Assembly rules during old-field succession in two contrasting environments

Abstract

Studies addressing the question of how communities develop reported contrasting temporal patterns of species associations during succession. Several hypotheses were formulated about succession, but a general explanation of community assembly is missing. We analysed trends of species associations during old-field succession in two contrasting habitats: the first with chernozemic brown forest soil and temperate climate, and the second with sand soil and dryer climate. Significant pair-wise associations were calculated across a range of spatial scales. Comparing the two succession seres, one under harsh and the other under favourable environment, we attempted to make generalisations about species relation patterns. We found no trend but fluctuation in the level of community organization during succession. None of the existing succession models explained our results about changes in spatial structure of grassland communities during succession. Fluctuation in the number of significant associations was more intense and took longer under less favourable environmental conditions. Our results suggest that the stressed habitat type posed stronger constraints on species coexistence during succession than the favourable habitat did, but validating this hypothesis needs further investigations.

References

  1. Aarssen, L. W. and R. Turkington. 1985. Vegetation dynamics and neighbour associations in pasture-community evolution. J. Ecol. 73:585–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Armesto, J. J., S. T. A. Pickett and M. J. McDonnell. 1991. Spatial heterogeneity during succession: a cyclic model of invasion and exclusion. In: J. Kolasa and S. T. A. Pickett (eds.), Ecological Heterogeneity. Springer-Verlag, New York, Inc. pp. 256–269.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Bartha, S. and M. Kertész. 1998. The importance of neutral-models in detecting interspecific spatial associations from ‘trainsect’ data. Tiscia 31:85–98.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bartha, S., S. T. A. Pickett and M. L. Cadenasso. 2000. Limitations to species coexistence in secondary succession. In: Proceedings IAVS Symposium. Opulus Press, IAVS, Uppsala. pp. 55–58.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Belyea, L. R. and J. Lancaster. 1999. Assembly rules within a contingent ecology. Oikos 86:402–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Booth, B. D. and C. J. Swanton. 2002. Assembly theory applied to weed communities. Weed Science 50:2–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Borhidi, A. 1993. Characteristics of the climate of the Danube-Tisza Mid-Region. In: J. Szujkó-Lacza and D. Kováts (eds.), The Flora of the Kiskunság National Park. Hungarian Natural History Museum. pp. 9–20.

  8. Burke, I. C., W. K. Lauenroth, M. A.Vinton, P. B. Hook, R. H. Kelly, H. E. Epstein, M. R. Aguiar, M. D. Robles, M. O. Aguilera, K. L. Murphy and R. A. Gill. 1998. Plant-soil interactions in temperate grasslands. Biogeochemistry 42:121–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Csecserits, A. and T. Rédei. 2001. Secondary succession on sandy old-fields in Hungary. Appl. Veg. Sci. 4:63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dale, M. R. T., D. J. Blundon, D. A. MacIsaac and A. G. Thomas. 1991. Multiple species effects and spatial autocorrelation in detecting species associations. J. Veg. Sci. 2:635–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Diamond, J. M. 1975. Assembly of species communities. In: M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds.), Ecology and evolution of communities. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. pp. 342–444.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gitay, H. and J. B. Wilson. 1995. Post-fire changes in community structure of tall tussock grasslands: a test of alternative models of succession. J. Ecol. 83:775–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Greig-Smith, P. 1952. Ecological observations on degraded and secondary forest in Trinidad, British West Indies. II. Structure of the communities. J. Ecol. 40:316–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Greig-Smith, P. 1983. Quantitative Plant Ecology, 3rd edition. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hogeweg, P., B. Hesper, C. P. van Schaik and W. G. Beeftink. 1985. Patterns in vegetation succession, an ecomorphological study. In: J. White (ed.), The Population Structure of Vegetation. Dr W. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht. pp. 637–666.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Jakab, S. 1972. Observaþii pedogeografice i pedomorfologice în Cîmpia Transilvaniei (Pedogeographic and pedomorphogenetic observations in the Transylvanian Plain). Ştinþa Solului 10:55–69.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kovács-Láng, E., Gy. Kröel-Dulay, M. Kertész, G. Fekete, S. Bartha, J. Mika, I. Dobi-Wantuch, T. Rédei, K. Rajkai and I. Hahn. 2000. Changes in the composition of sand grasslands along a climatic gradient in Hungary and implications for climate change. Phytocoenologia 30:385–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kullback, S. 1959. Information Theory and Statistics. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kun, A., E. Ruprecht and A. Szabó. 2004. Az Erdélyi-medence bio-klimatológiai jellemzése (The bioclimatological characteristics of the Transylvanian Basin (Romania)). Múzeumi Füzetek 13:63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lawton, J. H. 1987. Are there assembly rules for successional communities? In: A. J. Gray, M. J. Crawley and P. J. Edwards (eds.), Colonization, Succession and Stability. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford. pp. 225–244.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Legendre, P. and L. Legendre. 1998. Numerical Ecology, 2nd English edition. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherland.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lepš, J. and V. Buriánek 1990. Interspecific associations in old-field succession. In: F. Krahulec, A. D. Q. Agnew, S. Agnew and J. H. Willems (eds.), Spatial Processes in Plant Communities. SPB Academic Publisher, The Hague. pp. 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lockwood, J. L. 1997. An alternative to succession: Assembly rules offer guide to restoration efforts. Restoration & Management Notes 15:45–50.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Margalef, R. 1963. On certain unifying principles in ecology. Am. Nat. 97:357–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Margalef, R. 1968. Perspectives in Ecological Theory. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Myster, R. W. and S. T. A. Pickett. 1992. Dynamics of associations between plants in ten old fields during 31 years of succession. J. Ecol. 80:291–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. O’Connor, I. and L. W. Aarssen. 1987. Species association patterns in abandoned sand quarries. Vegetatio 73:101–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Osbornová, J., M. Kováøová, J. Lepš and K. Prach (eds.). 1990. Succession in Abandoned Fields. Studies in Central Bohemia, Czechoslovakia. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Palmer, M. W. and E. van der Maarel. 1995. Variance in species richness, species association, and niche limitation. Oikos 73:203–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Peet, R. K. 1992. Community structure and ecosystem function. In: D. C. Glenn-Levin, R. K. Peet and T. T. Veblen (eds.), Plant succession: Theory and Prediction. Chapman & Hall, London. pp. 103–151.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Pickett, S. T. A., M. L. Cadenasso and S. Bartha. 2001. Implications from the Buell-Small Succession Study for vegetation restoration. Appl. Veg. Sci. 4:41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Podani, J. 1987. Computerized sampling in vegetation studies. Coenoses 2:9–18.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Podani, J.,T. Czárán and S. Bartha. 1993. Pattern, area and diversity: the importance of spatial scale in species assemblages. Abstracta Botanica 17:37–51.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rice, W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43: 223–225.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Ruprecht, E. 2005. Secondary succession on old-fields in the Transylvanian Lowland (Romania). Preslia 77:145–157.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Temperton, V. M., R. J. Hobbs, T. Nuttle and S. Halle. 2004. Assembly Rules and Restoration Ecology. Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice. Island Press, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Tilman, D. 1988. Plant Strategies and the Dynamics and Structure of Plant Communities. Princeton University Press, USA, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Várallyay, Gy. 1993. Soils in the region between the rivers Danube and Tisza (Hungary). In: J. Szujkó-Lacza and D. Kováts (eds.), The Flora of the Kiskunság National Park. Hungarian Natural History Museum. pp. 21–42.

  39. Verhoeven, K. J. F., K. L. Simonsen and L. M. McIntyre. 2005. Implementing false discovery rate control: increasing your power. Oikos 108:643–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Vitousek, P. M. and L. R. Walker. 1987. Colonization, succession and resource availability: ecosystem-level interactions. In: A. J. Gray, M. J. Crawley and P. J. Edwards (eds.), Colonization, Succession and Stability Blackwell, Oxford. pp. 315–339.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Watkins, A. J. and J. B. Wilson. 1992. Fine-scale community structure of lawns. J. Ecol. 80:15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Watkins, A. J. and J. B. Wilson. 2003. Local texture convergence: a new approach to seeking assembly rules. Oikos 102:525–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Weiher, E., G. D. P. Clarke and P. A. Keddy. 1998. Community assembly rules, morphological dispersion, and the coexistence of plant species. Oikos 81:309–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Wiens, J. A. 1989. Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct. Ecol. 3:385–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Wilson, J. B. and H. Gitay. 1995. Limitations to species coexistence: evidence for competition from field observations, using a patch model. J. Veg. Sci. 6:369–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wilson, J. B. and R. J. Whittaker. 1995. Assembly rules demonstrated in a saltmarsh community. J. Ecol. 83:801–807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Wilson, J. B., M. T. Sykes and R. K. Peet. 1995. Time and space in the community structure of a species-rich limestone grassland. J. Veg. Sci. 6:729–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Zobel, M. 1992. Plant species coexistence – the role of historical, evolutionary and ecological factors. Oikos 65:314–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E. Ruprecht.

Rights and permissions

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ruprecht, E., Bartha, S., Botta-Dukát, Z. et al. Assembly rules during old-field succession in two contrasting environments. COMMUNITY ECOLOGY 8, 31–40 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.8.2007.1.5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Plant interactions
  • Soil
  • Spatial organization
  • Spatial scale
  • Species association
  • Structure