(2020). Forest fragmentation shapes the alpha–gamma relationship in plant diversity. Journal Of Vegetation Science. 31 (1). 63-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/jvs.12817, https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00592/70438/
Copy this text
Forest fragmentation shapes the alpha–gamma relationship in plant diversity
Questions
Forest fragmentation affects biodiversity locally (α diversity) and beyond — at relatively larger scales (γ diversity) — by increasing dispersal and recruitment limitations. Yet, does an increase in fragmentation affect the relationship between α and γ diversity and what can we learn from it?
Location
Northern France.
Methods
We surveyed 116 forest patches across three fragmentation levels: none (continuous forest); intermediate (forest patches connected by hedgerows); and high (isolated forest patches). Plant species richness of both forest specialists and generalists was surveyed at five nested spatial resolutions across each forest patch: 1 m2; 10 m2; 100 m2; 1,000 m2; and total forest patch area. First, we ran log‐ratio models to quantify the α–γ relationship. We did that separately for all possible combinations of fragmentation level (none vs intermediate vs high) × spatial scale (e.g., α‐1 m2 vs γ‐10 m2) × species type (e.g., α‐specialists vs γ‐specialists). We then used linear mixed‐effects models to analyze the effect of fragmentation level, spatial scale, species type and all two‐way interaction terms on the slope coefficient extracted from all log‐ratio models.
Results
We found an interaction effect between fragmentation level and species type, such that forest specialists shifted from a linear (i.e., proportional sampling) to a curvilinear plateau (i.e., community saturation) relationship at low and high fragmentation, respectively, while generalists shifted from a curvilinear to a linear pattern.
Conclusions
The impact of forest fragmentation on the α–γ relationship supports generalist species persistence over forest specialists, with contrasting mechanisms for these two guilds. As fragmentation increases, forest specialists shift from proportional sampling towards community saturation, thus reducing α diversity likely due to dispersal limitation. Contrariwise, generalists shift from community saturation towards proportional sampling, thus increasing α diversity likely due to an increase in the edge:core ratio. To ensure long‐term conservation of forest specialists, one single large forest patch should be preferred over several small ones.
Keyword(s)
agricultural landscapes, alpha diversity, anthropogenic disturbances, community assembly, dispersal limitations, gamma diversity, habitat conservation strategies, habitat fragmentation, local-regional richness relationship, metacommunity dynamics
Full Text
| File | Pages | Size | Access | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Publisher's official version | 12 | 1 Mo | ||
Appendix S1. Data table (raw data) used in the log‐ratio model showing the species richness | - | 47 Ko | ||
Appendix S2. Species list | 5 | 83 Ko | ||
Appendix S3. Description of the covariates used in the log‐ratio models | 2 | 113 Ko | ||
Appendix S4. Detailed description of the log‐ratio model | 3 | 433 Ko | ||
Appendix S5. One‐sample t test for the distribution of the 270 slope values & ANOVA outputs | - | 16 Ko | ||
Appendix S6. Based on the coefficient estimate or slope parameter of the log(γ) variable, the α–γ relationship (AGR) was classified into four types (I, II, INT, IND) for each of the three levels of... | 1 | 328 Ko | ||
Appendix S7. Output from all candidate models | - | 18 Ko | ||
Appendix S8. Detailed output of two studied cases in the log‐ratio models of αFS–γFS | - | 12 Ko | ||
Author's final draft | 31 | 2 Mo |
How to cite