Advertisement

Vegetatio

, Volume 48, Issue 3, pp 267–275 | Cite as

Numerical classification and ordination of ruderal plant communities (Sisymbrietalia, Onopordetalia) in the western part of Slovakia

  • L. Mucino
Article
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

The ruderal communities of the orders Sisymbrietalia and Onopordetalia from the western part of Slovakia have been subjected to numerical classification and ordination. The ordination techniques proved to be a useful tool in the elucidation of the cluster pattern as well as in the detection of the main environmental variation underlying the floristic variation within the data. Results obtained with numerical techniques and traditional syntaxonomical classification have been compared. The similarity between these results is low at the level of the orders. This incompatability is explained by the differences in the weighting of the species in the course of the classification process and by the addition of non-floristical criteria that often occurs in syntaxonomical classification according to Braun-Blanquet. The highest value has been observed at the 3-clusters level (both orders and the Malvion neglectae). High similarity among the results of the numerical techniques have been observed, particularly in the group of space-dilating clusterings (Ward's method, Complete linkage clustering and MeQuitty's similarity analysis). Average linkage clustering produces the most diverse result. The Malvion neglectae appeared as a separate group in all numerical techniques adopted. This suggests the upranking of its syntaxonomical position. The Bromo-Hordeion murini turned out to be a very heterotoneous syntaxon.

Keywords

Cluster analysis Dendrogram analysis Malylan neglectae Numerical syntaxonomy Onopordetalia Ordination Ruderal communities Sisymbrietalia Slovakia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Braun-Blanquet J., 1964. Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde. 3. Aufl. Springer, Wien, New York. 865 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Coetzee B. J. & Werger M. J. A., 1973. On hierarchical syndrome analysis and the Zürich-Montpellier table method. Bothalia 11: 159–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ehrendorfer F. (ed.) et al. 1973. Liste der Gefässpflanzen Mitteleuropas. 2. Aufl. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart. 318 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Goldstein R. A. & Grigal D. F., 1972. Computer programs for the ordination and classification of ecosystems (ORNL-IBP-71–10). Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.Google Scholar
  5. Goodman L. A. & Kruskal W. H., 1954. Measures of association for cross classifications. J. Am. Stat. Ass. 49: 732–764.Google Scholar
  6. Grigal D. F. & Ohmann L. F., 1975. Classification, description, and dynamics of upland plant communities within a Minnesota wilderness area. Ecol. Monogr. 45: 389–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hill M. O., 1979. DECORANA. A Fortran program for detrended correspondence analysis and reciprocal averaging. Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University, Ithaca. 52 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Hill M. O., 1973. Reciprocal averaging: An eigenvector method of ordination. J. Ecol. 61: 237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hill M. O. & Gauch H. G.Jr., 1980. Detrended correspondence analysis: An improved ordination technique. Vegetatio 42: 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hogeweg P., 1976. Iterative character weighting in numerical taxonomy. Comput. Biol. Med. 6: 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Holgate P., 1971. Notes on the Marczewski-Steinhaus coefficient of similarity. In: G. P. Patil, E. C. Pielou & W. E. Waters (eds.). Many species populations, ecosystems, and system analysis. Statist. Ecol. Ser. 3: 181–193. Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  12. Lance G. N. & Williams W. T., 1967. A general theory of classificatory sorting strategies. 1. Hierarchical systems. Comput. J. 9: 373–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Maarel E. van der, 1975. The Braun-Blanquet approach in perspective. Vegetatio 30: 213–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Maarel E. van der, 1980. On the interpretability of ordination diagrams. Vegetatio 42: 43–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maarel E. van der (ed.), 1980. Classification and ordination. Advances in vegetation science, Vol. 2. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague. 188 pp. (Vegetatio, Vol. 42).Google Scholar
  16. Mucina L., 1981. Die Ruderalvegetation des nördlichen Teils der Donau-Ticfebene. 1. Onopordion acanthii-Verband. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 16: 225–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mucina, L., 1982. Všcobecná charakteristika ruderálnej vegetácie severozápadnej časti Podunajskej ni ziny. (General characteristic of the ruderal vegetation in the northwestern part of Podunajská ni zina Lowlands (Slovakia)). Preslia 54 (in press).Google Scholar
  18. Orlóci L., 1967. An agglomerative method for classification of plant communities. J. Ecol. 55: 193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Orlóci L., 1978. Multivariate analysis in vegetation research. 2nd ed. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague. 451 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Pielou E. C., 1977. Mathematical ecology, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, Now York, Brishane, Toronto. 396 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Popma, J., Tongeren, O. van, Mucina, L. & Maarel, E. van der, 1982. On the determination of optirnal levels in phytosociological classification. Vegetatio (submitted).Google Scholar
  22. Prichard N. M. & Anderson A. J. B., 1971. Observations on the use of cluster analysis in botany with an ecological example. J. Ecol. 59: 727–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rohlf F. J., 1974. Methods of comparing classifications. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5: 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roskam, E., 1971. Programme ORDINA: Multidimensional ordination of observation vectors. Programme Bull. 16, Psychology Lab., University of Nijmegen. 8 pp.Google Scholar
  25. Sneath P. H. A. & Sokal R. R., 1973. Numerical Taxonomy. Freeman, San Francisco. 573 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Stanek W., 1973. A comparison of Braun-Blanquet's method with sum-of-squares agglemeration for vegetation classification. Vegetatio 27: 323–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ward J. H., 1963. Hierarchical grouping to optimise an objective function. J. Am. Stat. Ass., 58: 236–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Westhoff V. & Maarel E. van der, 1978. The Braun-Blanquet approach. In: R. H. Whittaker (ed.), Classification of plant communities, p. 287–399. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Westhoff V., 1967. Problems and use of structure in the classification of vegetation. Acta Bot. Neerl. 15: 495–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Whittaker R. H., 1972. Convergence of ordination and classification. In: E. van der Maarel and R. Tüxen (eds.), Basic problems and methods in phytosociology. Ber. Int. Symp. Rinteln 1970, p. 39–57, Dr. W. Junk, The Hague.Google Scholar
  31. Wishart, D., 1978. CLUSTAN 1C. User manual. 3rd. ed. Inter-University Research Council Series. Report 47. 175 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr W. Junk Publishers 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Mucino
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of GeobotanyUniversity of NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations