Plant Ecology

, Volume 136, Issue 1, pp 77–94 | Cite as

Reduced community diversity in semi-natural meadows in southern Sweden, 1965–1990

  • A.-C. Linusson
  • G. A. I. Berlin
  • E. G. A. Olsson
Article

Abstract

Two data sets, one from the 1960s and one from 1990, from continuously managed semi-natural meadows (semi-natural grasslands used for hay-cutting) in Småland, southern Sweden, were analysed to describe the vegetation and in an attempt to characterise changes that have occurred in the vegetation. Based on a classification of the data set, nine plant communities were recognised. The main vegetational differences, as revealed by an ordination, were due to variation in soil moisture, which ranged from wet to dry.

During the investigation period, the amount of hay meadow area decreased, particularly the area of wet-moist meadows. In addition, the total variation in the vegetation diminished, and three plant communities more or less disappeared. The turnover index of species in the data set was 36%, and most of the species that were lost had initially been uncommon. Lost species included rare taxa, such as Gentianella campestris and Linum catharticum, while the new species tended to be common in the region. Annual and biennial species accounted for a greater proportion of the lost taxa than did perennial species. The mean cover of species per plot and the relative abundance of graminoids per plot increased.

The recorded changes in the vegetation may be related to the increased loads of nitrogen pollutants as well as to a decrease in management intensity. The diminished area is related to changes in land-use. The meadow sites in Småland have been part of a landscape rich in grasslands, but today they have a more or less relict status. They differ from grasslands found elsewhere in Sweden and Scandinavia. In Sweden, the majority (68%) of endangered vascular plants belong to the agricultural landscape. To ensure the survival of individual species it is important to preserve all types of meadows, not only a few selected ones, since no two meadows are alike.

Community diversity Landscape changes Long-term study Management Nitrogen deposition Species change 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aerts, R. & Berendse, F. 1988. The effect of increased nutrient availability on vegetation dynamics in wet heathland. Vegetatio 76: 63-69.Google Scholar
  2. Albertsson, N. 1946. Österplana hed - ett alvarsområde på Kinnekulle. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 20: 1-245. Dissertation.Google Scholar
  3. Alexandersson, H., Karlström, C. & Larsson-McLann, S. 1991. Temperaturen och Nederböden i Sverige 1961-1990, Referensnormaler. Sveriges meteorologiska och hydrologiska institut, SMHI Meteorologi No. 81.Google Scholar
  4. Almquist, E. 1929. Upplands vegetaion och flora. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 1: 1-622. Dissertation.Google Scholar
  5. Bengtsson-Lindsjö, S., Ihse, M. & Olsson, E. G. A. 1991. Landscape patterns and grassland plant species diversity in the 20th century. In: Berglund, B. E. (ed.), The cultural landscape during 6000 years in southern Sweden - The Ystad Project. Ecol. Bull. 41: 388-396.Google Scholar
  6. Berendse, F., Elberse, W. T., & Geerts, R. H. M. 1992. Competition and nitrogen loss from plants in grassland ecosystems. Ecology 73(1): 46-53.Google Scholar
  7. Berglund, B. E. 1991. The late bronze age landscape; Landscape, land use and vegetation. In: Berglund, B. E. (ed.), The cultural landscape during 6000 years in southern Sweden - The Ystad Project. Ecol. Bull. 41: 73-77.Google Scholar
  8. Berglund, B. E., Malmer, N. & Persson, T. 1991. Landscape-ecological aspects of long-term changes in the Ystad area. In: Berglund B. E. (ed.), The cultural landscape during 6000 years in southern Sweden - The Ystad Project. Ecol. Bull. 41: 405-424.Google Scholar
  9. Berlin, G. A. I., Linusson, A-C. & Olsson, E. G. A. Vegetation changes in semi-natural grasslands in southern Sweden, 1965- 1990, submitted.Google Scholar
  10. Bernes, C. 1994. Biologisk mångfald i Sverige. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Naturvårdsverket Förlag, Solna.Google Scholar
  11. Bjørndal, J. E. 1986. Vegetajonsøkologi og - utvikling på urterike slåtteenger i Sogndalsdalen, indre Sogn. Botanisk Institutt, Universitetet Bergen. Thesis.Google Scholar
  12. Bloom, S. A. 1980. Multivariate quantification of community recovery. In: Cairns, J.Jr. (ed.), The recovery process in damaged ecosystems. Ann Arbor Science, Michigan.Google Scholar
  13. Bobbink, R. 1991. Effects of nutrient enrichment in Dutch chalk grassland. J. Appl. Ecol. 28: 28-41Google Scholar
  14. Dumortier, M., Verlinden, A., Beeckman, H. & van der Mijnsbrugge, K. 1996. Effects of harvesting dates and frequencies on above and below-ground dynamics in Belgian wet grasslands. Ecoscience 3(2): 190-198.Google Scholar
  15. Du Rietz, G. E. 1921. Zur methodologischen Grundlage der modernen Pflanzensoziologie. Uppsala.Google Scholar
  16. Ekstam, U., Aronsson, M. & Forshed, N. 1988. Ängar, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Solna, Sweden. pp. 1-207.Google Scholar
  17. Ekstam, U. & Forshed, N. 1992. If grassland management ceases - Vascular plants as indicator species in meadows and pastures. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Solna, Sweden, pp. 1-135. In Swedish. Summary in English.Google Scholar
  18. Ellenberg, H., Weber, H. E., Dull, R., Wirth, V., Werner, W. & Paulissen, D. 1991. Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1-248.Google Scholar
  19. Fuller, R. M. 1987. The Changing Extent and Conservation Interest ofLowland Grasslands in England and Wales: A Review of Grassland surveys 1930-84. Biol. Cons. 40: 281-300.Google Scholar
  20. Gaillard, M., Birks, H. J.B., Emanuelsson, U., Karlsson, S., Lagerås, P., & Olausson, D. 1994. Application of modern pollen/land-use relationships to the interpretation of pollen diagrams - reconstructions of land-usehistory in south Sweden, 3000-0 BP. Rev Palaeobotany Palynology 82: 47-73.Google Scholar
  21. Glenn, S. M. & Collins, S. L. 1993. Experimental analysis of patch dynamics in tallgrass plant communities. J. Veg. Sci. 4: 157-162.Google Scholar
  22. Glimskär, A. & Svensson, R. 1990. Vegetationens förändring vid gödsling och ändrad hävd. Department of Ecology and Environmental Research, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Rapport 38: 1-31.Google Scholar
  23. Grime, P. J. 1979. Plant strategies and vegetation processes. J. Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England.Google Scholar
  24. Grime, P. J., Hodgson, J. G. & Hunt, R. 1988. Comparative plant ecology: a functional approach to common British species, Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 1-700.Google Scholar
  25. Grubb, P. J. 1977. The maintenance of species-richness in plant communities: the importance of the regeneration niche. Biol Rev 52: 107-145.Google Scholar
  26. Haeggström, C. 1988. Protection of wooded meadows in Èland - problems, methods and perspectives. Oulanka Reports 8: 88-95.Google Scholar
  27. Hallingbäck, T. & Holmåsen, I. 1985. Mossor; en fälthandbok. Interpublishing, Stockholm, pp. 1-288.Google Scholar
  28. Hanski, I. 1982. Dynamics of regional distribution: the core and satellite species hypothesis. Oikos 38: 210-221.Google Scholar
  29. Heil, G. W. & Diemont, W. H. 1983. Raised nutrient change heathland into grassland. Vegetatio 53: 113-120.Google Scholar
  30. Herben, T., Krahulec, F., Hadincová, V. & Kavarova, M. 1993. Small-scale spatial dynamics of plant species in a grassland community over six years. J. Veg. Sci. 4: 171-178.Google Scholar
  31. Hobbs, R. J. & Mooney, H. A. 1995. Spatial and temporal variability in California annual grassland: results from a long-term study. J. Veg. Sci. 6: 43-56.Google Scholar
  32. Hogg, P, Squires, P. & Fitter, A. H. 1995. Acidification, nitrogen deposition and rapid vegetational change in a small valley mire in Yorkshire. Biol. Cons. 71: 143-153.Google Scholar
  33. Hopkins, A. & Wainright, J. 1989. Changes botanical composition and agricultural management of enclosed grassland in upland areas of England and Wales, 1970-86, and Some Conservation Implications. Biol. Cons. 47: 219-235.Google Scholar
  34. Hultén; E. 1971. Atlas of the distribution of vascular plants in northwestern Europe. Generalstabens litografiska anstalts förlag, Stockholm. In Swedish.Google Scholar
  35. Ihse, M. 1995. Swedish agricultural landscapes - patterns and changes during the last 50 years, studied by aerial photos. Landscape Urban Planning 31: 21-37.Google Scholar
  36. Ingelög, T., Thor, G. & Hallingbäck, T. 1990. Hotade växter i Sverige. SBT-förlag, Lund., pp. 1-48.Google Scholar
  37. Jonsson, L. 1995. Effects of restoration on wooded meadows in southeastern Sweden. Department of Ecology, Dissertation.Google Scholar
  38. Jonsson, L., Persson, S., & Emanuelsson, U. 1991. Vegetationens utveckling i Ires ängar före och efter restaurering. Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift 85: 417-442.Google Scholar
  39. Konradsson, S. 1963. Slåtterängar i Långasjö socken. Deparment of Plant Ecology, Lund University, Sweden.Google Scholar
  40. Krok, O. B. N. & Almquist, S. 1985. Svensk Flora; fanerogamer och ormbunksväxter, Esselte Herzogs, Uppsala, pp. 1-570.Google Scholar
  41. Kull, K. & Zobel, M. 1991. High species richness in an Estonian wooded meadow. J. Veg. Sci. 2: 711-714.Google Scholar
  42. Lagerås, P. 1996. Vegetation and land-use in the Småland Uplands, southern Sweden, during the last 6000 years. Department of Quaternary Geology, Dissertation.Google Scholar
  43. Londo, G. 1990. Conservation and management of semi-natural grasslands in northwestern Europe. Pp. 69-77. In: Bohn, U. and Neuhäusl, R. (eds), Vegetation and flora of temperate zones, The Hague. SPB Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
  44. Losvik, M. H. 1988. Phytosociology and ecology of old hay meadows in Hordaland, western Norway in relation to management. Vegetatio 78: 157-187.Google Scholar
  45. Losvik, M. H. 1992. Hay meadow communities in western Norway and relations between vegetation and environmental factors. Nordic J. Bot. 13: 195-206.Google Scholar
  46. Lundqvist, M. (ed). 1953. Atlas över Sverige. Svensk sällskapet för antropologi och geografi. Generalstabens litografiska anstalts förlag, Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  47. Magurran, A. 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurements. Croom Helm, London.Google Scholar
  48. Malmer, N. 1962. Studies on mire vegetation in the Archaean area of southwestern Götaland South Sweden - Vegetation and habitat conditions on the Èkhult mire. Opera Botanica 7(1), 1-322.Google Scholar
  49. Malmer, N. 1965. The south-western dwarf shrub heaths. In: Du Rietz, G.E. (ed.), The plant cover of Sweden. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 50.Google Scholar
  50. Malmer, N. & Wallén, B. 1980. Wet deposition of plant mineral nutrients in southern Sweden. Dep. of Plant Ecology, Lund University. Meddelanden 43: 1-28.Google Scholar
  51. Morecroft, M. D., Sellers, E. K. & Lee, J. A. 1994. An experimental investigation into the effects of atmospheric nitrogen deposition on two semi-natural grasslands. J. Ecol. 82: 475-483.Google Scholar
  52. Mountford, J. O., Lakhani, K. H. & Kirkham, F. W. 1993. Experimental assessment of the effects of nitrogen addition under haycutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of meadows on Somerset peat moor. J. Appl. Ecol. 30: 321-332.Google Scholar
  53. Noest, V. & van der Maarel, E. 1989. A new dissimilarity measure and a new optimality criterion in phytosociological classification. Vegetatio 83: 157-165.Google Scholar
  54. Norderhaug, A. 1988. Urterike slåtteenger i Norge, rapport fra forprosjektet. Økoforsk utredning 1988: 3, 1-92.Google Scholar
  55. Nordic Council of Ministers 1977. Naturgeografisk regionindelning av Norden. NU B 1977: 34.Google Scholar
  56. Olsson, E. G. A. 1991a. The early 18th century landscape; Landscape, land-use and vegetation. In: Berglund, B. E. (ed), The cultural landscape during 6000 years in southern Sweden - The Ystad Project. Ecol. Bull. 41: 94-95.Google Scholar
  57. Olsson, E. G. A. 1991b. Agro-ecosystems from Neolitic time to the present. In: Berglund, B. E. (ed.), The cultural landscape during 6000 years in southern Sweden - the Ystad Project. Ecol. Bull. 41: 293-314.Google Scholar
  58. Olsson, K. 1995. Changes in epiphytic lichen and moss flora in some beech forests in southern Sweden during 15 years. In: Staaf, H. & Tyler G. (eds), Effects of acid deposition and tropospheric ozone on forest ecosystems in Sweden. Ecol. Bull. 44: 238-247.Google Scholar
  59. Osvald, H. 1962. Vallodling och växtföljd, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  60. Påhlsson, L. (ed). 1994. Vegetationstyper i Norden. Nordiska Ministerrådet, Köpenhamn. TemaNord 1994: 665.Google Scholar
  61. Persson, S. 1984. Vegetation development after the exclusion of grazing in a meadow area in the south of Sweden. Vegetatio 55: 65-92.Google Scholar
  62. Persson, S. 1981. Ecological indicator values as an aid in the interpretation of ordination diagrams. J Ecol 69: 71-84.Google Scholar
  63. Pettersson, B. 1958. Dynamik och konstans i Gotlands flora. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 40: 1-288.Google Scholar
  64. Pickett, S. T. A. & White, P. S. 1985. The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics, Orlando, Academic Press, Florida.Google Scholar
  65. Pielou, E. 1966. Species-diversity and pattern-diversity in the study of ecological successions. J. Theor. Biol. 13: 370-383.Google Scholar
  66. Prach, K. 1993. Vegetational changes in a wet meadow complex, South Bohemia, Czech Republic. Folia Geobotanica Phytotaxonomica 28: 1-13.Google Scholar
  67. Reinhammar, L-G., Olsson, E. G. A. & Sørmeland, E. Conservation biology of an endangered plant species, Pseudorchis albida, with referenses to the closely related alpine P. straminea (Orchidaceae), submitted.Google Scholar
  68. Rosén, E. 1982. Vegetation development and sheep grazing in limestone grasslands of south Öland, Sweden. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 72: 1-104.Google Scholar
  69. SGU 1958. Karta över Sveriges berggrund, skala 1:1 000 000. Sveriges Geologiska Undersökningar. Map in Swedish.Google Scholar
  70. Shannon, C. E. & Weaver, W. 1949. The mathematical theory of communications, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  71. Silvertown, J. 1980. The dynamics of a grassland ecosystem: Botanical equilibrium in the Park Grass experiment. Ecol. Bull. 17: 491-504.Google Scholar
  72. Sjörs, H. 1954. Slåtterängar i Grangärde Finnmark. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 34: 1-135.Google Scholar
  73. Sjörs, H. 1971. Nordisk växtgeografi. Munkgaards, Copenhagen. pp. 1-240.Google Scholar
  74. Skånes, H. 1996. Grassland dynamics and landscape change 1741-1993 in Virestad, south Sweden. In Landscape change and grassland dynamics - Retrospective studies based on aerial photographes and old cadastral maps during 200 years in south Sweden. The Department of Physical Geography, Stockholm University, Sweden. Dissertation.Google Scholar
  75. Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J. 1987. Introduction to biostatistics. Second edition. W.H. Freeman Co., New York.Google Scholar
  76. Svensson, B. M. 1996. Ekologiska processer som påverkar artdiversiteten i treditionellt brukade betes-och slåttermarker - Halvparasitiska växters betydelse. Progress report to Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  77. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 1987. Inventering av ängs-och hagmarker - handbok. Solna, Sweden.Google Scholar
  78. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Ängs-och hagmarker i Sverige - resultatet av den landsomfattande inventeringen. (Lindahl, C.). Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Solna, Sweden, unpublished.Google Scholar
  79. Sykes, M. T., van der Maarel, E., Peet, R. K. & Willems, J. H. 1994. High species mobility in species-rich plant communities: An intercontinental comparison. Folia Geobotanica Phytotaxonomica 29: 439-448.Google Scholar
  80. Ter Braak, C. J. F. CANOCO - Version 3.12. 1991. Agricultural Mathematics Group DLO, Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  81. The County Administrative Board 1990. Ängs-och hagmarker i Halmstads kommun. Meddel. 1990: 7. Miljövårdsenheten, The County Administrative Board, Hallands län.Google Scholar
  82. The County Administrative Board 1993. Ängs-och hagmarker i Jönköpings län. Miljö i Jönköpings län 1990: 1. Miljövårdsenheten, The County Administrative Board, Jönköpings län.Google Scholar
  83. The County Administrative Board 1993. Ängs-och hagmarker i Kronobergs län. Miljövårdsenheten, The County Administrative Board, Kronobergs län.Google Scholar
  84. Thompson, D. B. A., Stoud, D. A. & Pienkowski, M.W. 1988. Afforestation and upland birds: consequences for population ecology. In: Usher, M. B. & Thompson, D. B. A. (eds), Ecological change in the Uplands. Blackwell Scientific Publications, the University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  85. Trass, H. & Malmer N. 1973. North European approches to classification. Pp. 529-574. In: Whittaker, R. H. (ed.), Handbook of Vegetation Science part 5: Ordination and classification of vegetation. Junc, The Hague.Google Scholar
  86. van der Maarel, E. & Sykes M. T. 1993. Small-scale plant species turnover in a limestone grassland: the carousel model and some comments on the niche concept. J. Veg. Sci. 4: 179-188.Google Scholar
  87. van Dijk, G. 1991. The status of semi-natural grasslands in Europe. Pp. 15-36. In: Gortup, P. D. & Batten, L. A. Norton, (eds), The conservation of lowland dry grassland birds in Europe, J.A. Newsburg Joint Nature Cop.Google Scholar
  88. Welch, D. & Scott, D. 1995. Studies in the grazing of heather moorland in northeast Scotland. VI. 20-year trends in botanical composition. Ecol Bull. 32: 596-611.Google Scholar
  89. Willems, J. H. 1983. Species composition and above ground phytomass in chalk grassland with different management. Vegetatio 52: 171-180.Google Scholar
  90. Willems, J. H., Peet, R. K., & Bik, L. 1993. Changes in chalk-grassland structure and species richness resulting from selective nutrient additions. J Veg Scie 4: 203-212.Google Scholar
  91. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics 1963 and 1994. Statistics Sweden SCB. Stockholm, Sweden. In Swedish.Google Scholar
  92. Zobel, M. 1992. Plant species coexistence - the role of historical, evolutionary and ecological factors. Oikos 65: 314-320.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • A.-C. Linusson
    • 1
  • G. A. I. Berlin
    • 1
  • E. G. A. Olsson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Ecology, Plant EcologyLund UniversityLundSweden
  2. 2.Department of Botany, Plant EcologyNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations