Niche breadth and niche overlap in three epixylic hepatics in a boreal old-growth forest, southern Finland

References

• Albinsson C. 1997. Niche relations and association analysis of southern Swedish mire hepatics. Journal of Bryology 19: 409–424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bengtsson BO, Ceplitis A. 2000. The balance between sexual and asexual reproduction in plants living in variable environments. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 13: 415–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhatla SC, Chopra RN. 1981. Hormonal regulation of gametangial formation in the moss Bryum argenteum Hedw. Journal of Experimental Botany 32: 1243–1256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bopp M, Bhatla SC. 1990. Physiology of sexual reproduction in mosses. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 9: 317–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chopra RN, Bhatla SC. 1981. Effect of physical factors on gametangial induction, fertilization and sporophyte development in the moss Bryum argenteum grown in vitro. New Phytologist 89: 439–447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chopra RN, Kumra S. 1986. Hormonal regulation of growth and gametangial formation in Riccia gangetica Ahmad. Beitraege zur Biologie der Pflanzen 61: 99–115.
   Google Scholar
• Chopra RN, Rahbar K. 1982. Temperature, light and nutritional requirements for gametangial induction in the moss Bartramidula bartramioides. New Phytologist 92: 251–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damsholt K. 2002. Illustrated flora of Nordic liverworts and hornworts. Lund: Nordic Bryological Society.
   Google Scholar
• During HJ, Lloret F. 2001. The species-pool hypothesis from a bryological perspective. Folio Geobotanica 36: 63–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fesl C. 2002. Biodiversity and resource use of larval chironomids in relation to environmental factors in a large river. Freshwater Biology 47: 1065–1087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hedenis H, Bolyukh VO, Jonsson BG. 2003. Spatial distribution of epiphytes on Populus tremula in relation to dispersal mode. Journal of Vegetation Science 14: 233–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heikinheimo O, Raatikainen M. 1981. Ruutukoordinaattien ja paikan-nimien käytti5 Suomessa [Grid reference and names of localities in the recordings of biological finds in Finland]. Notulae Entomologicae 61: 133–154.
   Google Scholar
• Hura CE, Crow TR. 2004. Woody debris as a component of ecological diversity in thinned and unthinned northern hardwood forests. Natural Areas Journal 24: 57–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurlbert SH. 1978. The measurement of niche overlap and some relatives. Ecology 59: 67–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimmerer RW. 1991. Reproductive ecology of Tetraphis pellucida. I. Population density and reproductive mode. Bryologist 94: 255–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimmerer RW. 1994. Ecological consequences of sexual versus asexual reproduction in Dicranum flagellare and Tetraphis pellucida. Bryologist 97: 20–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimmerer RW, Young, CC. 1996. Effect of gap size and regeneration niche on species coexistence in bryophyte communities. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 123: 16–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirby KN. 1993. Advanced data analysis with SYSTAT. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
   Google Scholar
• Kuusinen M, Penttinen A. 1999. Spatial pattern of the threatened epiphytic bryophyte Neckera pennata at two scales in a fragmented boreal forest. Ecography 22: 729–735.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laaka-Lindberg S. 2000. Substrate preference and reproduction in a leafy hepatic Lophozia silvicola (Hepaticopsida) in southern Finland. Annales Botanici Fennici 37: 85–93.
   Google Scholar
• Laaka-Lindberg S. 2001. Biomass allocation to sexual and asexual reproduction in a leafy hepatic Lophozia silvicola Buch. Journal of Bryology 23: 3–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laaka-Lindberg S, Korpelainen H, Pohjamo M. 2003. Dispersal of asexual propagules in bryophytes. Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory 93: 319–330.
   Google Scholar
• Longton RE, Schuster RM. 1983. Reproductive biology. In: Schuster RM, ed. New manual of bryology. Nichinan: Hattori Botanical Laboratory, 386–462.
   Google Scholar
• Mathias A, Kisdi E, Olivieri I. 2001. Divergent evolution of dispersal in a heterogeneous landscape. Evolution 55: 246–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles CJ, Longton RE. 1990. The role of spores in reproduction in mosses. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 104: 149–173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles CJ, Longton RE. 1992. Deposition of moss spores in relation to distance from parent gametophytes. Journal of Bryology 17: 355–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mogensen GS. 1983. The spore. In: Schuster RM, ed. New manual of bryology. Nichinan: Hattori Botanical Laboratory, 325–342.
   Google Scholar
• Pahlsson L. 1994. Vegetationstyper I Norden. Temallord 1994:665. Copenhagen: Nordiska ministerrädet.
   Google Scholar
• Pianka ER. 1973. The structure of lizard communities. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4: 53–74.
   Google Scholar
• Pohjamo M, Laaka-Lindberg S. 2003. Reproductive modes in the leafy epixylic hepatic Anastrophyllum hefierianum. Perspectives in Plant Evolution, Ecology and Systematics 6: 159–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pohjamo M, Laaka-Lindberg S. 2004. Demographic population structure in the leafy hepatic Anastrophyfium hefierianum (Nees ex Lindenb.) R.M.Schust. Plant Ecology 170: 73–81.
   Google Scholar
• Ranta E, Rita H, Kould J. 1989. Biometria. Tlastotiedettfi ekologeille. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino.
   Google Scholar
• Rydin H. 1986. Competition and niche separation in Sphagnum. Canadian Journal of Botany 64: 1817–1824.
   Google Scholar
• Rydin H, Barber, KE. 2001. Long-term and fine-scale coexistence of closely related species. Folio Geobotanica 36: 53–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slack NG. 1990. Bryophytes and ecological niche theory. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 104: 187–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slack NG, Glime JM 1985. Niche relationships of mountain stream bryophytes. Bryologist 88: 7–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Söderström L. 1988a. Niche width and niche overlap in some epixylic bryophytes. In: Herben T, McQueen CB, eds. Proceedings of the Sixth CEBWG Meeting, 1988 Liblice, 108–119.
   Google Scholar
• Söderström L. 1988b. Sequence of bryophytes and lichens in relation to substrate variables of decaying coniferous wood in Northern Sweden. Nordic Journal of Botany 8: 89–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Söderström L. 1993. Substrate preference in some forest bryophytes: a quantitative study. Lindbergia 18: 98–103.
   Google Scholar
• Söderström L, Herben T. 1997. Dynamics of bryophyte metapopula-tions. Advances in Bryology 6: 205–240.
   Google Scholar
• Soro A, Sundberg S, Rydin H. 1999. Species diversity, niche metrics and species associations in harvested and undisturbed bogs. Journal of Vegetation Science 10: 549–560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Baaren M, During H, Leltz G. 1988. Bryophyte communities in mesotrophic fens in The Netherlands. Holarctic Ecology 11: 32–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson MA. 1980. Patterns of habitat occupation in mosses — relevance to consideration of the niche. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 107: 345–372.
   Google Scholar
• Watson MA 1981. Patterns of microhabitat occupation of six closely related species of mosses along a complex altitudinal gradient. Ecology 62: 1067–1078.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkler E, Fischer M. 2002. The role of vegetative spread and seed dispersal for optimal life histories of clonal plants: a simulation model. Evolutionary Ecology 15: 281–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar