Patterns of plant diversity and plant–environmental relationships across three riparian corridors

Abstract Riparian corridors are often the ecosystem level component most sensitive to changes within the surrounding environment. High levels of variability and heterogeneity commonly characterize plant communities and plant species within riparian corridors. The overall aim of this study was to assess and characterize riparian forest vegetation (trees and shrubs) and its relationship to environmental attributes along three different riparian corridors. The three corridors represented different levels of disturbance. We wanted to determine if and how disturbance level in the riparian corridor, defined by existing land cover, might be influencing patterns of both native and non-native woody vegetation. Our specific objectives were to: (1) characterize and classify the tree and shrub layers across the three riparian corridors; (2) determine if riparian disturbance was a good predictor of plant diversity patterns; (3) assess the relationships between geomorphology and soils and tree and shrub vegetation; (4) ascertain any linkages between the tree and shrub layers; and (5) characterize the extent of non-native tree and shrub species across corridors. Our assumption that species diversity was negatively correlated with land cover disturbances was not fully supported. In addition, shrub species and tree species appear to be responding to different underlying gradients and in different ways. Detrended correspondence analysis (DCA) and canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) ordinations showed four distinct tree species assemblages that appeared to be responding to both underlying soil (pH, base saturation, NO 3 , Ca) and morphological (height above river, slope) gradients. However, no unique shrub assemblages could be distinguished in the DCA and CCA ordinations. In addition, other than pH, shrub plots did not exhibit strong correlations with any of the environmental variables measured. Thus, the tree and shrub layers appear to be uncoupled. The shrub layer does appear more susceptible to invasive non-native species than the tree layer although both non-native tree and shrub species appear to have been somewhat evenly distributed across the three riparian corridors. Overall, this study identified key underlying gradients, abiotic conditions and major soil factors that are influencing tree species in the three riparian corridors studied. The importance of shrub species as well as low frequency, non-dominant tree species contributions to diversity in these riparian forests should be emphasized in protection and conservation efforts. Disturbance, as determined by large-scale land cover patterns, provided only a partial explanation of woody species composition, structure and diversity in the riparian corridors.

[1]  R. Naiman,et al.  River ecology and management : lessons from the Pacific coastal ecoregion , 2000 .

[2]  Christer Nilsson,et al.  A Comparison of Species Richness and Traits of Riparian Plants between a Main River Channel and Its Tributaries , 1994 .

[3]  F. Alcaraz,et al.  Variation in the riparian landscape of the Segura River Basin, SE Spain , 1997 .

[4]  Jean Paul Metzger,et al.  Pattern of tree species diversity in riparian forest fragments of different widths (SE Brazil) , 1997, Plant Ecology.

[5]  J. Wiens.  Riverine landscapes: taking landscape ecology into the water , 2002 .

[6]  H. Décamps.  The renewal of floodplain forests along rivers: a landscape perspective , 1996 .

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

[8]  J. Gosz,et al.  Boundary dynamics: a conceptual framework for studying landscape ecosystems , 1985 .

[9]  C. Johnston,et al.  The Potential Importance of Boundaries of Fluvial Ecosystems , 1988, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[10]  H. Ahles,et al.  Flora of the Northeast: A Manual of the Vascular Flora of New England and Adjacent New York , 2000 .

[11]  J. Hornbeck,et al.  Riparian management in forests of the continental Eastern United States , 2000 .

[12]  J. Gray,et al.  Effect of Woodland Clearance on Stream Temperature , 1969 .

[13]  W. C. Johnson,et al.  Woodland Expansions in the Platte River, Nebraska: Patterns and Causes , 1994 .

[14]  J. Ward.  RIVERINE LANDSCAPES: BIODIVERSITY PATTERNS, DISTURBANCE REGIMES, AND AQUATIC CONSERVATION , 1998 .

[15]  M. Hill,et al.  Data analysis in community and landscape ecology , 1987 .

[16]  Petr Pyšek,et al.  Plant invasions and the role of riparian habitats: a comparison of four species alien to central Europe. , 1993 .

[17]  C. Nilsson,et al.  INTERCONTINENTAL SIMILARITIES IN RIPARIAN-PLANT DIVERSITY AND SENSITIVITY TO RIVER REGULATION , 2004 .

[18]  H. Décamps.  River Margins and Environmental Change. , 1993, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[19]  J. Lyon,et al.  Gradient analysis in a riparian landscape: contrasts among forest layers , 1997 .

[20]  F. Stuart Chapin,et al.  The Role of Life History Processes in Primary Succession on an Alaskan Floodplain , 1986 .

[21]  R. Naiman,et al.  The Ecology of Interfaces: Riparian Zones , 1997 .

[22]  R. Miller,et al.  Chemical and microbiological properties , 1982 .

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

[24]  David A. Kovacic,et al.  Riparian vegetated buffer strips in water‐quality restoration and stream management , 1993 .

[25]  R. Naiman,et al.  The ecology and management of aquatic-terrestrial ecotones. , 1990 .

[26]  Richard E. Sparks,et al.  Need for Ecosystem Management of Large Rivers and Their Floodplains These phenomenally productive ecosystems produce fish and wildlife and preserve species , 1995 .

[27]  M. Hill,et al.  Detrended correspondence analysis: an improved ordination technique , 1980 .

[28]  R. Naiman,et al.  The Role of Riparian Corridors in Maintaining Regional Biodiversity. , 1993, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[29]  C. Nilsson,et al.  Basic Principles and Ecological Consequences of Changing Water Regimes: Riparian Plant Communities , 2002, Environmental management.

[30]  M. Palmer.  PUTTING THINGS IN EVEN BETTER ORDER: THE ADVANTAGES OF CANONICAL CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS' , 1993 .

[31]  K. Rogers,et al.  Riparian vegetation‐environment relationships: complimentarity of gradients versus patch hierarchy approaches , 2000 .

[32]  D. Lodge,et al.  Biological invasions: Lessons for ecology. , 1993, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[33]  F. Swanson,et al.  An Ecosystem Perspective of Riparian ZonesFocus on links between land and water , 1991 .

[34]  W. C. Johnson,et al.  Forest Overstory Vegetation and Environment on the Missouri River Floodplain in North Dakota , 1976 .

[35]  E. Tabacchi,et al.  Changes in the hydrological regime and invasions by plant species along riparian systems of the Adour River, France , 1995 .

[36]  S. Dakota.  Recommended Chemical Soil Test Procedures for the North Central Region , 1998 .

[37]  R. O'Neill.  A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. , 1986 .

[38]  Martin J. Wassen,et al.  Patterns in vegetation, hydrology, and nutrient availability in an undisturbed river floodplain in Poland , 2003, Plant Ecology.

[39]  E. O. Mclean.  Soil pH and Lime Requirement , 1982 .

[40]  Jean O. Lacoursière,et al.  Nutrient retention in riparian ecotones , 1994 .

[41]  J. Lyon,et al.  Correspondence analysis of functional groups in a riparian landscape , 2003, Plant Ecology.