Abstract
The benefits of masting (volatile, quasi-synchronous seed production at lagged intervals) include satiation of seed predators, but these benefits come with a cost to mutualist pollen and seed dispersers. If the evolution of masting represents a balance between these benefits and costs, we expect mast avoidance in species that are heavily reliant on mutualist dispersers. These effects play out in the context of variable climate and site fertility among species that vary widely in nutrient demand. Meta-analyses of published data have focused on variation at the population scale, thus omitting periodicity within trees and synchronicity between trees. From raw data on 12 million tree-years worldwide, we quantified three components of masting that have not previously been analysed together: (i) volatility, defined as the frequency-weighted year-to-year variation; (ii) periodicity, representing the lag between high-seed years; and (iii) synchronicity, indicating the tree-to-tree correlation. Results show that mast avoidance (low volatility and low synchronicity) by species dependent on mutualist dispersers explains more variation than any other effect. Nutrient-demanding species have low volatility, and species that are most common on nutrient-rich and warm/wet sites exhibit short periods. The prevalence of masting in cold/dry sites coincides with climatic conditions where dependence on vertebrate dispersers is less common than in the wet tropics. Mutualist dispersers neutralize the benefits of masting for predator satiation, further balancing the effects of climate, site fertility and nutrient demands.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Seed production data are available at the Duke Data Repository https://doi.org/10.7924/r4348ph5t. Species traits are downloaded from TRY Plant Trait database at https://www.try-db.org/TryWeb/Home.php. Cation exchange capacity data were obtained at https://soilgrids.org/. Climate data were extracted from Terraclimate at http://www.climatologylab.org/ and CHELSA at https://chelsa-climate.org/.
Code availability
R statistical software v.4.0.2 was used in this work. All analyses used published R packages, with details stated in Methods. MASTIF includes code in R and C++, which is published on CRAN at https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mastif/index.html.
References
Janzen, D. H. Seed predation by animals. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 2, 465–492 (1971).
Kelly, D. & Sork, V. L. Mast seeding in perennial plants: why, how, where? Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33, 427–447 (2002).
Jansen, P. A., Bongers, F. & Hemerik, L. Seed mass and mast seeding enhance dispersal by a neotropical scatter-hoarding rodent. Ecol. Monogr. 74, 569–589 (2004).
Herrera, C. M., Jordano, P., Guitian, J. & Traveset, A. Annual variability in seed production by woody plants and the masting concept: reassessment of principles and relationship to pollination and seed dispersal. Am. Nat. 152, 576–594 (1998).
Siepielski, A. M. & Benkman, C. W. Conflicting selection from an antagonist and a mutualist enhances phenotypic variation in a plant. Evolution 64, 1120–1128 (2010).
Wang, Y. Y. et al. Variation and synchrony of tree species mast seeding in an old-growth temperate forest. J. Veg. Sci. 28, 413–423 (2017).
Huang, L. et al. Benefit versus cost trade-offs of masting across seed-to-seedling transition for a dominant subtropical forest species. J. Ecol. 109, 3087–3098 (2021).
Seget, B. et al. Costs and benefits of masting: economies of scale are not reduced by negative density-dependence in seedling survival in Sorbus aucuparia. New Phytol. 233, 1931–1938 (2022).
Clark, J. S., Nunez, C. & Tomasek, B. Foodwebs based on unreliable foundations: spatiotemporal masting merged with consumer movement, storage, and diet. Ecol. Monogr. 89, e01381 (2019).
Janzen, D. Herbivores and the number of tree species in tropical forests. Am. Nat. 104, 501–528 (1970).
Clotfelter, E. D. et al. Acorn mast drives long-term dynamics of rodent and songbird populations. Oecologia 154, 493–503 (2007).
Chen, W. et al. Proximity to roads disrupts rodents’ contributions to seed dispersal services and subsequent recruitment dynamics. J. Ecol. 107, 2623–2634 (2019).
Curran, L. M. & Leighton, M. Vertebrate responses to spatiotemporal variation in seed production of mast-fruiting dipterocarpaceae. Ecol. Monogr. 70, 101–128 (2000).
Pearse, I. S., LaMontagne, J. M., Lordon, M., Hipp, A. L. & Koenig, W. D. Biogeography and phylogeny of masting: do global patterns fit functional hypotheses? New Phytol. 227, 1557–1567 (2020).
Greenberg, C. H. Individual variation in acorn production by five species of southern Appalachian oaks. For. Ecol. Manage. 132, 199–210 (2000).
Clark, J. S., LaDeau, S. & Ibanez, I. Fecundity of trees and the colonization-competition hypothesis. Ecol. Monogr. 74, 415–442 (2004).
Chen, X., Brockway, D. G. & Guo, Q. Characterizing the dynamics of cone production for longleaf pine forests in the southeastern United States. For. Ecol. Manage. 429, 1–6 (2018).
Pucek, Z., Jedrzejewski, W., Jedrzejewska, B. & Pucek, M. Rodent population-dynamics in a primeval deciduous forest (Bialowieza National Park) in relation to weather, seed crop, and predation. Acta Theriol. 38, 199–232 (1993).
Bogdziewicz, M., Zwolak, R. & Crone, E. E. How do vertebrates respond to mast seeding? Oikos 125, 300–307 (2016).
Christensen, K. M. & Whitham, T. G. Impact of insect herbivores on competition between birds and mammals for pinyon pine seeds. Ecology 74, 2270–2278 (1993).
Crone, E. E. & Rapp, J. M. Resource depletion, pollen coupling, and the ecology of mast seeding. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1322, 21–34 (2014).
Steele, M. A. & Yi, X. Squirrel-seed interactions: the evolutionary strategies and impact of squirrels as both seed predators and seed dispersers. Front. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2020.00259 (2020).
Pearse, I. S., Koenig, W. D. & Kelly, D. Mechanisms of mast seeding: resources, weather, cues, and selection. New Phytol. 212, 546–562 (2016).
Janzen, D. H. Tropical blackwater rivers, animals, and mast fruiting by the dipterocarpaceae. Biotropica 6, 69–103 (1974).
Smaill, S. J., Clinton, P. W., Allen, R. B. & Davis, M. R. Climate cues and resources interact to determine seed production by a masting species. J. Ecol. 99, 870–877 (2011).
Tanentzap, A. J., Lee, W. G. & Coomes, D. A. Soil nutrient supply modulates temperature-induction cues in mast-seeding grasses. Ecology 93, 462–469 (2012).
Fernández-Martínez, M. et al. Nutrient scarcity as a selective pressure for mast seeding. Nat. Plants 5, 1222–1228 (2019).
Rosecrance, R. C., Weinbaum, S. A. & Brown, P. H. Alternate bearing affects nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and starch storage pools in mature pistachio trees. Ann. Bot. 82, 463–470 (1998).
Sala, A., Hopping, K., McIntire, E. J. B., Delzon, S. & Crone, E. E. Masting in whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) depletes stored nutrients. New Phytol. 196, 189–199 (2012).
Sork, V. L. Evolutionary ecology of mast-seeding in temperate and tropical oaks (Quercus spp.). Vegetatio 107, 133–147 (1993).
Sharma, A., Weindorf, D. C., Wang, D. D. & Chakraborty, S. Characterizing soils via portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometer: 4. Cation exchange capacity (cec). Geoderma 239, 130–134 (2015).
Hazelton, P. & Murphy, B. Interpreting Soil Test Results: What Do All the Numbers Mean? (CSIRO Publishing, 2016).
Elser, J. J. et al. Growth rate-stoichiometry couplings in diverse biota. Ecol. Lett. 6, 936–943 (2003).
Kelly, D. et al. Of mast and mean: differential-temperature cue makes mast seeding insensitive to climate change. Ecol. Lett. 16, 90–98 (2013).
Schauber, E. M. et al. Masting by eighteen New Zealand plant species: the role of temperature as a synchronizing cue. Ecology 83, 1214–1225 (2002).
Espelta, J. M., Cortés, P., Molowny-Horas, R., Sánchez-Humanes, B. & Retana, J. Masting mediated by summer drought reduces acorn predation in Mediterranean oak forests. Ecology 89, 805–817 (2008).
Pérez-Ramos, I. M., Ourcival, J. M., Limousin, J. M. & Rambal, S. Mast seeding under increasing drought: results from a long-term data set and from a rainfall exclusion experiment. Ecology 91, 3057–3068 (2010).
Koenig, W. D., Knops, J. M. H., Carmen, W. J. & Pearse, I. S. What drives masting? The phenological synchrony hypothesis. Ecology 96, 184–192 (2015).
Wion, A. P., Weisberg, P. J., Pearse, I. S. & Redmond, M. D. Aridity drives spatiotemporal patterns of masting across the latitudinal range of a dryland conifer. Ecography 43, 569–580 (2020).
LaMontagne, J. M., Pearse, I. S., Greene, D. F. & Koenig, W. D. Mast seeding patterns are asynchronous at a continental scale. Nat. Plants 6, 460–465 (2020).
Vacchiano, G. et al. Spatial patterns and broad-scale weather cues of beech mast seeding in Europe. New Phytol. 215, 595–608 (2017).
Clark, J. S., Bell, D. M., Kwit, M. C. & Zhu, K. Competition-interaction landscapes for the joint response of forests to climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 1979–1991 (2014).
Lamontagne, J. M. & Boutin, S. Local-scale synchrony and variability in mast seed production patterns of Picea glauca. J. Ecol. 95, 991–1000 (2007).
Straub, J. N., Leach, A. G., Kaminski, R. M., Ezell, A. W. & Leininger, T. D. Red oak acorn yields in green-tree reservoirs and non-impounded forests in Mississippi. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 43, 491–499 (2019).
Ascoli, D. et al. Inter-annual and decadal changes in teleconnections drive continental-scale synchronization of tree reproduction. Nat. Commun. 8, 2205 (2017).
Hacket-Pain, A. J., Friend, A. D., Lageard, J. G. & Thomas, P. A. The influence of masting phenomenon on growth-climate relationships in trees: explaining the influence of previous summers’ climate on ring width. Tree Physiol. 35, 319–330 (2015).
Berdanier, A. B. & Clark, J. S. Divergent reproductive allocation trade-offs with canopy exposure across tree species in temperate forests. Ecosphere 7, e01313 (2016).
Redmond, M. D., Forcella, F. & Barger, N. N. Declines in pinyon pine cone production associated with regional warming. Ecosphere 3, 120 (2012).
Whipple, A. V. et al. Long-term studies reveal differential responses to climate change for trees under soil- or herbivore-related stress. Front. Plant Sci. 10, 132 (2019).
Bogdziewicz, M., Kelly, D., Thomas, P. A., Lageard, J. G. A. & Hacket-Pain, A. Climate warming disrupts mast seeding and its fitness benefits in European beech. Nat. Plants 6, 88–94 (2020).
Espelta, J. M., Bonal, R. & Sanchez-Humanes, B. Pre-dispersal acorn predation in mixed oak forests: interspecific differences are driven by the interplay among seed phenology, seed size and predator size. J. Ecol. 97, 1416–1423 (2009).
Yamauchi, A. Theory of mast reproduction in plants: storage-size dependent strategy. Evolution 50, 1795–1807 (1996).
Koenig, W. D. & Knops, J. M. H. The mystery of masting in trees: some trees reproduce synchronously over large areas, with widespread ecological effects, but how and why? Am. Sci. 93, 340–347 (2005).
LaMontagne, J. M. & Boutin, S. Quantitative methods for defining mast-seeding years across species and studies. J. Vege. Sci. 20, 745–753 (2009).
Clark, J. S. Individuals and the variation needed for high species diversity in forest trees. Science 327, 1129–1132 (2010).
Shibata, M., Masaki, T., Yagihashi, T., Shimada, T. & Saitoh, T. Decadal changes in masting behaviour of oak trees with rising temperature. J. Ecol. 108, 1088–1100 (2020).
Clark, J. S. et al. Continent-wide tree fecundity driven by indirect climate effects. Nat. Commun. 12, 1242 (2021).
Qiu, T. et al. Limits to reproduction and seed size-number trade-offs that shape forest dominance and future recovery. Nat. Commun. 13, 2381 (2022).
Vander Wall, S. B. How plants manipulate the scatter-hoarding behaviour of seed-dispersing animals. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 989–997 (2010).
Zwolak, R., Bogdziewicz, M., Wrobel, A. & Crone, E. E. Advantages of masting in European beech: timing of granivore satiation and benefits of seed caching support the predator dispersal hypothesis. Oecologia 180, 749–758 (2016).
Larue, C., Austruy, E., Basset, G. & Petit, R. J. Revisiting pollination mode in chestnut (Castanea spp.): an integrated approach. Bot. Lett. 168, 348–372 (2021).
Garcia, G., Re, B., Orians, C. & Crone, E. By wind or wing: pollination syndromes and alternate bearing in horticultural systems. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 376, 20200371 (2021).
Journe, V. et al. Globally, tree fecundity exceeds productivity gradients. Ecol. Lett. 25, 1471–1482 (2022).
Smith, C. C., Hamrick, J. L. & Kramer, C. L. The advantage of mast years for wind pollination. Am. Nat. 136, 154–166 (1990).
Augspurger, C. K. Reproductive synchrony of a tropical shrub: experimental studies on effects of pollinators and seed predators in Hybanthus prunifolius (Violaceae). Ecology 62, 775–788 (1981).
Crone, E. E. Responses of social and solitary bees to pulsed floral resources. Am. Nat. 182, 465–473 (2013).
Koenig, W. D. et al. Dissecting components of population-level variation in seed production and the evolution of masting behavior. Oikos 102, 581–591 (2003).
Satake, A. & Kelly, D. Studying the genetic basis of masting. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 376, 20210116 (2021).
Mueller, R. C., Wade, B. D., Gehring, C. A. & Whitham, T. G. Chronic herbivory negatively impacts cone and seed production, seed quality and seedling growth of susceptible pinyon pines. Oecologia 143, 558–565 (2005).
Schopmeyer, C. S. et al. Seeds of Woody Plants in the United States (US Department of Agriculture, 1974).
Crawley, M. J. & Long, C. R. Alternate bearing, predator satiation and seedling recruitment in Quercus robur L. J. Ecol. 83, 683–696 (1995).
Manson, R. H., Ostfeld, R. S. & Canham, C. D. The effects of tree seed and seedling density on predation rates by rodents in old fields. Écoscience 5, 183–190 (1998).
Zwolak, R., Celebias, P. & Bogdziewicz, M. Global patterns in the predator satiation effect of masting: a meta-analysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2105655119 (2022).
Bascompte, J. Mutualistic networks. Front. Ecol. Environ. 7, 429–436 (2009).
Qui, T. et al. Is there tree senescence? The fecundity evidence. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci USA 118, e2106130118 (2021).
Clark, J. S., Silman, M., Kern, R., Macklin, E. & HilleRisLambers, J. Seed dispersal near and far: patterns across temperate and tropical forests. Ecology 80, 1475–1494 (1999).
Tobin, J. Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables. Econometrica 26, 24–36 (1958).
Clark, J. S., Nemergut, D., Seyednasrollah, B., Turner, P. J. & Zhang, S. Generalized joint attribute modeling for biodiversity analysis: median-zero, multivariate, multifarious data. Ecol. Monogr. 87, 34–56 (2017).
Olson, D. M. et al. Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth: a new global map of terrestrial ecoregions provides an innovative tool for conserving biodiversity. Bioscience 51, 933–938 (2001).
Zanne, A. E. et al. Three keys to the radiation of angiosperms into freezing environments. Nature 506, 89–92 (2014).
Revell, L. J. phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things). Methods Ecol. Evol. 3, 217–223 (2012).
Freckleton, R. P., Harvey, P. H. & Pagel, M. Phylogenetic analysis and comparative data: a test and review of evidence. Am. Nat. 160, 712–726 (2002).
Hadfield, J. D. & Nakagawa, S. General quantitative genetic methods for comparative biology: phylogenies, taxonomies and multi-trait models for continuous and categorical characters. J. Evol. Biol. 23, 494–508 (2010).
Kattge, J. et al. TRY plant trait database – enhanced coverage and open access. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 119–188 (2020).
Acknowledgements
For access to sites and logistical support, we thank the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON). The project has been funded continuously since 1992 by National Science Foundation grants to J.S.C., most recently DEB-1754443, and by the Belmont Forum (1854976), NASA (AIST16-0052, AIST18-0063) and the Programme d’Investissement d’Avenir under project FORBIC (18-MPGA-0004)(‘Make Our Planet Great Again’). T.Q. acknowledges support from the start-up funds provided by Pennsylvania State University. Puerto Rico data were funded by NSF grants to M.U., most recently DEB 0963447 and LTREB 11222325. Data from the Andes Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research Group were funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and NSF LTREB 1754647 to M.S. Additional funding to M.Z. came from the W. Szafer Institute of Botany of the Polish Academy of Sciences and the Polish National Science Foundation (2019/33/B/NZ8/0134). M.B. was supported by Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange Bekker programme PPN/BEK/2020/1/00009/U/00001. F.R.S. was supported by FEDER 2014–2020 and Consejeria de Economia, Conocimiento, Empresas y Universidad of Junta de Andalucia (grant US-1381388). J.F.F.’s data remain accessible through NSF LTER DEB-1440409. USDA Forest Service and USGS research were funded by those agencies. Any use of trade, firm or product names does not imply endorsement by the US Government.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
J.S.C. and T.Q. designed the study, performed analyses and wrote the paper. J.S.C. compiled the MASTIF data and wrote the MASTIF model and software. M.B., B.C., V.J. and G.K. co-wrote the paper. T.Q., M.-C.A., D.A., Y.B., M.B., T.B., R.B., T.C., M.C., R.C., S.D.C., J.J.C., C.-H.C-Y., J.C., F.C., B.C., A.C., A.J.D., N.D., S.D., M.D., L.D., J.M.E., T.J.F., W.F.-R., J.F.F., C.A.G., G.S.G., G.G., C.H.G., A.G., Q.G., A.H.-P., A.H., Q.H., J.H., K.H., I.I., J.F.J., V.J., T.K., J.M.H.K., G.K., H.K., J.G.A.L., J.M.L., F.L., T.L., J.-M.L., J.A.L., D.M., A.M., E.J.B.M., C.M.M., E.M., R.M., J.A.M., T.A.N., S.N., M.N., M.O., R.P., I.S.P., I.M.P.-R., L.P., T.P., J.P., M.D.R., C.D.R., K.C.R., F.R.-S., P.S., J.D.S., C.L.S., B.S., S. Sharma, M. Shibata, M. Silman, M.A.S., N.L.S., J.N.S., S. Sutton, J.J.S., M. Swift, P.A.T., M.U., G.V., A.V.W., T.G.W., A.P.W., S.J.W., K.Z., J.K.Z., M.Z. and J.S.C. contributed data and revised the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Plants thanks Irene Mendoza and Thomas Wohlgemuth for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data
Extended Data Fig. 1 MASTIF sites.
The summary of MASTIF sites with symbol size proportional to observations. Detailed data distribution is in the supplementary csv file.
Extended Data Fig. 2 Correlations between volatility and quasi-periodicity.
Correlations between volatility and quasi-periodicity at ecoregion/species level within phylogenetic groups (see methods). Top-left labels include Pearson’s correlation coefficients (two-sided test), including those that are significant (~, *, **, and ***) indicate 0.1, 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001 significant level, respectively. Shading represents positive (brown) and negative (teal) correlations. Colors of the points indicate different genera within each phylogenetic group. Across all ecoregion/species level observations, volatility is negatively correlated with quasi-periodicity (-0.28, 95% CI = (-0.36,-0.21)).
Extended Data Fig. 3 Correlations between volatility and synchronicity.
Correlations between volatility and synchronicity at the ecoregion-species level within phylogenetic groups (see Methods). Symbology follows the extended data fig. 2. Volatility is negatively associated with synchronicity for animal pollinated (AP) species (-0.17, 95% CI = (-0.06,-0.26)) while positively associated with synchronicity for wind pollinated (WP) species (0.26, 95% CI = (0.13,0.39)). Blue lines in AP and WP panels indicate linear regression.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Qiu, T., Aravena, MC., Ascoli, D. et al. Masting is uncommon in trees that depend on mutualist dispersers in the context of global climate and fertility gradients. Nat. Plants 9, 1044–1056 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-023-01446-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-023-01446-5
This article is cited by
-
Quality evaluation of Nothofagus pumilio seeds linked to forest management and climatic events
Ecological Processes (2024)
-
Summer solstice orchestrates the subcontinental-scale synchrony of mast seeding
Nature Plants (2024)
-
Evolution of masting in plants is linked to investment in low tissue mortality
Nature Communications (2023)
