Soil and vegetation development during early succession on restored coal wastes: a six-year permanent plot study
- 609 Downloads
Little is known about how soil parameters change during early stages of revegetation dynamics on newly-restored coal mines, particularly in a Mediterranean climate. Our aim was to explore the short-term interactions of changes in soil physico-chemical properties and vegetation succession (composition and structure) in these newly-forming ecosystems, and discuss potential functional relationships.
Between 2004 and 2009, we monitored soil and vegetation changes in nine permanent plots (20 m2 each one) at a restored open-pit coal mine annually; these plots were set up in a structured way to account for site aspect (north, south and flat). We used linear mixed models and multivariate analysis to derive patterns of soil parameters changes through time and to relate soil variables with vegetation structure or floristic compositional changes.
Soil variables showed a general trend over time of increasing soil organic matter, total carbon and nitrogen, sand content and exchangeable calcium, but a reduction in soil pH, clay and lime contents, whereas electrical conductivity, P, Mg2+ and K+ showed no change through time. More importantly, these changes in soil properties were independent of aspect, whereas vegetation functional/structural changes were related to the accumulation of organic matter and sand content, and pH reduction. Surprisingly, floristic compositional changes had little relationship with soil factors.
The results indicate that age since restoration was the main driving agent, at least in the short-term, of soil and vegetation compositional changes during ecosystem development through the restoration of a coal mine, whereas vegetation functional/structural changes are involved in the mechanism that induce some soil changes, favouring the increase of plant community complexity in such mined areas. Finally, these results suggest that if soil-forming material is sufficiently good for vegetation development, floristic compositional differences are mainly driven by a combination of abiotic and stochastic factors in the short-term.
KeywordsSoil disturbance Soil physico-chemical properties Floristic composition Vegetation structure Soil organic carbon Restoration work DCA ordination Vegetation dynamics
- Allen SE (1989) Chemical analysis of ecological materials. Blackwell’s, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Anderson JM, Ingram JSI (1993) Tropical soil biology and fertility: a handbook of methods, 2nd edn. C.A.B. International, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
- Bremner JM, Mulvaney CS (1982) Nitrogen total. In: Miller AL, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 595–624Google Scholar
- Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference-a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Day P (1965) Particle fractionation and particle size analysis. In: Black CA (ed) Method of soil analysis. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 565–566Google Scholar
- R Development Core Team (2009) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, http://www.R-project.org
- Hill MO (1979) DECORANA – A Fortran program for detrended correspondence analysis and reciprocal averaging. Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University, IthacaGoogle Scholar
- Legendre P, Legendre L (2003) Numerical ecology, 3rd edn. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- Marrs RH, Bradshaw AD (1993) Primary succession on man-made wastes: the importance of resource acquisition. In: Miles J, Walton DWH (eds) Primary succession on land. Blackwell’s Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp 221–248Google Scholar
- Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, O’Hara RG, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Henry M, Stevens H, Wagner H (2010) vegan: community ecology package. R package version 1.17-0, http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
- Olsen SR, Sommers LE (1982) Phosphorus. In: Miller AL, Keeney DR (eds) Methods of soil analysis. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 403–427Google Scholar
- Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D (2009) nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3:1–96Google Scholar
- Porta J, Lopez-Acevedo M, Roquero De Laburu C (1994) Edafología para la agricultura y el medio ambiente. Mundi Prensa, MadridGoogle Scholar