The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Seed Availability as a Limiting Factor in Forest Recovery Processes in Costa Rica
Open accessAbstract
Abandoned pastures and secondary forests are increasingly prominent features of tropical landscapes. Forest regrowth on abandoned pastures is generally slow and virtually limited to regeneration from seeds from external sources, since agricultural activities alter site conditions. We hypothesize that seed availability is a major limiting factor in forest recovery on abandoned pastures. This hypothesis was tested by studying the seed bank, seed rain, and seed predation in a small pasture (1 ha) situated in a forest‐pasture mosaic in northwestern Costa Rica. The tree seed density in the pasture seed bank was much lower (21/m 2) than the density in the seed bank of a neighboring secondary forest (402/m 2). Within a period of five weeks, 23 tree seeds entered the pasture by seed rain. This number is low compared to densities found in closed forests but higher than densities reported in other studies where virtually no seeds were found beyond 20 m from the forest edge. Possibly the small size of the pasture with seed sources nearby and the small‐scale landscape mosaic enhance seed dispersal. Predation limits the seed density in pastures, with 42% of the woody species consumed by predators. The low seed density in the seed bank, and hampered recruitment combined with significant losses, pose severe restrictions to forest recovery on abandoned pastures. Moderate land use, and small sized clearings with seed sources nearby may increase the pace of recovery. Nevertheless, forest establishment may still take a considerable time. Thus, enlarging the available pool of species may be a worthwhile management strategy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Tropical forest recovery: legacies of human impact and natural disturbances
Chazdon, R. L. (2003) · Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics · doi:10.1078/1433-8319-00042 · Cited by 1,122
What's new about old fields? Land abandonment and ecosystem assembly
CRAMER, V, HOBBS, R., & STANDISH, R. (2008) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2007.10.005 · Cited by 890
Primary Succession and Ecosystem Rehabilitation
Walker, L. R., & del Moral, R. (2003) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511615078 · Cited by 884
Arroyo-Rodríguez, V., Melo, F. P. L., Martínez-Ramos, M., Bongers, F., Chazdon, R. L., Meave, J. A., Norden, N., Santos, B. A., Leal, I. R., & Tabarelli, M. (2017) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12231 · Cited by 688
Rates of change in tree communities of secondary Neotropical forests following major disturbances
Chazdon, R. L., Letcher, S. G., van Breugel, M., Martínez-Ramos, M., Bongers, F., & Finegan, B. (2007) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.1990 · Cited by 606
Metadata
- Authors
- Wijdeven, S. M. J., & Kuzee, M. E.
- Venue
- Restoration Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-12
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 414-424
- ISSN
- 1061-2971 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-100X
- OpenAlex
- W2156700357
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Seed Availability as a Limiting Factor in Forest Recovery Processes in Costa Rica. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1526-100x.2000.80056.x
- The paper
- Wijdeven, S. M. J., & Kuzee, M. E. (2000). Seed Availability as a Limiting Factor in Forest Recovery Processes in Costa Rica. Restoration Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100x.2000.80056.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.