Folia Geobotanica

, Volume 46, Issue 2–3, pp 165–179 | Cite as

Remnant Populations and Plant Functional Traits in Abandoned Semi-Natural Grasslands

  • Veronika A. Johansson
  • Sara A. O. Cousins
  • Ove Eriksson
Article

Abstract

Although semi-natural grasslands in Europe are declining there is often a time delay in the local extinction of grassland species due to development of remnant populations, i.e., populations with an extended persistence despite a negative growth rate. The objectives of this study were to examine the occurrence of remnant populations after abandonment of semi-natural grasslands and to examine functional traits of plants associated with the development of remnant populations. We surveyed six managed semi-natural grasslands and 20 former semi-natural grasslands where management ceased 60–100 years ago, and assessed species response to abandonment, assuming a space-for-time substitution. The response of species was related to nine traits representing life cycle, clonality, leaf traits, seed dispersal and seed mass. Of the 67 species for which data allowed analysis, 44 species declined after grassland abandonment but still occurred at the sites, probably as remnant populations. Five traits were associated with the response to abandonment. The declining but still occurring species were characterized by high plant height, a perennial life form, possession of a perennial bud bank, high clonal ability, and lack of dispersal attributes promoting long-distance dispersal. Traits allowing plants to maintain populations by utilizing only a part of their life cycle, such as clonal propagation, are most important for the capacity to develop remnant populations and delay local extinction. A considerable fraction of the species inhabiting semi-natural grasslands maintain what is most likely remnant populations after more than 60 years of spontaneous succession from managed semi-natural grasslands to forest.

Keywords

Clonal growth Grassland abandonment Land use change Landscape history Remnant population dynamics Species-rich grasslands 

References

  1. Anonymous (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/index_en.htm
  2. Berglund H, Jonsson BG (2005) Verifying an extinction debt among lichens and fungi in Northern Swedish boreal forests. Conservation Biol 19:338–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernes C (ed) (1994) Biological diversity in Sweden. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, SolnaGoogle Scholar
  4. Brys R, Jacqemyn H, Endels P, Hermy M, De Blust G (2003) The relationship between reproductive success and demographic structure in remnant populations of Primula veris. Acta Oecol 24:247–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Colling G, Matthies D, Reckinger C (2002) Population structure and establishment of the threatened long-lived perennial Scorzonera humilis in relation to environment. J Appl Ecol 39:310–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cousins SAO (2001) Analysis of land-cover transitions based on 17th and 18th century cadastral maps and aerial photographs. Landscape Ecol 16:41–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cousins SAO, Eriksson O (2002) The influence of management history and habitat on plant species richness in a rural hemiboreal landscape, Sweden. Landscape Ecol 17:517–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cousins SAO, Eriksson O (2008) After the hotspots are gone: land use history and grassland plant species diversity in a strongly transformed agricultural landscape. Appl Veg Sci 11:365–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ekstam U, Forshed N (1992) Om hävden upphör: kärlväxter som indikatorarter i ängs- och hagmarker (If grassland management ceases: Vascular plants as indicator species in meadows and pastures). Naturvårdsverket, Solna (in Swedish with English summary)Google Scholar
  10. Eriksson O (1996) Regional dynamics of plants: a review of evidence for remnant source-sink and metapopulations. Oikos 77:248–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eriksson O (2000) Functional roles of remnant plant populations in communities and ecosystems. Global Ecol Biogeogr 9:443–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eriksson O, Ehrlén J (2001) Landscape fragmentation and the viability of plant populations. In Silvertown J, Antonovics J (eds) Integrating ecology and evolution in a spatial context. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 157–175Google Scholar
  13. 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
  14. Fuller RM (1987) The changing conservation interest of lowland grasslands in England and Wales: a review of grassland surveys 1930–1984. Biol Conservation 40:281–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garnier E, Cortez J, Billés G, Navas M-L, Roumet C, Debussche M, Laurent G, Blanchard A, Aubry D, Bellman A, Neill C, Toussaint J-P (2004) Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession. Ecology 85:2630–2637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grime JP (1979) Plant strategies and vegetation processes. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  17. Hanski I (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  18. Hanski I (2000) Extinction debt and species credit in boreal forest: modelling the consequences of different approaches to biodiversity conservation. Ann Zool Fennici 37:271–280Google Scholar
  19. Helm A, Hanski I, Pärtel M (2006) Slow response of plant species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation. Ecol Lett 9:72–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Herben T, Münzbergová Z, Mildén M, Ehrlén J, Cousins SAO, Eriksson O (2006) Long term spatial dynamics of Succisa pratensis in a changing rural landscape: linking dynamical modelling with historical maps. J Ecol 94:131–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hodgson JG, Grime JP, Wilson PJ, Thompson K, Band SR (2005) The impacts of agricultural change (1963–2003) on the grassland flora of Central England: processes and prospects. Basic Appl Ecol 6:107–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hodkinson DJ, Askew AP, Thompson K, Hodgson JG, Bakker JP, Bekker RM (1998) Ecological correlates of seed size in the British flora. Funct Ecol 12:762–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johnson EA, Miyanishi K (2008) Testing the assumptions of chronosequences in succession. Ecol Lett 11:419–431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Klimešová J, Klimeš L (2006) CLO-PLA 3 database. Available at: http://clopla.butbn.cas.cz/
  25. Klimešová J, Klimeš L (2008) Clonal growth diversity and bud banks of plants in the Czech flora: an evaluation using the CLO-PLA 3 database. Preslia 80:255–275Google Scholar
  26. Knevel IC, Bekker RM, Kunzmann D, Stadler M, Thompson K (eds) (2005) The LEDA Traitbase – collecting and measuring standards of life-history traits of the Northwest European flora. LEDA Traitbase project, University of Groningen, Groningen. Available at: www.leda-traitbase.org
  27. Leishman MR, Wright IJ, Moles AT, Westoby M (2000) The evolutionary ecology of seed size. In Fenner M (ed) The ecology of regeneration in plant communities. Ed. 2, CAB International, Wallingford, pp 31–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lindborg R (2007) Evaluating the distribution of plant life-history traits in relation to current and historical landscape configuration. J Ecol 95:555–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004) Historical landscape connectivity affects present plant species diversity. Ecology 85:1840–1845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Loehle C, Li B-L (1996) Habitat destruction and the extinction debt revisited. Ecol Applications 6:784–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mossberg B, Stenberg L (2003) Den nya Nordiska floran (The new Nordic flora). Wahlström & Widstrand, NorgeGoogle Scholar
  32. Öster M, Cousins SAO, Eriksson O (2007) Size and heterogeneity rather than landscape context determine plant species richness in semi-natural grasslands. J Veg Sci 18:859–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ovaskainen O, Hanski I (2002) Transient dynamics in metapopulation response to perturbation. Theor Populat Biol 61:285–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ozinga WA, Hennekens SM, Schaminée JHJ, Smits NAC, Bekker RM, Römermann C, Klimeš L, Bakker JP, van Groenendael JM (2007) Local above-ground persistence of vascular plants: life history trade-offs and environmental constraints. J Veg Sci 18:489–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pärtel M, Zobel M (1999) Small-scale plant species richness in calcareous grasslands determined by the species pool, community age and shoot density. Ecography 22:153–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pärtel M, Mändla R, Zobel M (1999) Landscape history of a calcareous (alvar) grassland in Hanila, western Estonia, during the last three hundred years. Landscape Ecol 14:187–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Persson K (2005) Ängs-och betesmarksinventeringen 2002–2004 (Survey of semi-natural pastures and meadows 2002–2004). Jordbruksverket, Jönköping (in Swedish with English summary)Google Scholar
  38. R Development Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing, version 2.6.2. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Available at: http://www.r-project.org/
  39. Rydberg H, Wanntorp H-E (2001) Sörmlands flora. Botaniska Sällskapet i Stockholm, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  40. Salisbury EJ (1942) The reproductive capacity of plants. G. Bell and Sons, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. Sammul M, Kull T, Lanno K, Otsus M, Mägi M, Kana S (2008) Habitat preferences and distribution characteristics are indicative of species long-term persistence in the Estonian flora. Biodivers & Conservation 17:3531–3550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tilman D (1994) Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology 75:2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tilman D, May RM, Lehman CL, Nowak MA (1994) Habitat destruction and the extinction debt. Nature 371:65–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. van Groenendael JM, de Kroon H, Kalisz S, Tuljapurkar S (1994) Loop analysis, evaluating life history pathways in population projection matrices. Ecology 75:2410–2415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vellend M, Verheyen K, Jacquemyn H, Kolb A, Van Calster H, Peterken G, Hermy M (2006) Extinction debt of forest plants persist for more than a century following habitat fragmentation. Ecology 87:542–548PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Weiher E, van der Werf A, Thompson K, Roderick M, Garnier E, Eriksson O (1999) Challenging Theophrastus: a common core list of plant traits for functional ecology. J Veg Sci 10:609–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Westoby M, Falster DS, Moles A, Vesk PA, Wright IJ (2002) Plant ecological strategies: Some leading dimensions of variation between species. Annual Rev Ecol Syst 33:125–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson PJ, Thompson K, Hodgson JG (1999) Specific leaf area and leaf dry matter content as alternative predictors of plant strategies. New Phytol 143:155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M, Ackerly DD, Baruch Z, Bongers F, Cavender-Bares J, Chaplin T, Cornelissen JHC et al. (2004) The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature 428:821–827PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Veronika A. Johansson
    • 1
  • Sara A. O. Cousins
    • 2
  • Ove Eriksson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BotanyStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary GeologyStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations