4.4 Article

Plant community development following reclamation of oil sands mines using four cover soil types in northern Alberta

Journal

RESTORATION ECOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 1, Pages 82-92

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/rec.13039

Keywords

boreal forest; ordination; species coexistence; species composition; succession and assembly

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Understanding the effects of reclamation treatments on plant community development is an important step in setting realistic indicators and targets for reclamation of upland oil sands sites to forest ecosystems. We examine trends in cover, richness, evenness, and community composition for four cover soil types (clay over overburden, clay over tailings sand, peat-mineral mix over overburden, and peat-mineral mix over tailings sand) and natural boreal forests over a 20 year period in the mineable oil sands region of northern Alberta, Canada. Tree, shrub, and nonvascular plant species cover showed similar increases over time for all reclamation treatments, with corresponding declines in forb and graminoid cover with time. These trends resemble those in the natural boreal forests of the region and the trajectory of community development for the reclamation treatments appears to follow typical early successional trends for boreal forests. Species richness and diversity of natural forest differed significantly from reclamation treatments. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling ordination and multi-response permutation procedure revealed that species composition was not affected by reclamation treatment but clearly differed from natural forest. Analysis of species co-occurrence indicated random plant community assembly following reclamation, in contrast to a higher proportion of nonrandom plant community assembly in natural forests. Thus, reclaimed plant communities appear to be unstructured through year 20 and assembly is still in progress on these reclaimed sites.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available