Plot sizes used for phytosociological sampling of European vegetation

Abstract In European phytosociology, variable plot sizes are traditionally used for sampling different vegetation types. This practice may generate problems in current vegetation or habitat survey projects based on large data sets, which include relevés made by many authors at different times. In order to determine the extent of variation in plot sizes used in European phytosociology, we collected a data set of 41 174 relevés with an indication of plot size, published in six major European journals focusing on phytosociology from 1970 to 2000. As an additional data set, we took 27 365 relevés from the Czech National Phytosociological Database. From each data set, we calculated basic statistical figures for plot sizes used to sample vegetation of various phytosociological classes. The results show that in Europe the traditionally used size of vegetation plots is roughly proportional to vegetation height; however, there is a large variation in plot size, both within and among vegetation classes. The effect of variable plot sizes on vegetation analysis and classification is not sufficiently known, but use of standardized plot sizes would be desirable in future projects of vegetation or habitat survey. Based on our analysis, we suggest four plot sizes as possible standards. They are 4 m2 for sampling aquatic vegetation and low-grown herbaceous vegetation, 16 m2 for most grassland, heathland and other herbaceous or low-scrub vegetation types, 50 m2 for scrub, and 200 m2 for woodlands. It has been pointed out that in some situations, sampling in either small or large plots may result in assignment of relevés to different phytosociological classes or habitat types. Therefore defining vegetation and habitat types as scale-dependent concepts is needed.

[1]  Ladislav Mucina,et al.  European vegetation survey: current state of some national programmes. , 1993 .

[2]  A. Nelson.  Scale dependence of vegetation-environment correlations: A case study of a North Carolina piedmont woodland , 1993 .

[3]  Quantitative Plant Ecology , 1960 .

[4]  J. Braun.  Vegetation of the Nival Zone in Southeastern Switzerland@@@Die Vegetationsverhaltnisse der Schneestufe in den Ratisch-Lepontischen Alpen. , 1914 .

[5]  J. Rodwell.  THE EUROPEAN VEGETATION SURVEY QUESTIONNARE: AN OVERVIEW OF PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL DATA, VEGETATION SURVEY PROGRAMMES AND DATABASES IN EUROPE , 1995 .

[6]  M. Chytrý.  Phytosociological data give biased estimates of species richness , 2001 .

[7]  T. Allen,et al.  Toward a Unified Ecology. , 1994 .

[8]  Ladislav Mucina,et al.  European Vegetation Survey: update on progress , 1995 .

[9]  J. Barkman,et al.  A critical evaluation of minimum area concepts , 1989, Vegetatio.

[10]  François Gillet,et al.  La phytosociologie synusiale intégrée : objets et concepts , 1991 .

[11]  D. Moss,et al.  The Diversity of European Vegetation: an overview of phytosociological alliances and their relationships to EUNIS habitats , 2002 .

[12]  Thomas B. Starr,et al.  Hierarchy: Perspectives for Ecological Complexity , 1982 .

[13]  D. Rietz,et al.  Zur methodologischen Grundlage der modernen Pflanzensoziologie , 1921 .

[14]  J. Braun-Blanquet,et al.  Pflanzensoziologie: Grundzuge der Vegetationskunde. , 1967 .

[15]  Joop H.J. Schaminée,et al.  On the concept of vegetation class in phytosociology , 1995 .

[16]  S. Levin.  The problem of pattern and scale in ecology , 1992 .

[17]  François Gillet,et al.  Integrated synusial phytosociology: some notes on a new, multiscalar approach to vegetation analysis , 1996 .

[18]  Ladislav Mucina,et al.  Common data standards for recording relevés in field survey for vegetation classification. , 2000 .

[19]  J. S. Rodwell,et al.  British Plant Communities: British Plant Communities , 2000 .

[20]  J. Schaminée,et al.  The diversity of European vegetation. , 2003 .

[21]  V. T. Parker,et al.  Ecological scale : theory and applications , 1999 .

[22]  J. Schaminée,et al.  TURBOVEG, a comprehensive data base management system for vegetation data , 2001 .

[23]  Milan Chytrý,et al.  Czech National Phytosociological Database: basic statistics of the available vegetation-plot data Česká národní fytocenologická databáze: základní statistika dostupných snímkových dat , 2003 .

[24]  P. Greig-Smith,et al.  QUANTITATIVE PLANT ECOLOGY , 1959 .

[25]  Helge Bruelheide,et al.  Towards unification of national vegetation classifications: A comparison of two methods for analysis of large data sets , 2000 .

[26]  P. Juhász-Nagy,et al.  Information theory methods for the study of spatial processes and succession , 1983, Vegetatio.

[27]  G. Decocq.  Patterns of plant species and community diversity at different organization levels in a forested riparian landscape , 2002 .

[28]  M. Palmer,et al.  Fractal geometry: a tool for describing spatial patterns of plant communities , 1988, Vegetatio.

[29]  E. Maarel,et al.  A new approach to the minimal area of a plant community , 1982, Vegetatio.