Measurement of the Dispersal of Large Seeds and Fruits with a Magnetic Locator

Author(s): William Surprison Alverson and Ana Gomez Diaz

Source: Biotropica, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Mar., 1989), pp. 61-63
Published by: The Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2388443 .
Accessed: 24/07/2013 07:34

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Biotropica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 150.216.68.200 on Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:34:15 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Measurement of the Dispersal of Large Seeds and Fruitswitha
Magnetic Locator1

WilliamSurprison Alverson
Botany Department,University
of Wisconsin,Madison, Wisconsin53706, U.S.A.
and
Ana G6mez Diaz
ForestryResources, MississippiState University,
Drawer FR, MississippiState, Mississippi39762, U.S.A.

ABSTRACT
We reporta new methodformeasuringthe dispersalof individualseeds and fruitsby animals.Magnetsweighing2.2 and 0.25
g wereinsertedinto palm fruits,and the fruitswereexperimentallyhidden in 0.01-ha plots at the La Selva BiologicalStationin
Costa Rica. Using a magneticlocator,we wereable to recover99.5 percentof markedfruitsthatwerehidden on the soil surface
or buriedto 10 cm deep. The largermagnetsweredetectable100 percentof the time,even when buried to 40 cm. These data
suggestthat,undersimilarhabitatand dispersalconditions,searchtimesof 20 to 40 h per hectarewould allow recoveryof ca.
99 percentof markedseeds and fruits.

POSTDISPERSAL SEED SHADOWS of animal-dispersed tropical mammal-dispersed fruitsin Costa Rica, withsearchtimes
trees(sensuJanzen 1971) are virtuallyunknown.Infor- of about 63 m2/h(160 h/ha). Searchtimesare long in
mationon seed dispersalin naturalpopulationsof these both of thesestudiesbecausethe plate-likesensorof the
treesis neededto answerquestionsof demography, com- metaldetector(10-30 cm diam.) mustpass directly over
petition,animalinteraction, and geneticpopulationstruc- a markedseed or fruitto detectitspresence,requiringan
ture(Howe & Smallwood1982), butis difficult to obtain. extremely thoroughsearchofthestudyarea;theverylarge
The techniquereportedherewas developedto facilitate a numberofmarkedacornsin Sork'sstudyaccountsforthe
studyof potentialgene dispersalvia seeds of rodent-dis- muchslowerrate.Groundvegetation, treebuttresses, and
persedlowlandtropicalforesttrees.It employsa magnetic fallenbranchesand logs frequently make it difficult to
locatorthatoperateson a different principlethanthatof applythe sensorclose enoughto thegroundforeffective
conventional metaldetectors and offersthe advantagesof detection.Metallicrefuseor magneticrockscan also give
highrecovery ratesand relativelyshortsearchtimes. falsepositivesignalsthatcan be time-consuming to dis-
Two previouslyavailabletechnologies providemeans tinguishfrommarkedseeds or fruits.
to bothlocateand identify individualseedsafterdispersal.
In the first, spools of threadare placed in or attachedto
fruitsand seedslargeenoughto accommodatethem(W.
METHODS
Hallwachs,pers.comm.). By followingthethread,which The studytookplace at FincaLa Selva,a biologicalstation
is paid out behindthe fruitor seed as it is carriedaway of the OrganizationforTropicalStudiesin the Atlantic
by an animal,dispersaleventsof 100 m or morecan be lowlandforests ofCostaRica, HerediaProvince(see Hold-
documented. ridgeet al. 1971, p. 365, forsitedescription).
Conventionalmetal detectorshave been used to re- Fruitsof two commonpalms were collectedand a
locatefruits partiallywrappedin aluminumfoiland shal- cavitymade in eachwitha 5-mm-diameter drillbit. Each
lowlyburied(1-4 cm deep) by researchers (Stapanian& fruitcontaineda singlelargeseed surroundedby a thin,
Smith1978, 1984, 1986; Sork1983, 1987). Sork(1984) firm,fibrouspericarp.In the largerfruitsof Astrocaryum
used a metal detectorto locate acornsof Quercusrubra alatum Loomis (ca. 50 mm long, 35 mm diam., 20 g),
(Fagaceae) thatboresmallironinsertsaftertheirdispersal cylindrical AlnicoII magnets(16 mm long,3 mm diam.,
by rodents.She recovered80 percentof markedacorns 2.2 g, Edmund Scientific Co., Barrington, New Jersey)
on thesoil surfaceor buriedto 3 cm deep at a searchrate wereembeddedand sealedwithwax. In thesmallerfruits
of about 5 m2/h.Using similarequipment,Hallwachs of Bactrisgasipaes H.B.K. (ca. 25 mm long, 17 mm
(pers. comm.) reportsa higherrecovery rate forvarious diam.,2-5 g), smaller,disc-shapedrareearthmagnets(4
mm diam., 1 mm thick,0.25 g, BerntsenInc., Madison,
Wisconsin)were embedded. These marked fruitswere
I Received 5 May 1987, accepted5 January1988. thenplaced withinsquare 0.01-ha studyplots by one of

BIOTROPICA21(1): 61-63 1989 61

This content downloaded from 150.216.68.200 on Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:34:15 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TABLE 1. Timeto 100 percentrecovery ofmarkedfruitshidden TABLE 2. Timeto 100 percentrecovery
ofburied,markedfruits
on soil surface.Values are averagesof threetrials, in the PP Plot. Valuesfromsingletrials with 10
withN = 10 markedfruitsper trial. fruits.

with
Fruitsmarked with
Fruitsmarked Fruitsmarked
Alnicomagnets rareearthmagnets Fruitsmarkedwith withrare
Alnicomagnets earthmagnets
Plot: PP CES CC PP CES CC
Time(min): 12.0 15.8 16.4 14.3 -a 24.1 Depth(cm): 10 20 40 10 40
Time(min): 16.6 17.2 12.6 15.1 a
aOnly29 of 30 markedfruits duringa 51.4-
wererecovered
minsearch. a wererecovered
Only3 of 10 magnets a 25-minsearch.
during

us (AGD), witha subsequent"blind" searchof the area of thetime,evenwhenburiedto a depthof 40 cm. The
bytheother(WSA) usinga Schonstedt HelifluxGA-52Bsmaller,rare earthmagnetsperformedwell even when
MagneticLocator (SchonstedtInstrumentCo., Reston, buried to 10 cm, but were mostlyundetectablewhen
Virginia).The magneticlocatorweights1.4 kg and op- buriedto 40 cm.
erateson four1.5 V "C" batteries. Searchtimesto recovery of 100 percentofthemarked
fruits
Three studyplots wereused. The first,the Pejibaye in thestudyplotsaregivenin Tables 1 and 2. Times
(PP) Plot, was in a palm grovewithscatteredZingiber-forindividualtrialswithunburied,markedfruitsranged
aceae and Musaceaeplantingsand a groundcoverofgrass from 10.3 to 32.6 min. The average searchtimes for
10 to 30 cm tall. The second,the Camino Experimentalunburiedfruitscarrying rareearthmagnetswereslightly
Sur (CES) Plot,was in a primaryforest greaterthanthoseforfruits
nearthebiological withthelarger,morepowerful
stationand containedone largebuttressed Alnicomagnets.With theexceptionof thefruitscarrying
tree,numerous
smallertrees,manyshrubs,and a moderately rareearthmagnetsthatwereburiedat 40 cm, burialdid
open lower
understory. These two plots have experiencedheavyusenot greatlyincreasesearchtimes. Multiplicationof the
by researchers time values in Tables 1 and 2 by 100 gives estimated
who have lefta legacyof metallicstakes,
tags,wire,and screen.The thirdplot,theCaminoCentral searchtimesofonly20 to 40 h/ha fora 99 to 100 percent
recovery
(CC) Plot is a primaryforestplot witha slightlydenser rateofmarkedfruits on thesoil surfaceor buried
understory thantheCES Plot,but located4 km fromthe to a depthof 10 cm.
biologicalstation;thisplot containedno metallichuman Metallicrefusein the soil of the PP and CES Plots
artifacts. gave falsepositivesignalsand increasedthe timeneeded
to identifythe locationsof marked fruits.Once these
After3 h of practicein the PP Plot, recoverytrials
wererunformarkedfruits signalswereinvestigated
placed on thesoil surface.Ten and theirsourcediscovered,the
markedfruitswere used foreach trial.Three trialsfor locationsof refusewerenotedforsubsequentsearchesof
each typeof magnetwereconductedin each of the three thesame area,or therefusewas removed.The difference
plots (N = 180 markedfruits).Searchtimerequiredto in intensity of theirmagneticfieldsalloweddifferentiation
locateeach fruitwas recordedduringthe trials. of themagnetsfromrefuseupon close inspection.Differ-
Five additional trials were conducted by buryingentiation becamemoredifficult and timeconsumingwhen
the markedfruitswere buried. Soil mineralization
markedfruits10, 20, or 40 cm below the soil surfacein and
the PP Plot (N = 50). Upon detection,the locationof magneticrocksare potentialproblems,but in theseplots
each fruitwas markedwitha plasticstake and the fruitit was fairlyeasy to distinguishtheirsignalsfromthose
of the magnets.
excavatedafterthe time trial. During these trials,the
responseof the magneticlocatorto marked fruitswas The mostefficient methodof searchingis to walk in
usuallyunambiguous,but whenevera falsepositivewas a straight line,swingingthesensorofthemagneticlocator
fromside to side whilemovingforward
suspected,i.e., wheneverthe locatorseemed to indicate slowlyenoughto
thata markedfruitwas presentwhenthiswas untrue,the insurethatno areaswithina studyplothaveto be searched
a second time. Because the magneticlocatorpicked up
entireplot was searchedand the locationof everysignal
was noted,withexcavationafterthe timetrials. signalsfrom50 to 100 cm on eitherside of its sensor,
the effective widthof a searchtransectwas muchgreater
thanthatafforded by conventional metal detectors.Fur-
RESULTS thermore, treebuttressesand brushwereessentially trans-
Overall, 199 (99.5%) of the 200 markedfruitson the parentto themagneticlocator,and magnetsburiedunder
soilsurfaceorburiedto 10 cmwerelocated.Fruitsmarked fallenlogs could easilybe foundby searchingalong the
withthelargerAlnicomagnetscouldbe found100 percent edges of the logs at groundlevel. In contrastto metal

62 Alversonand Diaz

This content downloaded from 150.216.68.200 on Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:34:15 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
detectors,the waterproofsensoryend of the magnetic $800) and ofthesmall,powerfulrareearthmagnets($ 1-
locatoris small and can be insertedinto brush,between $2); rustingof magnetsif they are uncoated and left
buttresses or roots,and into animal burrowswith ease. outdoorsforlong periods;increasedtime investment in
The investigation of furrowsor holes in the forestfloor siteswithverylarge amountsof metallicdebrisor min-
and areasaroundthebases of largetreesrequireda slight eralizedrocks;animaldispersalagentsthatwouldroutinely
amountofadditionaltimebecausesensitivity adjustments buryseeds deeperthan 10 cm, or thatmightbe harmed
werenecessary. by the presenceof a magnetin a fruitor a seed; and
detrimental modifications to fruitor seed qualityas ex-
periencedby the animalsthatdispersethe seeds (such as
DISCUSSION increasedweight,repellent scent,incorrect presentationon
Magneticlocatorsarepotentially usefultoolsforthestudy the forestfloor,etc.).
of seed and fruitdispersal.Searchtimesare much lower We reportthesedata to encourageothersto consider
and recoveryrateshigherthan with conventionalmetal using such an instrument fordispersalstudiesin which
detectors.In comparison,the locationof dispersedseeds plant diasporesor animalsof limitedvagilitycan be re-
or fruitsby a visual searchis an extremely slow or im- coveredin a limitedareaand areofsufficient sizeto receive
possibletask. small magnets.Researchers interested in usingthismag-
In futurestudies,magnetscouldbe individually coded neticlocatorin Costa Rica shouldcontactthefirstauthor.
witha jeweler'sfileand manymarkedfruitsor seedsused
to insurea good returnin numberof observationsper ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
hectaresearched.Furthermore, if an area is subjectedto
a preliminary searchthatresultsin a highrecovery rateof We thankW. Hallwachs and V. Sork forextensiveadvice on
the project,G. Vega forfieldassistance,J. Hohol fortechnical
dispersedmarkedfruits(as in thesetrials),bne advice on the magneticlocator,and B. Benz, T. Gibson, H.
artificially
couldcomparethisrecovery ratewith that of a subsequent Iltis,S. Solheim,D. Waller,and two anonymousreviewers who
searchformarkedfruitsdispersedby animalsto provide providedconstructive criticismof the manuscript.Work was
a good estimateofdispersalbeyondthelimitsofthestudy supportedby grantsfromthe Societyof Sigma Xi, the J. S.
area.Quantitativedata on long-distance dispersal,usually Noyes Foundation,the E. K. and 0. N. AllenFund, the Wis-
consinNatural HistoryMuseum Council,and the Davis Fund
in
absent dispersal would
studies, thus be available. of the Universityof Wisconsin.
Limitationsand potentialproblemsassociatedwith
thenewtechnique indude:costofmagnetic locators($500-

LITERATURECITED
HOLDRIDGE, L. R., W. C. GRENKE, W. H. HATHEWAY, T. LIANG, AND J. A. Tosi. 1971. Forestenvironments in tropicallife
zones: a pilot study.PergamonPress,Oxford.
HOWE, H. F., AND J. SMALLWOOD. 1982. Ecologyof seed dispersal.Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 13: 201-228.
JANZEN, D. H. 1971. Seed predationby animals.Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst.2: 465-492.
SORK, V. L. 1983. Distributionof pignuthickory(Carya glabra) along a forestto edge transect, seedling
and factorsaffecting
recruitment. Bull. TorreyBot. Club 110: 494-506.
1984. Examinationof seed dispersaland survivalin red oak, Quercusrubra(Fagaceae), using metal-taggedacorns.
Ecology65: 1020-1022.
* 1987. Effects in Gustaviasuperba.Ecology68: 1341-1350.
of predationand lighton seedlingestablishment
STAPANIAN, M. A., AND C. C. SMITH. 1978. A model forseed scatterhoarding: coevolutionof fox squirrelsand black walnuts.
Ecology59: 884-896.
1984. Density-dependent nuts:an experimental
survivalof scatterhoarded approach.Ecology65: 1387-1396.
1986. How foxsquirrelsinfluencethe invasionof prairiesby nut-bearingtrees.J. Mamm. 67: 326-332.

Measuring Disperal witha Magnetic Locator 63

This content downloaded from 150.216.68.200 on Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:34:15 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions