Impacts of urbanization and agricultural legacy on taxonomic and functional diversity in isolated wetlands

  • Audréanne Loiselle
  • Stéphanie PellerinEmail author
  • Monique Poulin
Original Paper


Land use changes pose major threats to biodiversity. In this study, we analysed the impacts of urbanization and agricultural legacy on plant communities of isolated wetlands (Laval, Québec, Canada). We sampled 35 marshes and 32 swamps. We used multi-factor analysis of variance to compare taxonomic richness and functional diversity between wetland types, urbanization levels and former agricultural use. We calculated beta diversity as between-site similarities in composition, and differences were evaluated using tests for homogeneity in multivariate dispersions. We also analysed the effect of exotic species on beta diversity. We found that urbanization and former agricultural use had no effect on taxonomic richness, functional diversity or beta diversity. However, exotics tended to be more abundant in urban and previously cultivated wetlands than in more natural ones. Furthermore, despite the absence of difference in beta diversity in response to present and past human disturbances when analysing the total species pool, we found that exotic species tend to favor homogenization. We also found that species composition differed in response to urbanization in marshes, while in swamps it differed according to former agricultural uses. This contrasting result was likely due to the fact that marshes are dominated by herbaceous species and swamps by woody species (short vs. long regeneration time). Our study highlights the importance of looking at different types of habitats within the same urban context and considering land use legacy to understand the response of ecosystems to urbanization, especially due to the time lag between disturbances and vegetation responses.


Agricultural legacy Beta diversity Functional traits Marshes Urbanization Species composition Swamps 



This research received financial support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Discovery grant to S. Pellerin: RGPIN-2014-05367 and M. Poulin RGPIN-2014-05,663) and the Fonds Nature et technologies (scholarship to A. Loiselle). We are grateful to the City of Laval and landowners who allowed us to work on their lands. Our thanks to the CRE-Laval for their data and their logistical supports, numerous field assistants, Karen Grislis for linguistic revision and two anonymous reviewers for comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.

Supplementary material

11273_2019_9692_MOESM1_ESM.docx (119 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 119 kb)


  1. Anderson M (2001) A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol 26:32–46. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson MJ, Ellingsen KE, McArdle BH (2006) Multivariate dispersion as a measure of beta diversity. Ecol Lett 9:683–693. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aronson MF, Handel SN, La Puma IP, Clemants SE (2015) Urbanization promotes non-native woody species and diverse plant assemblages in the New York metropolitan region. Urban Ecosyst 18:31–45. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbour MG, Burk JH, Pitts WD (1987) Terrestrial plant ecology. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo ParkGoogle Scholar
  5. Blouin D, Pellerin S, Poulin M (2018) Changes in spontaneous flora of anthropogenic microhabitats along rural-urban gradients. J Urban Ecol. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brice MH, Pellerin S, Poulin M (2016) Environmental filtering and spatial processes in urban riparian forests. J Veg Sci 27:1023–1035. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brice MH, Pellerin S, Poulin M (2017) Does urbanization lead to taxonomic and functional homogenization in riparian forests? Divers Distrib 23:8284840. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brouillet L, Desmet P, Coursol F et al (2017) Database of vascular plants of Canada (VASCAN). Accessed Jan 2017
  9. Burton ML, Samuelson LJ, Mackenzie MD (2009) Riparian woody plant traits across an urban–rural land use gradient and implications for watershed function with urbanization. Landsc Urban Plan 90:42–55. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cailliez F (1983) The analytical solution of the additive constant problem. Psychometrika 48:305–308. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cameron DS, Leopold DJ, Raynal DJ (1997) Effect of landscape position on plant diversity and richness on electric transmission rights-of-way in New York State. Can J Bot 75:242–251. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Catford JA, Downes BJ, Gippel CJ, Vesk PA (2011) Flow regulation reduces native plant cover and facilitates exotic invasion in riparian wetlands. J Appl Ecol 48:432–442. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiarucci Enright NJ, Perry GLW, Miller BP, Lamont BB (2003) Performance of nonparametric species richness estimators in a high diversity plant community. Divers Distrib 9:283–295. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coutts AM, Beringer J, Tapper NJ (2007) Impact of increasing urban density on local climate: spatial and temporal variations in the surface energy balance in Melbourne, Australia. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 46:477–493. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Devictor V, van Swaay C, Brereton T et al (2012) Differences in the climatic debts of birds and butterflies at a continental scale. Nat Clim Change 2:121–124. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Díaz S, Cabido M (2001) Vive la difference: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol Evol 16:646–655. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ehrenfeld JG (1995) Microtopography and vegetation in Atlantic white cedar swamps: the effects of natural disturbances. Can J Bot 73:474–484. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ehrenfeld JG (2000) Evaluating wetlands within an urban context. Ecol Eng 15:253–265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ehrenfeld JG (2005) Vegetation of forested wetlands in urban and suburban landscapes in New Jersey. J Torrey Bot Soc 132:262–279.;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Findlay CS, Bourdages J (2000) Response time of wetland biodiversity to road construction on adjacent lands. Conserv Biol 14:86–94. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Findlay CS, Houlahan J (1997) Anthropogenic correlates of species richness in southeastern Ontario wetlands. Conserv Biol 11:1000–1009. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fitter AH, Peat HJ (1994) The ecological flora database. Accessed Oct 2016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Flinn KM, Vellend M (2005) Recovery of forest plant communities in post-agricultural landscapes. Front Ecol Environ 3:243–250.;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Flinn KM, Lechowicz MJ, Waterway MJ (2008) Plant species diversity and composition of wetlands within an upland forest. Am J Bot 95:1216–1224. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Garnier E, Lavorel S, Ansquer P et al (2007) Assessing the effects of land-use change on plant traits, communities and ecosystem functioning in grasslands: a standardized methodology and lessons from an application to 11 European sites. Ann Bot 99:967–985. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Gong C, Chen J, Yu S (2013) Biotic homogenization and differentiation of the flora in artificial and near-natural habitats across urban green spaces. Landsc Urban Plan 120:158–169. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Groffman PM, Bain DJ, Band LE et al (2003) Down by the riverside: urban riparian ecology. Front Ecol Environ 1:315–321.;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL, Jones PG, Jarvis A (2005) Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 25:1965–1978. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hintze C, Heydel F, Hoppe C, Cunze S, König A, Tackenberg (2013) D3: the dispersal and diaspore database. Accessed Jan 2017
  30. Hodges MN, McKinney ML (2018) Urbanization impacts on land snail community composition. Urban Ecosyst 21:721–735. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Houlahan JE, Findlay CS (2004) Estimating the ‘critical’ distance at which adjacent land-use degrades wetland water and sediment quality. Landsc Ecol 19:677–690. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Houlahan JE, Keddy PA, Makkay K, Findlay CS (2006) The effects of adjacent land use on wetland species richness and community composition. Wetlands 26:79–96.;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Institut de la statistique du Québec (2019) Coup d’œil sur les régions et les MRC. Accessed May 2018
  34. Jackson ST, Sax DF (2010) Balancing biodiversity in a changing environment: extinction debt, immigration credit and species turnover. Trends Ecol Evol 25:153–160. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnson AL, Tauzer EC, Swan CM (2015) Human legacies differentially organize functional and phylogenetic diversity of urban herbaceous plant communities at multiple spatial scales. Appl Veg Sci 18:513–527. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kartesz JT (2015) The biota of North America Program (BONAP). Taxonomic Data Center. Accessed Jan 2017
  37. Kirkman LK, Lide RF, Wein G, Sharitz RR (1996) Vegetation changes and land-use legacies of depression wetlands of the western coastal plain of South Carolina: 1951–1992. Wetlands 16:564–576. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kleyer M, Bekker RM, Knevel IC et al (2008) The LEDA Traitbase: a database of life-history traits of the Northwest European flora. J Ecol 96:1266–1274. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Knapp S, Kühn I, Wittig R, Ozinga WA, Poschlod P, Klotz S (2008) Urbanization causes shifts of species’ trait state frequencies. Preslia 80:375–388. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Knop E (2016) Biotic homogenization of three insect groups due to urbanization. Glob Change Biol 22:228–236. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kühn I, Brandl R, Klots S (2004) The flora of German cities is naturally species rich. Evol Ecol Res 6:749–764Google Scholar
  42. Kuussaari M, Bommarco R, Heikkinen RK et al (2009) Extinction debt: a challenge for biodiversity conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 24:564–571. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Laliberté E, Legendre P (2010) A distance-based framework for measuring functional diversity from multiple traits. Ecology 91:299–305. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Legendre P, De Cáceres M (2013) Beta diversity as the variance of community data: dissimilarity coefficients and partitioning. Ecol Lett 16:951–963. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Legendre P, Legendre LF (2012) Numerical ecology. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  46. Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004) Historical landscape connectivity affects present plant species diversity. Ecology 85:1840–1845. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lopez RD, Davis CB, Fennessy MS (2002) Ecological relationships between landscape change and plant guilds in depressional wetlands. Landsc Ecol 17:43–56. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lougheed VL, McIntosh MD, Parker CA, Stevenson RJ (2008) Wetland degradation leads to homogenization of the biota at local and landscape scales. Freshw Biol 53:2402–2413. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Magura T, Lovei GL, Tothmeresz B (2010) Does urbanization decrease diversity in ground beetle (Carabidae) assemblages? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:16–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mayfield MM, Bonser SP, Morgan JW, Aubin I, McNamara S, Vesk PA (2010) What does species richness tell us about functional trait diversity? Predictions and evidence for responses of species and functional trait diversity to land-use change. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:423–431. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. McCune JL, Vellend M (2013) Gains in native species promote biotic homogenization over four decades in a human-dominated landscape. J Ecol 101:1542–1551. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McKinney ML (2002) Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation: the impacts of urbanization on native species are poorly studied, but educating a highly urbanized human population about these impacts can greatly improve species conservation in all ecosystems. Bioscience 52:883–890.;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. McKinney ML (2004) Do exotics homogenize or differentiate communities? Roles of sampling and exotic species richness. Biol Invasions 6:495–504. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. McKinney ML (2008) Do humans homogenize or differentiate biotas? It depends. J Biogeogr 35:1960–1961. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. McKinney ML, Lockwood JL (1999) Biotic homogenization: a few winners replacing many losers in the next mass extinction. Trends Ecol Evol 14:450–453. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Melliger RL, Braschler B, Rusterholz HP, Baur B (2018) Diverse effects of degree of urbanisation and forest size on species richness and functional diversity of plants, and ground surface-active ants and spiders. PLoS ONE 13:e0199245. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: wetlands and water synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Moffatt SF, McLachlan SM, Kenkel NC (2004) Impacts of land use on riparian forest along an urban–rural gradient in southern Manitoba. Plant Ecol 174:119–135. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Nazarnia N, Schwick C, Jaeger JA (2016) Accelerated urban sprawl in Montreal, Quebec City, and Zurich: investigating the differences using time series 1951–2011. Ecol Indic 60:1229–1251. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Neil K, Wu J (2006) Effects of urbanization on plant flowering phenology: a review. Urban Ecosyst 9:243–257. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nock CA, Paquette A, Follett M, Nowak DJ, Messier C (2013) Effects of urbanization on tree species functional diversity in Eastern North America. Ecosystems 16:1487–1497. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Økland RH, Rydgren K, Økland T (2008) Species richness in boreal swamp forests of SE Norway: the role of surface microtopography. J Veg Sci 19:67–74. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Olden JD, Poff NL (2003) Toward a mechanistic understanding and prediction of biotic homogenization. Am Nat 162:442–460. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Olden JD, Rooney TP (2006) On defining and quantifying biotic homogenization. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 15:113–120. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Patenaude T, Smith AC, Fahrig L (2015) Disentangling the effects of wetland cover and urban development on quality of remaining wetlands. Urban Ecosyst 18:663–684. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Paul MJ, Meyer JL (2001) Streams in the urban landscape. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:333–365. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pellerin S, Poulin M (2013) Analyse de la situation des milieux humides au Québec et recommandations à des fins de conservation et de gestion durable. Ministère du Développement durable, de l’Environnement, de la Faune et des Parcs, QuébecGoogle Scholar
  68. Poff NL, Olden JD, Merritt DM, Pepin DM (2007) Homogenization of regional river dynamics by dams and global biodiversity implications. PNAS 104:5732–5737. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Pollock MM, Naiman RJ, Hanley TA (1998) Plant species richness in riparian wetlands—a test of biodiversity theory. Ecology 79:94–105Google Scholar
  70. Pyšek P (1993) Factors affecting the diversity of flora and vegetation in Central European settlements. Vegetatio 106:89–100. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Pyšek P, Richardson DM (2008) Traits associated with invasiveness in alien plants: where do we stand? In: Nentwig W (ed) Biological invasions. Springer, Berlin, pp 97–125. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Qian H, Guo Q (2010) Linking biotic homogenization to habitat type, invasiveness and growth form of naturalized alien plants in North America. Divers Distrib 16:119–125. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Reed PB (1988) National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: national summary. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  74. Rheinhardt R (1992) A multivariate analysis of vegetation patterns in tidal freshwater swamps of lower Chesapeake Bay, USA. Bull Torrey Bot Club 119:192–207. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Rioux JF, Cimon-Morin J, Pellerin S, Alard D, Poulin M (2019) How land cover spatial resolution affects mapping of urban ecosystem service flows. Front Environ Sci. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Romalho CE, Hobbs RJ (2012) Time for a change: dynamic urban ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 27:179–188. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Rooney RC, Bayley SE (2011) Relative influence of local-and landscape-level habitat quality on aquatic plant diversity in shallow open-water wetlands in Alberta’s boreal zone: direct and indirect effects. Landsc Ecol 26:1023–1034. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Rooney TP, Olden JD, Leach MK, Rogers DA (2007) Biotic homogenization and conservation prioritization. Biol Conserv 134:447–450. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rosenblad KC, Sax DF (2017) A new framework for investigating biotic homogenization and exploring future trajectories: oceanic island plant and bird assemblages as a case study. Ecography 40:1040–1049. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Schütz C, Schulze CH (2015) Functional diversity of urban bird communities: effects of landscape composition, green space area and vegetation cover. Ecol Evol 5:5230–5239. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. Siefert A, Violle C, Chalmandrier L et al (2015) A global meta-analysis of the relative extent of intraspecific trait variation in plant communities. Ecol Lett 18:1406–1419. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Skultety D, Matthews JW (2018) Human land use as a driver of plant community composition in wetlands of the Chicago metropolitan region. Urban Ecosyst 21:447–458. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Trentanovi G, von der Lippe M, Sitzia T, Ziechmann U, Kowarik I, Cierjacks A (2013) Biotic homogenization at the community scale: disentangling the roles of urbanization and plant invasion. Divers Distrib 19:738–748. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Vellend M, Verheyen K, Jacquemyn H, Kolb A, Van Calster H, Peterken G, Hermy M (2006) Extinction debt of forest plants persists for more than a century following habitat fragmentation. Ecology 87:542–548. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Violle C, Navas ML, Vile D, Kazakou E, Fortunel C, Hummel I, Garnier E (2007) Let the concept of trait be functional! Oikos 116:882–892. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Vivian-Smith G (1997) Microtopography heterogeneity and floristic diversity in experimental wetland communities. J Ecol 85:71–82. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Wania A, Kühn I, Klotz S (2006) Plant richness patterns in agricultural and urban landscapes in Central Germany—spatial gradients of species richness. Landsc Urban Plan 75:97–110. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Warner BG, Rubec CDA (1997) The Canadian wetland classification system, 2nd edn. Wetlands Research Centre, University of Waterloo, WaterlooGoogle Scholar
  89. Williams NSG, Hahs AK, Vesk PA (2015) Urbanisation, plant traits and the composition of urban floras. Perspect Plant Ecol 17:78–86. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Williamson MH, Fitter A (1996) The characters of successful invaders. Biol Conserv 78:163–170. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Yang J, La Sorte LA, Pyšek P, Yan P, Nowak D, McBride J (2015) The compositional similarity of urban forests among the world’s cities is scale dependent. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 24:1413–1423. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Yang J, Yan P, He R, Song X (2017) Exploring land-use legacy effects on taxonomic and functional diversity of woody plants in a rapidly urbanizing landscape. Landsc Urban Plan 162:92–103. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Zeeman BJ, McDonnell M, Kendal D, Morgan JW (2017) Biotic homogenization in an increasingly urbanized temperate grassland ecosystem. J Veg Sci 28:550–561. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut de recherche en biologie végétale, Université de Montréal and Jardin botanique de MontréalMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Québec Center for Biodiversity ScienceMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Department of PhytologyUniversité LavalQuebecCanada

Personalised recommendations