Blogs

The likely mechanism controlling the interaction between fir and aspen trees is facilitative succession. This occurs to be the mechanism forwarding the secondary succession found in the example, as aspen tree density expansion allows for fir trees to be able to establish themselves within the environment. This is shown in Figure 2 as the figure shows the progression of the respective densities of the two trees in the context of the different successional stages. In Figure 2 it shows that aspen trees are able to establish themselves in meadows and in turn increase in density until aspen trees are able to grow and eventually overtake them density wise.

The likely mechanism controlling the interaction between fir and aspen trees is facilitative succession. This occurs to be the mechanism forwarding the secondary succession found in the example, as aspen tree density expansion allows for fir trees to be able to establish themselves within the environment. This is shown in Figure 2 as the figure shows the progression of the respective densities of the two trees in the context of the different successional stages. 

Under the control situation for the experiment in question, where the aspen population was not thinned by the experimenters, mortality rates for both aspens and firs both remained at approximately 5% mortality. In the experimental scenario where aspen tree populations were reduced aspen mortality remained around an approximate 5% mortality rate while fir trees saw a massive increase in mortality rate, with a rate of approximately 22%. This increase in mortality for firs most likely occurs as aspens initiate the earliest stage of secondary succession in open meadows created by fire or deforestation, which in turn allow for firs to grow. Thus, when aspen density is reduced by experimental thinning firs are unable to grow successfully, increasing mortality significantly.

Under the control situation for the experiment in question, where the aspen population was not thinned by the experimenters, mortality rates for both aspens and firs both remained at approximately 5% mortality. In the experimental scenario where aspen tree populations were reduced aspen mortality remained around an approximate 5% mortality rate while fir trees saw a massive increase in mortality rate, with a rate of approximately 22%. This increase in mortality for firs most likely occurs as aspens initiate the earliest stage of secondary succession in open meadows created by fire or deforestation, which in turn allow for firs to grow. Thus, when aspen density is reduced by experimental thinning firs are unable to grow successfully, increasing mortality significantly.

Under the control situation for the experiment in question, where the aspen population was not thinned by the experimenters, mortality rates for both aspens and firs both remained at approximately 5% mortality. In the experimental scenario where aspen tree populations were reduced aspen mortality remained around an approximate 5% mortality rate while fir trees saw a massive increase in mortality rate, with a rate of approximately 22%. This increase in mortality for firs most likely occurs as aspens initiate the earliest stage of secondary succession in open meadows created by fire or deforestation, which in turn allow for firs to grow. 

Under the control situation for the experiment in question, where the aspen population was not thinned by the experimenters, mortality rates for both aspens and firs both remained at approximately 5% mortality. In the experimental scenario where aspen tree populations were reduced aspen mortality remained around an approximate 5% mortality rate while fir trees saw a massive increase in mortality rate, with a rate of approximately 22%. This increase in mortality for firs most likely occurs as aspens initiate the earliest stage of secondary succession in open meadows created by fire or deforestation.

Under the control situation for the experiment in question, where the aspen population was not thinned by the experimenters, mortality rates for both aspens and firs both remained at approximately 5% mortality. In the experimental scenario where aspen tree populations were reduced aspen mortality remained around an approximate 5% mortality rate while fir trees saw a massive increase in mortality rate, with a rate of approximately 22%.

Under the control situation for the experiment in question, where the aspen population was not thinned by the experimenters, mortality rates for both aspens and firs both remained at approximately 5% mortality. In the experimental scenario where aspen tree populations were reduced aspen mortality remained around an approximate 5% mortality rate

Ulva lactuca and Gigartina canaliculata are two seaweeds that interact within their shared environment. In an experiment scientists observed, tracked, and graphically represented the presence of  G.canaliculata in two separate scenarios, one in which U. Lactuca was removed from the environment and one in which  U. Lactuca was present. In the presence of U. Lactuca G.canaliculata was able to thrive in environment with a significant number of recruits, while the removal of  U. Lactuca resulted in low recruitment for G.canaliculata. This shows the effect of Ulva on Gigartina can be characterized by a facilitative successional mechanism. Facilitative succession is defined by a scenario in which one species allows for the growth of successive species in an environment, this appears to be the case here as the presence of U. Lactuca results in the growth of G.canaliculata and its removal causes the recruitment of G.canaliculata to decrease significantly in comparison to the. Since  U. Lactuca allows G.canaliculata to grow more in comparison to the alternative situation where U. Lactuca is not present, this positive relationship between the two species can be seen as facilitative in nature.

Ulva lactuca and Gigartina canaliculata are two seaweeds that interact within their shared environment. In an experiment scientists observed, tracked, and graphically represented the presence of  G.canaliculata in two separate scenarios, one in which U. Lactuca was removed from the environment and one in which  U. Lactuca was present. In the presence of U. Lactuca G.canaliculata was able to thrive in environment with a significant number of recruits, while the removal of  U. Lactuca resulted in low recruitment for G.canaliculata. This shows the effect of Ulva on Gigartina can be characterized by a facilitative successional mechanism. Facilitative succession is defined by a scenario in which one species allows for the growth of successive species in an environment, this appears to be the case here as the presence of U. Lactuca results in the growth of G.canaliculata and its removal causes the recruitment of G.canaliculata to decrease significantly in comparison to the. Since  U. Lactuca allows G.canaliculata to grow more in comparison to the alternative situation where U. Lactuca is not present, this positive relationship between the two species can be seen as facilitative in nature.