Vegetatio

, Volume 69, Issue 1–3, pp 79–87

Ecological amplitudes of plant species and the internal consistency of Ellenberg's indicator values for moisture

  • Cajo J. F. Ter Braak
  • Niek J. M. Gremmen
Article

Abstract

Two methods for estimating ecological amplitudes of species with respect to Ellenberg's moisture scale are discussed, one based on weighted averaging and the other on maximum likelihood. Both methods are applied to phytosociological data from the province of Noord-Brabant (The Netherlands), and estimate the range of occurrence of species to be about 4–6 units on the moisture scale. Due to the implicit nature of Ellenberg's definition of moisture, it is impossible to improve the indicator values in a statistically sound way on the basis of floristic data only. The internal consistency of the Ellenberg indicator values is checked by using Gaussian logit regression. For 45 out of the 240 species studied the indicator value is inconsistent with those of the other species. The same method is used to estimate the optima and amplitudes of species considered moisture-indifferent and of some species not mentioned by Ellenberg. Some of these ‘indifferent’ species show a remarkably narrow amplitude.

It is concluded that the Ellenberg indicator values for moisture form a reasonably consistent system.

Keywords

Amplitude Gaussian logit curve Indicator value Logit regression Maximum likelihood Optimum Tolerance Unimodal response curve Weighted averaging 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Böcker R., Kowarik I. & Bornkamm R., 1983. Untersuchungen zur Anwendung der Zeigerwerte nach Ellenberg. Verh. Ges. Ökol. 9: 35–56.Google Scholar
  2. Clausman P. H. M. A., 1980. Ecologische interpretatie van vegetatieopnamen m.b.v. een computer. WLO-Meded. 7: 92–98.Google Scholar
  3. Durwen K.-J., 1982. Zur Nutzung von Zeigerwerten und artspezifischen Merkmalen der Gefäszpflanzen Mitteleuropas für Zwecke der Landschaftsökologie und-planung mit Hilfe der EDV-Voraussetzungen, Instrumentarien, Methoden und Möglichkeiten. Arbeitsber. Lehrst. Landschaftsökol. Münster 5: 1–138.Google Scholar
  4. Ellenberg, H., 1979. Zeigerwerte der Gefäszpflanzen Mitteleuropas. 2nd ed., Scripta Geobotanica 9, Göttingen.Google Scholar
  5. Ellenberg H., 1983. Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen in ökologischer Sicht. 3rd ed., Ulmer Verlag, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  6. Gremmen N. J. M., Reijnen M. J. S. M., Wiertz J. & VanWirdum G., 1985. Modelling for the effects of ground-water withdrawal on the species composition of the vegetation in the Pleistocene areas of The Netherlands. In. Ann. Rep. 1984. Research Institute for Nature Management, Arnhem, pp 89–111.Google Scholar
  7. Hill M. O. & Gauch H. G., 1980. Detrended correspondence analysis: an improved ordination technique. Vegetatio 42: 47–58.Google Scholar
  8. Persson S., 1981. Ecological indicator values as an aid in the interpretation of ordination diagrams. J. Ecol. 69: 71–84.Google Scholar
  9. Reijnen M. J. S. M. & Wiertz J., 1984. Grondwater en vegetatie: een nieuw systeem voor kartering en effectvoorspelling. (Engl. Summary) Landschap 1: 261–281.Google Scholar
  10. Smeets P. J. A. M., Werger M. J. A. & Tevonderen H. A. J., 1980. Vegetation changes in a moist grassland under altered water conditions. Biol. Conserv. 18: 123–142.Google Scholar
  11. Ter Braak C. J. F. & Barendregt L. G., 1986. Weighted averaging of species indicator values: its efficiency in environmental calibration. Math. Biosci. 78: 57–72.Google Scholar
  12. Ter Braak C. J. F. & Looman C. W. M., 1986. Weighted averaging, logistic regression and the Gaussian response model. Vegetatio 65: 3–11.Google Scholar
  13. Whittaker R. H., 1956. Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecol. Monogr. 26: 1–80.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr W. Junk Publishers 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cajo J. F. Ter Braak
    • 1
  • Niek J. M. Gremmen
    • 2
  1. 1.TNO Institute of Applied Computer ScienceWageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Research Institute for Nature ManagementLeersumThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations