Tree diversity in southern California's urban forest: the interacting roles of social and environmental variables

Socio-economic and environmental drivers are important determinants urban plant richness patterns. The scale at which these patterns are observed in different regions, however, has not been explored. In arid regions, where forests are not native, the majority of the urban forest is planted, and trees are presumably chosen for specific attributes. Here, we investigate the role of spatial scales and the relative importance of environmental versus socio-economic drivers in determining the community structure of southern California’s urban forest. Second, we assess the usefulness of ecosystem service-based traits for understanding patterns of urban biodiversity, compared with species composition data. Third, we test whether resident preferences for specific tree attributes are important for understanding patterns of species composition and diversity. We studied tree communities in 37 neighborhoods in three southern California counties (Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside). The urban forest in southern California is very diverse with 114 species. Using multiple regression analyses we found socio-economic drivers were generally more important than environmental and the strength of the relationship between urban forest community structure and socio-economic drivers depended on whether we were analyzing within or across counties. There was greater tree richness in wealthier neighborhoods compared with less affluent neighborhoods across all counties and Orange County, but not in Los Angeles or Riverside counties alone. We also found a greater proportion of residential shade trees in hotter neighborhoods than in cooler neighborhoods, which corresponds with survey results of residents’ preferences for tree attributes. Ultimately our study demonstrates that the species richness and functional traits of urban tree communities are influenced by managers’ and residents’ preferences and perceptions of urban tree traits.

[1]  Meghan L. Avolio,et al.  Understanding preferences for tree attributes: the relative effects of socio-economic and local environmental factors , 2015, Urban Ecosystems.

[2]  M. F. Aronson,et al.  Urbanization promotes non-native woody species and diverse plant assemblages in the New York metropolitan region , 2015, Urban Ecosystems.

[3]  C.Y. Jim,et al.  Species diversity and performance assessment of trees in domestic gardens. , 2014 .

[4]  Dexter H. Locke,et al.  An Ecology of Prestige in New York City: Examining the Relationships Among Population Density, Socio-economic Status, Group Identity, and Residential Canopy Cover , 2014, Environmental Management.

[5]  Tenley M. Conway,et al.  The influence of land use type and municipal context on urban tree species diversity , 2014, Urban Ecosystems.

[6]  G. D. Jenerette,et al.  Urban vegetation and income segregation in drylands: a synthesis of seven metropolitan regions in the southwestern United States , 2013 .

[7]  G. D. Jenerette,et al.  The evolution of tree nursery offerings in Los Angeles County over the last 110 years , 2013 .

[8]  G. D. Jenerette,et al.  The luxury of vegetation and the legacy of tree biodiversity in Los Angeles, CA , 2013 .

[9]  G. D. Jenerette,et al.  A trait‐based ecology of the Los Angeles urban forest , 2013 .

[10]  T. Gillespie,et al.  Urban tree planting programs, function or fashion? Los Angeles and urban tree planting campaigns , 2013 .

[11]  S. Collins,et al.  Small-scale patch structure in North American and South African grasslands responds differently to fire and grazing , 2013, Landscape Ecology.

[12]  D. Kendal,et al.  Plant traits link people's plant preferences to the composition of their gardens , 2012 .

[13]  R. D. Ramsey,et al.  Determinants of urban tree canopy in residential neighborhoods: Household characteristics, urban form, and the geophysical landscape , 2012, Urban Ecosystems.

[14]  S. Hall,et al.  Residential landscapes as social-ecological systems: a synthesis of multi-scalar interactions between people and their home environment , 2012, Urban Ecosystems.

[15]  Jamie B. Kirkpatrick,et al.  Temporal and spatial variation in garden and street trees in six eastern Australian cities , 2011 .

[16]  Stephanie Pincetl,et al.  Transpiration of urban forests in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. , 2011, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[17]  Jianguo Liu,et al.  Effects of attitudinal and sociodemographic factors on pro-environmental behaviour in urban China , 2011, Environmental Conservation.

[18]  William N. Venables,et al.  Modern Applied Statistics with S , 2010 .

[19]  S. Pavoine,et al.  Using biological traits to assess how urbanization filters plant species of small woodlands , 2010 .

[20]  Christopher G. Boone,et al.  Landscape, vegetation characteristics, and group identity in an urban and suburban watershed: why the 60s matter , 2010, Urban Ecosystems.

[21]  Lisa T. Smallbone,et al.  Socio-Economics and Vegetation Change in Urban Ecosystems: Patterns in Space and Time , 2009, Ecosystems.

[22]  Ken Thompson,et al.  A conceptual framework for predicting the effects of urban environments on floras , 2009 .

[23]  Richard Field,et al.  Spatial species‐richness gradients across scales: a meta‐analysis , 2009 .

[24]  C.Y. Jim,et al.  Pattern and divergence of tree communities in Taipei's main urban green spaces , 2008 .

[25]  N. Grimm,et al.  Global Change and the Ecology of Cities , 2008, Science.

[26]  K. Anderson Temporal Patterns in Rates of Community Change during Succession , 2007, The American Naturalist.

[27]  G. D. Jenerette,et al.  Regional relationships between surface temperature, vegetation, and human settlement in a rapidly urbanizing ecosystem , 2007, Landscape Ecology.

[28]  Ulrike Groemping,et al.  Relative Importance for Linear Regression in R: The Package relaimpo , 2006 .

[29]  M. L. Cadenasso,et al.  Characterization of Households and its Implications for the Vegetation of Urban Ecosystems , 2006, Ecosystems.

[30]  B. Enquist,et al.  Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[31]  Michael C. Wendl,et al.  Argonaute—a database for gene regulation by mammalian microRNAs , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[32]  Paige S. Warren,et al.  Neighborhood socioeconomic status is a useful predictor of perennial landscape vegetation in residential neighborhoods and embedded small parks of Phoenix, AZ , 2004 .

[33]  P. Reich,et al.  A handbook of protocols for standardised and easy measurement of plant functional traits worldwide , 2003 .

[34]  C. Gries,et al.  Socioeconomics drive urban plant diversity , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  Greg Lindsey,et al.  Correlates of Urban Forest Canopy Cover , 2003 .

[36]  E. G. McPherson,et al.  Assessing Canopy Cover Over Streets and Sideswalks in Street Tree Populations , 2002, Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

[37]  Chi Yung Jim,et al.  Patterns and dynamics of urban forests in relation to land use and development history in Guangzhou City, China , 2001 .

[38]  Chi Yung Jim,et al.  Species diversity of three major urban forest types in Guangzhou city, China , 2001 .

[39]  R. Whittaker,et al.  Scale and species richness: towards a general, hierarchical theory of species diversity , 2001 .

[40]  K. Gaston Global patterns in biodiversity , 2000, Nature.

[41]  Louis R. Iverson,et al.  Urban forest cover of the Chicago region and its relation to household density and income , 2000, Urban Ecosystems.

[42]  Sandra Díaz,et al.  Plant functional traits and environmental filters at a regional scale , 1998 .

[43]  P. Reich,et al.  From tropics to tundra: global convergence in plant functioning. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[44]  W. Zipperer,et al.  Urban tree cover: an ecological perspective , 1997, Urban Ecosystems.

[45]  Lawrance M. Lesser Street Tree Diversity and DBH in Southern California , 1996, Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

[46]  C.Y. Jim Trees and landscape of a suburban residential neighbourhood in Hong Kong , 1993 .

[47]  R. A. Sanders Some determinants of urban forest structure , 1984 .

[48]  Arthur M. Winer,et al.  Composition and dominance in Los Angeles Basin urban vegetation , 1984 .

[49]  J. McBride,et al.  Urban forest development: A case study, Menlo Park, California , 1976 .

[50]  Nicholas S. G. Williams,et al.  Drivers of diversity and tree cover in gardens, parks and streetscapes in an Australian city , 2012 .

[51]  Johan Östberg,et al.  Diversity and distribution of the urban tree population in ten major Nordic cities , 2012 .

[52]  Lara A. Roman,et al.  Street tree survival rates: Meta-analysis of previous studies and application to a field survey in Philadelphia, PA, USA , 2011 .

[53]  P. Legendre,et al.  A distance-based framework for measuring functional diversity from multiple traits. , 2010, Ecology.

[54]  P. Legendre,et al.  vegan : Community Ecology Package. R package version 1.8-5 , 2007 .

[55]  Xu Yu-bo,et al.  Reachability Checking of Finite Precision Timed Automata , 2006 .

[56]  G. Talarchek THE URBAN FOREST OF NEW ORLEANS: AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS OF RELATIONSHIPS , 1990 .

[57]  Wolfram Kunick Woody vegetation in settlements , 1987 .

[58]  J. Mcbride,et al.  都市林の遷移,カリフォルニア州,メンロ・パークでのケース・スタディ , 1976 .