The effect of soil on spatial variation of the herbaceous layer modulated by overstorey in an Eastern European poplar-willow forest

Open access

Abstract

The tree species composition can influence the dynamics of herbaceous species and enhance the spatial heterogeneity of the soil. But there is very little evidence on how both overstorey structure and soil properties affect the spatial variation of the herb layer. The aim of this study is to evaluate the factors of the soil and overstorey structure by which it is possible to explain the fine-scale variation of herbaceous layer communities in an Eastern European poplar-willow forest. The research was conducted in the “Dnipro-Orils’kiy” Nature Reserve (Ukraine). The research polygon (48°30′51″N, 34°49″02″E) was laid in an Eastern European poplar-willow forest in the floodplain of the River Protich, which is a left inflow of the River Dnipro. The site consists of 7 transects. Each transect was made up of 15 test points. The distance between rows in the site was 3 m. At the site, we established a plot of 45×21 m, with 105 subplots of 3×3 m organized in a regular grid. The adjacent subplots were in close proximity. Vascular plant species lists were recorded at each 3×3 m subplot along with visual estimates of species cover using the nine-degree Braun-Blanquet scale. Within the plot, all woody stems ≥ 1 cm in diameter at breast height were measured and mapped. Dixon’s segregation index was calculated for tree species to quantify their relative spatial mixing. Based on geobotanical descriptions, a phytoindicative assessment of environmental factors according to the Didukh scale was made. The redundancy analysis was used for the analysis of variance in the herbaceous layer species composition. The geographic coordinates of sampling locations were used to generate a set of orthogonal eigenvector-based spatial variables. Two measurements of the overstorey spatial structure were applied: the distances from the nearest tree of each species and the distance based on the evaluation of spatial density of point objects, which are separate trees. In both cases, the distance matrix of sampling locations was calculated, which provided the opportunity to generate eigenvector-based spatial variables. A kernel smoothed intensity function was used to compute the density of the trees’ spatial distribution from the point patterns’ data. Gaussian kernel functions with various bandwidths were used. The coordinates of sampling locations in the space obtained after the conversion of the trees’ spatial distribution densities were used to generate a set of orthogonal eigenvector-based spatial variables, each of them representing a pattern of particular scale within the extent of the bandwidth area structured according to distance and reciprocal placement of the trees. An overall test of random labelling reveals the total nonrandom distribution of the tree stems within the site. The unexplained variation consists of 43.8%. The variation explained solely by soil variables is equal to 15.5%, while the variation explained both by spatial and soil variables is 18.0%. The measure of the overstorey spatial structure, which is based on the evaluation of its density enables us to obtain different estimations depending on the bandwidth. The bandwidth affects the explanatory capacity of the tree stand. A considerable part of the plant community variation explained by soil factors was spatially structured. The orthogonal eigenvector-based spatial variables (dbMEMs) approach can be extended to quantifying the effect of forest structures on the herbaceous layer community. The measure of the overstorey spatial structure, which is based on the evaluation of its density, was very useful in explaining herbaceous layer community variation.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Aiba M. Takafumi H. & Hiura T. (2012). Interspecific differences in determinants of plant species distribution and the relationships with functional traits. J. Ecol. 100. 950−957. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2012.01959.x.

  • Aitchison J. (1986). The statistical analysis of compositional data. London: Chapman and Hall.

  • Aitchison J. & Greenacre M. (2002). Biplots of Compositional Data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics) 51 375–392. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9876.00275.

  • Andivia E. Fernández M. Alejano R. & Vázquez-Piqué J. (2015). Tree patch distribution drives spatial heterogeneity of soil traits in cork oak woodlands. Ann. For. Sci. 72 549–559. DOI: 10.1007/s13595-015-0475-8.

  • Angers D.A. & Caron J. (1998). Plant-induced Changes in Soil Structure: Processes and Feedbacks. Biogeochemistry 42(1–2) 55–72. DOI: 10.1023/A:1005944025343.

  • Baddeley A. & Turner R. (2005). Spatstat: an R package for analyzing spatial point patterns. Journal of Statistical Software 12 1–42. DOI: 10.18637/jss.v012.i06.

  • Barthes B. & Roose E. (2002). Aggregate stability as an indicator of soil susceptibility to runoff and erosion; validation at several levels. Catena 47(2) 133–149. DOI: 10.1016/S0341-8162(01)00180-1.

  • Binkley D. & Giardina C. (1998). Why do tree species affect soils? The warp and woof of tree-soil interactions. Biogeochemistry 42(1–2) 89–106. DOI: 10.1023/A:1005948126251.

  • Blanchet F.G. Legendre P. & Borcard D. (2008). Forward selection of explanatory variables. Ecology 89(9) 2623–2632. DOI: 10.1890/07-0986.1.

  • Blank L. & Carmel Y. (2012). Woody vegetation patch type determines herbaceous species richness and composition in Mediterranean ecosystem. Community Ecol. 13 72–81. DOI: 10.1556/ComEc.13.2012.1.9.

  • Boogaart van der K.G. Tolosana-Delgado R. & Bren M. (2018). Compositions: Compositional Data Analysis. R package version 1.40-2. https://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=compositions

  • Borcard D. & Legendre P. (2002). All-scale spatial analysis of ecological data by means of principal coordinates of neighbour matrices. Ecol. Model. 153 51–68. DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3800(01)00501-4.

  • Bratton S. (1976). Resource division in an understory herb community: responses to temporal and microtopographic gradients. Am. Nat. 110(974) 679–693. www.jstor.org/stable/2459584.

  • Breshears D. Rich P. Barnes F. & Campbell K. (1997). Overstorey-imposed heterogeneity in solar radiation and soil moisture in a semiarid woodland. Ecol. Appl. 7(4) 1201–1215. DOI: 10.2307/2641208.

  • Buzuk G.N. (2017). Phytoindication with ecological scales and regression analysis: environmental index. Bulletin of Pharmacy 2 (76) 31–37.

  • Canton Y. Sole-Benet A. Asensio C. Chamizo S. & Puigdefabregas J. (2009). Aggregate stability in range sandy loam soils Relationships with runoff and erosion. Catena 77 192–199. DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2008.12.011.

  • Chang L.-W. Zelený D. Li C.-F. Chiu S.-T. & Hsieh C.-F. (2013). Better environmental data may reverse conclusions about niche-and dispersal-based processes in community assembly. Ecology 94 2145–2151. DOI: 10.1890/12-2053.1.

  • Chase J.M. (2014). Spatial scale resolves the niche versus neutral theory debate. J. Veg. Sci. 25 319–322. DOI: 10.1111/jvs.12159.

  • Chudomelová M. Zelený D. & Li Ch.-F. (2017). Contrasting patterns of fine-scale herb layer species composition in temperate forests. Acta Oecol. 80 24–31. DOI: 10.1016/j.actao.2017.02.003.

  • Cottenie K. (2005). Integrating environmental and spatial processes in ecological community dynamics. Ecol. Lett. 8 1175–1182. DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00820.x.

  • Dallas T. & Drake J.M. (2014). Relative importance of environmental geographic and spatial variables on zooplankton metacommunities. Ecosphere 5(9) 104. DOI: 10.1890/ES14-00071.1.

  • De la Cruz M. (2008). Metodos para analizar datos puntuales. In F.T. Maestre A. Escudero & A. Bonet (Eds.) Introduccion al Analisis Espacial de Datos en Ecologia y Ciencias Ambientales: Metodos y Aplicaciones (pp. 76−127). Madrid: Asociacion Espanola de Ecologia Terrestre Universidad Rey Juan Carlos y Caja de Ahorros del Mediterraneo.

  • Didukh Ya.P. (2011). The ecological scales for the species of Ukrainian flora and their use in synphytoindication. Kyiv: Phytosociocentre.

  • Dixon P.M. (2002). Nearest-neighbor contingency table analysis of spatial segregation for several species. Ecoscience 9(2) 142–151. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42901478

  • Dray S. Bauman D. Blanchet G. Borcard D. Clappe S. Guenard G. Jombart T. Larocque G. Legendre P. Madi N. & Wagner H.H. (2018). adespatial: Multivariate multiscale spatial analysis. R package version 0.3-2. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=adespatial.

  • Egozcue J.J. Pawlowsky–Glahn V. Mateu–Figueras G. & Barcel’o–Vidal C. (2003). Isometric logratio transformations for compositional data analysis. Mathematical Geology 35(3) 279–300. DOI: 10.1023/A:1023818214614.

  • Elliott K.J. Vose J.M. Knoepp L.D. Clinton B.D. & Kloeppel B.D. (2015). Functional role of the herbaceous layer in eastern deciduous forest ecosystems. Ecosystems 18(2) 221–236. DOI: 10.1007/s10021-014-9825-x.

  • Fekete I. Varga C. Biró B. Tóth J.A. Várbíró G. Lajtha K. Szabó S. & Kotroczó Z. (2016). The effects of litter production and litter depth on soil microclimate in a Central European deciduous forest. Plant Soil 398 (1–2) 291–300. DOI: 10.1007/s11104-015-2664-5.

  • Fortin M.-J. & Dale M. (2005). Spatial analysis: Guide for ecologists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Frelich L.E. Machado J.L. & Reich P.B. (2003). Fine scale environmental variation and structure of understorey plant communities in two old growth pine forests. J. Ecol. 91 283–293. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2745.2003.00765.x.

  • Gazol A. & Ibanez R. (2010). Plant species composition in a temperate forest: Multi-scale patterns and determinants. Acta Oecol. 36 634–644. DOI: 10.1016/j.actao.2010.09.009.

  • Gilbert B. & Lechowicz M.J. (2004). Neutrality niches and dispersal in a temperate forest understory. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 101(20) 7651–7656. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0400814101.

  • Gilliam F.S. Turrill N.L. & Adams M.B. (1995). Herbaceous-layer and overstorey species in clear-cut and mature central Appalachian hardwood forests. Ecol. Appl. 5 947–955. DOI: 10.2307/2269345.

  • Gilliam F.S. (2007). The ecological significance of the herbaceous layer in temperate forest ecosystems. Bioscience 57 845–858. DOI: 10.1641/B571007.

  • Griffith D.A. (1992). What is spatial autocorrelation? Reflections on the past 25 years of spatial statistics. L’Espace Géographique 21 265–280.

  • Hurlbert S.H. (1984). Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol. Monogr. 54(2) 187–211. DOI: 10.2307/1942661.

  • Jones C.G. Lawton J.H. & Shachak M. (1994). Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69 373–386. DOI: 10.2307/3545850.

  • Jones M.M. Tuomisto H. Clark D.B. & Olivas P. (2006). Effects of mesoscale environmental heterogeneity and dispersal limitation on floristic variation in rainforest ferns. J. Ecol. 94 181–195. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2005.01071.x.

  • Jones M.M. Tuomisto H. Borcard D. Legendre P. Clark D.B. & Olivas P.C. (2008). Explaining variation in tropical plant community composition: influence of environmental and spatial data quality. Oecologia 155 593–604. DOI: 10.1007/s00442-007-0923-8.

  • Karst J. Gilbert B. & Lechowicz M.J. (2005). Fern community assembly: the roles of chance and the environment at local and intermediate scales. Ecology 86 2473–2486. DOI: 10.1890/04-1420.

  • King A.W. & With K.A. (2002). Dispersal success on spatially structured landscapes: when do spatial pattern and dispersal behavior really matter? Ecol. Model. 147(1) 23−39. DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3800(01)00400-8.

  • Laliberte A.S. Rango A. Herrick J.E. Fredrickson E.L. & Burkett L. (2009). An object–based image analysis approach for determining fractional cover of senescent and green vegetation with digital plot photography. J. Arid Environ. 69 1–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2006.08.016.

  • Legendre P. & Fortin M.J. (1989). Spatial pattern and ecological analysis. Vegetatio 80(2) 107–138. DOI: 10.1007/BF00048036.

  • Legendre P. (1993). Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm? Ecology 74 1659–1673. DOI: 10.2307/1939924.

  • Legendre P. & Gallagher E.D. (2001). Ecologically meaningful transformations for ordination of species. Oecologia 129(2) 271–280. DOI: 10.1007/s004420100716.

  • Legendre P. Mi X. Ren H. Ma K. Yu M. Sun I.–F. & He F. (2009). Partitioning beta diversity in a subtropical broadleaved forest of China. Ecology 90 663–674. DOI: 10.1890/07-1880.1.

  • Legendre P. & Legendre L. (2012.) Numerical ecology. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

  • Legendre P. & Gauthier O. (2014). Statistical methods for temporal and space-time analysis of community composition data. Proc. R. Soc. B 281(1778) 20132728. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2013.2728.

  • Lennon J.J. (2000). Red-shifts and red herrings in geographical ecology. Ecography 23 101−113. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2000.tb00265.x.

  • Levin D.A. & Wilson A.C. (1976). Rates of evolution in seed plants: Net increase in diversity of chromosome numbers and species numbers through time. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 73(6) 2086–2090. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.73.6.2086.

  • Lososová Z. Šmarda P. Chytrý M. Purschke O. Pyšek P. Sádlo J. Tichý L. & Winter M. (2015). Phylogenetic structure of plant species pools reflects habitat age on the geological time scale. J. Veg. Sci. 26 1080–1089. DOI: 10.1111/jvs.12308.

  • Lyon J. & Sharpe W.E. (2003). Impacts of hay-scented fern on nutrition of northern red oak seedlings. J. Plant Nutr. 26(3) 487–502. DOI: 10.1081/PLN-120017661.

  • MacKinney A.L. (1929). Effects of forest litter on soil temperature and soil freezing in autumn and winter. Ecology 10(3) 312–321. DOI: 10.2307/1929507.

  • Mölder A. Bernhardt-Römermann M. & Schmidt W. (2008). Herb-layer diversity in deciduous forests: raised by tree richness or beaten by beech? For. Ecol. Manag. 256(3) 272–281. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.04.012.

  • Nettesheim F.C. Garbin M.L. Rajão P.H.M. Araujo D.S.D. & Grelle C.E.V. (2018). Environment is more relevant than spatial structure as a driver of regional variation in tropical tree community richness and composition. Plant Ecology & Diversity DOI: 10.1080/17550874.2018.1473520.

  • Oijen D. Feijen M. Hommel P. Ouden J. & Waal R. (2005). Effects of tree species composition on within-forest distribution of understorey species. Appl. Veg. Sci. 8(2) 155–166. DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-109X.2005.tb00641.x.

  • Oksanen J. Blanchet F.G. Kindt R. Legendre P. Minchin P.R. O’Hara R.B. Simpson G.L. Solymos P. Stevens M.H.H. & Wagner H. (2018). Community ecology package. R package version 2.5-2. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan

  • Paluch J.G. & Gruba P. (2012). Effect of local species composition on topsoil properties in mixed stands with silver fir (Abies alba Mill.). Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research 85(3) 413–426. DOI: 10.1093/forestry/cps040.

  • Parent L. de Almeida C. Hernandes A. Egozcue J.J. Gülser C. Bolinder M.A. Kätterer T. Andrén O. Parent S.E. Anctil F. Centurion J.F. & Natale W. (2012). Compositional analysis for an unbiased measure of soil aggregation. Geoderma 179–180 123–131. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.02.022.

  • Pennisi B.V. & van Iersel M. (2002). Three ways to measure medium EC. GMPro 22(1) 46–48.

  • Rao C.R. (1964). The use and interpretation of principal component analysis in applied research. Sankhyā: The Indian Journal of Statistics Series A 26 329–358. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25049339

  • Siefert A. Ravenscroft C. Althoff D. Alvarez-Y Epiz J.C. Carter B.E. Glennon K.L. Heberling J.M. Jo I.S. Pontes A. Sauer A. Willis A. & Fridley J.D. (2012). Scale dependence of vegetation-environment relationships: a meta-analysis of multivariate data. J. Veg. Sci. 23 942–951. DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2012.01401.x.

  • Silvertown J. McConway K. Gowing D. Dodd M. Fay M.F. Joseph J.A. & Dolphin K. (2006). Absence of phylogenetic signal in the niche structure of meadow plant communities. Proc. R. Soc. B 273 39–44. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3288.

  • Smith T.W. & Lundholm J.T. (2010). Variation partitioning as a tool to distinguish between niche and neutral processes. Ecography 33 648–655. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.06105.x.

  • Standovár T. Ódor P. Aszalós R. & Gálhidy L. (2006). Sensitivity of ground layer vegetation diversity descriptors in indicating forest naturalness. Community Ecol. 7(2) 199–209. DOI: 10.1556/ComEc.7.2006.2.7.

  • Stohlgren T.J. Owen A.J. & Lee M. (2000). Monitoring shifts in plant diversity in response to climate change: a method for landscapes. Biodivers. Conserv. 9(1) 65–86. DOI: 10.1023/A:1008995726486.

  • Teng S.N. Xu C. Sandel B. & Svenning J-C. (2018). Effects of intrinsic sources of spatial autocorrelation on spatial regression modelling. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 9 363–372. DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.12866.

  • Tobler W. (1970). A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region. Economic Geography 46(1) 234–240. DOI: 10.2307/143141.

  • Vadunina A.F. & Korchagin S.A. (1986). Methods for research of physical properties of the soil. Moscow: Agropromizdat.

  • von Oheimb G. & Härdtle W. (2009). Selection harvest in temperate deciduous forest: impact on herb layer richness and composition. Biodivers. Conserv. 18(2) 271–287. DOI: 10.1007/s10531-008-9475-4.

  • Weiher E. Freund D. Bunton T. Stefanski A. Lee T. & Bentivenga S. (2011). Advances challenges and a developing synthesis of ecological community assembly theory. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 366 2403–2413. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0056.

  • Westhoff V. & van der Maarel E. (1978). The Braun-Blanquet approach. In R.H. Whittaker (Ed.) Classification of plant communities (pp. 289−399). Hague: W. Junk.

  • Whigham D.F. (2004). The ecology of woodland herbs in temperate deciduous forests. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 35 583–621. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.021103.105708.

  • Xing Z. Yan D. Wang D. Liu Sh. & Dong G. (2018). Experimental analysis of the effect of forest litter cover on surface soil water dynamics under continuous rainless condition in North China. Kuwait Journal of Science 45(2) 75–83.

  • Yoon T. K. Noh N. J. Han S. Lee J. & Son Y. (2014). Soil moisture effects on leaf litter decomposition and soil carbon dioxide efflux in wetland and upland forests. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 78 1804–1816. DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2014.03.0094.

  • Zadorozhnaya G.A. Andrusevych K.V. & Zhukov O.V. (2018). Soil heterogeneity after recultivation: ecological aspect. Folia Oecol. 45(1) 46–52. DOI: 10.2478/foecol-2018-0005.

  • Zhukov A. & Gadorozhnaya G. (2016). Spatial heterogeneity of mechanical impedance of a typical chernozem: the ecological approach. Ekológia (Bratislava) 35 263–278. DOI: 10.1515/eko-2016-0021.

  • Zhukov A.V. & Zadorozhnaya G.A. (2016). Ecomorphes of the sod-lithogenic soils on reddish-brown clays. Issues of Steppe Forestry and Forest Reclamation of Soils 45 91–103.

  • Zhukov O. Kunah O. Dubinina Y. & Novikova V. (2018). The role of edaphic and vegetation factors in structuring beta diversity of the soil macrofauna community of the Dnipro river arena terrace. Ekológia (Bratislava) 37(3) 301–327. DOI: 10.2478/eko-2018-0023.

  • Zinke P. (1962). The pattern of influence of individual forest trees on soil properties. Ecology 43(1) 130–133. DOI: 10.2307/1932049.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.77

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.283
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.534

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 49 49 28
PDF Downloads 39 40 27