2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.11.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A null model test of Floristic Quality Assessment: Are plant species’ Coefficients of Conservatism valid?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
36
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
2
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Those taxa with values lower than 3 are species that inhabit areas that have experienced extreme degradation such as toxic pollution, vehicular traffic, or overgrazing (Freyman et al 2015). Floristic quality tends to increase in prairie restorations with age and proper management (Spyreas et al 2012) and is useful in evaluating restoration progress (Matthews et al 2015). Furthermore, a new website increases accessibility of floristic quality assessment worldwide (Freyman et al 2015; http://universalFQA.org).…”
Section: Field Study Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Those taxa with values lower than 3 are species that inhabit areas that have experienced extreme degradation such as toxic pollution, vehicular traffic, or overgrazing (Freyman et al 2015). Floristic quality tends to increase in prairie restorations with age and proper management (Spyreas et al 2012) and is useful in evaluating restoration progress (Matthews et al 2015). Furthermore, a new website increases accessibility of floristic quality assessment worldwide (Freyman et al 2015; http://universalFQA.org).…”
Section: Field Study Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Change in percentage cover relative to preharvest conditions by growth form (graminoids, ferns and allies, native forbs, subshrubs, exotic species, moss species) as well as successional role was also analysed. Successional role was determined based on Coefficient of Conservatism values specific to the study region (c), resulting in 74 species, being characterized as early successional (c 1-4), 63 as mid successional (c 5-6) and 35 as later successional (c 7-10) (12 species c values were unknown) (Bernthal 2003;Milburn, Bourdaghs & Husveth 2007;Mortellaro et al 2012;Matthews, Spyreas & Long 2015). Area (block) was considered a random factor while shrub treatment, VRH treatment, year and their two-way and three-way interactions were considered fixed factors.…”
Section: A T a A N A L Y S I Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) method incorporates a coefficient of conservatism assigned to each species based on its tolerance of anthropogenic disturbance, with these “ C ‐values” ranging from 0 (high tolerance) to 10 (low tolerance) (Freyman, Masters, & Packard, ). Although C ‐values are partially subjective, they have been shown to consistently track aspects of plant life history and community membership (Bauer, Koziol, & Bever, ; Matthews, Spyreas, & Long, ). C ‐values are assigned by expert botanists on a state or regional level, and those reported below are averages of at least three scores per taxon from McAvoy () (Delaware), Reznicek, Penskar, Walters, and Slaughter () (Michigan), Ladd and Thomas () (Missouri), Andreas, Mack, and McCormac () (Ohio), Gianopulos () (Southeastern US wetlands), or the Mid‐Atlantic Wetland Workgroup ().…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%