38


3.25
4.43
2.28
4.41
1.37
0.67
1.84


6.28 1.76
6.25 1.56
3.99 0.55
9.93 0.63
12.02 3.28
7.15 -




3.19 1.08
1.02 0.43
0.57 0.09
0.60 0.06
1.74 0.68
0.71 -




10.91 2.42
7.73 2.98
5.24 0.47
16.84 5.68
16.89 3.62
5.11 -


Light reduction
n mean SD


5.92 1.58
6.85 1.94
2.95 0.44
10.21 0.67
15.67 4.25





2.80 0.72
1.06 0.19
0.50 0.26
0.69 0.03
2.35 0.65





11.53 1.45
9.48 1.20
7.08 1.23
16.84 1.12
20.84 2.20


Root (%)
ASPC
CALL
CASE
COUC
LACP
PLAE
TABR

Root (mg)
ASPC
CALL
CASE
COUC
LACP
PLAE
TABR

Stem (%)
ASPC
CALL
CASE
COUC
LACP
PLAE
TABR










Table B-1. Continued
Species Pre-treatment Post-treatment (2 months)
Control Defoliation Light reduction
n mean SD n mean SD n mean SD n mean SD


9.99 0.88
3.15 0.58
5.50 0.56
4.63 0.45
11.77 -
4.85 0.24
1.45 0.12


12.94 1.24
4.11 0.87
6.55 0.66
5.49 0.40
15.00 -
5.96 0.18
1.79 0.18


4 11.18 3.77
4 6.86 2.87
4 5.51 1.92
4 4.35 0.58
4 10.28 2.60
4 7.19 0.66
4 1.58 0.32


4 15.98 5.28
4 9.38 4.54
4 6.40 2.32
4 5.47 0.82
4 13.12 3.22
4 9.22 1.20
4 2.31 0.60


9.25 2.27
2.32 0.64
2.81 1.23
2.62 0.44
7.77 2.61
2.93 -




12.44 3.15
3.34 1.07
3.37 1.32
3.22 0.40
9.51 3.29
3.64 -


8.71 1.25
3.55 0.47
4.42 1.49
2.94 0.30
10.10 1.83





11.51 1.62
4.73 0.47
4.92 1.66
3.62 0.31
12.45 2.43

1.06


Stem (mg)
ASPC
CALL
CASE
COUC
LACP
PLAE
TABR

Total (mg)
ASPC
CALL
CASE
COUC
LACP
PLAE
TABR















LIST OF REFERENCES


Ashwell, G. (1966) New colorimetric methods of sugar analysis. VII. The phenol-sulfuric
acid reaction for carbohydrates. Methods in Enzymology, 8, 93-95.

Asquith, N.M., Wright, S.J. & Clauss, M.J. (1997) Does mammal community
composition control recruitment in neotropical forests? Evidence from Panama.
Ecology, 78, 941-946.

Augspurger, C.K. (1984a) Seedling survival of tropical tree species: Interactions of
dispersal distance, light-gaps, and pathogens. Ecology, 65, 1705-1712.

Augspurger, C.K. (1984b) Light requirements of neotropical tree seedlings: A
comparative study of growth and survival. Journal ofEcology, 72, 777-795.

Augspurger, C.K. (1983) Seed dispersal of the tropical tree, Platypodium elegans, and the
escape of its seedlings from fungal pathogens. Journal of Ecology, 71, 759-771.

Augspurger, C.K. & Kelly, C.K. (1983) Pathogen mortality of tropical tree seedlings:
Experimental studies of the effects of dispersal distance, seedling density, and light
conditions. Oecologia, 61, 211-217.

Becker, P. (1983) Effects of insect herbivory and artificial defoliation on survival of
.V\/in ea seedlings. Tropical Rain Forest: Ecology and Management (eds. S.L.
Sutton, T.C. Whitmore, & A.C. Chadwick), pp. 241-252. Blackwell Scientific
Publishers, Oxford.

Bloom, A.J., Chapin, F.S. III & Mooney, H.A. (1985) Resource limitation in plants: An
economic analogy. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 16, 363-392.

Boot, R.G.A. (1996) The significance of seedling size and growth rate of tropical rain
forest tree seedlings for regeneration in canopy openings. The Ecology of Tropical
Forest Tree Seedlings (ed M.D. Swaine), pp. 267-282. UNESCO, Paris.

Bullock, S.H. (1992) Seasonal differences in nonstructural carbohydrates in two
dioecious monsoon-climate trees. Biotropica, 24, 140-145.

Canham, C.D., Kobe, R.K., Latty, E.F. & Chazdon, R.L. (1999) Interspecific and
intraspecific variation in tree seedling survival: effects of allocation to roots versus
carbohydrate reserves. Oecologia, 121, 1-11.









Chazdon, R.L. & Fetcher, N. (1984) Photosynthetic light environments in a lowland
tropical rain forest in Costa Rica. Journal ofEcology, 72, 553-564.

Chazdon, R.L. & Pearcy, R.W. (1986) Photosynthetic responses to light variation in
rainforest species. II. Carbon gain and photosynthetic efficiency during lightflecks.
Oecologia, 69, 524-531.

Clark, D.B. & Clark, D.A. (1989) The role of physical damage in the seedling mortality
regime of a neotropical rainforest. Oikos, 55, 225-230.

Coley, P.D., Bryant, J.P., & Chapin, F.S. III (1985) Resource availability and plant
antiherbivore defense. Science, 230, 895-899.

Connell, J.H. (1971) On the role of natural enemies in preventing competitive exclusion
in some marine animals and in rain forest trees. Dynamics ofPopulations (eds P.J.
den Boer & G.R. Gradwell), pp. 298-312. Center for Agricultural Publication and
Documentation, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Connell, J.H. & Green, P.T. (2000) Seedling dynamics over thirty-two years in a tropical
rain forest tree. Ecology, 81, 568-584.

Cunningham, S.A. (1997) The effect of light environment, leaf area, and stored
carbohydrates on inflorescence production by a rain forest understory palm.
Oecologia, 111, 36-44.

Dubois, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton, J.K., Rebers, P.A. & Smith, F. (1956) Colorimetric
method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry,
28, 350-356.

Engelbrecht, M.J. & Kursar, T.A. (2003) Comparative drought-resistance of seedlings of
28 species of co-occurring tropical woody plants. Oecologia, 136, 383-393.

Farris-Lopez, K., Denslow, J.S., Moser, B. & Passmore, H. (2004) Influence of a
common palm, Oenocarpus mapora, on seedling establishment in a tropical moist
forest in Panama. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 20, 429-438.

Fox, G.A. (2001) Failure-time analysis: Studying times to events and rates at which
events occur. Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments (eds S.M. Scheiner &
J. Gurevitch), pp.235-266. Oxford University Press, Inc., New York.

Givnish, T.J. (1988) Adaptation to sun and shade: A whole-plant perspective. Australian
Journal ofPlant Physiology, 15, 63-92.

Green, P.T. & Juniper, P.A. (2004) Seed mass, seedling herbivory and the reserve effect
in tropical rainforest seedlings. Functional Ecology, 18, 539-547.

Grime, J.P. (1965) Shade tolerance in flowering plants. Nature, 208, 161-163.









Grubb, P.J., Lee, W.G., Kollmann, J. & Wilson, J.B. (1996) Interaction of irradiance and
soil nutrient supply on growth of seedlings of ten European tall-shrub species and
Fagus sylvatica. Journal ofEcology, 84, 827-840.

Gunatilleke, C.V.S., Gunatilleke, I.A.U.N., Perera, G.A.D., Burslem, D.F.R.P., Ashton,
P.M.S. & Ashton, P.S. (1997) Responses to nutrient addition among seedlings of
eight closely related species of ,l/,,,ea in Sri Lanka. Journal ofEcology, 85, 301-
311.

Harms, K.E. & Dalling, J.W. (1997) Damage and herbivory tolerance through
resprouting as an advantage of large seed size in tropical trees and lianas. Journal
of Tropical Ecology, 13, 617-621.

Harms, K.E., Wright, S.J., Calder6n, O., Hernandez, A. & Herre, E.A. (2000) Pervasive
density-dependent recruitment enhances seedling diversity in a tropical forest.
Nature, 404, 493-495.

Hoffman, W.A., Orthen, B. & Franco, A.C. (2004) Constraints to seedling success of
savanna and forest trees across the savanna-forest boundary. Oecologia, 140, 252-
260.

Hoffman, W.A., Orthen, B. & Nascimento, P.K.V. (2003) Comparative fire ecology of
tropical savanna and forest trees. Functional Ecology, 17, 720-726.

Hubbell, S.P. (1979) Tree dispersion, abundance, and diversity in a tropical dry forest.
Science, 203, 1299-1309.

Janzen, D.H. (1970) Herbivores and the number of tree species in tropical forests.
American Naturalist, 104, 501-528.

Kabeya, D. & Sakai, S. (2003) The role of roots and cotyledons as storage organs in early
stages of establishment in Quercus crispula: A quantitative analysis of the
nonstructural carbohydrate in cotyledons and roots. Annals ofBotany, 92, 537-545.

Khurana, E. & Singh, J.S. (2004) Germination and seedling growth of five tree species
from tropical dry forest in relation to water stress: Impact of seed size. Journal of
Tropical Ecology, 20, 385-396.

Kitajima, K. (2004) Impact of cotyedon and leaf removal on seedling survival in three
tree species with contrasting cotyledon functions. Biotropica, 35, 429-434.

Kitajima, K. (2002) Do shade-tolerant tropical tree seedlings depend longer on seed
reserves? Functional growth analysis of three Bignoniaceae species. Functional
Ecology, 16, 433-444.

Kitajima, K. (1996) Ecophysiology of tropical tree seedlings. Tropical Forest Plant
Ecophysiology (eds S.S. Mulkey, R.L. Chazdon, & A.P. Smith), pp. 559-596.
Chapman and Hall, New York, NY.









Kitajima, K. (1994) Relative importance of photosynthetic traits and allocation patterns
as correlates of seedling shade tolerance of 13 tropical trees. Oecologia, 98, 419-
428.

Kobe, R.K. (1999) Light gradient partitioning among tropical tree species through
differential seedling mortality and growth. Ecology, 80, 187-201.

Kobe, R.K. (1997) Carbohydrate allocation to storage as a basis of interspecific variation
in sapling survivorship and growth. Oikos, 80, 226-233.

Kobe, R.K., Pacala, S.W., Silander, J.A., Jr. & Canham, C.D. (1995) Juvenile tree
survivorship as a component of shade tolerance. Ecological Applications, 5, 517-
532.

Li, M., Leiberman, M. & Leiberman, D. (1996) Seedling demography in undisturbed
tropical wet forest in Costa Rica. The Ecology of Tropical Forest Tree Seedlings
(ed M.D. Swaine), pp. 285-314. UNESCO, Paris.

Loach, K. (1967) Shade tolerance in tree seedlings. I. Leaf photosynthesis and respiration
in plants raised under artificial shade. New Phytologist, 66, 607-621.

Marenco, R.A, de C. Gongalves, J.F. & Vieira, G. (2001) Leaf gas exchange and
carbohydrates in tropical trees differing in successional status in two light
environments in central Amazonia. Tree Physiology, 21, 1311-1318.

Marquis, R.J., Newell, E.A. & Villegas, A.C. (1997) Non-structural carbohydrate
accumulation and use in an understory rain-forest shrub and the relevance for the
impact of leaf herbivory. Functional Ecology, 11, 636-643.

McPherson, K. & Williams, K. (1998) The role of cabbage palm seedlings in the growth,
resilience, and persistence of cabbage palm seedlings (Sabalpalmetto). Oecologia,
117, 460-468.

Moles, A.T. & Westoby, M. (2004) What do seedlings die from and what are the
implication for the evolution of seed size? Oikos, 106, 193-199.

Montgomery, R.A. (2004) Effects of understory foliage on patterns of light attenuation
near the forest floor. Biotropica, 36, 33-39.

Montgomery, R.A. & Chazdon, R.L. (2002) Light gradient partitioning by tropical tree
seedlings in the absence of canopy gaps. Oecologia, 131, 165-174.

Newell, E.A., Mulkey, S.S., & Wright, S.J. (2002) Seasonal patterns of carbohydrate
storage in four tropical tree species. Oecologia, 131, 333-342.

Osunkoya, 0.0., Ash, J.E., Hopkins, M.S. & Graham, A.W. (1994) Influence of seed size
and seedling ecological attributes on shade-tolerance of rain-forest tree species in
northern Queensland. Journal ofEcology, 82, 149-163.









Osunkoya, 0.0., Ash, J.E., Hopkins, M.S., & Graham, A.W. (1992) Factors affecting
survival of tree seedlings in North Queensland rainforests. Oecologia, 91, 569-578.

Pacala, S.W., Canham, C.D., Saponara, J., Silander, J.A., Kobe, R.K. & Ribbens, E.
(1996) Forest models defined by field measurements: Estimation, error analysis and
dynamics. Ecological Monographs, 66, 1-43.

Poorter, L. (1999) Growth responses of 15 rain-forest trees to a light gradient: The
relative importance of morphological and physiological traits. Functional Ecology,
13, 396-410.

Rand, A.S. & Rand, W.M. (1982) Variation in rainfall on Barro Colorado Island. The
Ecology ofa Tropical Forest (eds E.G. Leigh, Jr., A.S. Rand & D.M. Windsor), pp.
47-66. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Rose, S.A. & Poorter, L (2002) The importance of seed mass for early regeneration in
tropical forest: A review. Long term changes in Composition and Diversity: case
studies from the Guyana Va\l/,/, Africa, Borneo and Melanesia (ed H. ter Steege),
pp. 5-19. Tropenbos Foundation, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Scariot, A. (2000) Seedling mortality by litterfall in Amazonian forest fragments.
Biotropica, 32, 662-669.

Tissue, D.T. & Wright, S.J. (1995) Effects of seasonal water availability on phenology
and the annual shoot carbohydrate cycle of tropical forest shrubs. Functional
Ecology, 9, 518-527.

Vazquez-Yanes, C., Orozco-Segovia, A., Rincon, E., Sanchez-Coronado, M.E., Huante,
P., Toledo, J.R., & Barradas, V.L. (1990) Light beneath the litter in a tropical
forest: Effect on seed germination. Ecology, 71, 1952-1958.

Veneklaas, E.J. & Poorter, L. (1998) Growth and carbon partitioning of tropical tree
seedlings in contrasting light environments. Inherent Variation in Plant Gi 1,11 th.
Physiological Mechanisms and Ecological Consequences (eds H. Lambers, H.
Poorter & M.M.I. Van Vuuren), pp.337-361. Backkhuys Publishers, Leiden, The
Netherlands.

Walter, M.B. & Reich, P.B. (2000) Seed size, nitrogen supply, and growth rate effect tree
seedling survival in deep shade. Ecology, 81, 1887-1901.

Walters, M.B. & Reich, P.B. (1999) Low-light carbon balance and shade tolerance in the
seedlings of woody plants: Do winter deciduous and broad-leaved evergreen
species differ? New Phytologist, 143, 143-154.

Walters, M.B. & Reich, P.B. (1996) Are shade tolerance, survival, and growth linked?
Low light and nitrogen effects on hardwood seedlings. Ecology, 77, 841-853.






62


Wang, Y.H. & Augspurger, C.K. (2004) Dwarf palms and cyclanths strongly reduce
Neotropical seedling recruitment. Oikos, 107, 619-633.

Welden, C.W., Hewett, S.W., Hubbell, S.P. & Foster, R.B. (1991) Sapling survival,
growth, and recruitment: Relationship to canopy height in a neotropical forest.
Ecology, 72, 35-50.

Woodward, F.I. (1990) From genes to ecosystems: The importance of shade tolerance.
Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 111-115.

Wright, S.J. (2002) Plant diversity in tropical forests: A review of mechanisms of species
coexistence. Oecologia, 130, 1-14.















BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Jonathan's interest in the natural world began when he was a boy growing up in the

forests and fields of western New York State. His formal education in the natural

sciences began during his junior year in high school, where he enrolled in and completed

a 2-year vocational program in natural resources conservation. Jonathan went on to

pursue a 2-year degree in forestry from Paul Smith's College, Paul Smiths, New York,

graduating in May of 1999. As part of his Paul Smith's education, he participated in a

tropical biology field course in Belize, which sparked his interest in both tropical

ecosystems and a professional career in ecology. He continued his undergraduate

education at Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, majoring in biological sciences, with

a concentration in ecology and evolutionary biology. He graduated with a B.S. degree in

May of 2002 and was awarded high honors for an undergraduate thesis on seed dispersal

by white-tailed deer, later published in Oecologia (2004). Jonathan spent the following

summer working as research assistant for the Institute of Ecosystem Studies, studying

hurricane effects on seedling regeneration at the Luquillo Experimental Forest in Puerto

Rico.

Jonathan began his graduate work in the fall of 2002 in the Department of Botany

at the University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, studying tropical rainforest seedling

ecology and ecophysiology. During his second semester, he participated in an 8-week

tropical ecology field course in Costa Rica, hosted through the Organization for Tropical

Studies at Duke University. He then traveled northwest to Panama to begin the field






64


research for his M.S. thesis, which focused on the role of nonstructural carbohydrate

reserves in seedling growth, survival, and stress tolerance in a tropical wet forest. He

received his M.S. degree in interdisciplinary ecology, with a concentration in botany, in

May of 2005. Jonathan is currently working towards a Ph.D. in tropical forest

community ecology in the Department of Biological Sciences at Louisiana State

University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and plans to pursue an academic career in research

and teaching.