A nested-intensity design for surveying plant diversity
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Managers of natural landscapes need cost-efficient, accurate, and precise systems to inventory plant diversity. We investigated a nested-intensity sampling design to assess local and landscape-scale heterogeneity of plant species richness in aspen stands in southern Colorado, USA. The nested-intensity design used three vegetation sampling techniques: the Modified-Whittaker, a 1000-m2 multiple-scale plot (n = 8); a 100-m2 multiple-scale Intensive plot (n = 15); and a 100-m2 single-scale Extensive plot (n = 28). The large Modified-Whittaker plot (1000 m2) recorded greater species richness per plot than the other two sampling techniques (P < 0.001), estimated cover of a greater number of species in 1-m2 subplots (P < 0.018), and captured 32 species missed by the smaller, more numerous 100-m2 plots of the other designs. The Intensive plots extended the environmental gradient sampled, capturing 17 species missed by the other techniques, and improved species–area calculations. The greater number of Extensive plots further expanded the gradient sampled, and captured 18 additional species. The multi-scale Modified-Whittaker and Intensive designs allowed quantification of the slopes of species–area curves in the single-scale Extensive plots. Multiple linear regressions were able to predict the slope of species–area curves (adj R 2 = 0.64, P < 0.001) at each Extensive plot, allowing comparison of species richness at each sample location. Comparison of species–accumulation curves generated with each technique suggested that small, single-scale plot techniques might be very misleading because they underestimate species richness by missing locally rare species at every site. A combination of large and small multi-scale and single-scale plots greatly improves our understanding of native and exotic plant diversity patterns.
- Baker W.L. 1989. Landscape ecology and nature preserve design in the boundary waters canoe area, Minnesota. Ecology 70: 23–35.
- Baker W.L., Munroe J.A. and Hessl A.E. 1997. The effects of elk on aspen in the winter range of Rocky Mountain National Park. Ecography 20: 155–165.
- Bonham C.D. 1989. Measurement for Terrestrial Vegetation. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York.
- Bunge J. and Fitzpatrick M. 1993. Estimating the number of species: a review. Journal of the American Statistical Association 88: 364–373.
- Burnham K.P. and Anderson D.R. 1998. Model Selection and Inference: A Practical Information – Theoretic Approach. Springer-Verlag, New York.
- Chong G.W., Reich R.M., Kalkhan M.A. and Stohlgren T.J. 2001. New approaches for sampling and modeling native and exotic plant species richness. Great Basin Naturalist 61: 328–335.
- Colwell R.K. 1997. EstimateS: Statistical Estimation of Species Richness and Shared Species from Samples. Version 5. User's Guide and Application. Published at: http://viceroy.eeb.uconn.edu/estimate.
- Connor E.F. and McCoy E.D. 1979. The statistics and biology of the species–area relationship. The American Naturalist 113: 791–833.
- Daubenmire R.F. 1959. Canopy coverage method of vegetation analysis. Northwest Science 33: 43–64.
- DeByle N.V. 1985. Wildlife. In: DeByle N.V. and Winokur R.P. (eds), Aspen: Ecology and Management in the Western United States. General Technical Report RM-119. USDA Forest Service, Fort Collins, Colorado pp. 135–152.
- Flather C.H. 1996. Fitting species–accumulation functions and assessing regional land use impacts on avian diversity. Journal of Biogeography 23: 155–168.
- Gaston K.J. 2000. Global patterns in biodiversity. Nature 405: 220–227.
- Green D.G. 1989. Simulated effects of fire, dispersal, and spatial pattern on competition within forested mosaics. Vegetatio 82: 139–153.
- Harte J., Kinzig A. and Green J. 1999. Self-similarity in the distribution and abundance of species. Science 284: 334–336.
- Kalkhan M.A., Reich R.M. and Stohlgren T.J. 1998. Assessing the accuracy of Landsat Thematic Mapper classification using double sampling. International Journal of Remote Sensing 19: 2049–2060.
- Kotliar N.B. 1996. Scale dependency and the expression of hierarchical structure in Delphinium patches. Vegetatio 127: 117–128.
- Krebill R.G. 1972. Mortality of aspen on the Gros Ventre Elk Winter Range. USDA Forest Service Research Paper INT-129. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah.
- Krebs C.J. 1989. Ecological Methodology. Harper & Row, New York.
- Leitner W.A. and Rosenzweig M.L. 1997. Nested species–area curves and stochastic sampling: a new theory. Oikos 79: 503–512.
- Levin S.A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73: 1943–1967.
- Ludwig J.A. and Reynolds J.F. 1988. Statistical Ecology. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.
- Margules C.R. and Pressey R.L. 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 243–253.
- MathSoft Inc. 1999. S-Plus 2000. MathSoft Inc., Seattle, Washington.
- Mulder B.S., Noon B.R., Spies T.A., Raphael M.G., Palmer C.J., Olsen A.R. et al., 1999. The strategy and design for the effectiveness monitoring program for the Northwest Forest Plan. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-437. USDA National Forest Service, Portland, Oregon.
- Myers N., Mittermeier R.A., Mittermeier C.G., da Fonseca G.A.B. and Kent J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858.
- Nusser S.M. and Goebel J.J. 1997. The National Resources Inventory: a long-term multi-resource monitoring programme. Environmental and Ecological Systematics 4: 181–204.
- Parker K.W. 1951. A Method for Measuring Trend in Range Condition in National Forest Ranges. USDA National Forest Service, Washington, DC.
- Peterson D.L., Silsbee D.G. and Schmoldt D.L. 1995. A planning approach for developing inventory and monitoring programs in national parks. Natural Resources Report NPS/NRUW/NRR-95/16. National Park Service, Washington, DC.
- Reed R.A., Peet R.K., Palmer M.W. and White P.S. 1993. Scale dependence of vegetation–environment correlations: a case study of a North Carolina piedmont woodland. Journal of Vegetation Science 4: 329–340.
- Reich R.L. and David R. 1998. Quantitative Spatial Analysis. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, www.CNR.colostate.edu/~robin.
- Reich and Bravo 1998. Integrating spatial statistics with GIS and remote sensing in designing multiresource inventories The North American Symposium Towards a Unified Framework for Inventory and Monitoring Forest Ecosystem Resources. Guadalajara, Mexico.
- Ripple W.J. and Larsen E.J. 2000. Historic aspen recruitment, elk, and wolves in Northern Yellowstone National Park, USA. Biological Conservation 95: 361–370.
- Romme W.H., Turner M.G., Wallace L.L. and Walker J.S. 1995. Aspen, elk, and fire in Northern Yellowstone National Park. Ecology 76: 2097–2106.
- Rosenzweig M.L. 1995. Species Diversity in Space and Time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
- SAS Institute 1998. SAS for Windows. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina.
- Schreuder H.T., Williams M.S. and Reich R.M. 1999. Estimating the number of tree species in a forest community using survey data. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 56: 293–303.
- Shmida A. 1984. Whittaker's plant diversity sampling method. Israel Journal of Botany 33: 41–46.
- Simonson S.E., Opler P.A., Stohlgren T.J. and Chong G.W. 2001. Rapid assessment of butterfly diversity in a montane landscape. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1369–1386.
- SPSS Inc. 2000. SYSTAT 9. SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois.
- Stohlgren T.J. 1994. Planning long-term vegetation studies at landscape scales. In: Powell T.M. and Steele J.H. (eds), Ecological Time Series. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 209–241.
- Stohlgren T.J., Binkley D., Chong G.W., Kalkhan M.A., Schell L.D., Bull K.A. et al. 1999. Exotic plant species invade hot spots of native plant diversity. Ecological Monographs 69: 25–46.
- Stohlgren T.J., Bull K.A. and Otsuki Y. 1998a. Comparison of rangeland vegetation sampling techniques in the Central Grasslands. Journal of Range Management 51: 164–172.
- Stohlgren T.J., Bull K.A., Otsuki Y., Villa C.A. and Lee M. 1998b. Riparian zones as havens for exotic plant species in the central grasslands. Plant Ecology 138: 113–125.
- Stohlgren T.J., Chong G.W., Kalkhan M.A. and Schell L.D. 1997a. Multi-scale sampling of plant diversity: effects of minimum mapping unit size. Ecological Applications 7: 1064–1074.
- Stohlgren T.J., Chong G.W., Kalkhan M.A. and Schell L.D. 1997b. Rapid assessment of plant diversity patterns: a methodology for landscapes. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 48: 25–43.
- Stohlgren T.J., Coughenour M.B., Chong G.W., Binkley D., Kalkhan M.A., Schell L.D. et al. 1997c. Landscape analysis of plant diversity. Landscape Ecology 12: 155–170.
- Stohlgren T.J., Falkner M.B. and Schell L.D. 1995. A modified-Whittaker nested vegetation sampling method. Vegetatio 4: 1–8.
- Stohlgren T.J., Owen A. and Lee M. 2000. Monitoring shifts in plant diversity in response to climate change: a method for landscapes. Biodiversity and Conservation 9: 67–86.
- Turner M.B. 1989. Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process. Annual Review of Ecological Systematics 20: 171–197.
- USDA, NRCS 2001. The PLANTS Database. Version 3.1. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, US, (http://plants.usda.gov).
- A nested-intensity design for surveying plant diversity
Biodiversity & Conservation
Volume 12, Issue 2 , pp 255-278
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers
- Additional Links
- Nested-intensity designs
- Plant species richness
- Sample plot size
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA
- 2. Midcontinent Ecological Science Center, United States Geological Survey, Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA