Folia Geobotanica

, Volume 30, Issue 4, pp 499–510 | Cite as

Small-scale distribution of species richness in a grassland (Bílé Karpaty Mts., Czech Republic)

  • Leoš Klimeš


Variation in the number of species was studied in a subthermophilous grassland at a scale of 0.05 ×0.05 m during a 5-year period. The observed variance of species richness (VSR) was compared with a null model based on random distribution of species over a set of squares. It was found that distribution of species richness had more values than, expected around the mean and less values at the “shoulders”. Both tails fell within the predicted limits. Application of the procedures removing spatial dependence (random shifts, rotation/reflection method byPalmer & van der Maarel 1995) and environmental heterogeneity (patch model byWatkins & Wilson 1992) did not change the observed pattern.

Using simulations in which the number of clumps and clumping intensity were manipulated it was found that the effect of the clumped spatial pattern, on VSR results in a wide range of variances. Both variance excess and variance deficit were found more frequently than expected under the null model.

To test the effect of the limitation to the number of individuals per square, a null model was developed which included that observed number of plant shoots per square, the observed distribution of the number of shoots belonging to individual species per square and the observed spatial distribution of the shoots. The observed VSR was still lower than that produced by the null model. Therefore, it is concluded that at a scale of 0.05×0.05 m plant species combine in a non-random way in the studied grassland. It is suggested that the shape of left and right “shoulders” of the species richness distribution may be caused by different factors, such as positive and negative covariance between species, respectively. Their simultaneous impact can generate the observed pattern in species richness.


Community structure Competition Null models Spatial dependence Variance of species richness 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aarssen L.W. &Epp G.A. (1990): Neighbor manipulations in natural vegetation: a review.—J. Veg. Sci. 1: 13–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartha S., Collins S.L., Glenn S.M. &Kertész M. (1995a): Fine-scale spatial organization of tallgrass prairie vegetation along a topographic gradient.—Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 169–184.Google Scholar
  3. Bartha S., Czárán T. &Oborny B. (1995b): Spatial constraints masking community assembly rules: a simulation study.—Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 471–482.Google Scholar
  4. Bertness M.D. &Callaway R. (1994): Positive interactions in communities. —Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 191–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bycroft C.M., Nicolasou N., Smith B. &Wilson B. (1993): Community structure (niche limitation and guild proportionality) in relation to the effect of spatial scale, in aNothofagus forest sampled with a circular transect.—New Zealand J. Ecol. 17: 59–65.Google Scholar
  6. Caldwell M.M. &Pearcy R.W. (1994) [eds.]: Exploitation of environmental heterogeneity by plants.— Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
  7. Cale W.G., Henebry M. &Yeakley J.A. (1989): Inferring process from pattern in natural communities.—BioScience 39: 600–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clements F.E. (1916): Plant succession: an analysis of the development of vegetation.—Carnegie Inst., Washington, Publ. No. 242.Google Scholar
  9. Grace J.B. &Tilman D. (1990) [eds] Perspectives on plant competition.—Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
  10. Greig-Smith P. (1983): Quantitative plant ecology. Ed 3.—University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  11. Goldberg D. (1995): Generating and testing predictions about community structure: which theory is relevant and can it be tested with observational data?—Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 511–518.Google Scholar
  12. Harvey P.H., Colwell R.K., Silvertown J.W. &May R.M. (1983): Null models in ecology. —Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst. 14: 189–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Herben T., Krahulec F., Hadincová V. &Kovářová M. (1993): Small-scale spatial dynamics of plant species in a grassland community over six years.—J. Veg. Sci. 4: 171–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hunter A.F. &Aarssen L.W. (1988): Plants helping plants: New evidence indicates that beneficence is important in vegetation.—BioScience 38: 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jongman R.H., ter Braak C.J.F. &van Tongeren O.F.R. (1987): Data analysis in community and landscape ecology.—Wageningen, Pudoc, 299 pp.Google Scholar
  16. Jongepierová I., Jongepier J.W. &Klimeš L. (1994): Restoration of species-rich meadows in the Bílé Karpaty Moutains.—Příroda 1: 185–189.Google Scholar
  17. Klimeš L., Jongepier J.W. &Jongepierová I. (1995). Niche limitation, guild structure and small-scale dynamics in species-rich meadows.—Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 243–253.Google Scholar
  18. Lepš J. (1995): Variance deficit is not reliable evidence for niche limitation.—Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 455–459.Google Scholar
  19. Lepš J. &Štursa J. (1989): Species-area curve, life history strategies, and succession: a field test of relationships.—Vegetatio 83: 249–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Marsaglia G., Narasimhan B. &Zaman A. (1990): A random number generator for PC’s.—Comp. Physics Comm. 60: 345–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McConnaughay K.D.M. &Bazzaz F.A. (1991): Is physical space a soil resource?.—Ecology 72: 94–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McIntosh R.P. (1981). Succession and ecological theory..—In:West D.C., Shugart H.H. &Botkin D.B. [eds.]: Forest succession: Concepts and applications.—Springer-Verlag, New York pp. 10–23.Google Scholar
  23. Palmer M.W. (1987): Variability in species richness within Minnesota oldfields: a use of the variance test.— Vegetatio 70: 61–64.Google Scholar
  24. Palmer M.W. &van der Maarel E. (1995): Variance in species richness, species association and niche limitation.—Oikos 73: 203–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pickett S.T.A. &McDonnell M.J. (1989): Changing perspectives in community dynamics: a theory of successional forces.—Trends Ecol. Evol. 4: 241–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rabotnov T.A. (1992): Javljaetsja li ob’’em fizičeskoj sredy resursom dlja rastenij? (Is physical space a resource for plants?).—Bjull. Moskovsk. Obšč. Isp. Prir., Otd. Biol. 97(5): 81–82.Google Scholar
  27. Ryser P. (1990): Influence of gaps and neighbouring plants on seedling establishment in limestone grasslands. —Veröff. Geobot. Inst. ETH, Stiftung Rübel, Zürich, 104.Google Scholar
  28. Ryser P. (1993): Influences of neighbouring plants on seedling establishment in limestone grassland.—J. Veg. Sci. 4: 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schluter D. (1984): A variance test for detecting species associations, with some example applications.— Ecology 65: 998–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tlusták V. (1975): Syntaxonomický, přehled travinných společenstev Bílých Karpat (Syntaxonomical survey of grasslands in the Bílé Karpaty Mountains).—Preslia 47: 129–144.Google Scholar
  31. Utkin A.I., Byastrov L.G., Dylis N.V. &Solntseva O.N. (1969): Vertikal’no-frakcionnoe raspredelenie fitomassy i principy vydelenija biogeogorizontov v lesnych biogeocenozah (Vertical-fractional distribution of biomass and principles of recognition of biogeohorizons in forest biocenoses).—Bjull. Moskovsk. Obšč. Isp. Prir., Otd. Biol. 74(1): 85–100.Google Scholar
  32. Van der Maarel E. &Sykes M.T. (1993): Small-scale plant species turnover in a limestone grassland: the carousel model and some comments on the niche concept.—J. Veget Sci. 4: 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Watkins A.J. &Wilson J.B. (1992): Fine-scale community structure of lawns.—J. Ecol. 80: 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wilson J.B. (1995a): Variance in species richness, niche limitation, and vindication of patch models.—Oikos 73: 277–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wilson J.B. (1995b): Testing for community structure: a Bayesian approach.—Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 461–469.Google Scholar
  36. Wilson J.B., Gitay H. &Agnew A.D.Q. (1987): Does niche limitation exist?—Funct. Ecol. 1: 391–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wilson J.B., Roxburgh S.H. &Watkins A.J. (1992): Limitation, to plant species coexistence at a point: a study in a New Zealand lawn.—J. Veg. Sci. 3:711–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leoš Klimeš
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of BotanySection of Plant EcologyTŕeboňCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations