6.5 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ecological succession | 5/6 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_succession | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T07:17:58.613092+00:00 | kb-cron |
=== Grassland succession === For a long time, grasslands were thought to be early stages of succession, dominated by weedy species and with little conservation value. However, comparing grasslands that form after recovery from long-term disruptions like agricultural tillage with ancient or "old-growth" grasslands has shown that grasslands are not inherently early-successional communities. Rather, grasslands undergo a centuries-long process of succession, and a grassland that is tilled up for agriculture or otherwise destroyed is estimated to take a minimum of 100 years, and potentially on average 1,400 years, to recover to its previous level of biodiversity. However, planting a high diversity of late-successional grassland species in a disturbed environment can accelerate the recovery of the soil's ability to sequester carbon, resulting in twice as much carbon storage as a naturally recovering grassland over the same period of time. Many grassland ecosystems are maintained by disturbance, such as fire and grazing by large animals, or else the process of succession will change them to forest or shrubland. In fact, it is debated whether fire should be considered disturbance at all for the North American prairie ecosystems, since it maintains, rather than disrupts, an equilibrium state. Many late-successional grassland species have adaptations that allow them to store nutrients underground and re-sprout rapidly after "aboveground" disturbances like fire or grazing. Disturbance events that severely disrupt or destroy the soil, such as tilling, eliminate these late-successional species, reverting the grassland to an early successional stage dominated by pioneers, whereas fire and grazing benefit late-successional species. Both too much and too little disturbance can damage the biodiversity of disturbance-dependent ecosystems like grasslands. In North American semi-arid grasslands, the introduction of livestock ranching and absence of fire was observed to cause a transition away from grasses to woody vegetation, particularly mesquite. However, the means by which ecological succession under frequent disturbance results in ecosystems of the sort seen in remnant prairies is poorly understood.
== History == Ecological succession is one of the first concepts that emerged within the study of ecology. Precursors of the idea of ecological succession go back to the beginning of the 19th century. As early as 1742 French naturalist Buffon noted that poplars precede oaks and beeches in the natural evolution of a forest. Buffon was later forced by the theological committee at the University of Paris to recant many of his ideas because they contradicted the biblical narrative of Creation. Swiss geologist Jean-André Deluc and the later French naturalist Adolphe Dureau de la Malle were the first to make use of the word succession concerning the vegetation development after forest clear-cutting. In 1859 Henry David Thoreau wrote an address called "The Succession of Forest Trees" in which he described succession in an oak-pine forest. "It has long been known to observers that squirrels bury nuts in the ground, but I am not aware that any one has thus accounted for the regular succession of forests." The Austrian botanist Anton Kerner published a study about the succession of plants in the Danube river basin in 1863. Ragnar Hult's 1885 study on the stages of forest development in Blekinge noted that grassland becomes heath before the heath develops into forest. Birch dominated the early stages of forest development, then pine (on dry soil) and spruce (on wet soil). If the birch is replaced by oak it eventually develops to beechwood. Swamps proceed from moss to sedges to moor vegetation followed by birch and finally spruce.
=== H. C. Cowles === Between 1899 and 1910, Henry Chandler Cowles, at the University of Chicago, developed a more formal concept of succession. Inspired by studies of Danish dunes by Eugen Warming, Cowles studied vegetation development on sand dunes on the shores of Lake Michigan (the Indiana Dunes). He recognized that vegetation on dunes of different ages might be interpreted as different stages of a general trend of vegetation development on dunes (an approach to the study of vegetation change later termed space-for-time substitution, or chronosequence studies). He first published this work as a paper in the Botanical Gazette in 1899 ("The ecological relations of the vegetation of the sand dunes of Lake Michigan"). In this classic publication and subsequent papers, he formulated the idea of primary succession and the notion of a sere—a repeatable sequence of community changes specific to particular environmental circumstances.
=== Gleason and Clements === From about 1900 to 1960, however, understanding of succession was dominated by the theories of Frederic Clements, a contemporary of Cowles, who held that seres were highly predictable and deterministic and converged on a climatically determined stable climax community regardless of starting conditions. Clements explicitly analogized the successional development of ecological communities with ontogenetic development of individual organisms, and his model is often referred to as the pseudo-organismic theory of community ecology. Clements and his followers developed a complex taxonomy of communities and successional pathways. Henry Gleason offered a contrasting framework as early as the 1920s. The Gleasonian model was more complex and much less deterministic than the Clementsian. It differs most fundamentally from the Clementsian view in suggesting a much greater role of chance factors and in denying the existence of coherent, sharply bounded community types. Gleason argued that species distributions responded individualistically to environmental factors, and communities were best regarded as artifacts of the juxtaposition of species distributions. Gleason's ideas, first published in 1926, were largely ignored until the late 1950s. Two quotes illustrate the contrasting views of Clements and Gleason. Clements wrote in 1916:
The developmental study of vegetation necessarily rests upon the assumption that the unit or climax formation is an organic entity. As an organism the formation arises, grows, matures, and dies. Furthermore, each climax formation is able to reproduce itself, repeating with essential fidelity the stages of its development. while Gleason, in his 1926 paper, said: