Effects of Urbanization on Tree Species Functional Diversity in Eastern North America
- 1.3k Downloads
Urban forests provide ecosystem services for millions of people. Numerous introductions have elevated tree species richness in cities, which may enhance functional diversity. However, few studies have examined changes in tree community composition or functional diversity with urbanization, even though functional diversity, and not species number per se, is directly linked with ecosystem function and associated services. We combined tree abundance data from both urban and extra-urban forest inventory plots for seven metropolitan areas in eastern North America to analyze changes in species composition, Shannon’s diversity, and functional diversity with urbanization. As expected, urban tree diversity was reduced at local scales, and the effect varied with land use. Rarefaction analysis indicated that at large scales, urban tree species pools were equal with respect to species or functional diversity compared to extra-urban forests, but in urban areas at small scales this diversity is not realized because of low tree density. Ordination revealed that with urbanization, introduced species increased in importance, and regional variation in species composition became more homogenous. Increasing tree density and/or tree cover through changes in management practices and urban design could facilitate local scale urban tree diversity using existing species pools, which are functionally diverse. Monitoring of forests at large spatial scales that include urban areas, and the use of methods that account for abundance and functional trait variation can provide insights into the effects of urbanization on tree diversity at multiple scales.
Keywordsfunctional diversity land-use change functional traits tree species diversity urban forest urbanization gradient rarefaction
We thank Casey Trees, the City of Chicago, the Davey Resource Group and those involved with the urban data collection. We also thank Bill Shipley and Jens Kattge for assistance with trait data, Steve Walker for helpful discussions and Dylan Craven for input on rare_Rao. Funding was provided by a NSERC-Hydro-Québec Industrial Research Chair held by CM.
- Cornelissen JHC, Cerabolini B, Castro-Díez P, Villar-Salvador P, Montserrat-Martí G, Puyravaud JP, Maestro M, Werger MJA, Aerts R. 2003. Functional traits of woody plants: correspondence of species rankings between field adults and laboratory-grown seedlings? J Vegetation Sci 14:311–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cornelissen JHC, Quested HM, Gwynn-Jones D, Van Logtestijn RSP, De Beus MAH, Kondratchuk A, Callaghan TV, Aerts R. 2004. Leaf digestibility and litter decomposability are related in a wide range of subarctic plant species and types. Braarvig J, Hartmann J-U, Matsuda K, Sander L, editors. Funct Ecol 18:779–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Díaz S, Hodgson JG, Thompson K. 2004. The plant traits that drive ecosystems: evidence from three continents. J Vegetation Sci 15:295–304.Google Scholar
- Flynn DF, Gogol-Prokurat M, Nogeire T, Molinari N, Richers BT, Lin BB, Simpson N, Mayfield M, DeClerck F. 2009. Loss of functional diversity under land use intensification across multiple taxa. Ecology 12:22–33.Google Scholar
- Grabosky J, Bassuk N. 1996. Testing of structural urban tree soil materials for use under pavement to increase street tree rooting volumes. J Arboricult 22:255–63.Google Scholar
- Laliberté E, Shipley B. 2011. FD: measuring functional diversity from multiple traits, and other tools for functional ecology. R package version 1.0-11.Google Scholar
- Mayfield MM, Bonser SP, Morgan JW, Aubin I, McNamara S, Vesk PA. 2010. What does species richness tell us about functional trait diversity? Predictions and evidence for responses of species and functional trait diversity to land-use change. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:423–31.Google Scholar
- McDonnell MJ, Pickett STA. 1990. Ecosystem structure and function along urban-rural gradients: an unexploited opportunity for ecology. Ecology 71:1232–7.Google Scholar
- McDonnell MJ, Pickett STA, Pouyat RV (1993) The application of the ecological gradient paradigm to the study of urban effects. In: McDonnell MJand STAP, editor. Humans as components of ecosystems: subtle human effects and the ecology of populated areas. New York: Springer, pp. 175–189.Google Scholar
- Moles A, Leishman MR. 2008. The seedling as part of a plant’s life history strategy. In: Leck MA, Parker VT, Simpson RL, Eds. Seedling ecology and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p 217–37.Google Scholar
- Nowak DJ (2010) Urban biodiversity and climate change. In: Muller N., P. W, J.G. K, editors. Urban biodiversity and design. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing inc. pp. 101–117.Google Scholar
- Nowak DJ, Crane DE, Stevens JC, Hoehn RE, Walton JT, Bond J. 2008. A ground-based method of assessing urban forest structure and ecosystem services. Arboric Urban For 34:347–58.Google Scholar
- Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, O’Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H. 2007. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 1. p. 17–9. Google Scholar
- Pautasso M. 2007. Scale dependence of the correlation between human population presence and vertebrate and plant species richness. Ecol Lett 10:16–24.Google Scholar
- Pyšek P, Chocholousková Z, †Pyšek A, Jarošík V, Chytrý M, Tichý L. 2004. Trends in species diversity and composition of urban vegetation over three decades. J Veg Sci 15:781–8.Google Scholar
- R Development Core Team. 2012. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Team RDC, editor. R Foundation for Statistical Computing 1(2.11.1):409. http://www.r-project.org.
- Royal Botanical Gardens KEW. 2008. Seed Information Database (SID), Version 7.1. http://data.kew.org/sid/.
- Willis CG, Halina M, Lehman C, Reich PB, Keen A, McCarthy S, Cavender-Bares J. 2010. Phylogenetic community structure in Minnesota oak savanna is influenced by spatial extent and environmental variation. Ecography 33:565–77.Google Scholar