Species response curves along environmental gradients. A case study from SE Norwegian swamp forests

Abstract Vegetation science has relied on untested paradigms relating to the shape of species response curves along environmental gradients. To advance in this field, we used the HOF approach to model response curves for 112 plant species along six environmental gradients and three ecoclines (as represented by DCA ordination axes) in SE Norwegian swamp forests. Response curve properties were summarized in three binary response variables: (1) model unimodal or monotonous (determinate) vs. indeterminate; (2) for determinate models, unimodal vs. monotonous and (3) for unimodal models, skewed vs. symmetric. We used logistic regression to test the influence, singly and jointly, of seven predictor variables on each of three response variables. Predictor variables included gradient type (environmental or ecocline) and length (compositional turnover); species category (vascular plant, moss, Sphagnum or hepatic), species frequency and richness, tolerance (the fraction of the gradient along which the species occurs) and position of species along each gradient. The probability for fitting a determinate model increased as the main occurrence of species approached gradient extremes and with increasing species tolerance and frequency and gradient length. Appearance of unimodal models was favoured by low species tolerance and disfavoured by closeness of species to gradient extremes. Appearance of skewed models was weakly related to predictors but was slightly favoured by species optima near gradient extremes. Contrary to the results of previous studies, species category, gradient type and variation in species richness along gradients did not contribute independently to model prediction. The overall best predictors of response curve shape were position along the gradient (relative to extremes) and tolerance; the latter also expressing gradient length in units of compositional turnover. This helps predicting species responses to gradients from gradient specific species properties. The low proportion of skewed response curves and the large variation of species response curves along all gradients indicate that skewed response curves is a smaller problem for the performance of ordination methods than often claimed. We find no evidence that DCA ordination increases the unimodality, or symmetry, of species response curves more than expected from the higher compositional turnover along ordination axes. Thus ordination axes may be appropriate proxies for ecoclines, applicable for use in species response modelling. Abbreviations: GAM = Generalized Additive Model; GLM = Generalized linear model; HOF = Huisman-Olff-Fresco; LNMDS = Local Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling. Nomenclature: Lid & Lid (1994); Frisvoll et al. (1995); Krog et al. (1994), except for Polytrichastrum G.L.Sm., which is not recognized as distinct from Polytrichum Hedw. Several groups of related taxa were treated collectively.

[1]  B. Økland Mycetophilidae (Diptera), an insect group vulnerable to forestry practices? A comparison of clearcut, managed and semi-natural spruce forests in southern Norway , 1994, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[2]  L. Söderström,et al.  Habitat qualities versus long-term continuity as determinants of biodiversity in boreal old-growth swamp forests , 1997 .

[3]  Peter R. Minchin,et al.  An evaluation of the relative robustness of techniques for ecological ordination , 1987 .

[4]  R. Ejrnæs,et al.  Can we trust gradients extracted by Detrended Correspondence Analysis , 2000 .

[5]  G. Tyler,et al.  Herb layer vegetation of south Swedish beech and oak forests—effects of management and soil acidity during one decade , 1996 .

[6]  E. Maarel,et al.  Plant functional types – a strategic perspective , 2000 .

[7]  R. Douglas Martin,et al.  S-PLUS Version 3 , 1992 .

[8]  Mike P. Austin,et al.  Models for the analysis of species’ response to environmental gradients , 1987 .

[9]  S. Díaz,et al.  Plant functional traits, ecosystem structure and land-use history along a climatic gradient in central-western Argentina , 1999 .

[10]  Martin Kent,et al.  Trends and problems in the application of classification and ordination methods in plant ecology , 1988, Vegetatio.

[11]  M. Austin,et al.  Current approaches to modelling the environmental niche of eucalypts: implication for management of forest biodiversity , 1996 .

[12]  H. Olff,et al.  A hierarchical set of models for species response analysis , 1993 .

[13]  Jari Oksanen,et al.  Rate of compositional turnover along gradients and total gradient length , 1995 .

[14]  J. Oksanen,et al.  Continuum theory revisited: what shape are species responses along ecological gradients? , 2002 .

[15]  T. Økland,et al.  PLANT SPECIES COMPOSITION OF BOREAL SPRUCE SWAMP FORESTS: CLOSED DOORS AND WINDOWS OF OPPORTUNITY , 2003 .

[16]  C. Braak,et al.  Weighted averaging, logistic regression and the Gaussian response model , 2004, Vegetatio.

[17]  M. O. Hill,et al.  DECORANA - A FORTRAN program for detrended correspondence analysis and reciprocal averaging. , 1979 .

[18]  M. Ohlson,et al.  BOREAL SWAMP FORESTS : BIODIVERSITY HOTSPOTS IN AN IMPOVERISHED FOREST LANDSCAPE , 1998 .

[19]  C.J.F. ter Braak,et al.  A Theory of Gradient Analysis , 2004 .

[20]  J. Oksanen,et al.  Niche characteristics of Danish woody species as derived from coenoclines , 2002 .

[21]  M. Austin,et al.  On non-linear species response models in ordination , 1976, Vegetatio.

[22]  A. O. Nicholls,et al.  Determining species response functions to an environmental gradient by means of a β‐function , 1994 .

[23]  M. Austin,et al.  The theoretical basis of vegetation science. , 1986, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[24]  R. H. Økland Are ordination and constrained ordination alternative or complementary strategies in general ecological studies , 1996 .

[25]  R. Knox,et al.  Putting Things in Order: The Advantages of Detrended Correspondence Analysis , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[26]  T. J. Carleton Variation in terricolous bryophyte and macrolichen vegetation along primary gradients in Canadian boreal forests , 1990 .

[27]  A. O. Nicholls,et al.  Measurement of the realized qualitative niche: environmental niches of five Eucalyptus species , 1990 .

[28]  Bruce McCune,et al.  INFLUENCE OF NOISY ENVIRONMENTAL DATA ON CANONICAL CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS , 1997 .

[29]  R. Peet Forest vegetation of the Colorado Front Range: Patterns of species diversity , 1978, Vegetatio.

[30]  C.J.F. ter Braak,et al.  CANOCO Reference Manual and User's Guide to Canoco for Windows: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (Version 4) , 1998 .

[31]  E. Maarel,et al.  Theoretical vegetation science on the way , 1989 .

[32]  Peter R. Minchin,et al.  Montane vegetation of the Mt. Field massif, Tasmania: a test of some hypotheses about properties of community patterns , 1989, Vegetatio.

[33]  M. Austin,et al.  Community theory and competition in vegetation. , 1990 .

[34]  S. Ferson,et al.  Putting Things in Order: A Critique of Detrended Correspondence Analysis , 1987, The American Naturalist.

[35]  T. M. Smith,et al.  A new model for the continuum concept , 1989 .

[36]  James B. Grace,et al.  The factors controlling species density in herbaceous plant communities: an assessment , 1999 .

[37]  C. Braak Canonical Correspondence Analysis: A New Eigenvector Technique for Multivariate Direct Gradient Analysis , 1986 .

[38]  M. Austin,et al.  New approaches to direct gradient analysis using environmental scalars and statistical curve-fitting procedures , 1984 .

[39]  Frans Bongers,et al.  Distribution of twelve moist forest canopy tree species in Liberia and Côte d'Ivoire: response curves to a climatic gradient , 1999 .

[40]  R. H. Økland On the variation explained by ordination and constrained ordination axes , 1999 .

[41]  Mike P. Austin,et al.  The potential contribution of vegetation ecology to biodiversity research , 1999 .

[42]  M. Austin A silent clash of paradigms : some inconsistencies in community ecology , 1999 .

[43]  Mike P. Austin Searching for a Model for Use in Vegetation Analysis , 1980 .

[44]  C. L. Mohler,et al.  Measuring compositional change along gradients , 1983, Vegetatio.

[45]  Hugh G. Gauch,et al.  Noise Reduction By Eigenvector Ordinations , 1982 .

[46]  T. Økland An ecological approach to the investigation of a beech forest in Vestfold, SE Norway , 1988 .

[47]  A. O. Nicholls,et al.  To fix or not to fix the species limits, that is the ecological question: Response to Jari Oksanen , 1997 .

[48]  Robert H. Whittaker,et al.  Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains , 1956 .

[49]  R. Whittaker,et al.  GRADIENT ANALYSIS OF VEGETATION* , 1967, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[50]  M. Austin,et al.  Current problems of environmental gradients and species response curves in relation to continuum theory , 1994 .

[51]  K. Rydgren Vegetation‐environment relationships of old‐growth spruce forest vegetation in Østmarka Nature Reserve, SE Norway, and comparison of three ordination methods , 1996 .

[52]  R. H. Myers Generalized Linear Models: With Applications in Engineering and the Sciences , 2001 .

[53]  Knut Rydgren,et al.  Single-tree influence on understorey vegetation in a Norwegian boreal spruce forest , 1999 .

[54]  J. Oksanen Problems of joint display of species and site scores in correspondence analysis , 1987, Vegetatio.

[55]  Mark Vellend,et al.  Do commonly used indices of β‐diversity measure species turnover? , 2001 .

[56]  R. H. Økland Studies in SE Fennoscandian mires: relevance to ecological theory , 1992 .