The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Are Plant Populations Seed Limited? A Critique and Meta‐Analysis of Seed Addition Experiments
Abstract
We examine the relative importance of processes that underlie plant population abundance and distribution. Two opposing views dominate the field. One posits that the ability to establish at a site is determined by the availability of suitable microsites (establishment limitation), while the second asserts that recruitment is limited by the availability of seeds (seed limitation). An underlying problem is that establishment and seed limitation are typically viewed as mutually exclusive. We conducted a meta-analysis of seed addition experiments to assess the relative strength of establishment and seed limitation to seedling recruitment. We asked (1) To what degree are populations seed and establishment limited? (2) Under what conditions (e.g., habitats and life-history traits) are species more or less limited by each? (3) How can seed addition studies be better designed to enhance our understanding of plant recruitment? We found that, in keeping with previous studies, most species are seed limited. However, the effects of seed addition are typically small, and most added seeds fail to recruit to the seedling stage. As a result, establishment limitation is stronger than seed limitation. Seed limitation was greater for large-seeded species, species in disturbed microsites, and species with relatively short-lived seed banks. Most seed addition experiments cannot assess the relationship between number of seeds added and number of subsequent recruits. This shortcoming can be overcome by increasing the number and range of seed addition treatments.
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
Cites
Harper, J. L. (1977) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 9,128
The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography
Jetschke, G. (2002) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[1771:tuntob]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 6,993
Trenbath, B., & Harper, J. L. (1978) · The Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.2307/2402622 · Cited by 6,942
THE MAINTENANCE OF SPECIES‐RICHNESS IN PLANT COMMUNITIES: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE REGENERATION NICHE
GRUBB, P. J. (1977) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.1977.tb01347.x · Cited by 4,402
The Optimal Balance between Size and Number of Offspring
Smith, C. C., & Fretwell, S. D. (1974) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282929 · Cited by 2,918
Competition and Biodiversity in Spatially Structured Habitats
Tilman, D. (1994) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1939377 · Cited by 2,780
Spatial patterns of seed dispersal, their determinants and consequences for recruitment
Nathan, R., & Muller-Landau, H. C. (2000) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(00)01874-7 · Cited by 2,094
Comparative Plant Ecology: A Functional Approach to Common British Species
Grime, J. P., Hodgson, J., & Hunt, R. (1989) · Cited by 1,582
Spatial ecology : the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions
Tilman, D. G., & Kareiva, P. (1997) · Ecology · Cited by 1,556
Light-Gap Disturbances, Recruitment Limitation, and Tree Diversity in a Neotropical Forest
Hubbell, S. P., Foster, R. B., O'Brien, S. T., Harms, K. E., Condit, R., Wechsler, B., Wright, S. J., & de Lao, S. L. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.283.5401.554 · Cited by 1,537
Cited by
Plant–soil feedbacks: a meta‐analytical review
Kulmatiski, A., Beard, K. H., Stevens, J. R., & Cobbold, S. M. (2008) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01209.x · Cited by 983
Gómez‐Aparicio, L. (2009) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01573.x · Cited by 512
Plant species diversity and environmental heterogeneity: spatial scale and competing hypotheses
Lundholm, J. T. (2009) · Journal of Vegetation Science · doi:10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.05577.x · Cited by 295
Connectivity and propagule sources composition drive ditch plant metacommunity structure
Favre-Bac, L., Ernoult, A., Mony, C., Rantier, Y., Nabucet, J., & Burel, F. (2014) · Acta Oecologica · doi:10.1016/j.actao.2014.10.006 · Cited by 20
Fire may mediate effects of landscape connectivity on plant community richness in prairie remnants
Alstad, A. O., & Damschen, E. I. (2016) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/ecog.01492 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Clark, C. J., Poulsen, J. R., Levey, D. J., & Osenberg, C. W.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2007-07
- Volume
- 170
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 128-142
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2121622946
- Cited by
- 494
- References
- 65
- FWCI
- 20.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Are Plant Populations Seed Limited? A Critique and Meta‐Analysis of Seed Addition Experiments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/518565
- The paper
- Clark, C. J., Poulsen, J. R., Levey, D. J., & Osenberg, C. W. (2007). Are Plant Populations Seed Limited? A Critique and Meta‐Analysis of Seed Addition Experiments. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/518565
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.