Influence of environmental and spatial variables on regional distribution of forest plant species in a fragmented and changing landscape

During the past several centuries, forests in Europe and large parts of North America have been subject to extensive forest clearance. The last several decades, however, numerous new forest patches have been established onto former agricultural land. As a result, the present forest area often consists of a mixture of small forest patches of different age, area, habitat quality and connectivity embedded within a hostile agricultural landscape. In these patchy landscapes, distribution patterns of plant species may be affected by both regional and local factors, although the relative importance of both is still poorly understood. In this study, we investigated distribution patterns of 113 forest plant species in a fragmented landscape. Species abundances at the regional scale conformed to a clearly unimodal abundance distribution which we believe to be related to 1) environmental heterogeneity due to succession and 2) inequality in migration rates. Patch incidence was significantly related to life form, which in turn was correlated to seed mass and dispersal mechanism. Multiple logistic regressions showed that presence/absence of 59 species studied was significantly affected by patch connectivity, patch area and age for 35, 30 and 34 species, respectively. The results of this study indicate that distribution patterns of forest plant species are influenced by both local and regional factors. Moreover, they also demonstrate that next to spatial aspects of fragmentation, temporal patterns of landscape change may have far-reaching effects on presence/absence patterns of plant species and therefore should be incorporated in studies dealing with regional population structures of plants.

[1]  M. Vellend.  HABITAT LOSS INHIBITS RECOVERY OF PLANT DIVERSITY AS FORESTS REGROW , 2003 .

[2]  K. Kirby,et al.  Seasonal and observer differences in vascular plant records from British woodlands , 1986 .

[3]  Lenore Fahrig,et al.  Relative importance of spatial and temporal scales in a patchy environment , 1992 .

[4]  J. Faaborg,et al.  Habitat fragmentation in the temperate zone , 1999 .

[5]  Stuart L. Pimm,et al.  On the Risk of Extinction , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[6]  J. Silvertown,et al.  Integrating ecology and evolution in a spatial context : the 14th Special Symposium of the British Ecological Society held at Royal Holloway College, University of London, 29-31 August, 2000 , 2001 .

[7]  O. Eriksson,et al.  Species abundance patterns of plants in Swedish semi-natural pastures , 1995 .

[8]  J. Ehrlén,et al.  Influence of habitat quantity, quality and isolation on the distribution and abundance of two epiphytic lichens , 2003 .

[9]  Anne Lohrli.  Chapman and Hall , 1985 .

[10]  Alan Hastings,et al.  Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, and Restoration , 1999 .

[11]  O. Eriksson,et al.  Large‐scale spatial dynamics of plants: a response to Freckleton & Watkinson , 2003 .

[12]  P. Klinkhamer,et al.  Declining plant species richness of grassland ditch banks—a problem of colonisation or extinction? , 2003 .

[13]  Steven L Van Wilgenburg,et al.  Large‐Scale Conversion of Forest to Agriculture in the Boreal Plains of Saskatchewan , 2002 .

[14]  Paul A. Keddy,et al.  A comparative approach to predicting competitive ability from plant traits , 1988, Nature.

[15]  Johan Ehrlén,et al.  DISPERSAL LIMITATION AND PATCH OCCUPANCY IN FOREST HERBS , 2000 .

[16]  C. Thomas,et al.  The spatial structure of populations , 1999 .

[17]  R. Freckleton,et al.  Are all plant populations metapopulations? , 2003 .

[18]  M. Groom,et al.  Allee Effects Limit Population Viability of an Annual Plant , 1998, The American Naturalist.

[19]  P. McCullagh,et al.  Generalized Linear Models , 1992 .

[20]  K. Thompson,et al.  The Electronic Comparative Plant Ecology , 1995, Springer Netherlands.

[21]  H. Ridley.  The Distribution of Plants , 1923 .

[22]  Mark P. Johnson.  The influence of patch demographics on metapopulations, with particular reference to successional landscapes , 2000 .

[23]  Dennis D. Murphy,et al.  Conservation Strategy: The Effects of Fragmentation on Extinction , 1985, The American Naturalist.

[24]  R. Brys,et al.  Patch occupancy, population size and reproductive success of a forest herb (Primula elatior) in a fragmented landscape , 2002, Oecologia.

[25]  J. Ehrlén,et al.  How perennial are perennial plants , 2002 .

[26]  M. Villard,et al.  Fragmentation Effects on Forest Birds: Relative Influence of Woodland Cover and Configuration on Landscape Occupancy , 1999 .

[27]  Lucy Bastin,et al.  The distribution of plant species in urban vegetation fragments , 1999, Landscape Ecology.

[28]  O. Eriksson.  Regional dynamics of plants : a review of evidence for remnant, source-sink and metapopulations , 1996 .

[29]  Johan Ehrlén,et al.  Habitat configuration, species traits and plant distributions , 2002 .

[30]  R. Freckleton,et al.  Large‐scale spatial dynamics of plants: metapopulations, regional ensembles and patchy populations , 2002 .

[31]  David E. Hiebeler,et al.  Populations on fragmented landscapes with spatially structured heterogeneities : Landscape generation and local dispersal , 2000 .

[32]  Andrew P. Dobson,et al.  Hopes for the Future: Restoration Ecology and Conservation Biology , 1997 .

[33]  K. Holsinger,et al.  The application of minimum viable population theory to plants. , 1991 .

[34]  O. Eriksson.  Functional roles of remnant plant populations in communities and ecosystems , 2000 .

[35]  Eric S. Menges,et al.  Inferring Metapopulation Dynamics from Patch‐Level Incidence of Florida Scrub Plants , 1996 .

[36]  M. Diekmann,et al.  Prediction of occurrence of vascular plants in deciduous forests of South Sweden by means of Ellenberg indicator values , 1998 .

[37]  Z. Dzwonko.  Assessment of light and soil conditions in ancient and recent woodlands by Ellenberg indicator values , 2002 .

[38]  Lindsay A. Turnbull,et al.  Are plant populations seed-limited? A review of seed sowing experiments. , 2000 .

[39]  S. Scheiner,et al.  Placing empirical limits on metapopulation models for terrestrial plants , 1997, Evolutionary Ecology.

[40]  J. Maron,et al.  Regional Turnover and Fluctuation in Populations of Five Plants Confined to Serpentine Seeps , 2000 .

[41]  Jorge X Velasco-Hernández,et al.  Extinction Thresholds and Metapopulation Persistence in Dynamic Landscapes , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[42]  Karin Johst,et al.  Metapopulation persistence in dynamic landscapes: the role of dispersal distance , 2002 .

[43]  M. Nowak,et al.  Habitat destruction and the extinction debt , 1994, Nature.

[44]  B. Husband,et al.  A METAPOPULATION PERSPECTIVE IN PLANT POPULATION BIOLOGY , 1996 .

[45]  Ruprecht Düll,et al.  Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa , 1992 .

[46]  H. Jacquemyn,et al.  The species pool concept applied to forests in a fragmented landscape: dispersal limitation versus habitat limitation , 2002 .

[47]  J. P. Grime,et al.  Comparative Plant Ecology , 1988, Springer Netherlands.

[48]  Pol Coppin,et al.  Effects of area, age and diversity of forest patches in Belgium on plant species richness, and implications for conservation and reforestation , 1999 .

[49]  I. Hanski,et al.  Patch-occupancy dynamics in fragmented landscapes. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[50]  G. von Oheimb,et al.  Migration of vascular plants to secondary woodlands in southern Sweden , 1998 .

[51]  R. Primack,et al.  Dispersal Can Limit Local Plant Distribution , 1992 .