Skip to main content
Log in

Multivariate characterization of Sonoran Desert vegetation in southwest Arizona using US Army field data

  • Published:
Plant Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes the classification and ordination of Sonoran Desert vegetation using systematically collected data from the US Army Yuma Proving Ground (USYPG). Two classifications were created, one based upon relative plant cover derived from 100 m line transect data and one based upon relative plant density derived from 6 m . × 100 m belt transect data, with the belt transect being a lateral extension of the line transect. Both cluster analysis using Ward’s Method and TWINSPAN were used for classifying the data while Principal Component Analysis, Correspondence Analysis, Detrended Correspondence Analysis, and Non-Metric Multidimensional Scaling were used as ordination methods. Cluster analysis was superior to TWINSPAN in creating logical classifications comparable to published descriptions of vegetation communities found in the Lower Colorado Subdivision of the Sonoran Desert. Together, the ordination methods served to accentuate different aspects of the data including main gradients of species composition, in particular a gradient separating plots with riparian-af-finities from the main data set, a Larrea tridentata-Ambrosia dumosa gradient, and a gradient separating Encelia farinosa from the main data set. The main difference between the relative cover and relative density classifications was that the former under-represented cacti such as Opuntia bigelovii and the latter under-represented such as Parkinsonia microphylla and Olneya tesota. The classification methodology used in this study is useful for evaluating resource sampling strategies on U.S. Army bases in sparsely vegetated areas and the classifications could be used as a baseline for monitoring changes in vegetation communities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Geological Institute. (1976). Dictionary of Geological Terms. Anchor Press, Garden City, New York, USA.

  • Ayres Associates. (1996). Geomorphic, hydrologic, and vegetation characterization and base-line conditions of Yuma Wash, Yuma Proving Grounds, Arizona. Ayres Project No. 92-0904.01. Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.

  • L Belbin C. McDonald (1993) ArticleTitleComparing three classification strategies for use in ecology Journal of Vegetation Science 4 341–348

    Google Scholar 

  • C.M. Bern (1995) Land condition-trend analysis installation report Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona 1991-1995 Center for Ecological Management of Military Lands. Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran C.C. (1992). Soil survey of the U. S. Army Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona parts of LaPaz and Yuma Counties. USDA Soil Conservation Service.

  • G Cowlishaw J.G. Davies (1997) ArticleTitleFlora of the Pro-Namib Desert Swakop River catchment, Namibia: community classification and implications for desert vegetation sampling Journal of Arid Environments 36 271–290 Occurrence Handle10.1006/jare.1996.0203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Defense Government Applications Task Force (GAFT). 1996. Mojave Desert Tortoise GATF Project Final Report. US Army Topographic Engineering Center.

  • V.E. Diersing R.B Shaw D.J. Tazik (1992) ArticleTitleUS Army Land Condition-Trend Analysis (LCTA) Program. Environmental Management 16 405–414

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Ghani M.M.A, Amer W.M. in press. Soil-vegetation relationships in a coastal desert plain of southern Sinai, Egypt. Journal of Arid Environments.

  • H.G. Gauch (1982) Multivariate Analysis in Community Ecology Cambridge studies in ecology. Cambridge University Press New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • H.G Gauch R.H. Whittaker (1981) ArticleTitleHierarchical classification of community data Journal of Ecology 69 537–557

    Google Scholar 

  • D.H. Grossman D. Faber-Langendoen A.S. Weakly M. Anderson P. Bougeron R. Crawford K. Goodin S. Landaal K. Metzler K.D. Patterson M. Pyne M Reid L. Sneddon (1988) International classification of ecological communities: terrestrial vegetation of the United States. Volume I, The National Vegetation Classification System: development, status, and applications. The Nature Conservancy Arlington, Virginia, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • M.O. Hill R.G.H Bunce M.W. Shaw (1975) ArticleTitleIndicator species analysis, a divisive polythetic method of classification, and its application to a survey of native pinewoods in Scotland Journal of Ecology 63 597–613

    Google Scholar 

  • M.O Hill H.G.J. Gauch (1980) ArticleTitleDetrended correspondence analysis: an improved ordination technique Vegetatio 42 47–58 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00048870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R.G.H. Jongman (1995) Types of ecological research R.G.H. Jongman C.J.F ter Braak O.F.R. Tongeren Particlevan (Eds) Data Analysis in Community and Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK 91–173

    Google Scholar 

  • J.T. Kartesz (1999) Asynonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland, First edition J.T Kartesz C.A. Meacham (Eds) Synthesis of the North American flora (computer program). Version 1.0. North Carolina Botanical Garden Chapel Hill North, Carolina, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • C.J. Krebs (1989) Ecological methodology Harper and Row New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • P Legendre L. Legendre (1998) Numerical Ecology Elsevier New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • M. Lewis (1998) ArticleTitleNumeric classification as an aid to spectral mapping of vegetation communities Plant Ecology 136 133–149 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1009746100894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • J.B. Marks (1950) ArticleTitleVegetation and soil relations in the Sonoran Desert Ecology 31 176–193

    Google Scholar 

  • B McCune M.J. Medford (1997) Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data Version 3. 01. MjM Software Gleneden Beach, Oregon, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • P.R. Minchin (1987) ArticleTitleAn evaluation of the relative robustness of techniques for ecological ordination Vegetatio 69 89–107 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00038690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • L. Mucina (1997) ArticleTitleClassification of vegetation: past, present and future Journal of Vegetation Science 8 751–760

    Google Scholar 

  • D Mueller-Dombois H. Ellenberg (1974) Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology John Wiley and Sons New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • NatureServe. (2003). NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life _web application_. Version 1.8. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: July 21, 2003) .

  • M.W. Palmer (1993) ArticleTitlePutting things in even better order: the advantages of canonical correspondence analysis Ecology 74 2215–2230

    Google Scholar 

  • K.C. Parker (1991) ArticleTitleTopography, substrate, and vegetation patterns in the northern Sonoran Desert Journal of Biogeography 18 151–163

    Google Scholar 

  • R.K. Peet R.G. Knox J.S Case R.B. Allen (1987) ArticleTitlePutting things in order: the advantages of detrended correspondence analysis The American Naturalist 131 924–934

    Google Scholar 

  • E.C. Pielou (1984) The Interpretation of Ecological Data A Primer on Classification and Ordination John Wiley and Sons New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • C.E Shannon W. Weaver (1949) The mathematical theory of communication University of Illinois Press Urbana, Illinois, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • F. Shreve (1951) Vegetation of the Sonoran Desert Carnegie Institute of Washington Publication Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • S.M. Shupe (2000) Extending a field based Sonoran Desert vegetation classification to a regional scale using optical and microwave satellite imagery. Ph.D. Dissertation the University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • P.H.A Sneath R.R. Sokal (1973) Numerical Taxonmy W.H. Freeman and Co San Francisco, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tazik D.J., Warren S.D., Diersing V.E., Shaw R.B., Brozka R.J., Bagley C.F, Whitworth W.R. (1992). U. S. Army land condi-tion-trend analysis _LCTA. plot inventory Field methods. USACERL Technical Report N-92/03.

  • C.J.F. ter Braak (1995) Ordination R.G.H. Jongman C.J.F ter Braak O.F.R. Tongeren Particlevan (Eds) Data Analysis in Community and Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • R.M Turner D.E. Brown (1994) Tropical-subtropical desert-lands; Sonoran Desertscrub D.E. Brown (Eds) Biotic Communities of the Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico. University of Utah Press Salt Lake, City, Utah, USA 180–221

    Google Scholar 

  • J.H. Ward (1963) ArticleTitleHierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function Journal of American Statistical Association 58 236–244

    Google Scholar 

  • D.S. Wartenberg S Ferson F.J. Rohlf. (1987) ArticleTitlePutting things in order: a critique of detrended correspondence analysis American Naturalist 129 434–448 Occurrence Handle10.1086/284647

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Scott M. Shupe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shupe, S.M. Multivariate characterization of Sonoran Desert vegetation in southwest Arizona using US Army field data. Plant Ecol 176, 215–235 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-004-0096-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-004-0096-z

Keywords

Navigation