Plant species diversity in dry coastal dunes of the southern Baltic coast

Peyrat, Jann; Fichtner, Andreas

doi:10.1556/comec.12.2011.2.10

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the one hand, trampling destroys the complex spatial structure and affects main ecological functions of beaches (Labuz & Grunewald ; Barbier et al. ; Peyrat & Fichtner ; Santoro et al. ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the one hand, trampling destroys the complex spatial structure and affects main ecological functions of beaches (Labuz & Grunewald 2007;Barbier et al 2011;Peyrat & Fichtner 2011;Santoro et al 2012). On the other hand, beach access is essential to coastal tourism and is a prime factor in beach vacation destinations (Haller et al 2011).…”

Section: Policy Implications For Beach Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Beaches under pressure – effects of human access on vegetation at Baltic Sea beaches

Seer

Irmler

Schrautzer

2016

Applied Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questions How do cover, richness and composition of plant species vary according to different levels of beach access? What shifts in plant traits occur along gradients of tourism intensity? What recommendations regarding the sustainable management of Baltic Sea beaches can be proposed? Location Southern Baltic Sea beaches in Germany. Methods In this study, the species composition of vascular plants on beaches with differing accessibility to tourists was analysed at the southwest Baltic Sea coast. In total, 894 vegetation plots were evaluated in order to determine vegetation changes along the sea–inland gradient due to different levels of human accessibility at beaches. Relevés were conducted as repeated transects from the beach ridge to the shore. Shifts in vegetation characteristics due to different levels of tourism access were analysed at the level of plant communities and plant species traits. Results Species richness did not differ significantly between the levels of accessibility. Vegetation cover significantly increased with distance to the shore and was highest in the upper shore area of closed beaches (52.0 ± 2.7%). Corresponding to the increase in beach access, we observed an increase in ruderal species and a decrease in typical beach species of the vegetation class Honckenyo‐Elymetea. Tourism access and distance to the shoreline had a decisive influence on the distribution of plants with selected plant traits. In particular, at accessible sites, a loss of plants with leaves having high scleromorphy was recorded. Conclusions Increased beach access results in a loss of typical beach plant species. Changes in vegetation characteristics are considered to alter the function of the beach ecosystem. Based on these results, we derived spatially differentiated management measures for excluding the most sensitive beach areas from tourism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Policy Implications For Beach Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beaches under pressure – effects of human access on vegetation at Baltic Sea beaches

Seer

Irmler

Schrautzer

2016

Applied Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…). These perspectives are accompanied by the wide observation of a unimodal trend in species richness during succession, demonstrated in chronosequence studies for contrasting habitats (Clebsch & Busing ; Bonet & Pausas ; Peyrat & Fichtner ). One plausible ecological model that integrates these findings invokes a competition–colonization trade‐off (Turnbull et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the facilitative effect of early-successional nitrogen-fixers in ameliorating soil conditions (Lawrence et al 1967;Chapin et al 1994). These perspectives are accompanied by the wide observation of a unimodal trend in species richness during succession, demonstrated in chronosequence studies for contrasting habitats (Clebsch & Busing 1989;Bonet & Pausas 2004;Peyrat & Fichtner 2011). One plausible ecological model that integrates these findings invokes a competition -colonization trade-off (Turnbull et al 1999;Rees et al 2001), in which species may be effective colonists ('pioneers') or strong competitors, but not both (Cadotte et al 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Signatures of autogenic epiphyte succession for an aspen chronosequence

Ellis

2012

J Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Question Is the succession of cryptogamic epiphyte communities (lichens) consistent with autogenic processes and life‐history trade‐offs? Location Northern Britain (Scotland). Methods We subsampled epiphytes from the lower bole of aspen (Populus tremula L.) and tested for two signatures in community succession. First, we used resampling among microhabitats to estimate species richness (sR) and species density (ρ) for trees along a chronosequence. We tested sR and ρ against patterns consistent with autogenic and life history‐mediated succession. Second, we constructed null model communities from a regional species pool to test for significant dispersion in multivariate trait diversity. Results We show that species density (ρ) declined along the tree age chronosequence. This decline was consistent with the observed unimodal pattern in species richness (sR) for a habitat that has a non‐stationary area (increasing lower bole habitat area with tree age). We found under‐dispersed trait diversity for younger trees, tending towards equilibrium between the regional species pool and local community for mid‐ and older‐aged trees. Over‐dispersion was evident for communities with the highest species richness. Conclusions We conclude that lichen epiphyte communities undergo succession structured by autogenic processes (interference competition) and may also be structured by life‐history trends, e.g. the competition–colonization trade‐off. However, we suggest that the stochastic extirpation of competitive and dominant species may allow pioneer species to persist in the long term, explaining equilibrium in trait diversity observed for older‐aged trees.

show abstract

“…), the changing productivity–richness relationship (Zuo et al. ) and the changing disturbance–richness relationship (Peyrat & Fichtner ) along the successional gradient.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primary succession, disturbance and productivity drive complex species richness patterns on land uplift beaches

Nylén

Luoto

2014

J Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abbreviations GLMM = generalized linear mixed modelling or generalized linear mixed models; DEM = Dynamic equilibrium model; IDH = Intermediate disturbance hypothesis. AbstractQuestions: What are the interactive effects of succession time, disturbance and productivity on the fine-scale species richness of beach vegetation? How do these effects differ between functional groups that are known to represent different adaptive strategies?Location: Boreal beach and dune systems (ca. 60°-65°N) of the Baltic Sea coast in Finland, characterized by steep environmental gradients, post-glacial land uplift and resulting primary succession.Methods: The analysis was based on an extensive and systematic survey of vascular plant, bryophyte and lichen species and environmental factors. Total species richness and the species richness of seven functional groups were modelled as functions of succession time, disturbance, productivity and their statistical interactions. The effects of the local environmental variability were taken into account by applying generalized linear mixed models (GLMM).Results: All three environmental factors and their statistical interactions, including the three-way interaction, were highly significant in explaining total species richness. The effect of disturbance on total species richness changed from negative to positive along succession time and productivity gradients. The response of beach specialist richness to succession time and disturbance was unimodal, while the responses of the generalist functional groups were monotonic. Beach specialist richness showed a strong positive response to productivity, whereas the richness of the generalist groups was not related to changes in productivity. Conclusions:The patterns of species richness on uplifting beaches are determined by the interplay of primary succession, disturbance and productivity. When both succession time and productivity increase, competitive exclusion starts to limit total species richness. In these circumstances, disturbance favours diversity by creating gaps in the vegetation. A combination of long succession time, low disturbance and low productivity result in maximum species richness. The richness of functional groups, particularly the opportunistic and disturbance-tolerant beach specialist group and the competitive but disturbance-sensitive groups, reach their peak in divergent environmental conditions. Consequently, the complex richness patterns observed on uplifting beaches are created not only by strongly interacting environmental drivers but also by differences in species' adaptive strategies.

show abstract

Plant species diversity in dry coastal dunes of the southern Baltic coast

Cited by 11 publications

References 25 publications

Beaches under pressure – effects of human access on vegetation at Baltic Sea beaches

Beaches under pressure – effects of human access on vegetation at Baltic Sea beaches

Signatures of autogenic epiphyte succession for an aspen chronosequence

Primary succession, disturbance and productivity drive complex species richness patterns on land uplift beaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About