Advertisement

Wetlands

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 81–93 | Cite as

Quantitative Comparison of Plant Community Hydrology Using Large-Extent, Long-Term Data

  • Daniel Gann
  • Jennifer Richards
Original Research

Abstract

Large-extent vegetation datasets that co-occur with long-term hydrology data provide new ways to develop biologically meaningful hydrologic variables and to determine plant community responses to hydrology. We analyzed the suitability of different hydrological variables to predict vegetation in two water conservation areas (WCAs) in the Florida Everglades, USA, and developed metrics to define realized hydrologic optima and tolerances. Using vegetation data spatially co-located with long-term hydrological records, we evaluated seven variables describing water depth, hydroperiod length, and number of wet/dry events; each variable was tested for 2-, 4- and 10-year intervals for Julian annual averages and environmentally-defined hydrologic intervals. Maximum length and maximum water depth during the wet period calculated for environmentally-defined hydrologic intervals over a 4-year period were the best predictors of vegetation type. Proportional abundance of vegetation types along hydrological gradients indicated that communities had different realized optima and tolerances across WCAs. Although in both WCAs, the trees/shrubs class was on the drier/shallower end of hydrological gradients, while slough communities occupied the wetter/deeper end, the distribution of Cladium, Typha, wet prairie and Salix communities, which were intermediate for most hydrological variables, varied in proportional abundance along hydrologic gradients between WCAs, indicating that realized optima and tolerances are context-dependent.

Keywords

Conditional density estimates EDEN Everglades Hydrological gradients Hydroperiod Random forest classifier Realized optima and tolerances Water depth Wetland vegetation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank A. Gottlieb, who set us thinking about vegetation hydrological optima and tolerances in the context of Everglades restoration. The South Florida Water Management District (P.O. #4500033517) supported our initial work on plant community hydrology in WCA 2A. This is contribution number 698 from the Southeast Environmental Research Center at Florida International University.

References

  1. Adler D (2005) Vioplot: violin plot. R package version 0.2Google Scholar
  2. Barbier EB, Acreman M, Knowler D (1997) Economic valuation of wetlands: a guide for policy makers and planners. Ramsar Convention Bureau, GlandGoogle Scholar
  3. Biedinger R, Lushine JB (1993) Duration of the summer season in south Florida. http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mfl/?n=summer_season
  4. Bowman AW, Azzalini A (2014) R package “sm”: nonparametric smoothing methods (version 2.2-5.4). University of Glasgow, UK and Università di Padova, ITGoogle Scholar
  5. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32. doi: 10.1023/a:1010933404324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Busch J, Mendelssohn IA, Lorenzen B et al (2004) Growth responses of the Everglades wet prairie species Eleocharis cellulosa and Rhynchospora tracyi to water level and phosphate availability. Aquat Bot 78:37–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Childers DL, Doren RF, Jones R et al (2003) Decadal change in vegetation and soil phosphorus pattern across the Everglades landscape. J Environ Qual 32:344–362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Childers DL, Iwaniec D, Rondeau D et al (2006) Responses of sawgrass and spikerush to variation in hydrologic drivers and salinity in Southern Everglades marshes. Hydrobiologia 569:273–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Craft CB, Vymazal J, Richardson CJ (1995) Response of Everglades plant communnities to nitrogen and phosphorus additions. Wetl 15:258–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. David PG (1996) Changes in plant communities relative to hydrologic conditions in the Florida Everglades. Wetl 16:15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DeBusk WF, Newman S, Reddy KR (2001) Spatio-temporal patterns of soil phosphorus enrichment in Everglades water conservation area 2A. J Environ Qual 30:1438–1446PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deegan BM, White SD, Ganf GG (2007) The influence of water level fluctuations on the growth of four emergent macrophyte species. Aquat Bot 86:309–315. doi: 10.1016/j.aquabot.2006.11.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Desmond G, Survey USG (2007) High accuracy elevation data collection project. U.S. Geological Survey, RestonGoogle Scholar
  14. R Development Core Team, R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computingGoogle Scholar
  15. Edwards AL, Lee DW, Richards JH (2003) Responses to a fluctuating environment: effects of water depth on growth and biomass allocation in Eleocharis cellulosa Torr. (Cyperaceae). Can J Bot 81:964–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ESRI (2011) ArcGIS desktop: release 10. Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  17. Fennema RJ, Neidrauer CJ, Johnson RA et al (1994) A computer model to simulate natural Everglades hydrology. In: Davis SM, Ogden JC (eds) Everglades ecosyst. its restor. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, pp 249–289Google Scholar
  18. Gaiser EE, Childers DL, Jones RD et al (2005) Cascading ecological effects of low-level phosphorus enrichment in the Florida Everglades. J Environ Qual 34:717–723PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gann D, Richards JH, Biswas H (2012) Determine the effectiveness of vegetation classification using WorldView 2 satellite data for the Greater Everglades. 62 ppGoogle Scholar
  20. Givnish TJ (2002) Ecological constraints on the evolution of plasticity in plants. Evol Ecol 16:213–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Givnish TJ, Volin JC, Owen VD et al (2008) Vegetation differentiation in the patterned landscape of the central Everglades: importance of local and landscape drivers. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17:384–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grace JB (1989) Effects of water depth on Typha latifolia and Typha domingensis. Am J Bot 76:762–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gunderson LH (1994) Vegetation of the Everglades: determinants of community composition. In: Davis SM, Ogden JC (eds) Everglades, ecosyst. its restoration. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, pp 323–340Google Scholar
  24. Hintze JL, Nelson RD (1998) Violin plots: a box plot-density trace synergism. Am Stat 52:181–184Google Scholar
  25. Jones JW, Price SD (2007) Initial Everglades Depth Estimation Network (EDEN) digital elevation model research and development. 29 ppGoogle Scholar
  26. Jones DT, Sah JP, Ross MS et al (2006) Responses of twelve tree species common in Everglades tree islands to simulated hydrologic regimes. Wetl 26:830–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Keddy PA (2000) Wetland ecology. 614 ppGoogle Scholar
  28. Larsen L, Aumen N, Bernhardt C et al (2011) Recent and historic drivers of landscape change in the Everglades ridge, slough, and tree island mosaic. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 41:344–381. doi: 10.1080/10643389.2010.531219 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liaw A, Wiener M (2002) Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2:18–22Google Scholar
  30. Light SS, Dineen JW (1994) Water control in the Everglades: a historical perspective. In: Davis SM, Ogden JC (eds) Everglades - ecosyst. its restor. St. Lucie Press, Delray BeachGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu Z, Volin JC, Owen DV et al (2009) Validation and ecosystem applications of the EDEN water-surface model for the Florida Everglades. Ecohydrol 2:182–194. doi: 10.1002/eco.56 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. LoGalbo AM, Zimmerman MS, Hallac D et al (2013) Using hydrologic suitability for native Everglades slough vegetation to assess Everglades restoration scenarios. Ecol Indic 24:294–304. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.06.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Loveless CM (1959) A study of the vegetation in the Florida Everglades. Ecology 40:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Macek P, Rejmankova E, Houdkova K (2006) The effect of long-term submergence on functional properties of Eleocharis cellulosa Torr. Aquat Bot 84:251–258. doi: 10.1016/j.aquabot.2005.11.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McVoy CW, Said WP, Obeysekera J et al (2011) Landscapes and hydrology of the predrainage Everglades. University Press of Florida, GainesvilleGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2007) Wetl, 4th ed. 582 ppGoogle Scholar
  37. Newman S, Grace JB, Koebel JW (1996) Effects of nutrients and hydroperiod on Typha, Cladium, and Eleocharis: Implications for Everglades restoration. Ecol Appl 6:774–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Noe GB, Childers DL, Jones RD (2001) Phosphorus biogeochemistry and the impact of phosphorus enrichment: Why is the Everglades so unique? Ecosystems 4:603–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ogden JC, Davis SM, Jacobs KJ et al (2005) Total system conceptual ecological model. Wetl 25:955–979. doi: 10.1672/0277-5212(2005)025[0795:tuocem]2.0.co;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Palaseanu M, Pearlstine L (2008) Estimation of water surface elevations for the Everglades, Florida. Comput Geosci 34:815–826. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2007.08.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pearlstine L, Higer A, Palaseanu M, et al (2007) Spatially continuous interpolation of water stage and water depths using the Everglades Depth Estimation Network (EDEN). 32 ppGoogle Scholar
  42. Peters J, De BB, Verhoest NEC et al (2007) Random forests as a tool for ecohydrological distribution modelling. Ecol Modell 207:304–318. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.05.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ross MS, Reed DL, Sah JP et al (2003) Vegetation: environment relationships and water management in Shark Slough, Everglades National Park. Wetl Ecol Manag 11:291–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rutchey K, Schall TN, Doren RF, et al (2006) Vegetation classification for south florida natural areas. 142 ppGoogle Scholar
  45. Scholz F, Zhu A (2012) kSamples: K-Sample rank tests and their combinations. R package version 1.0Google Scholar
  46. Spalding EA, Hester MW (2007) Interactive effects of hydrology and salinity on oligohaline plant species productivity: Implications of relative sea-level rise. Estuar Coasts 30:214–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stone PA, Gleason PJ, Chmura GL (2002) Bayhead tree islands on deep peats of the northeastern Everglades. In: Sklar F, Van der Valk A (eds) Tree islands Everglades. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 71–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Strobl C, Boulesteix A-L, Zeileis A, Hothorn T (2007) Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution. BMC Bioinforma 8:25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Todd MJ, Muneepeerakul R, Pumo D et al (2010) Hydrological drivers of wetland vegetation community distribution within Everglades National Park, Florida. Adv Water Resour 33:1279–1289. doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2010.04.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. White PS (1994) Synthesis: vegetation pattern and process in the Everglades ecosystem. In: Davis SM, Ogden JC (eds) Everglades, ecosyst. its restoration. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, pp 445–458Google Scholar
  51. Wood JM, Tanner GW (1990) Graminoid community composition and structure within four everglades management areas. Wetl 10:127–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Xie ZX, Liu ZW, Jones JW et al (2011) Landscape unit based digital elevation model development for the freshwater wetlands within the Arthur C. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, Southeastern Florida. Appl Geogr 31:401–412. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.10.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zweig CL, Kitchens WM (2008) Effects of landscape gradients on wetland vegetation communities: information for large-scale restoration. Wetl 28:1086–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GISRS-CenterFlorida International UniversityMiamiUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biological SciencesFlorida International UniversityMiamiUSA
  3. 3.Southeast Environmental Research CenterFlorida International UniversityMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations