4.7 Article

Evaluation of restoration success in alluvial grasslands under contrasting flooding regimes

期刊

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
卷 118, 期 5, 页码 641-650

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2003.10.013

关键词

flood-plain; dispersal; hydrochory; ordination

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Along the northern Upper Rhine, Germany, large-scaled restoration attempts aiming at the recovery of species-rich alluvial meadows from ex-arable fields were evaluated. We analysed floristic composition, soil nutrient status and biomass production of old and newly established meadows with respect to their position in both, the recent functional flood-plain and the fossil flood-plain compartment which is protected from flooding by a dyke. It is hypothesised that restoration in terms of species-enrichment will be more successful in the functional floodplain due to the input of propagules in the course of flooding events. Generally, we found great floristic differences between old and new meadows, independent of their position in the floodplain. After 15-20 years of restoration management, the floristic structure of new meadows was still dominated by sown grasses and a high proportion of ruderal and arable species, whereas target species of flood-meadows largely failed to establish in both compartments. Old and new meadows differed only slightly in the environmental variables, while measured significant differences in plant available phosphorus and biomass yield were revealed between floodplain compartments. The results indicated a minor effect of edaphic site conditions on the low restoration success and limited dispersal and recruitment were revealed to be the main constraints for restoration. We found no evidence that species enrichment is enhanced in the functional floodplain via the input of diaspores by flooding. Our results strongly suggest that dispersal limitation of target species is unlikely to be overcome merely by the restoration of more natural flooding conditions. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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