Advertisement

Plant Ecology

, Volume 189, Issue 2, pp 155–173 | Cite as

Impacts of local and regional factors on vegetation of boreal semi-natural grasslands

  • Katja M. Raatikainen
  • Risto K. Heikkinen
  • Juha Pykälä
Original paper

Abstract

Using data from 46 sites in southern Finland and ordination methods, we examined plant-environment relationships in boreal mesic semi-natural grasslands at two spatial scales (grain sizes), using plots of 0.25 ha and 1 × 1 m. We applied the variation partitioning approach to determine the pure fractions of environmental variable groups and their joint effects on plant species compositional variation in the studied grasslands. The variables related to land-use intensity and high nutrient level (especially phosphorus) had a major role in explaining the species composition at both scales, although soil heterogeneity and habitat characteristics also accounted for a notable amount of the species compositional variation at the 0.25 ha grain size. At the 1 × 1 m grain size, the majority of the species compositional variation was related to the “pure” spatial differences between the studied grasslands (i.e. the site identity (dummy 0/1) variable), whereas the impacts of within-site variation of local environmental factors were considerably smaller. High nutrient levels and variables related to low land-use intensity, e.g. litter accumulation, were also significantly correlated with floristic variation at the 1 × 1 m grain size. Rare and declining grassland species are associated with low-nutrient grassland sites and patches. The main recommendation for the management planning of boreal semi-natural grasslands is that the first restoration attempts should be targeted to areas where nutrient levels, particularly that of phosphorus, are relatively low. Soil properties and plant species composition can provide useful guidelines for defining the correct management procedures for different sites.

Keywords

CCA Grassland plants Land-use Ordination Soil nutrients Variation partitioning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Juha Pöyry, Miska Luoto, Vigdis Vandvik and two anonymous referees for methodological advice and comments. Stefan Fronzek helped in aggregating the climate data. Johanna Kolehmainen and Heidi Lyytikäinen helped in data collection. Ahti Mäkinen advised with soil samples. The research was supported by the Maj and Thor Nessling Foundation (grant number 2005289). Data collection was funded by the Finnish Ministry of Environment through the Finnish Biodiversity Research Programme FIBRE coordinated by the Academy of Finland. Michael Bailey improved the language of the manuscript.

References

  1. Aerts R, Chapin FS (2000) The mineral nutrition of wild plants revisited: a re-evaluation of processes and patterns. Adv Ecol Res 30:1–67Google Scholar
  2. Anderson M, Gribble N (1998) Partitioning the variation among spatial, temporal and environmental components in a multivariate data set. Aust J Ecol 23:158–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Austrheim G (2002) Plant diversity patterns in semi-natural grasslands along an elevational gradients in southern Norway. Plant Ecol 161:193–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Austrheim G, Gunilla E, Olsson A, Grontvedt E (1999) Land-use impact on plant communities in semi-natural sub-alpine grasslands of Budalen, central Norway. Biol Conserv 87:369–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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
  6. Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD (2003) Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol Evol 18:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bignal EM, McCracken DI (1996) Low-intensity farming systems in the conservation of the countryside. J Appl Ecol 33:413–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borcard D, Legendre P, Drapeau P (1992) Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73:1045–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Braakhekke WG, Hooftman DAP (1999) The resource balance hypothesis of plant species diversity in grassland. J Veg Sci 10:187–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Critchley CNR, Allen DS, Fowbert JA, Mole AC, Gundrey AL (2004) Habitat establishment on arable land: assessment of an agri-environment scheme in England, UK. Biol Conserv 119:429–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cushman S, McGarigal K (2004) Hierarchical analysis of␣forest bird species-environment relationships in␣the␣Oregon coast range. Ecol Appl 14:1090– 1105Google Scholar
  12. Duckworth JC, Bunce RGH, Malloch AJC (2000) Modelling the potential effects of climate change on calcareous grasslands in Atlantic Europe. J Biogeogr 27:347–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ekstam U, Aronsson M, Forshed N (1988) Ängar. LTs förlag, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  14. Eriksson O, Cousins SAO, Bruun HH (2002) Land-use history and fragmentation of traditionally managed grasslands in Scandinavia. J Veg Sci 13:743–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eriksson Å, Eriksson H, Berglund H (1995) Species abundance patterns of plants in Swedish semi-natural pastures. Ecography 18:310–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Freemark KE, Kirk DA (2001) Birds on organic and conventional farms in Ontario: partitioning effects of habitat and practices on species composition and abundance. Biol Conserv 101:337–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gates S, Donald PF (2000) Local extinction of British farmland birds and the prediction of further loss. J␣Appl Ecol 37:806–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gough MW, Marrs RH (1990) A comparison of soil fertility between semi-natural and agricultural plant communities: implications for the creation of species-rich grassland on abandoned agricultural land. Biol Conserv 51:83–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grime JP (1973) Competitive exclusion in herbaceous vegetation. Nature 242:344–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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 41:824–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Huhta AP, Rautio P, Tuomi J, Laine K (2001) Restorative mowing on an abandoned semi-natural meadow: Short-term and predicted long-term effects. J Veg Sci 12:677–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Huston MA (1994) Biological diversity. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle 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. Ihse M (1995) Swedish agricultural landscapes—patterns and changes during the last 50 years, studies by aerial photos. Landsc Ecol 31:21–37Google Scholar
  25. Information Centre of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (2004) Yearbook of Farm Statistics 2004. Tike, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  26. Janssens F, Peeters A, Tallowin JRB, Bakker JP, Bekker RM, Fillat F, Oomes MJM (1998) Relation between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity. Plant Soil 202:69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jantunen J, Saarinen K, Marttila O (2002) A comparison of vegetation in grazed, formerly grazed and ungrazed valuable semi-natural grasslands in SE Finland. Memoranda Soc Fauna Flora Fennica 78:55–61Google Scholar
  28. Johnston AE, Poulton PR (1977) Yields on the exhaustion land and changes in the NPK content of the soils due to cropping and manuring, 1852–1975. Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1976 Part 2:53–85Google Scholar
  29. Kooijman AM, Besse M (2002) The higher availability of N and P in lime-poor than in lime-rich coastal dunes in the Netherlands. J Ecol 90:394–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kull K, Zobel M (1991) High species richness in an Estonian wooded meadow. J Veg Sci 2:711–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Köhler B, Ryser P, Güsewell S, Gigon A (2001) Nutrient availability and limitation in traditionally mown and in abandoned limestone grasslands: a bioassay experiment. Plant Soil 230:323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lahti T, Kurtto A, Väisänen RA (1988) Floristic composition and regional species richness of vascular plants in Finland. Ann Bot Fenn 25:281–296Google Scholar
  33. Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004a) Effects of restoration on plant species richness and composition in Scandinavian semi-natural grasslands. Restor Ecol 12:318–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004b) Historical landscape connectivity affects present plant species diversity. Ecology 85:1840–1845Google Scholar
  35. Liu Q (1997) Variation partitioning by partial Redundancy Analysis (RDA). Environmetrics 8:75–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Marrs RH (1993) Soil fertility and nature conservation in Europe: theoretical considerations and practical management solutions. Adv Ecol Res 24:241–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McCrea AR, Trueman IC, Fullen MA, Atkinson MD, Besenyei L (2001) Relationships between soil characteristics and species richness in two botanically heterogeneous created meadows in the urban English West Midlands. Biol Conserv 97:171–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McCune B, Mefford MJ (1999) PC-ORD. Multivariate analysis of ecological data, Version 4. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OregonGoogle Scholar
  39. Moreira F, Beja P, Morgado R, Reino L, Gordinho L, Delgado A, Borralho R (2005) Effects of field management and landscape context on grassland wintering birds in Southern Portugal. Agric Ecosyst Environ 109:59–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Økland R (1990) Methods: Collecting data. Sommerfeltia Suppl 1:72–90Google Scholar
  41. Olde Venterink H, Wassen MJ, Verkroost AWM, de Ruiter PC (2003) Species richness-productivity patterns differ between N-, P- and K-limited wetlands. Ecology 84:2191–2199Google Scholar
  42. Olff H, Ritchie ME (1998) Effects of herbivores on grassland plant diversity. Trends Ecol Evol 13:261–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Olsson EGA, Austrheim G, Grenne SN (2000) Landscape change patterns in mountains, land use and environmental diversity, Mid-Norway 1960–1993. Landsc Ecol 15:155–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pakeman RJ (2004) Consistency of plant species and trait responses to grazing along a productivity gradient: a multi-site analysis. J Ecol 92:893–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Palmer MW (1993) Putting things in even better order: the advantage of canonical correspondence analysis. Ecology 74:2215–2230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Parker M, Mac Nally R (2002) Habitat loss and the habitat fragmentation threshold: an experimental evaluation of impacts on richness and total abundances using grassland invertebrates. Biol Conserv 105:217–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pykälä J (2000) Mitigating human effects on European biodiversity through traditional animal husbandry. Conserv Biol 14:705–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pykälä J (2001) Maintaining biodiversity through traditional animal husbandry. Finnish Environment Institute, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  49. Pykälä J (2003) Effects of restoration with cattle grazing on plant species composition and richness of semi-natural grasslands. Biodivers Conserv 12:2211–2226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pykälä J (2005) Plant species responses to cattle grazing in mesic semi-natural grassland. Agric Ecosyst Environ 108:109–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pywell RF, Webb NR, Putwain PD (1994) Soil fertility and its implications for the restoration of heatland on farmland in Southern Britain. Biol Conserv 70:169–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pöyry J, Lindgren S, Salminen J, Kuussaari M (2004) Restoration of butterfly and moth communities in semi-natural grasslands by cattle grazing. Ecol Appl 14:1656–1670Google Scholar
  53. Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  54. Rassi P, Alanen A, Kanerva T, Mannerkoski I (2001) The 2000 red list of Finnish species. Ministry of the Environment and Finnish Environment Institute, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  55. Roem WJ, Berendse F (2000) Soil acidity and nutrient supply ratio as possible factors determining changes in plant species diversity in grassland and heathland communities. Biol Conserv 92:151–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rosén E, Borgegård S-O (1999) The open cultural landscape. Acta Phytogeogr Suec 84:113–134Google Scholar
  57. Salonen J (1993) Weed infestation and factors affecting weed incidence in spring cereals in Finland—a multivariate approach. Agr Sci Finland 2:525–535Google Scholar
  58. ter Braak CJF (1986) Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67:1167–1179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. ter Braak CJF, Smilauer P (2002) CANOCO Reference manual and Canodraw for Windows User’s guide: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Tilman D (1988) Dynamics and structure of plant communities. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  61. Vainio M, Kekäläinen H, Alanen A, Pykälä J (2001) Traditional rural biotopes in Finland. Final report of the nationwide inventory. Finnish Environment Institute, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  62. Vandvik V, Birks HJB (2002a) 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 162:233–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vandvik V, Birks HJB (2002b) Pattern and process in Norwegian upland grasslands: a functional analysis. J␣Veg Sci 13:123–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vandvik V, Birks HJB (2004) Mountain summer farms in Røldal, western Norway - vegetation classification and patterns in species turnover and richness. Plant Ecol 170:203–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vaughan IP, Ormerod SJ (2003) Improving the quality of distribution models for conservation by addressing shortcomings in the field collection of training data. Conserv Biol 17:1601–1611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Vuorinen J, Mäkitie O (1955) The method of soil testing in use in Finland. Agrogeol Publ 63:1–44Google Scholar
  67. Wiens JA (1989) Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct Ecol 3:385–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wijesinghe DK, John EA, Hutchings MJ (2005) Does patterns of soil resource heterogeneity determine plant community structure? An experimental investigation. J Ecol 93:99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Willems JH, Peet RK, Bik L (1993) Changes in chalk-grassland structure and species richness resulting from selective nutrient additions. J Veg Sci 4:203–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katja M. Raatikainen
    • 1
  • Risto K. Heikkinen
    • 1
  • Juha Pykälä
    • 1
  1. 1.Finnish Environment InstituteResearch Programme for BiodiversityHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations