The Assembly of Experimental Wetland Plant Communities

Weiher, Evan; Keddy, Paul A.

doi:10.2307/3545956

Cited by 427 publications

(310 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

297

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The initial species composition of the restored vegetation potentially affects the vegetation for a long time (Vécrin et al, 2002) and non-desirable species installed at the beginning can persist, hampering succession and/or changing the vegetation trajectory (Prach and Pysek, 2001;Prach et al, 2001aPrach et al, , 2001De Steven et al, 2006). Soil transfer may also reduce stochasticity, by immediately installing a stable community (Weiher and Keddy, 1995). Collinge and Ray (2009) and Reinartz and Warne (1993) have shown that wetlands that initially received more native seeds were less prone to colonization by exotic species, and that the early introduction of native wetland species may increase the long-term diversity of communities in created wetlands.…”

Section: > Other Benefits Of Soil Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporary wetland restoration after rice cultivation: is soil transfer required for aquatic plant colonization?

Muller

Buisson

Mouronval

et al. 2013

Knowl. Managt. Aquatic Ecosyst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key-words:former ricefield, restoration, spontaneous colonization, soil transfer, temporary wetland Mediterranean temporary wetlands have considerably declined in recent decades. Today, opportunities arise for the restoration of these wetlands due to land-use changes, such as the abandonment of cultivation. One critical question is whether communities, such as those observed in natural temporary wetlands, can develop alone or if active restoration should be implemented. In a series of experimental mesocosms, we transferred soil from several temporary wetlands chosen as a set of reference ecosystems. Four months after soil transfer, vegetation in transfer mesocosms was compared to that derived from spontaneous colonization (control mesocoms). Transfer mesocosms are colonized by all target hydrophyte species transferred with the soil and the resulting communities are similar to those of reference ecosystems. They also have fewer non-target species than the control mesocosms. Even though the study period was not sufficient to draw any definitive conclusion regarding the utility of forced dispersion by soil transfer, the preliminary results are promising for an application on a larger scale. RÉSUMÉRestauration d'un milieu humide temporaire après culture du riz : le transfert de sol est-il nécessaire à la recolonisation des plantes aquatiques ? Mots-clés :anciennes rizières, restauration, colonisation spontanée, transfert de sol, zone humide Les marais temporaires méditerranéens ont vu leur superficie se réduire considé-rablement au cours des dernières décennies. Aujourd'hui, des opportunités apparaissent pour la restauration de ces zones humides, en particulier à partir d'espaces agricoles abandonnés. L'une des questions majeures est alors de savoir si les communautés telles que l'on peut les observer dans les marais temporaires naturels peuvent se développer seules ou si une restauration active doit être mise en place. Dans un ensemble de mésocosmes expérimentaux, nous avons transféré du sol provenant de plusieurs marais temporaires choisis comme un ensemble d'écosystèmes de référence. Quatre mois après le transfert de sol, la végétation des mésocosmes transférés a été comparée à celle issue uniquement de la colonisation spontanée (témoins). Les mésocosmes ayant subi un transfert de sol sont colonisés par la totalité des hydrophytes cibles transférées par le sol et présentent des communautés similaires à celles des écosystèmes de référence. Ils présentent d'autre part moins d'espèces jugées indésirables que les mésocosmes témoins. Même si la durée de l'étude ne nous permet pas de conclure définitivement sur la nécessité d'opérer un forçage de dispersion par transfert de sol, ces résultats préliminaires sont prometteurs pour une application à plus large échelle.

show abstract

Section: > Other Benefits Of Soil Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporary wetland restoration after rice cultivation: is soil transfer required for aquatic plant colonization?

Muller

Buisson

Mouronval

et al. 2013

Knowl. Managt. Aquatic Ecosyst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two processes are often considered as central to the assembly of communities: (1) filtering of species that can persist within a community on the basis of their tolerance of the abiotic environment (e.g., Weiher and Keddy 1995), and (2) competitive interactions among species that limit their long-term coexistence (Elton 1946, MacArthur and Levins 1967, Chesson 1991, Leibold 1998). The two processes lead to opposite predictions about the phenotypic similarity and phylogenetic relatedness of co-occurring species (Tofts andSilvertown 2000, Webb et al 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic Structure of Floridian Plant Communities Depends on Taxonomic and Spatial Scale

Cavender‐Bares

Keen

Miles

2006

Ecology

501

607

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Consideration of the scale at which communities are defined both taxonomically and spatially can reconcile apparently contradictory results on the extent to which plants show phylogenetic niche conservatism. In plant communities in north central Florida, we collected species abundances in 55 0.1-ha plots in several state parks. When communities were defined narrowly to include a single phylogenetic lineage, such as Quercus, Pinus, or Ilex, neighbors tended to be less related than expected (phylogenetic overdispersion) or there was no pattern. If the same communities were defined more broadly, such as when all seed plants were included, neighbors tended to be more related than expected (phylogenetic clustering). These results provide evidence that species interactions among close relatives influence community structure, but they also show that niche conservatism is increasingly evident as communities are defined to include greater phylogenetic diversity. We also found that, as the spatial scale is increased to encompass greater environmental heterogeneity, niche conservatism emerges as the dominant pattern. We then examined patterns of trait evolution in relation to trait similarity within communities for 11 functional traits for a single phylogenetic lineage (Quercus) and for all woody plants. Among the oaks, convergent evolution of traits important for environmental filtering contributes to the observed pattern of phylogenetic overdispersion. At the broader taxonomic scale, traits tend to be conserved, giving rise to phylogenetic clustering. The shift from overdispersion to clustering can be explained by the increasing conservatism of traits at broader phylogenetic scales.

show abstract

“…These filters can be of a very different nature (abiotic or biotic), can be related to dispersal (Götzenberger et al 2012), and can be probabilistic or not, with traits having contrasting probabilities of passing through the "environmental sieve" (Shipley 2010). In turn, trait-based ecology provides a mechanistic connection between ecological processes and these deterministic processes (Weiher and Keddy 1995;Westoby and Wright 2006;McGill et al 2006). From our perspective, the stochastic versus deterministic notions constitute complementary and not mutually exclusive aspects of a very complex process (Gravel et al 2006), and their relative importance varies across biomes and ecological conditions (Valladares et al 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%