Habitat preferences of plant communities: New approach based on the GGE biplot analysis

• Autorzy: Sienkiewicz-Paderewska D. , Paderewski J.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In this paper we introduce a new way of analysing habitat preferences of plant communities using the genotype and genotype-by-environment interaction effects (GGE) biplot method. We took into consideration real data on six plant associations belonging to the Molinio-Arrhenatheretea class. A total of 241 phytosociological relevès collected with the Braun-Blanquet method were described by the Ellenberg indicators. The two-way classification relevès-by-indicators was analysed with GGE. As a result it is proposed the modified biplot that contains ellipses for making the plot clearer. Next, we present the equations that described both axes and allow adding into the biplot any other relevès or a mean of set of relevès. Based on the generated biplot it is possible to present an ecological characteristics of any type of plant community including its acceptable and typical habitat requirements. The ellipse ranges provide important information about the homogeneity and ecological spectrum of the analysed syntaxon. The constructed equations allow comparing new data with data analysed previously. Summing up, the GGE biplot method is useful for analysing and graphically presenting ecological preferences of plant communities in a simple and comprehensive way.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

habitat preference; plant community; genotype; GGE biplot type; Ellenberg indicator value; grassland; ecological preference

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: 63
• Numer: 3
• Opis fizyczny: p.387-399,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Sienkiewicz-Paderewska D.

• Department of Agronomy, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159, 02–776 Warsaw, Poland

autor

Paderewski J.

• Department of Experimental Design and Bioinformatics, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159, 02–776 Warsaw, Poland

Bibliografia

• H. Albrecht 2003 — Suitability of arable weeds as indicator organisms to evaluate species conservation effects of management in agricultural ecosystems — Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 98: 201–211.
• Z. Botta-Dukát, M. Chytrý, P. Hájková, M. Havlová 2005 — Vegetation of lowland wet meadows along a climatic continentality gradient in Central Europe — Preslia, Praha, 77: 89–111.
• J. Braun-Blanquet 1964 — Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde — Springer-Verlag, Wien—New York.
• J. De Leeuw, P. Mair 2009 — Simple and Canonical Correspondence Analysis Using the R Package anacor — J. Stat. Softw. 31, issue 05.
• Z. Dzwonko 2001 — Assessment of light and soil conditions in ancient and recent woodlands by Ellenberg indicator values — J. Appl. Ecol. 38, 942–951.
• H. Ellenberg, G.K. Strutt 2009 — Vegetation ecology of Central Europe — Cambridge University Press, 756 pp.
• H. Ellenberg, H.E. Weber, R. Düll, V. Wirth, W. Werner, D. Paulißen 1992 — Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobot. 18: 1–258.
• D. Fijałkowski, E. Chojnacka-Fijałkowska 1990 — Zbiorowiska z klas Phragmitetea, Molinio-Arrhenatheretea i Scheuchzerio-Caricetea fuscae w makroregionie lubelskim [Phytosociological associations belonging to classes Phragmitetea,Molinio-Arrhenatheretea i Scheuchzerio-Cariceteafuscae in the Lublin macroregion] Rocz. Nauk Rol. 217, 414 pp. (in Polish).
• K.R. Gabriel 1971 — The biplot graphic display of matrices with application to principal component analysis — Biometrica, 58: 453–467.
• H.G. Gauch 1992 — Statistical analysis of regional yield trials. AMMI analysis of factorial designs — Elsevier Science, New York, 278 pp.
• P.H. Glaser, J.A. Janssens, D.I. Siegiel 1990 — The response of vegetation to chemical and hydrological gradients in the lost river peatland, Northern Minnesota — J. Ecol. 78:1021–1048.
• M.O. Hill, D.B. Roy, J.O. Mountford, R.G.H. Bunce 2000 — Extending Ellenberg's indicator values to a new area: an algorithmic approach —J. Appl. Ecol. 37: 3–15.
• J. Kapfer, J.A. GrytnesU. Gunnarsson, H.J.B. Birks 2011 — Fine-scale changes in vegetation composition in a boreal mire over 50 years — J. Ecol. 99: 1179–1189.
• I. Knollová, M. Chytrý, L. Tichý, O. Hájek 2006 — Local ranges of phytosociological associations: are they reflected in numerical classification? —Biologia. Bratislava, 61: 71–77.
• A. Kryszak, M. Grynia 2001 — Floristic diversity and economic value of the Alopecuretum pratensis association in Western Poland — Grassland Sci. Eur. 6: 164–166.
• A. Kryszak, A. Klarzyńska, J. Kryszak, A. Strychalska, Ł. Maćkowiak 2012 — Influence of variability of ryegrass meadow soil conditions on their natural and utilization values — Not. Bot. Horti. Agrobo. 40:163 – 69. Available online et www.notulaebotanicae.ro.
• A. Kryszak, J. Kryszak 2001 — Effects of utilisation of Lolio-Cynosuretum pastures on plants species diversity and yield — Grassland Sci. Eur. 6: 167–169.
• A. Kryszak, A. Strychalska, J. Kryszak, A. Klarzyńska 2010 — The impact of Deschamspia caespitosa (L.) p. Beauv (tufted hairgrass) on the floristic composition of meadow communities — Grassland Sci. Eur. 15: 705–707.
• P. Legendre, L.F.J. Legendre 1998 — Numerical Ecology — Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 852 pp.
• A. Lengyel, M. Chytrý, L. Tichý 2011 — Heterogeneity — constrained random resampling of phytosociological databases — J. Veg. Sci. 22: 175–183.
• K.V. Mardia, J.T. Kent, J.M. Bibby 1979 — Multivariate Analysis — London: Academic Press, 521 pp.
• W. Matuszkiewicz 2008 — Przewodnik do oznaczania zbiorowisk roślinnych Polski (The guide for identification of Polish plant communities) — Wyd. Nauk. PWN (in Polish) 536 pp.
• R. Michalet, Ch. Rolland, D. Joud, D. Gafta, R.M. Callaway 2002 — Associations between canopy and understory species increase along a rainshadow gradient in the Alps: habitat heterogeneity or facilitation? — Plant Ecol. 165: 145–160.
• Z. Mirek, H. Piçkoś-Mirkowa, A. Zając, M. Zając 2002 — Flowering plants and pteridophytes of Poland. A checklist — Biodiversity of Poland —1, W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakov, 340 pp.
• M. Myśliwy, B. Bosiacka 2009 — Disappearance of Molinio-Arrhenatheretea meadows diagnostic species in the Upper Płonia River Valley (NW Poland) — Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 18, 3: 513–519.
• O. Nenadić, M. Greenacre 2007 — Computation of Multiple Correspondence Analysis, with Code in R, in Multiple Correspondence Analysis and Related Methods (eds. M. Greenacre and J. Blasius) — Boca Raton: Chapmann, Hall / CRC, pp. 523–551.
• M. Nowiński 1967 — Polskie zbiorowiska trawiaste i turzycowe [Polish communities of sedges and grasses] — PWRiL, Warsaw, 284 pp. (in Polish).
• M.E.D. Poor 1955 — The use of phytosociological methods in ecological investigations: I. The Braun-Blanquet System — J. Ecol. 43, 1, 226–244.
• R Development Core Team. 2008 — R: A language and environment for statistical computing — R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R - project.org.
• J. S. Rodwell 1998 — British plant communities: grasslands and montane communities — Cambridge University Press, 540 pp.
• J.A. Rogel, F.A. Ariza, R.O. Silla 2000 — Soil salinity and moisture gradients and plant zonation in Mediterranean salt marshes of Southeast Spain — Wetlands 20, 2: 357–372.
• A.P. Schaffers, K.V. Sýkora 2000 — Reliability of Ellenberg indicator values for moisture, nitrogen and soil reaction: a comparison with field measurements — J. Veg. Sci. 11: 225–244.
• I. Škodová, M. Janišová 2008 — The classification of Slovak grassland communities to the higher syntaxonomical units — Annali di Botanica (Roma), 8:31–42.
• Z. Stančić 2008 — Classification of mesic and wet grasslands in northwest Croatia — Biologia, Section Botany, 63: 1089–1103.
• T.H. Szymura, M. Szymura, A. Macioł 2014 — Bioindication with Ellenberg's indicator values: A comparison with measured parameters in Central European oak forests — Ecol. Indic. 46: 495–503.
• C.J.F. Ter Braak 1986 — Canonical Correspondence Analysis: A new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis — Ecology, 67: 1167–1179.
• C.J.F. Ter Braak 1987 — The analysis of vegetation-environment relationships by canonical correspondence analysis — Vegetatio, 69: 69–77.
• Cz. Trqba, P. Wolański, K. Oklejewicz 2008 — Floristic diversity and sward use value of Lolio-Cynosuretum association in the San River Valley — Ann. Univ. Maria Curie-Sklodowska, Lublin-Polonia, Agrie. E. 63: 67–73.
• Cz. Trąba, P. Wolański, L. Woźniak 2003 — The differentiation of meadows of the Arrhenatheretumelatioris association in the river valleys of Zamośćbasin — Grassland Sci. Eur. 8: 610–612.
• M. Wagner, A. Kahmen, H. Schlumprecht, V. Audorff, J. Perner, N. Buchmann, W.W. Weisser 2007 — Prediction of herbage yield in grassland: How well do Ellenebrg N - values perform? — Appl. Veg. Sci. 10: 15–24.
• Z. Wójcik 1983 — Characteristics and assessment of fields by bioindical methods — Wydawnictwo SGGW-AR, Warsaw.
• W. Yan, M.S. Kang 2003 — GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists, and Agronomists — CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL, 288 pp.
• K. Zarzycki H. Trzcińska-Tacik, W. Różański, Z. Szeląg, J. Wołek, U. Korzeniak 2002 — Ekologiczne liczby wskaźnikowe roślin naezyniowych Polski [Ecological indicator values of vascular plants of Poland] Biodiversity of Poland, 2 — W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, 183 pp. (in Polish).

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.3161/15052249PJE2015.63.3.009