Skip navigation
Universidade de Brasília
Use este identificador para citar ou linkar para este item: http://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/50393
Arquivos associados a este item:
Não existem arquivos associados a este item.
Registro completo de metadados
Campo DCValorIdioma
dc.contributor.authorWinck, Nadjarriny-
dc.contributor.authorColli, Guarino Rinaldi-
dc.contributor.authorMews, Henrique Augusto-
dc.contributor.authorSilvério, Divino V.-
dc.contributor.authorAbadia, Ana Clara-
dc.contributor.authorPinto, José Roberto Rodrigues-
dc.contributor.authorVieira, Thiago Bernardi-
dc.contributor.authorPurificação, Keila Nunes-
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, Eddie Lenza de-
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-20T12:58:38Z-
dc.date.available2024-09-20T12:58:38Z-
dc.date.issued2022-11-
dc.identifier.citationWINCK, Nadjarriny et al. Differences in plant-dispersal mechanisms between contrasting Brazilian savanna habitats. Plant Ecology & Diversity, [S. l.], v. 15, n. 3-4, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17550874.2022.2132543.pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/50393-
dc.language.isoengpt_BR
dc.publisherTaylor & Francispt_BR
dc.rightsAcesso Restritopt_BR
dc.titleDifferences in plant-dispersal mechanisms between contrasting Brazilian savanna habitatspt_BR
dc.typeArtigopt_BR
dc.subject.keywordConservação da biodiversidadept_BR
dc.subject.keywordCerradospt_BR
dc.subject.keywordPlantas - dispersãopt_BR
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1080/17550874.2022.2132543pt_BR
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17550874.2022.2132543pt_BR
dc.description.abstract1Background By favouring long-distance dispersal, anemochory is often associated with open and patchy habitats, whereas zoochory enables short-distance dispersal and prevails in closed and extensive habitats. Brazilian savanna (Cerrado) on shallow rocky soils (RS) have open vegetation and are patchily distributed, whereas savanna on deep soils (DS) have dense vegetation and occur in large stands. Thus, we predicted that zoochory would be favoured in DS and anemochory would characterise RS. Aims We tested the hypothesis that vegetation structure and distribution patchiness are related to the characteristic dispersal mechanisms associated with closed and open habitats. Methods We compared the abundance of dispersal mechanisms between DS and RS with generalised linear mixed models and used an indicator species analysis to identify species associated with each vegetation type. Results There was no difference between DS and RS in the number of species associated with one or the other dispersal mechanism. We found fewer-than-expected zoochorous individuals and more-than-expected anemochorous individuals in RS, and more zoochorous indicator species in DS. Conclusion Habitat patchiness and openness are related to the composition of dispersal mechanisms. Open vegetation on shallow rocky soils favours long-distance dispersal relative to zoochory. This implies reduced plant establishment and increased leaflessness, being harsher on animal dispersers. Protected areas are often concentrated in RS, whereas DS are rapidly converted into croplands due to their excellent aptitude for mechanised agriculture. Conserving DS and RS requires a balanced complementary approach, that ensures that all landscape elements are adequately represented in protected areas.pt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2628-5652pt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-7489-8197pt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1642-9496pt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2773-8588pt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2028-6176pt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1762-8294pt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9733-4784pt_BR
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9139-5949pt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade do Estado de Mato Grosso, Programa de Pós-graduação em Ecologia e Conservaçãopt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade de Brasília, Departamento de Engenharia Florestalpt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade Federal de Rondonópolis, Instituto de Ciências Exatas e Naturaispt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade Federal Rural da Amazônia, Capitão Poçopt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade do Estado de Mato Grosso, Programa de Pós-graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Nova Xavantina, Brasilpt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade de Brasília, Departamento de Engenharia Florestalpt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade Federal do Pará, Faculdade de Ciências Biológicas, Altamira, Brasilpt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade do Estado de Mato Grosso, Programa de Pós-graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Nova Xavantinapt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationInstituto de Ciências Exatas e Naturais, Universidade Federal de Rondonópolis, Rondonópolispt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade do Estado de Mato Grosso, Programa de Pós-graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Nova Xavantinapt_BR
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade do Estado de Mato Grosso, Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias, Biológicas e Sociais Aplicadas, Nova Xavantinapt_BR
dc.description.unidadeFaculdade de Tecnologia (FT)pt_BR
dc.description.unidadeDepartamento de Engenharia Florestal (FT EFL)pt_BR
Aparece nas coleções:Artigos publicados em periódicos e afins

Mostrar registro simples do item Visualizar estatísticas



Os itens no repositório estão protegidos por copyright, com todos os direitos reservados, salvo quando é indicado o contrário.