The ones we left behind: Comparing plot sampling and floristic habitat sampling for estimating bryophyte diversity

An efficient method for estimating bryophyte diversity in forest stands must consider more than just the dominant forest mesohabitat. We compared two methodologies commonly used for estimating diversity in forest ecosystems. Floristic habitat sampling (FHS) utilizes stratification of all forest mesohabitats, which includes the natural diversity of microhabitats found within and stratifies a mosaic of mesohabitats (e.g. forest, streams, seeps, and cliffs) and microhabitats (e.g. rocks logs, etc.) that are often not considered in forest research projects that use plot sampling to estimate species diversity. In Canadian cedar hemlock forest, FHS methodology recorded more than twice as many bryophyte species as plot sampling (PS). A comparison of the dominant forest mesohabitat concluded that plot sampling was not as efficient as FHS in estimating bryophyte diversity and that plot sampling can result in different interpretations of species diversity. Rare species ordination of stands sampled using FHS showed strong clustering of sites with respect to biogeoclimatic zones and age since the last major disturbance (fire or logging) as compared with rare species ordinations from PS data, which showed no delineation of stands along temporal gradients. Plot sampling has many useful applications in ecology, but floristic habitat sampling is more efficient for quantifying overall bryophyte diversity. FHS provides an excellent way to record a comprehensive list of species.