SREL Reprint #3019

Reproductive ecology of a federally endangered legume, Baptisia arachnifera, and its more widespread congener, B. lanceolata (Fabaceae)

 

Amy S. Young1, Shu-Mei Chang1 and Rebecca R. Sharitz1,2,*


1Department of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 USA;
2
Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, P.O. Drawer E, Aiken, South Carolina 29802 USA

 


Abstract
Comparisons between rare species and their more common congener species can provide valuable information for conservation. Reproductive traits have previously been shown to be critical for reproductive success and persistence of rare species. In this study, we compared floral, seedpod, and seed traits of two Baptisia species (one endangered and one common) to assess differences in reproduction between species and among populations. Because heat can trigger germination in hard-seeded legumes, we also exposed Baptisia seeds to a range of high temperatures (60-100°C) and determined seed viability. The rare Baptisia arachnifera had significantly greater pod damage by insects and produced significantly fewer, yet heavier, seeds than B. lanceolata. While B. arachnifera seeds were seldom viable at temperatures above 80°C, approximately 40% of B. lanceolata seeds maintained viability up to 100°C. Our various seed trait measurements suggest that B. arachnifera may be a poorer colonizer than the more widespread B. lanceolata. Additionally, B. arachnifera's reduced tolerance for high temperatures may have implications for appropriate fire management regimes for this endangered species.

 

Key Words
Baptisia; Fabaceae; heat-stimulated germination; predispersal seed predation; rare-common comparison; reproductive ecology; southeastern USA


*Corresponding author
Email address: sharitz@srel.edu (Rebecca R. Sharitz)

 

SREL Reprint #3019

 

Young, A. S., S. -M. Chang and R. R. Sharitz. 2007. Reproductive ecology of a federally endangered legume, Baptisia arachnifera, and its more widespread congener, B. lanceolata (Fabaceae). American Journal of Botanty 94(2): 228-236.

 

To request a reprint