Together yet separate: variation in soil chemistry determines differences in the arboreal-shrub structure of two contiguous rupestrian environments

Abstract

Rupestrian landscapes are characterized by vegetation mosaics comprised of different plant communities and strongly linked to environmental filters. These environments are nutrient-impoverished, and possess water retention deficits and high solar exposure. This study aimed to determine whether chemical properties of the soil shape the arboreal-shrub vegetation structure in two neighboring habitats; a rupestrian cerrado and a rupestrian grassland. We hypothesized that the habitat with higher soil chemical properties would have higher parameters for vegetation structure, and different species composition. We expected higher chemical properties of the soil to favor a greater variety of plant life-forms. A total of 1349 individuals of 85 species belonging to 24 families were recorded; 1141 individuals (65 species) in the rupestrian cerrado, and 208 individuals (20 species) in the rupestrian grassland. Overall, Asteraceae, Fabaceae and Melastomataceae had greater species richness in both areas. Both habitats floristic composition was strongly influenced by differences in soil chemistry. In the cerrado, species richness, composition, soil nutrient availability and acidity were greater than in the grassland. We demonstrated that variation in soil chemistry influences plant species richness and composition, and structural complexity of vegetation, in both contiguous rupestrian environments, and that soil chemistry heterogeneity yields different plant life-form strategies.

The type of substrate does not influence the intraspecific population structure of shrub‐tree species in the Brazilian savanna

“…In the Brazilian savanna, the soil is one of the main factors determining vegetation variations (Cole, 1986; Eiten, 1972; Françoso et al, 2020; Furley & Ratter, 1988; Lehmann et al, 2014; Reatto et al, 2008). Being that the influence of the physical–chemical properties of soils is even more evident in Rupestrian Savanna, since vegetation is strongly influenced by the soil environmental filter (Abreu et al, 2012; Almeida et al, 2018; Fernandes et al, 2018; Lemos et al, 2013; Mews, Pinto, Eisenlohr, & Lenza, 2016; Negreiros et al, 2014; Oliveira et al, 2015; Schaefer et al, 2016). Since the sandy and quartzite rocks as soil source material in the Rupestrian Savanna are poor in nutrients (Reatto et al, 2008; Schaefer et al, 2016), water availability in the soil is a strong environmental conditionality (Cássia‐Silva et al, 2017).…”

Environmental filters structure plant communities in the Brazilian Chaco

“…A low variation in soil fertility and elemental composition among the different types of Chaco (Morello 1967) might act as an environmental filter for woody species, driving community composition and structure at a local scale. Previous studies have considered the soil as a determinant of variation in phytophysiognomies in the Cerrado (Gottsberger & Silberbauer-Gottsberger 2006;Almeida et al 2018;Barros et al 2018), Amazonian Caatinga (Coomes & Grubb 1996), Mata Atlântica (Nettesheim et al 2019;Arruda et al 2020), Argentinean Chaco (Kunst et al 2006) and Paraguayan Chaco (Navarro et al 2006). The number of individuals of trees and shrubs in chaco forest is more than twice that of the chaco woodland.…”

“…Several filters within the soil and climatic conditions may occur simultaneously (Almeida et al 2018;Pinho et al 2019;Arruda et al 2020), and their interaction may form ecological gradients (Whittaker 1967;Dwyer & Laughlin 2017). The differences in environmental conditions may favor or hinder the establishment of species at un-matching degrees, therefore structuring taxonomic and functional diversity.…”

Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus availability on the early growth of two congeneric pairs of savanna and forest species

“…Nitrogen and phosphorus are strong environmental filters, regulating the establishment and prevalence of either savannas or forests, mainly in neighboring areas (Almeida et al, 2018;Pellegrini, 2016). As long as their cycles are being intensively modified, it may pose new challenges to plants (Peng et al, 2019).…”