Advertisement

Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 1067–1085 | Cite as

Relative importance of habitat area, connectivity, management and local factors for vascular plants: spring ephemerals in boreal semi-natural grasslands

  • Katja M. Raatikainen
  • Risto K. Heikkinen
  • Miska Luoto
Original Paper

Abstract

Using species and environmental data from an extensive grassland area in south-western Finland, we investigated the effect of patch area and connectivity, management and local habitat variables on the occurrence of spring-flowering vascular plants and their richness in boreal agricultural landscapes. Generalized linear models (GLM) and variation partitioning were used to study the explanatory power of the three groups of variables and their combined contributions on the richness and occurrence of six spring-flowering plant species. Generalized additive models (GAMs) and associated cross-validation tests were used to evaluate the predictability of the species occurrence and richness patterns. Present-day grassland patch area and connectivity were important predictors for occurrence and richness of the studied plant species. In addition, local habitat factors, especially radiation, accounted for major fractions of occurrence patterns of the studied species. Hybrid models including variables from all three variable groups had higher explanatory power and predictive capability than partial models. However, performance of the separate single-species models varied considerably between the six study species. Exclusion of radiation or connectivity from the hybrid models decreased their predictive performance, suggesting that these factors are of particular importance for grassland plant species at their northern range margins. When developing conservation and management planning for grassland plant species in Northern Europe, attention should be paid to well-connected networks of grassland patches including large, steeply-sloped patches with a favorable microclimate.

Keywords

Connectivity Habitat area Model performance Predictive capability Radiation Semi-natural grassland Spring flowering plant 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The data on plant species were collected by Miska Luoto, Tuuli Toivonen, Jere Salminen, Tea von Bonsdorff. Juha Pöyry and an anonymous referee gave useful comments on this paper. This research was funded by the Maj and Thor Nessling Foundation (grant number 2005289), the 6th framework EU-project COCONUT SSPI-CT-2006-044343 and the Academy of Finland (project grant 116544). Michael Bailey helped with the correction of the English text.

References

  1. Adriaens D, Honnay O, Hermy M (2006) No evidence of a plant extinction debt in highly fragmented calcareous grasslands in Belgium. Biol Conserv 133:212–224. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.06.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson M, Gribble N (1998) Partitioning the variation among spatial, temporal and environmental components in a multivariate data set. Aust J Ecol 23:158–167. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9993.1998.tb00713.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Araújo MB, Guisan A (2006) Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling. J Biogeogr 33:1677–1688. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01584.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Austin MP (2002) Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling. Ecol Modell 157:101–118. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00205-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Austin MP, Belbin L, Meyers JA, Doherty MD, Luoto M (2006) Evaluation of statistical models used for predicting plant species distributions: role of artificial data and theory. Ecol Modell 199:197–216. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.05.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bakker JP (1989) Nature management by grazing and cutting. On the ecological significance of grazing and cutting regimes applied to restore former species-rich grassland communities in the Netherlands. Kluwer Academic Press, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  7. Bennie J, Hill MO, Baxter R, Huntley B (2006) Influence of slope and aspect on long-term vegetation change in British chalk grasslands. J Ecol 94:355–368. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2006.01104.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bergman K-O (2001) Population dynamics and the importance of habitat management for conservation of the butterfly Lopinga achine. J Appl Ecol 38:1303–1313. doi: 10.1046/j.0021-8901.2001.00672.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Borcard D, Legendre P, Drapeau P (1992) Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73:1045–1055. doi: 10.2307/1940179 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bruun HH (2000) Patterns of species richness in dry grassland patches in an agricultural landscape. Ecography 23:641–650. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0587.2000.230601.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bruun HH, Fritzboger B, Rindel PO, Hansen UL (2001) Plant species richness in grasslands: the relative importance of contemporary environment and land-use history since the Iron Age. Ecography 24:569–578. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0587.2001.d01-212.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Butaye J, Adriaens D, Honnay O (2005) Conservation and restoration of calcareous grasslands: a concise review of the effects of fragmentation and management on plant species. Biotechnol Agron Soc Environ 9:111–118Google Scholar
  13. Collinge SK, Prudic KL, Oliver JC (2003) Effects of local habitat characteristics and landscape context on grassland butterfly diversity. Conserv Biol 17:178–187. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01315.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cousins SAO, Eriksson O (2002) The influence of management history and habitat on plant species richness in a rural hemiboreal landscape, Sweden. Landsc Ecol 17:517–529. doi: 10.1023/A:1021400513256 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cousins SAO, Ohlson H, Eriksson O (2007) Effects of historical and present fragmentation on plant species diversity in semi-natural grasslands in Swedish rural landscapes. Landsc Ecol 22:723–730. doi: 10.1007/s10980-006-9067-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Duelli P, Obrist MK (2003) Regional biodiversity in an agricultural landscape: the contribution of seminatural habitat islands. Basic Appl Ecol 4:129–138. doi: 10.1078/1439-1791-00140 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eriksson Å, Eriksson H, Berglund H (1995) Species abundance patterns of plants in Swedish semi-natural pastures. Ecography 18:310–317. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.1995.tb00133.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eriksson O, Cousins SAO, Bruun HH (2002) Land-use history and fragmentation of traditionally managed grasslands in Scandinavia. J Veg Sci 13:743–748. doi: 10.1658/1100-9233(2002)013[0743:LHAFOT]2.0.CO;2 Google Scholar
  19. Fischer M, Stocklin J (1997) Local extinctions of plants in remnants of extensively used calcareous grasslands 1950–1985. Conserv Biol 11:727–737. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.96082.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Forup ML, Memmott J (2005) The restoration of plant-pollinator interactions in hay meadows. Restor Ecol 13:265–274. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2005.00034.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guisan A, Edwards TCJ, Hastie T (2002) Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distributions: setting the scene. Ecol Modell 157:89–100. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00204-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guisan A, Lehmann A, Ferrier S, Austin M, Overton JM, Aspinall R et al (2006) Making better biogeographical predictions of species’ distributions. J Appl Ecol 43:386–392. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01164.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hämet-Ahti L, Suominen J, Ulvinen T, Uotila P (1998) Retkeilykasvio (Field Flora of Finland). Finnish Museum of Natural History, Botanical Museum, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  24. Hanski I (1994) A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. J Anim Ecol 63:151–162. doi: 10.2307/5591 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hanski I, Pöyry J (2007) Insect populations in fragmented habitats. In: Stewart AJA, New TR, Lewis OT (eds) Insect conservation biology. CABI, Wallingford, pp 175–202Google Scholar
  26. Hansson M, Fogelfors H (2000) Management of a semi-natural grassland; results from a 15-year-old experiment in southern Sweden. J Veg Sci 11:31–38. doi: 10.2307/3236772 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harrison S (1999) Local and regional diversity in a patchy landscape: native, alien, and endemic herbs on serpentine. Ecology 80:70–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hastie T, Tibshirani RJ (1990) Generalized additive models. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Heikkinen RK, Luoto M, Virkkala R, Rainio K (2004) Effects of habitat cover, landscape structure and spatial variables on the abundance of birds in an agricultural-forest mosaic. J Appl Ecol 41:824–835. doi: 10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00938.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heikkinen RK, Luoto M, Kuussaari M, Pöyry J (2005) New insights into butterfly-environment relationships using partitioning methods. Proc R Soc Lond Biol Sci 272:2203–2210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Helm A, Hanski I, Pärtel M (2006) Slow response of plant species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation. Ecol Lett 9:72–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Hennenberg K, Bruelheide H (2003) Ecological investigations on the northern distribution range of Hippocrepis comosa L. in Germany. Plant Ecol 166:167–188. doi: 10.1023/A:1023280109225 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hultén E (1971) Atlas över växternas utbredning i Norden. Generalstabens Litografiska Anstalts Förlag, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  34. Johnson JB, Omland KS (2004) Model selection in ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 19:101–108. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2003.10.013 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kahmen S, Poschlod P, Schreiber K-F (2002) Conservation management of calcareous grasslands. Changes in plant species composition and response of functional traits during 25 years. Biol Conserv 104:319–328. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3207(01)00197-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Klimek S, Richter AgK, Hofmann M, Isselstein J (2007) Plant species richness and composition in managed grasslands: the relative importance of field management and environmental factors. Biol Conserv 134:559–570. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.09.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kontula T, Lehtomaa L, Pykälä J (2000) Land-use history, vegetation and flora in Rekijoki valley, Somero SW Finland. Finn Environ 306:1–96Google Scholar
  38. Krauss J, Klein A-M, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2004a) Effects of habitat area, isolation, and landscape diversity on plant species richness of calcareous grasslands. Biodivers Conserv 13:1427–1439. doi: 10.1023/B:BIOC.0000021323.18165.58 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2004b) Local species immigration, extinction, and turnover of butterflies in relation to habitat area and habitat isolation. Oecologia 137:591–602. doi: 10.1007/s00442-003-1353-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lapointe L (2001) How phenology influences physiology in deciduous forest spring ephemerals. Physiol Plant 113:151–157. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-3054.2001.1130201.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lehmann A, Overton JM, Leathwick JR (2003) GRASP: generalized regression analysis and spatial prediction. Ecol Modell 160:165–183. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00354-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lehmann A, Leathwick JR, Overton JM (2004) GRASP v.3.0 user’s manual. Swiss Centre for Faunal Cartography, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  43. León-Cortés JL, Cowley MJR, Thomas CD (2000) The distribution and decline of a widespread butterfly Lycaena phlaeas in a pastoral landscape. Ecol Entomol 25:285–294. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2311.2000.00271.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004a) Effects of restoration on plant species richness and composition in Scandinavian semi-natural grasslands. Restor Ecol 12:318–326. doi: 10.1111/j.1061-2971.2004.00334.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004b) Historical landscape connectivity affects present plant species diversity. Ecology 85:1840–1845. doi: 10.1890/04-0367 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Luoto M, Kuussaari M, Rita H, Salminen J, von Bonsdorff T (2001) Determinants of distribution and abundance in the clouded apollo butterfly: a landscape ecological approach. Ecography 24:601–617. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0587.2001.d01-215.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Luoto M, Kuussaari M, Toivonen T (2002) Modelling butterfly distribution based on remote sensing data. J Biogeogr 29:1027–1037. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2699.2002.00728.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Luoto M, Pykälä J, Kuussaari M (2003a) Decline of landscape-scale habitat and species diversity after the end of cattle grazing. J Nat Conserv 11:171–178. doi: 10.1078/1617-1381-00052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Luoto M, Rekolainen S, Aakkula J, Pykälä J (2003b) Loss of plant species richness and habitat connectivity in grasslands associated with agricultural change in Finland. Ambio 32:447–452. doi: 10.1639/0044-7447(2003)032[0447:LOPSRA]2.0.CO;2 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Marini L, Scotton M, Klimek S, Isselstein J, Pecile A (2007) Effects of local factors on plant species richness and composition of Alpine meadows. Arg Ecosyst Environ 119:281–288. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.07.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Maurer K, Durka W, Stöcklin J (2003) Frequency of plant species remnants of calcareous grassland and their dispersal and persistence characteristics. Basic Appl Ecol 4:307–316. doi: 10.1078/1439-1791-00162 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized linear models. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  53. McCune B, Keon D (2002) Equations for potential annual direct incident radiation and heat load. J Veg Sci 13:603–606. doi: 10.1658/1100-9233(2002)013[0603:EFPADI]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Moilanen A, Nieminen M (2002) Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 83:1131–1145Google Scholar
  55. Öckinger E, Hammarstedt O, Nilsson SG, Smith HG (2006) The relationship between local extinctions of grassland butterflies and increased soil nitrogen levels. Biol Conserv 128:564–573. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.10.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pearce J, Ferrier S (2000) An evaluation of alternative algorithms for fitting species distribution models using logistic regression. Ecol Modell 128:127–147. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3800(99)00227-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pöyry J, Luoto M, Paukkunen J, Pykälä J, Raatikainen K, Kuussaari M (2006) Different responses of plants and herbivore insects to a gradient of vegetation height: an indicator of the vertebrate grazing intensity and successional age. Oikos 115:401–412. doi: 10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.15126.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pykälä J (2000) Mitigating human effects on European biodiversity through traditional animal husbandry. Conserv Biol 14:705–712. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99119.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pykälä J (2004) Cattle grazing increases plant species richness of most species trait groups in mesic semi-natural grasslands. Plant Ecol 175:217–226. doi: 10.1007/s11258-005-0015-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pykälä J (2005) Plant species responses to cattle grazing in mesic semi-natural grassland. Agric Ecosyst Environ 108:109–117. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2005.01.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pykälä J, Luoto M, Heikkinen RK, Kontula T (2005) Plant species richness and persistence of rare plants in abandoned semi-natural grasslands in northern Europe. Basic Appl Ecol 6:25–33. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2004.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Raatikainen KM, Heikkinen RK, Pykälä J (2007) Impacts of local and regional factors on vegetation of boreal semi-natural grasslands. Plant Ecol 189:155–173. doi: 10.1007/s11258-006-9172-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schultz CB (2001) Restoring resources for an endangered butterfly. J Appl Ecol 38:1007–1019. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2664.2001.00659.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schultz CB, Crone EE (2005) Patch size and connectivity thresholds for butterfly habitat restoration. Conserv Biol 19:887–896. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00462.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stenström M, Bergman P (1998) Bumblebees at an alpine site in northern Sweden: temporal development, population size, and plant utilization. Ecography 21:306–316. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.1998.tb00568.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Strijker D (2005) Marginal lands in Europe. Basic Appl Ecol 6:99–106. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2005.01.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293. doi: 10.1126/science.3287615 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vainio M, Kekäläinen H, Alanen A, Pykälä J (2001) Traditional rural biotopes in Finland. Final report of the nationwide inventory. The Finnish Environment, 527. Finnish Environment Institute, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  69. Vandvik V, Birks HJB (2002) Partitioning floristic variance in Norwegian upland grasslands into within-site and between-site components: are the patterns determined by environment or by land-use? Plant Ecol 162:233–245. doi: 10.1023/A:1020322205469 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vandvik V, Birks HJB (2004) Mountain summer farms in Røldal, western Norway—vegetation classification and patterns in species turnover and richness. Plant Ecol 170:203–222. doi: 10.1023/B:VEGE.0000021669.61982.d9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. WallisDeVries MF (2002) Options for the conservation of wet grasslands in relation to spatial scale and habitat quality. In: Durand J-L, Emile J-C, Huyghe C, Lemaire G (eds) Multi-function grasslands, quality forages, animal products and landscapes. Proceedings of the 19th general meeting of the European Grassland Federation, La Rochelle, France, 27–30 May 2002. Grassland Science in Europe. Organizing Committee of the 19th General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation, La Rochelle, pp 883–892Google Scholar
  72. Wettstein W, Schmid B (1999) Conservation of arthropod diversity in montane wetlands: effect of altitude, habitat quality and habitat fragmentation on butterflies and grasshoppers. J Appl Ecol 36:363–373. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2664.1999.00404.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wood SN, Augustin NH (2002) GAMs with integrated model selection using penalized regression splines and applications to environmental modelling. Ecol Modell 157:157–177. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00193-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katja M. Raatikainen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Risto K. Heikkinen
    • 1
  • Miska Luoto
    • 3
  1. 1.Research Programme for BiodiversityFinnish Environment InstituteHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Metsähallitus Natural Heritage ServicesVantaaFinland
  3. 3.Department of GeographyUniversity of OuluOuluFinland

Personalised recommendations