Plant and Soil

, Volume 293, Issue 1–2, pp 121–132 | Cite as

Large-scale causes of variation in the serpentine vegetation of California

  • James B. Grace
  • Hugh D. SaffordEmail author
  • Susan Harrison
Original Paper


Serpentine vegetation in California ranges from forest to shrubland and grassland, harbors many rare and endemic species, and is only moderately altered by invasive exotic species at the present time. To better understand the factors regulating the distribution of common/representative species, endemic/rare species, and the threat of exotics in this important flora, we analyzed broad-scale community patterns and environmental conditions in a geographically stratified set of samples from across the state. We considered three major classes of environmental influences: climate (especially precipitation), soils (especially the Mg2+/Ca2+ ratio), and the indirect influences of climate on soils. We used ordination to identify the major axes of variation in common species abundances, structural equation models to analyze the relationship of community axes and endemic and exotic species richness to the environment, and group analysis techniques to identify consistent groupings of species and characterize their properties. We found that community variation could be explained by a two-axis ordination. One axis ranged from conifer forest to grassland and was strongly related to precipitation. The second axis ranged from chaparral to grassland and had little relationship to current environmental conditions, suggesting a possible role for successional history. Precipitation and elevation were respectively the largest influences on endemic and exotic richness, followed by Mg2+/Ca2+. The results also support the idea that long-term precipitation patterns have altered the Mg2+/Ca2+ ratio via selective leaching, resulting in indirect influences on endemics (positive) and exotics (negative) but not affecting the abundances of common species. We discuss implications of these findings for the conservation of the California serpentine flora.


California Cluster analysis Ordination Serpentine Structural equation modeling Vegetation 



We thank V. P. Claassen, R. O’Dell, D. McGahan, R. J. Southard, and R. Zierenberg for helpful discussions on the relationship between rainfall and soil chemistry. We also acknowledge the reviews of two anonymous colleagues.


  1. Alexander EA (2004) Varieties of ultramafic soil formation, plant cover and productivity. In: Boyd RS, Baker AJM, Proctor J (eds) Ultramafic soils: their soils, vegetation and fauna. science reviews. St. Albans, UK, pp 9–18Google Scholar
  2. Alexander EA, Coleman RG, Keeler-Wolf T, Harrison S (2006) Serpentine geoecology of Western North America. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, 512 ppGoogle Scholar
  3. Arianoutsou M, Rundel PW, Berry WL (1993) Serpentine endemics as biological indicators of soil elemental concentrations. In: Markert B (ed) Plants as biomonitors: indicators for heavy metals in terrestrial environments. VCH, Weinheim, Germany, pp 179–190Google Scholar
  4. Baker AJM, Proctor J, Reeves RD (1992) The vegetation of ultramafic (serpentine) soils. Intercept Ltd., Andover, England, 509 ppGoogle Scholar
  5. Barrows HL, Kilmer VJ (1963) Plant nutrient losses from soil by water erosion. Adv Agron 15:303–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brooks RR (1987) Serpentine and its vegetation: a multidisciplinary approach. Dioscorides Press, Portland, Oregon, USA, 454 ppGoogle Scholar
  7. Daly C, Neilson RP, Phillips DL (1994) A statistical-topographic model for mapping climatological precipitation over mountainous terrain. J Appl Meteor 3:140–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Del Moral R (1982) Control of vegetation on contrasting substrates: herb patterns on serpentine and sandstone. Am J Bot 69:227–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grace JB (2006) Structural equation modeling and natural systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 378 ppGoogle Scholar
  10. Dufrêne M, Legendre P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol Monogr 67:345–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hansen M, Defries R, Townshend R, Sohlberg R, Dimiceli C, Carroll M (2004) MODIS normalized difference vegetation index. The Global Land Cover Facility, College Park, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  12. Harrison S, Davies KF, Safford HD, Viers JH (2006a) Beta diversity and the scale-dependence of the productivity-diversity relationship: a test in the Californian serpentine flora. J Ecol 94:110–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harrison S, Safford HD, Grace JB, Viers JH, Davies KF (2006b) Regional and local species richness in an insular environment: serpentine plants in California. Ecol Monogr 76:41–56Google Scholar
  14. Harrison S, Davies KF, Grace JB, Safford HD, Viers JH (2006c) Exotic invasion in a diversity hotspot: disentangling the direct and indirect relationships of exotic cover to native richness in the Californian serpentine flora. Ecology 87:695–703Google Scholar
  15. Hickman JC (1993) The Jepson manual: higher plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, USA, 1400 ppGoogle Scholar
  16. Huenneke LF, Hamburg S, Koide R, Mooney HA, Vitousek P (1990) Effects of soil resources on plant invasion and community structure in Californian serpentine grassland. Ecology 71:478–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keeley JE (2006) Fire management impacts on invasive plant species in the western United States. Conserv Biol 20:375–384PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Koenigs RL, Williams WA, Jones MB (1982) Factors affecting vegetation on a serpentine soil. I. Principal components analysis of vegetation data. Hilgardia 50:1–14Google Scholar
  19. Kruckeberg AR (1984) California serpentines: flora, vegetation, geology, soils and management problems. University of California Press, Berkeley, USA, 180 ppGoogle Scholar
  20. Kruckeberg AR (2002) Geology and plant life: the effects of land forms and rock types on plants. University of Washington Press, Seattle, USA, 362 ppGoogle Scholar
  21. Kruckeberg AR (2006) Introduction to California soils and plants serpentine, vernal pools, and other geobotanical wonders. University of California Press, Berkeley, USA, 286 ppGoogle Scholar
  22. McCune B, Grace JB (2002) Analysis of ecological communities. MJM Press, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, USA, 300 ppGoogle Scholar
  23. McCune B, Mefford MJ (1999) PC-ORD: multivariate analysis of ecological data. Version 5.0. MjM Software, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, USAGoogle Scholar
  24. Muthén LK, Muthén BO (2006) Mplus users’ guide (Version 4.1). Muthén and Muthén, Los Angeles, USAGoogle Scholar
  25. Roberts BA, Proctor J (1992) The ecology of areas with serpentinized rocks: a world view. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 427 ppGoogle Scholar
  26. Proctor J, Woodell SRJ (1975) The ecology of serpentine soils. Adv Ecol Res 9:255–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Safford HD, Harrison S (2001) Grazing and substrate interact to affect native versus exotic diversity in roadside grasslands. Ecol Appl 11:1112–1122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Safford HD, Harrison S (2004) Fire effects on plant diversity in serpentine versus sandstone chaparral. Ecology 85:539–548Google Scholar
  29. Safford HD, Viers JH, Harrison S (2005) Serpentine endemism in the California flora: a database of serpentine affinity. Madroño 52:222–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sanchez-Mata DS, Rodriguez-Rojo M, Barbour MG (2004) California ultramafic vegetation: diversity and phytosociological survey. In: Boyd RS, Baker AJM, Proctor J (eds) Ultramafic soils: their soils, vegetation and fauna. Science reviews, St. Albans, UK, pp 177–181Google Scholar
  31. Seabloom EW, Dobson AP, Stoms DM (2005) Extinction rates under nonrandom habitat loss. Proc Nat Acad Sci (USA) 99:11229–11234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Seabloom EW, Williams JW, Slayback D, Stoms DM, Viers JH, Dobson AP (2006) Human impacts, plant invasion, and imperiled species in California. Ecol Appl 16:1338–1350PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. SPSS (1999) SPSS base 9.0. Applications guide. SPSS, Chicago, Illinois, USAGoogle Scholar
  34. Stein BA, Kutner LS, Adams JS (2000) Precious heritage: the status of biodiversity in the United States. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 399 ppGoogle Scholar
  35. Viers JH, Thorne JH, Quinn JF (2006) CalJep: a spatial distribution database of Calflora and Jepson plant species. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 4, Issue 1, Article 1 ( Scholar
  36. Wells PV (1962) Vegetation in relation to geological substratum and fire in the San Luis Obispo quadrangle, California. Ecol Monogr 32:79–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Whittaker RH (1954) The vegetational response to serpentine soils. Ecology 35:275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Whittaker RH (1960) Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and California. Ecol Monogr 30:279–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Williams JW, Seabloom EW, Slayback D, Stoms DM, Viers JH (2005) Anthropogenic impacts upon plant species richness and NPP in California. Ecol Lett 8:127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wilson MV (1988) Within-community vegetation structure in the conifer woodlands of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon. Vegetation 78:61–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • James B. Grace
    • 1
  • Hugh D. Safford
    • 2
    Email author
  • Susan Harrison
    • 3
  1. 1.US Geological Survey, National Wetlands Research Center LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest RegionVallejoUSA
  3. 3.Department of Environmental Science and Policy UC DavisDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations