348 WHITTAKER 



that many communities which are not regionally prevalent are as much stabi- 

 lized, as much "climax," as the "climatic climax." Many ecologists have been 

 led to a polyclimax view which defines climaxes by an essentially stabilized, 

 or self-maintaining, condition, regardless of prevalence, and considers that a 

 number of climaxes may exist in a given area. The differences of monoclimax 

 and polyclimax approaches are in part semantic ones (Cain, 1947); for au- 

 thors of the two viewpoints use different terms for the same observations, or 

 the same terms for somewhat different conceptions. The essential difference 

 seems one of relative emphasis. Monoclimax authors emphasize the essential 

 unity of climax vegetation within a region, with allowance also for stabilized 

 communities other than the climatic climax. Polyclimax authors emphasize 

 the inherent complexity of climax vegetation, with allowance also for pre- 

 vailing climax communities which characterize the vegetation of a region and 

 express its relation to climate. This difference of emphasis is one of great im- 

 portance, for it affects the manner in which evidence on natural communities 

 is selected, treated, and interpreted; in a rather subtle and often unconscious 

 way it may color and condition the ecologist's whole perspective in the inter- 

 pretation of vegetation. 



Braun's (1950) approach to the eastern forests follows Clements in recog- 

 nition of climatic climaxes as regional units; other stabilized communities are 

 subclimaxes which "only theoretically could be replaced by the climax." One 

 region of the eastern forests, the Western Mesophytic Region, is characterized 

 not by a monoclimax but by a mosaic of unlike climaxes and subclimaxes. 

 In the present author's view, Braun's approach is primarily monoclimax both 

 in its expression (Braun, 1950, pp. 12-13) and in the manner in which the 

 description throughout the book is influenced by this conception. It is, how- 

 ever, quite different from the rather doctrinaire climate-climax-formation 

 identification of Clements. Monoclimax conceptions far removed from Clem- 

 ents have recently been expressed also by Dansereau (1954) and Walter 

 (1954a). Polyclimax, or climax-pattern, conceptions asserting that the cli- 

 max state is determined by the environments of individual communities, not 

 regional climate, have been stated by Schmithiisen (1950) and Whittaker 

 (1953) ; the latter identifies the climax as a community steady state and sub- 

 stitutes "prevailing climax" for "climatic climax." The varied current inter- 

 pretations of "climax" by the author and others suggest that none of these can 

 claim exclusive truth or univocal determination by properties of vegetation. 



Raup (1956) has discussed the role of hurricane winds in patchwise dis- 

 turbance of New England forests at time intervals that are short in relation 

 to the life cycles of trees. The eastern forests, Uke the prairies (Malin, 1956), 

 are probably much less stable than the climax ideal has suggested to many 

 ecologists. The more closely vegetational dynamics are observed, the less 

 clear-cut becomes the distinction between climax and successional communi- 

 ties (Whittaker, 1953). Vegetation does not really consist of climaxes and 



