Skip to content

#plant adaptation

8 public questions tagged with this topic.

Stress-tolerators are adapted to:

“High stress, low disturbance habitats” for stress-tolerators are adapted to. This relationship follows from the ecological mechanism represented by the terms in the item, not merely from an association between their names. Survivorship curves summarize age-specific mortality: Type I concentrates loss late in life, Type II approximates a constant hazard, and Type III concentrates loss early. They are empirical patterns, not rigid taxonomic rules. The remaining alternatives—“High resource, low stress habitats”, “Constant waterlogged environments”, “Periodic fire and drought”—refer to different states, processes, or scales and therefore do not express the same causal relationship. Selection favors the schedule that increases lifetime reproductive success under local mortality and resource conditions. Body size, development time, fecundity, parental investment, and generation length consequently tend to covary. This distinction matters because similar surface patterns can arise through different mechanisms, whereas ecological prediction depends on identifying the mechanism that actually changes rates.

Ref: Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes, Grime, 2nd Ed.

Ruderal species occur in environments with:

“Low stress, high disturbance” for ruderal species occur in environments with. This relationship follows from the ecological mechanism represented by the terms in the item, not merely from an association between their names. Survivorship curves summarize age-specific mortality: Type I concentrates loss late in life, Type II approximates a constant hazard, and Type III concentrates loss early. They are empirical patterns, not rigid taxonomic rules. The remaining alternatives—“High competition, high disturbance”, “Low disturbance, high stress”, “High competition, low disturbance”—refer to different states, processes, or scales and therefore do not express the same causal relationship. Selection favors the schedule that increases lifetime reproductive success under local mortality and resource conditions. Body size, development time, fecundity, parental investment, and generation length consequently tend to covary. Field observations could test this account by measuring the proposed driver and the demographic or ecosystem response while controlling plausible confounding factors. This distinction matters because similar surface patterns can arise through different mechanisms, whereas ecological prediction depends on identifying the mechanism that actually changes rates.

Ref: Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes, Grime, 2nd Ed.