Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 428

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The tortoise and the hare: ecology of angiosperm dominance and gymnosperm persistence

BOND, W. J.·1989·Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Abstract

Gymnosperms, and conifers in particular, are sometimes very productive trees yet angiosperms dominate most temperate and tropical vegetation. Current explanations for angiosperm success emphasize the advantages of insect pollination and seed dispersal by animals for the colonization of isolated habitats. Differences between gymnosperm and angiosperm reproductive and vegetative growth rates have been largely ignored. Gymnosperms are all woody, perennial and usually have long reproductive cycles. Their leaves are not as fully vascularized as those of angiosperms and are more stereotyped in shape and size. Gymnosperm tracheids are generally more resistant to solute flow than angiosperm vessels. A consequence of the less efficient transport system is that maximum growth rates of gymnosperms are lower than maximum growth rates of angiosperms in well lit, well watered habitats. Gymnosperm seedlings may be particularly uncompetitive since their growth depends on a single cohort of relatively inefficient leaves. Later, some gymnosperms attain a higher productivity than co-occurring angiosperm trees by accumulating several cohorts of leaves with a higher total leaf area. These functional constraints on gymnosperm growth rates suggest that gymnosperms will be restricted to areas where growth of angiosperm competitors is reduced, for example, by cold or nutrient shortages. Biogeographic evidence supports this prediction since conifers are largely confined to high latitudes and elevations or nutrient-poor soils. Experimental studies show that competition in the regeneration niche (between conifer seedlings and angiosperm herbs and shrubs) is common and significantly affects conifer growth and survival, Fast-growing angiosperms, especially herbs and shrubs, may also change the frequency of disturbance regimes thereby excluding slower-growing gymnosperms. Shade-tolerant and early successional conifers share similar characteristics of slow initial growth and low plasticity to a change in resources. Shade-tolerant gymnosperms would be expected to occur only where forest openings are small or otherwise unsuitable for rapid filling by fast-growing angiosperm trees, lianas or shrubs. The limited evidence available suggests that shade-tolerant conifers are confined to forests with small gap sizes where large disturbances are very rare. The regeneration hypothesis for gymnosperm exclusion by angiosperms is consistent with several aspects of the fossil record such as the early disappearance of gymnosperms from early successional environments where competition with angiosperms would have been most severe. However there are unresolved difficulties in interpreting process from paleoecological pattern which prevent the testing of alternative hypotheses.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1095-8312.1989.tb00492.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 428

Metadata

Authors
BOND, W. J.
Venue
Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
Published
1989-03
Volume
36
Issue
3
Pages
227-249
ISSN
0024-4066 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2027490872
Cited by
428
References
0
FWCI
7.37
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: The tortoise and the hare: ecology of angiosperm dominance and gymnosperm persistence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1989.tb00492.x
The paper
BOND, W. J. (1989). The tortoise and the hare: ecology of angiosperm dominance and gymnosperm persistence. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1989.tb00492.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.