4.3 Article

Impact of management on vegetation dynamics and seed bank formation of inland dune grassland in Hungary

期刊

FLORA
卷 200, 期 3, 页码 296-306

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.flora.2004.12.002

关键词

disturbance; grazing; permanent plots; propagule dispersal; secondary succession; seedling emergence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Seed bank formation and 7 years of vegetation dynamics were studied on permanent plots ora dry sandy pasture, Cynodonti-Festucetum pseudovinae. A stand overgrazed by domestic geese and a reference stand void of overgrazing were compared. Apart from this both stands were accidentally grazed by cattle, Vegetation of the overgrazed stand was significantly more species-rich, especially in summer annuals. The reference was dominated with perennials and winter annuals. Composition and dominance changed considerably at both stands but only composition became more alike. Declining species richness and increasing dominance of perennials was found in the overgrazed stand. The reference stand became dominated with the dwarf-shrub Thymus degenianus. Species richness or the overgrazed stand showed greater seasonal and year-to-year variation than that of the reference. No temporal change of nutrient availability was found and neither was a difference detected between the stands. Greenhouse germination revealed more dense and more species-rich seed bank in the overgrazed stand. Its established vegetation and soil seed bank were also more alike. Higher species richness of the overgrazed stand can be associated with intensive propagule dispersal of geese, as indicated by den-se seed banks of zoochorous hygrophytes delivered from neighbouring wetlands. Relatively high representation of persistent seed bank records suggests that, except for some sensitive perennials, the studied community is adapted to recurrent disturbances, Community regeneration seems to be limited by slow spread of perennial graminoids. (c) 2005 Elsevier GmbH. 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