4.3 Article

How habitat area, local and regional factors shape plant assemblages in isolated closed depressions

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.actao.2009.02.002

关键词

Closed depressions; Colonization; Connectivity; Fragmented habitats; Emergent Groups; Open and forested landscape; Life-history traits

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Classifying species by shared life-history traits is important if common ecological response groups are to be identified among different species. We investigated how habitat area, local and regional factors shape plant communities in small isolated closed depressions, and how the species richness is related to the interplay between environmental factors and specific life-history trait combinations. In Central-Western Europe, 169 closed depressions were completely Surveyed for plant presence in two highly contrasted landscapes (forested and open landscapes). All species were clustered into 9 Emergent Groups based oil 10 life-history traits related to plant dispersal, establishment and persistence. Habitat areas were related to species presence using logistic regressions. Most Emergent Groups were more area-dependent in open than in forested landscapes, owing to heterogeneous light levels in forest weakening the species-area relationship. In open landscapes, Floating Hydrophytes were severely underrepresented in very small depressions, owing to the absence of waterfowl poulation. Local environmental and regional factors were related to species richness using Generalized Linear Models. In open landscapes, local environmental factors such as water conductivity or soil productivity are respectively the main predictors. In forested landscapes, the abundance of most Emergent Groups Was better predicted by regional factors, i.e., habitat connectivity and distance to the forest edge. Forested landscapes strongly impeded the closed depressions' colonization by the less mobile Emergent Groups Such as Large-seeded Perennials. (C) 2009 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据