Assessment of phytomass changes in an alpine Geranium-Hedysarum meadow after the removal of dominants: The results of a ten-year experiment

Akhmetzhanova, A. A.

doi:10.1134/s1067413610010078

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the cases of full biomass compensation following dominant species removal, the species/functional groups responsible for the biomass compensatory response were diverse, in some instances the response was driven by co‐dominant species (Akhmetzhanova, 2010; Elumeeva et al., 2017; Pan et al., 2016), or by subdominant species belonging to the same functional group (Joner et al., 2011; Souza et al., 2011), but most frequently by subdominants from different functional groups (Bret‐Harte et al., 2008; Cross & Harte, 2007; McLaren & Turkington, 2011; Pan et al., 2016; Suding et al., 2006; Wardle et al., 1999; Yu et al., 2015). In a similar fashion, in our study, the largest biomass compensatory response was by the subdominant species B. curtipendula , a mid‐sized C 4 grass, but the response was limited and only produced partial biomass compensation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Complete compensation has also been observed following the removal of specific functional types, such as shallow‐rooted forbs in a subalpine meadow community (Cross & Harte, 2007). However, there are also several cases that did not find a full compensatory response following the reduction or loss (removal) of the dominant species or specific functional types (Abul‐Fatih & Bazzaz, 1979; Gurevitch & Unnasch, 1989; Li et al., 2015; Wardle et al., 1999), including tallgrass prairie (Smith et al., 1999; Smith & Knapp, 2003), semi‐arid transition biomes (Peters & Yao, 2012) and an alpine meadow (Akhmetzhanova, 2010; Elumeeva et al., 2017). The latter examples highlight that compensatory dynamics are not a consistent in all ecosystems (Houlahan et al., 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Resources do not limit compensatory response of a tallgrass prairie plant community to the loss of a dominant species

Chaves

Smith

2021

Journal of Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. The effect of species loss on ecosystem productivity is determined by both the functional contribution of the species lost, and the response of the remaining species in the community. According to the mass ratio hypothesis, the loss of a dominant plant species, which has a larger proportionate contribution to productivity, is expected to exert an overwhelming effect on this important ecosystem function. However, via competitive release, loss of a dominant species can provide the opportunity for other plant species to establish, thrive and become abundant in the community, potentially compensating for the function lost. Furthermore, if resource limitation is removed, then the compensatory response of function to the loss of a dominant species should be greater and more rapid than if resources are more limiting.2. To evaluate how resources may limit compensation of above-ground productivity to the loss of a dominant plant species, we experimentally removed the C 4 perennial tallgrass, Andropogon gerardii, from intact plant communities. We added water for 4 years, as well as nitrogen in the fourth year, to test the effect of resource limitation on the compensatory response.3. Overall, above-ground biomass production increased in the remaining community with both water and nitrogen addition. However, this increase in biomass production was not sufficient to fully compensate for the loss of A. gerardii, indicating water and nitrogen were not limiting short-term compensation in this community. 4. Following the removal of the dominant species, there was reordering of species abundances in the community, rather than changes in species richness. The C 4 grass Bouteloua curtipendula was the most responsive species, increasing by 57.9% in abundance with water addition and 91.0% with both water and nitrogen addition. Despite this dramatic increase in abundance, its short stature and lower per capita biomass production prevented this species from compensating for the loss of A. gerardii. 5.Synthesis. Short-term compensation after the loss of a dominant plant species can be hastened by increased resource availability, but ultimately full compensation appears to be limited by the presence and abundance of species in the remaining community that possess traits that allow them compensate for the species lost.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resources do not limit compensatory response of a tallgrass prairie plant community to the loss of a dominant species

Chaves

Smith

2021

Journal of Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Due to its low SLA (Shidakov & Onipchenko ) and hence slow decomposition rate, this species is the main source of litter in the studied grasslands, and other species cannot replace it in this function. In this it principally differs from forb dominants: their removal in the Geranium–Hedysarum alpine meadow does not significantly change litter accumulation (Akhmetzhanova ). Narrow‐leaved dominants not only affect litter quantity, but also strongly determine community‐weighted functional traits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…77% in the F. varia removal plots, 63% in the N. stricta removal plots and 52% in plots from which both dominants were removed, but these differences were not significant. In the Teberda Reserve, removal of both Geranium gymnocaulon and Hedysarum caucasicum – the dominants of the alpine Geranium–Hedysarum meadow – was, even after 10 yr, not fully compensated by the biomass of the remaining species, even though this community is comparatively productive (Akhmetzhanova ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No other species can replace them: evidence for the key role of dominants in an alpine Festuca varia grassland

Elumeeva

Онипченко

Werger

2017

J Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abbreviations FV = Festuca varia removal; FVNS = Festuca varia and Nardus stricta removal; NS = Nardus stricta removal. Nomenclature Onipchenko et al. (2011) for vascular plants AbstractQuestions: Festuca varia grasslands occupy extensive areas in the alpine belt of the Caucasus. In the Teberda Reserve the dominant, narrow-leaved grasses Festuca varia and Nardus stricta contribute up to 56% and 22%, respectively, to the total biomass of the community. How does community composition and structure change after removal of the dominant, and is any species able to replace dominants in abundance and function?Location: Teberda State Biosphere Reserve, northwestern Caucasus, Russia. Methods:We experimentally removed F. varia and N. stricta (as single dominants and both together). After 20 yr of treatment we compared the expected increase in species richness per plot, above-ground phytomass, community biomass-weighted mean SLA and leaf DMC, as well as the inter-annual dynamics of functional groups and the most abundant species.Results: Dominant removal led to a decrease in litter after removal of F. varia and of both dominants, and a decrease in total phytomass after removal of both dominants. Biomass of dominants did not respond to the treatments, however N. stricta increased shoot number after F. varia removal. Non-dominant narrowleaved grasses increased in all the treatments, both in biomass and shoot number. Community biomass-weighted SLA increased in all the treatments, and leaf DMC decreased.Conclusions: Dominants play a key role in alpine F. varia grasslands and determine the functional structure and composition of the community. Species from other functional groups and, remarkably, species from the same group, are not able to completely replace them. Traits of F. varia, as the main dominant, control community-weighted leaf traits and litter accumulation.

show abstract

“…При проведении фитоценотических исследований накапливаются данные о фитоценозах с участием копеечников и влиянии копеечников на эти фитоценозы, но таких исследований немного (Onipchenko et al, 1998(Onipchenko et al, , 2009Митрошенкова, Лысенко, 2003;Akhmetzhanova, 2010;Ямалов и др., 2011, 2012bПетрова, Ямалов, 2015;Лысенко, Ямалов, 2017), и при этом они охватывают H. grandiflorum косвенно, в ходе изучения других видов (Митрошенкова, 2015), в том числе и в районе исследования (Архипова и др., 2017; Лысенко и др., 2017; Сулейманова, 2017), а работы именно по копеечнику крупноцветковому единичны (Аверинова, 2014). Флористический состав фитоценозов с участием данного вида изучался ранее (Лаврентьев, Болдырев, 2016) и дополняет общую картину фитоценотического состава петрофитных степей.…”

unclassified

Syntaxonomic position of phytocenoses with participation of Hedysarum grandiflorum Pall. in the Southern part of Volga upland

Lavrentiev¹

2019

BBGSSU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessment of phytomass changes in an alpine Geranium-Hedysarum meadow after the removal of dominants: The results of a ten-year experiment

Cited by 7 publications

References 17 publications

Resources do not limit compensatory response of a tallgrass prairie plant community to the loss of a dominant species

Resources do not limit compensatory response of a tallgrass prairie plant community to the loss of a dominant species

No other species can replace them: evidence for the key role of dominants in an alpine Festuca varia grassland

Syntaxonomic position of phytocenoses with participation of Hedysarum grandiflorum Pall. in the Southern part of Volga upland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About