Efecto de la densidad de semillas en la germinación de Isolatocereus dumortieri y Myrtillocactus geometrizans, cactáceas columnares endémicas de México

Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 04/2009; 80(1):141-144.

ABSTRACT The effect of seed density on the germination of 2 columnar cactus species (Isolatocereus dumortieri and Myrtillocactus geometrizans) was evaluated using 5 seed density treatments (1, 5, 10, 20 and 50 seeds). Isolatocereus dumortieri had a lower germination percentage with increasing seed density; germination of M. geometrizans was not affected by seed density. These results suggest that I. dumortieri seedlings might compete for resources with siblings.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 1. We analysed a cacti-syrphid community focusing on the exploitation of decaying cacti resources by the flies, i.e. if exploitation exhibited a nested topology as a structural pattern, or whether it was temporally random. If availability of cactus resources was predictable during the rainy season, it would then be exploited by a more structured community, or as resource availability would be unpredictable during the dry season, we should expect it to be exploited by a random community. 2. We registered 12 Copestylum species (9 in dry and 11 in rainy season). Four cactus species were recorded per season, three were shared between seasons. 3. The community of Copestylum larvae in the rainy season was not randomly assembled but highly nested, revealing a highly structured pattern of resource use. It exhibited a random organization for the dry season. The high nestedness value obtained for the rainy season suggests that factors along with competition must play a major role in determining community structure. 4. Succession in the cacti-syrphid community mediated by microorganisms involved in necrosis is an important factor structuring nested subsets. The studied networks were small, which may limit the power of the analysis, and strong conclusions could also be limited.
    Ecological Entomology 12/2010; 35:754-759. · 1.97 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Gayana Botánica 01/2013; 70:113-117. · 0.52 Impact Factor


Available from
Jun 5, 2014