Field trip to Estabrook Woods

Sat, Oct 10th (rainout day Sun the 11th)

meet either:1) in front of Maxwell-Dorkin at 7:45 for 8 am departure; or2) at trail head on west side of Monument St. by 8:45

- email Julie to inform us if you are attending, where you will meet us, and if you can volunteer a car

- bring lunch & beverage, binoculars (if able to), good cheer

EW

Estabrook Woods Vegetation Map

Parking along left (west) side of Monument St.

Estabrook Woods Field Trip

1) trail walk: ecology of plant communities

2) sample two forest types:

Write-up:- data organized by teaching staff into tables in Excel spreadsheet & posted on website

- partially analyzed for you

Point Quarter Datasheet of Excel FieldTripData2007 file

Point Quarter SamplesOak Forest Transects

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Team #OF34 Sample Pt Unique Pt Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH DistanceOak Forest 4 1 Red Oak 20 9.4 Red Maple 12 2.1 American Elm 31 6.6 American Elm 27 3.6

32 2 Red Maple 51 4.4 White Pine 28 3.4 Red Oak 32 6.7 Red Maple 40 7.968 3 Red Oak 104 2.3 Red Oak 42 10.2 White Oak 14 7.3 Red Oak 17 6.098 4 Red Oak 70 8.9 Red Oak 93 7.6 White Oak 41 2.0 Red Maple 35 3.6

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Team #OF100 Sample Pt Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH DistanceOak Forest 4 5 Hornbeam 15 6.8 American Elm 32 6.0 Beech 25 2.7 Beech 11 5.6

32 6 Red Oak 48 2.2 Beech 12 7.6 Red Maple 33 8.9 Beech 30 5.368 7 Red Oak 39 3.0 Beech 33 1.5 Beech 26 2.5 Beech 30 5.998 8 Hornbeam 25 3.5 White Pine 10 5.2 White Oak 18 1.5 Red Maple 23 5.1

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Team #OF233 Sample Pt Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH DistanceOak Forest 4 9 Red Oak 45 6.0 Red Oak 30 1.4 Yellow Birch 15 9.0 Red Oak 23 4.8

32 10 Sugar Maple 10 6.1 Red Oak 28 4.0 Yellow Birch 14 4.2 Red Oak 29 1.268 11 White Pine 24 1.2 Red Oak 56 3.2 Red Oak 29 4.8 Red Oak 65 2.298 12 Yellow Birch 20 2.0 Yellow Birch 12 1.4 White Pine 21 3.9 Yellow Birch 17 6.8

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Team #OF330 Sample Pt Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH DistanceOak Forest 4 13 Beech 20 2.6 Red Oak 11 8.5 Beech 31 4.0 Red Oak 42 13.0

32 14 White Pine 52 1.3 Red Maple 13 5.1 Red Oak 21 5.1 Beech 14 7.368 15 Beech 20 0.5 Beech 33 5.1 Beech 27 8.2 White Oak 30 2.198 16 Red Oak 54 3.1 Beech 12 1.5 Beech 11 8.5 Beech 40 3.5126 17 White Pine 16 2.4 American Elm 23 5.7 Beech 25 4.3 Beech 35 6.2

Mixed (Pine-Hardwood) Forest TransectsQ1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Team #MF34 Sample Pt Unique Pt Species DBHDistance Species DBH Distance Species DBH Distance Species DBH

Distance

Mixed Forest 4 1 Red Oak 98 6.9 White Pine 113 9.3 White Pine 162 7.7 White Pine 40 3.632 2 White Pine 24 5.0 White Pine 52 3.0 White Pine 39 5.7 White Pine 38 5.868 3 Red Oak 36 2.5 White Pine 40 6.8 Red Oak 109 7.0 White Pine 48 5.898 4 Red Maple 95 9.0 Red Maple 53 7.7 White Pine 35 5.3 Pin Cherry 15 0.8126 5 Red Maple 25 1.3 White Pine 64 5.2 Mountain Maple 12 2.6 Pin Cherry 14 3.4156 6 White Pine 16 1.2 Mountain Maple 22 3.2 White Pine 47 4.7 Red Maple 13 3.3

185 7 Mountain Maple 42 5.0 White Pine 35 3.6 Hemlock 79 10.0 White Pine 42 2.5

Point Quarter Datasheet of Excel FieldTripData2007 fileOak Forest Transects Mixed (Pine-Hardwood) Forest TransectsUnique PtSpecies DBH Distance Unique PtSpecies DBH Distance1 American Elm 31 6.6 9 Black Oak 32 5.61 American Elm 27 3.6 16 Black Oak 33 8.35 American Elm 32 6.0 16 Black Oak 41 2.017 American Elm 23 5.7 7 Hemlock 79 10.05 Beech 25 2.7 9 Hemlock 47 5.45 Beech 11 5.6 16 Hornbeam 11 5.96 Beech 12 7.6 5 Mountain Maple 12 2.67 Beech 33 1.5 6 Mountain Maple 22 3.27 Beech 26 2.5 7 Mountain Maple 42 5.06 Beech 30 5.3 4 Pin Cherry 15 0.87 Beech 30 5.9 5 Pin Cherry 14 3.413 Beech 20 2.6 4 Red Maple 95 9.015 Beech 20 0.5 4 Red Maple 53 7.715 Beech 33 5.1 5 Red Maple 25 1.316 Beech 12 1.5 6 Red Maple 13 3.313 Beech 31 4.0 14 Red Maple 27 6.615 Beech 27 8.2 17 Red Maple 32 2.116 Beech 11 8.5 20 Red Maple 29 4.817 Beech 25 4.3 20 Red Maple 46 6.814 Beech 14 7.3 20 Red Maple 53 9.316 Beech 40 3.5 1 Red Oak 98 6.917 Beech 35 6.2 3 Red Oak 36 2.55 Hornbeam 15 6.8 3 Red Oak 109 7.08 Hornbeam 25 3.5 12 Red Oak 31 4.12 Red Maple 51 4.4 12 Red Oak 21 5.41 Red Maple 12 2.1 17 Red Oak 24 4.22 Red Maple 40 7.9 19 Red Oak 74 9.6

4 Red Maple 35 3.6 19 White Oak 40 8.8

6 Red Maple 33 8.9 1 White Pine 113 9.3

8 Red Maple 23 5.1 1 White Pine 162 7.714 Red Maple 13 5.1 1 White Pine 40 3.61 Red Oak 20 9.4 2 White Pine 24 5.03 Red Oak 104 2.3 2 White Pine 52 3.04 Red Oak 70 8.9 2 White Pine 39 5.73 Red Oak 42 10.2 2 White Pine 38 5.84 Red Oak 93 7.6 3 White Pine 40 6.8

2 Red Oak 32 6.7 3 White Pine 48 5.83 Red Oak 17 6.0 4 White Pine 35 5.3

6 Red Oak 48 2.2 5 White Pine 64 5.27 Red Oak 39 3.0 6 White Pine 16 1.29 Red Oak 45 6.0 6 White Pine 47 4.79 Red Oak 30 1.4 7 White Pine 35 3.6

Plot Datasheet of Excel FieldTripData2007 filePlot Samples

N/A= no trees in plot

Oak Forest Transects Oak Forest Transects Mixed Forest TransectsTeam #OF34 Sample Pt Plot # Tree Species DBH (cm) Plot # Tree Species DBH (cm) Plot # Tree Species DBH (cm)Oak Forest 4 1 Red Maple 12 6 Beech 30 2 Beech 33

32 2 Black Cherry 44 6 Beech 26 5 Mountain Maple 3032 2 Red Maple 27 6 Beech 30 5 Pin Cherry 1032 2 White Pine 22 6 Beech 16 5 Pin Cherry 1168 3 Red Oak 104 6 Beech 17 15 Red Maple 7468 3 Red Oak 17 15 Beech 15 24 Red Maple 2498 4 N/A N/A 17 Beech 57 3 Red Oak 36

18 Beech 12 5 Red Oak 25Team #OF100 Sample Pt Tree Species DBH (cm) 19 Beech 35 7 Red Oak 93Oak Forest 4 5 Hornbeam 15 19 Beech 25 5 White Pine 64

32 6 Red Oak 48 2 Black Cherry 44 6 White Pine 1632 6 Beech 30 5 Hornbeam 15 9 White Pine 1632 6 Red Oak 32 1 Red Maple 12 16 White Pine 3132 6 Beech 26 2 Red Maple 27 16 White Pine 3132 6 Beech 30 3 Red Oak 104 16 White Pine 4132 6 Beech 16 3 Red Oak 17 16 White Pine 3632 6 Beech 17 6 Red Oak 48 16 White Pine 2768 7 N/A N/A 6 Red Oak 32 17 White Pine 6898 8 N/A N/A 10 Red Oak 35 17 White Pine 48

10 Red Oak 35 17 White Pine 49Team #OF233 Sample Pt Tree Species DBH (cm) 10 Red Oak 29 18 White Pine 52Oak Forest 4 9 N/A N/A 10 Red Oak 26 18 White Pine 57

32 10 Red Oak 35 11 Red Oak 65 10 Yellow Birch 1232 10 Red Oak 35 14 Red Oak 35 11 Yellow Birch 1232 10 Red Oak 29 15 Red Oak 36 18 Yellow Birch 1232 10 Red Oak 26 16 Red Oak 4068 11 White pine 24 16 Red Oak 3568 11 Yellow Birch 25 17 Red Oak 3268 11 Red Oak 65 17 Red Oak 3998 12 Yellow Birch 20 17 Red Oak 27122 13 Yellow Birch 15 18 Red Oak 24146 14 Red Oak 35 19 Red Oak 36

2 White Pine 22Team #OF330 Sample Pt Tree Species DBH (cm) 11 White pine 24Oak Forest 4 15 Beech 15 11 Yellow Birch 25

4 15 Red Oak 36 12 Yellow Birch 2032 16 Red Oak 40 13 Yellow Birch 1532 16 Red Oak 35

Pt-Qtr Calculations Datasheet of Excel FieldTripData2007 filePoint-Quarter Calculations n= 17 points

Oak Forest Transects mean point to plant distance= 4.8 metersUnique Pt Species DBH Distance Basal Area total density of all spp= 436.43 trees >10cm dbh/ha1 American Elm 31 6.6 754.77

1 American Elm 27 3.6 572.56 Oak Forest5 American Elm 32 6.0 804.25 relative (no./ha) relative relative importance17 American Elm 23 5.7 415.48 density density dominance dominance frequency frequency value5 Beech 25 2.7 490.885 Beech 11 5.6 95.03 American Elm 5.88 25.67 16347.21 3.91 0.18 7.32 17.126 Beech 12 7.6 113.10 Beech 26.47 115.53 60211.96 14.41 0.47 19.53 60.416 Beech 30 5.3 706.86 Hornbeam 2.94 12.84 4284.65 1.03 0.12 4.88 8.857 Beech 33 1.5 855.30 Red Maple 10.29 44.93 37025.69 8.86 0.35 14.64 33.807 Beech 26 2.5 530.93 Red Oak 10.29 44.93 38375.36 9.19 0.35 14.64 34.127 Beech 30 5.9 706.86 Sugar Maple 10.29 44.93 30426.07 7.28 0.35 14.64 32.2213 Beech 20 2.6 314.16 White Oak 10.29 44.93 76881.77 18.40 0.35 14.64 43.3413 Beech 31 4.0 754.77 White Pine 10.29 44.93 79598.74 19.05 0.35 14.64 43.9914 Beech 14 7.3 153.94 Yellow Birch 10.29 44.93 75566.13 18.09 0.35 14.64 43.0315 Beech 20 0.5 314.1615 Beech 33 5.1 855.30 total= 97.06 423.59 418717.57 100.22 2.88 119.6015 Beech 27 8.2 572.56 should be 100.00 436.43 417787.75 100.00 2.41 100.0016 Beech 12 1.5 113.1016 Beech 11 8.5 95.03 yellow are correct, you have to edit other cells16 Beech 40 3.5 1256.6417 Beech 25 4.3 490.8817 Beech 35 6.2 962.125 Hornbeam 15 6.8 176.728 Hornbeam 25 3.5 490.881 Red Maple 12 2.1 103.872 Red Maple 51 4.4 2042.832 Red Maple 40 7.9 1256.644 Red Maple 35 3.6 962.126 Red Maple 33 8.9 855.308 Red Maple 23 5.1 415.4814 Red Maple 13 5.1 132.73

n= 20 points

mean point to plant distance= 5.1 meterstotal density of all spp= 386.36 trees >10cm dbh/ha

Mixed (Pine-Hardwood) Forest 20 sample pointsrelative (no./ha) relative relative importancedensity density dominance dominance frequency frequency value

Black Oak 3.75 14.49 14390.98 2.66 0.15 6.07 12.48Hemlock 5.00 19.32 24406.63 4.51 0.15 6.07 15.59Hornbeam 5.00 19.32 21590.26 3.99 0.15 6.07 15.07Mountain Maple 5.00 19.32 60841.15 11.25 0.15 6.07 22.33Pin Cherry 5.00 19.32 9482.72 1.75 0.15 6.07 12.83Red Maple 5.00 19.32 2564.13 0.47 0.15 6.07 11.55Red Oak 5.00 19.32 22816.19 4.22 0.15 6.07 15.29White Oak 5.00 19.32 82689.35 15.29 0.15 6.07 26.37White Pine 5.00 19.32 65134.93 12.05 0.15 6.07 23.12Yellow Birch 5.00 19.32 35188.20 6.51 0.15 6.07 17.58

total= 48.8 188.4 339104.5 62.7 1.5 60.7

Plot Calculations Datasheet of Excel FieldTripData2007 filePlot Calculations

Oak Forest Transects n=37 trees, Plot # Tree Species DBH (cm)Basal Area area = 19 plots * (5m x 10m) = 950m2/10000 = 0.095 ha6 Beech 30 706.96 Beech 26 530.9

6 Beech 30 706.9 Oak Forest6 Beech 16 201.1 relative relative relative importance6 Beech 17 227.0 density density dominance dominance frequency frequency value15 Beech 15 176.717 Beech 57 2551.8 Beech 105.26 22.91 70181.69 14.49 0.26 10.12 47.5318 Beech 12 113.1 Black Cherry 10.53 2.29 16005.63 3.30 0.05 2.02 7.6219 Beech 35 962.1 Hornbeam 10.53 2.29 1860.16 0.38 0.05 2.02 4.7019 Beech 25 490.9 Red Maple 10.53 2.29 1190.50 0.25 0.05 2.02 4.562 Black Cherry 44 1520.5 Red Oak 10.53 2.29 6026.91 1.24 0.05 2.02 5.565 Hornbeam 15 176.7 White Pine 10.53 2.29 89419.86 18.46 0.05 2.02 22.781 Red Maple 12 113.1 Yellow Birch 10.53 2.29 2389.27 0.49 0.05 2.02 4.812 Red Maple 27 572.63 Red Oak 104 8494.9 total= 168.4 36.7 187074.0 38.6 0.6 22.33 Red Oak 17 227.06 Red Oak 48 1809.6

Mixed Forest Transects n=25 trees, Plot # Tree Species DBH (cm)Basal Area area = 24 plots * (5m x 10m) = 1200m2/10000 = 0.12 ha2 Beech 33 855.35 Mountain Maple 30 706.9

5 Pin Cherry 10 78.5 Mixed (Pine-Hardwood) Forest5 Pin Cherry 11 95.0 relative relative relative importance15 Red Maple 74 4300.9 density density dominance dominance frequency frequency value24 Red Maple 24 452.43 Red Oak 36 1017.9 Beech 8.33 1.81 7127.51 1.47 0.04 1.60 4.895 Red Oak 25 496.6 Mountain Maple 8.33 1.81 5890.50 1.22 0.04 1.60 4.637 Red Oak 93 6792.9 Pin Cherry 16.67 3.63 1446.45 0.30 0.08 3.21 7.135 White Pine 64 3217.0 Red Maple 16.67 3.63 36632.37 7.56 0.08 3.21 14.406 White Pine 16 201.1 Red Oak 16.67 3.63 39610.34 8.18 0.08 3.21 15.019 White Pine 16 201.1 White Pine 16.67 3.63 12252.24 2.53 0.08 3.21 9.3616 White Pine 31 754.8 Yellow Birch 16.67 3.63 12621.00 2.61 0.08 3.21 9.4416 White Pine 31 754.816 White Pine 41 1320.3 total= 100.0 21.8 115580.4 23.9 0.5 19.216 White Pine 36 1017.916 White Pine 27 572.6

Population Ecology & Interspecific Competition

• Population Ecology– Density-dependent effects on growth, birth and

death rates– Life history patterns

• Interspecific Competition– Ecological effects of competition– Evolutionary effects of competition– Competition and community structure

Exponential & Logistic Population Growth

r = b-d

intrinsic rate of natural increase

Density-dependent birth and death rates determine K, the carrying capacity

Sea otters well below carrying capacity in a resource-rich environment:

Washington coast: N =600; increasing 10%/yr (K approx. 2400)

“Sigmoidal” or Logistic Population Growth is expected in most populations: changes in density-dependent mortality or fecundity occur as population nears K

Bacterium Lactobacillus annual Juncus modules Willow tree Salix

What determines an organism’s K? (population density)

Is this K variable from place to place & year to year?

Net recruitment curves as density increases towards K- defined as births - deaths

brown trout fruit flies, experimental herring

What population size allows greatest harvesting rate?

Life History Theory: -natural selection on “life history traits” influencing demographic variables -optimal life history evolves in ecological arena of selective pressures

• How long to live? (lifespan)

• Single bout of reproduction or many? (iteroparity/semelparity)

• Many flimsy offspring or a few robust ones? (allocation of reproductive effort into offspring size vs. litter size)

• Reproduce early or wait (and die later)? (age at first reproduction)

• How large to grow vs. allocate resources to reproduction? (allocation of resources into growth vs. reproduction)

Trade-off between growth and reproduction

Douglas fir Pseudotsuga ragwort Senecio

Trade-off between offspring number vs. size in the Australian snake Austrelaps ramsayi

Size of offspring(snout-vent length) vs.Litter size

Residual refers to statistically controlling for effect of maternal size

r-selection where adult survivorship low or uncertain

K-selection when adult survivorship high

Allometry of life history traits: + correlations with body size lifespan, survivorship (but variable!) age at first reproduction, iteroparity offspring size

- correlations with body size (lower value with increasing body size) litter size, fecundity

Humans as relatively r-selected: does high reproductive rate, relative to other great apes, indicate evolutionary history of relatively high mortality?

Large organisms (trees) in K-selected habitats:

a) iteroparous & low reproductive allocation

b) large offspring

c) delayed reproduction and long lifespans

Interspecific Competition• Occurs when individuals of one species suffer reduction in fecundity,

survivorship or growth because of exploitation of resources or interference by another species

• Therefore, these interactions affect population dynamics

• …and affect species distributions and evolution

• Therefore, competition influences the species composition of biological communities

• Competition in practice can have less impact than its potential

• Use of similar resources does not indicate competition is occurring, as resources may not be limiting to populations

Competitive exclusion in laboratory populations of two diatom species

Synedra outcompetes Asterionella even when starting population is smaller

Synedra

Asterionella

Why are Dolly Varden charr found at higher altitudes in Japanese streams compared than White-spotted charr?

Interference competition mediated by temperature-dependent aggressive behavior… but no evidence for dominance of DV charr at hi elevations (low temperature streams)

Fundamental niche larger than realized niche: expanded range where only one species

Sympatry Allopatry

Exploitative competition in Rocky Mountain Bombus:- when sympatric, specialize on preferred flower species- preference determined by feeding efficiency, matching proboscis length

- the “realized niche” are the resources & conditions for a population to exist, grow and reproduce in presence of competing population

Niche partitioning between diatoms where Si or P limited resource

Most interspecific competition is asymmetric: intertidal barnacles

…Balanaus outcompetes Chthamalus except in high dessication zone

Experimental removal of orange-crowned warblers resulted in 129% increase in Virginia warbler nestlings; and 78% reciprocally- hypothesized due to improved feeding efficiency

…but instead due to preferred nest site competition and reduced

predation

“Diffuse competition”between “guilds” of similar species with overlapping diet:

- overlap in seed size use was experimentally demonstrated to constrain relative abundances (American SW desert)

Asymmetric & diffuse competition among Bornean frugivores

The Competitive Exclusion Principle

• Coexistence of species in a stable environment depends on differences in their realized niches– Without such differentiation, one species will exclude the other

• Pattern not always linked to process: Different niches does not necessarily imply past or present competition– (species may differ from other evolutionary causes)

• Close competitors may coexist because environmental disturbance rarely allows competitive exclusion

• Disregard the Lotka-Volterra competition equations as they make simplistic assumptions about individual and environmental homogeneity, … but these indicate that coexistence possible when niches vary

The sea palm Postelsia colonizes gaps in mussel beds, and coexists by ephemeral occupation of these patches

- but coexist only if high rates of gap formation

Poorer competitors but better colonizers