The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Convergence During Secondary Forest Succession
Abstract
(1) Successional convergence in community composition was examined in terms of three questions: (i) for a given site is there a continuous shift in composition toward that characteristic of climax? (ii) does variation in community composition along an environmental gradient increase or decrease with succession? (iii) to what extent is the species composition along a successional gradient determined by site characteristics rather than by chance factors? Hypotheses regarding the nature of successional convergence are reviewed in terms of these questions. (2) These hypotheses were tested using data for tree (>0.5 cm dbh) and herb (all foliage 80-yr-old pines, and uneven-aged hardwoods). For each age-group first axis ordination scores (detrended correspondence analysis) were highly correlated most consistently with soil pH as compared with other soil and site variables. This correlation was greatest in the intermediate-age (40-60and 60-80-yr-old) pines and in the hardwood stands, and lowest in old pine stands. The distribution of species in the ordination space was most similar between the intermediate-age pine stands and the hardwoods; in contrast, young and old pine age classes were dissimilar to hardwoods. Species distributions in relation to the soil pH gradient were also most similar between intermediate-age pines and hardwoods. Thus, there is a shift in species composition toward that characteristic of climax, but it is probably not monotonic. (3) Beta-diversity was highest in the hardwoods and lowest among the pines. Community differentiation along gradients increased in this chronosequence. (4) Predictability of soil pH, based on stand species composition, was highest in the intermediate-age pines and in the hardwoods. Habitat breadth in relation to soil pH decreased steadily with successional age. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that the role of chance factors (e.g. site history and seed rain) decreases with successional age.
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
The use of chronosequences in studies of ecological succession and soil development
Walker, L. R., Wardle, D. A., Bardgett, R. D., & Clarkson, B. D. (2010) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2010.01664.x · Cited by 1,267
Putting Things in Even Better Order: The Advantages of Canonical Correspondence Analysis
Palmer, M. W. (1993) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1939575 · Cited by 1,161
The Myths of Restoration Ecology
Hilderbrand, R. H., Watts, A. C., & Randle, A. M. (2005) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-01277-100119 · Cited by 554
A theory of the spatial and temporal dynamics of plant communities
Smith, T., & Huston, M. (1989) · Vegetatio · doi:10.1007/bf00031680 · Cited by 537
Interpreting recruitment limitation in forests
Clark, J. S., Beckage, B., Camill, P., Cleveland, B., HilleRisLambers, J., Lichter, J., McLachlan, J., Mohan, J., & Wyckoff, P. (1999) · American Journal of Botany · doi:10.2307/2656950 · Cited by 465
Metadata
- Authors
- Christensen, N. L., & Peet, R. K.
- Venue
- The Journal of Ecology
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1984-03
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25
- ISSN
- 0022-0477 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2334251255
- Cited by
- 315
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.64
- 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: Convergence During Secondary Forest Succession. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2260004
- The paper
- Christensen, N. L., & Peet, R. K. (1984). Convergence During Secondary Forest Succession. The Journal of Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/2260004
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.