Riparian areas are local hot spots of biodiversity that are vulnerable and easily degraded. Comparing plant communities in habitats with different degrees of urbanization may provide valuable information for the management and restoration of these vulnerable habitats. In this study, we explored the impact of urbanization on vegetation communities between artificial and semi-natural habitats within two rivers with different levels of development. We compared species richness, types of vegetation, and composition patterns of the plants in our study. In artificial habitats, the sites with relatively high levels of urbanization had the highest species richness, while in semi-natural habitats, the highest species richness was recorded in the less urbanized sites. Furthermore, every component of urbanization that contributed to the variation of species richness was examined in the current study. In artificial habitats, the proportion of impervious surface was the strongest predictor of the variation in species richness and was associated with the richness of alien, native, and riparian species. In semi-natural habitats, most of the richness of alien and native species were associated with the distance to the city center, and the number of riparian and ruderal species was significantly related to the proportion of impervious surface. Moreover, we found that a high level of urbanization was always associated with a large abundance of alien and ruderal species in both artificial and in semi-natural habitats. We recommend the methods of pair comparison of multiple rivers to analyze the impact of urbanization on plant species in riparian areas and have suggested various management actions for maintaining biodiversity and sustainability in riparian ecosystems.
Anthropogenic disturbances pose significant threats to biodiversity. However, limited information has been acquired regarding the degree of impact human disturbance has on the β-diversity of plant assemblages, especially in threatened ecosystems (e.g., floodplains). In the present study, the effects of anthropogenic disturbance on plant communities of floodplain areas (the Miya River, Mie Prefecture, Japan) were analyzed. The taxonomic and functional β-diversity among different degradation levels were compared, and the differences were assessed by tests for homogeneity in multivariate dispersions. In addition, the effects of non-native species and environmental factors on β-diversity were analyzed. As revealed from the results, anthropogenic disturbance led to taxonomic homogenization at a regional scale. The increase in non-native invasions tended to improve homogenization, whereas at a low degradation level, the occurrence of non-natives species was usually related to taxonomic differentiation. Furthermore, though the increase in non-natives and environmental parameters significantly affected the β-diversity of the floodplain area, environmental factors may be of more crucial importance than biotic interactions in shaping species assemblages in this study. The previously mentioned result is likely to be dependent on the research scale and the extent to which floodplains are disturbed. Given the significant importance of floodplains, the significance of looking at floodplains in the different levels of degradation was highlighted, and both invasion of non-native species and environmental factors should be considered to gain insights into the response of ecosystems to anthropogenic disturbance. The findings of this study suggested that conservation programs in floodplain areas should place more emphasis on the preservation of natural processes and forest resources.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.