A robust method to determine historical annual cone production among slow-growing conifers

•We assessed whether cone abscission scars reflect historical annual cone production.•We compared cone scar estimates with observed historical (8–13years prior) cone data.•Cone scars were strongly correlated with observed cone abundances.•Minimal sampling effort was required: 4–5 branches per tree a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Forest ecology and management 2016-05, Vol.368, p.1-6
Main Authors: Redmond, Miranda D., Weisberg, Peter J., Cobb, Neil S., Gehring, Catherine A., Whipple, Amy V., Whitham, Thomas G.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Abundance
Climate change
Cone abscission scar
Cone scar
Conifer
Conifers
Estimates
Historic
Pinus
Pinus edulis
Scars
Seed production
Seeds
Tree reproduction
Trees
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:•We assessed whether cone abscission scars reflect historical annual cone production.•We compared cone scar estimates with observed historical (8–13years prior) cone data.•Cone scars were strongly correlated with observed cone abundances.•Minimal sampling effort was required: 4–5 branches per tree and 4–6 trees per site.•Cone scars are an accurate and time-efficient way to reconstruct historic cone production. Forest and woodland ecosystems may be strongly affected by climate change influences on tree population processes such as seed production and seedling recruitment. Yet climate effects on seed production are generally poorly understood, particularly for trees that exhibit masting behavior (i.e. high synchronicity and high inter-annual variability in seed production). This is largely due to the limited amount of long-term datasets on seed production, which are necessary to characterize the highly variable reproductive outputs of masting species. The cone abscission scar method provides a promising approach to accurately determine historical (past 10–20years) annual cone production, but the method has not been rigorously validated. Here we use a long-term dataset of cone abundance on individually monitored pinyon pine (Pinus edulis) trees to validate the cone abscission scar methodology. Tree cone production estimated using abscission scars was positively associated with observed mature cone and conelet abundances from 8 to 13years previously (Spearman’s ρ=0.52 and 0.66, respectively), the time period of our observed historical cone production data. Further, we show that between 4–5 branches per tree and 4–6 trees per site need to be sampled to minimize the variance in cone abundance estimates. Thus, only approximately 3–4h are needed to obtain an estimate of historical annual cone production in a stand. Overall, we show that the cone abscission scar method provides a robust and time efficient approach to accurately determine historical annual cone production for P. edulis and likely other slow-growing conifer trees.
ISSN:0378-1127
1872-7042
DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2016.02.028