Advertisement

Plant Ecology

, Volume 218, Issue 4, pp 433–445 | Cite as

Functional traits, spatial patterns and species associations: what is their combined role in the assembly of wetland plant communities?

Article

Abstract

Studies of community assembly focus on finding rules that predict which species can become member of a plant community. Within a community, species can be categorized in two ways: functional groups classify species according to their functional traits, whereas generalized guilds group species based on their (co-)occurrence, spatial distribution and abundance patterns. This study searches for community assembly rules by testing for coherence among functional groups and generalized guilds, as well as for correlations between the individual functional traits and assembly features, in two wetland plant communities in South Africa. The classifications of functional groups and generalized guilds were not consistent. However, rhizome internode length was related to fine-scale spatial pattern, suggesting that in systems dominated by clonal species (including wetlands, where recruitment sites are strongly limited) community assembly may be strongly linked to colonization ability. Functional groups do not predict guilds in wetland plant communities, precluding their use as the basis for assembly rules. However, an explicit consideration of clonal strategies and their effect on species’ spatial patterns appears to be important for understanding community assembly in systems dominated by clonal plants.

Keywords

Clonality Helophytes Functional groups Intrinsic guilds Wetlands Spatial autocorrelation Rhizomes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The funding for this research has been granted by the University of the Free State Research Funds to ES. Many thanks to Piet-Louis Grundling, Nerosha Govender (Isimangaliso Wetland Authority) and Birdlife International who helped out with the access to the research sites. Field assistance was provided by Nozipho Ndwalane and Althea Grundling and assistance with the measurement of functional traits was provided by Nina van Vliet and Ngaka Mzizi. We gratefully thank Mark Dale for advice on dealing with spatial autocorrelation and David Zelený and Geofrey Mukwada for looking at an early draft of this manuscript.

Supplementary material

11258_2017_701_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (13 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 13 kb)
11258_2017_701_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (11 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (XLSX 11 kb)
11258_2017_701_MOESM3_ESM.xlsx (38 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (XLSX 38 kb)
11258_2017_701_MOESM4_ESM.xlsx (27 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (XLSX 27 kb)
11258_2017_701_MOESM5_ESM.xlsx (11 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (XLSX 11 kb)
11258_2017_701_MOESM6_ESM.xlsx (11 kb)
Supplementary material 6 (XLSX 11 kb)

References

  1. Bartha S, Campetella G, Canullo R, Bodis J, Mucina L (2004) On the importance of fine-scale complexity in vegetation restoration studies. Int J Ecol Env Sci 30:101–116Google Scholar
  2. Blondel J (2003) Guilds or Functional Groups: does it matter? Oikos 100:223–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonanomi G, Incerti G, Mazzoleni S (2011) Assessing occurrence, specificity, and mechanisms of plant facilitation in terrestrial ecosystems. Plant Ecol 212:1777–1790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boutin C, Keddy PA (1993) A functional classification of wetland plants. J Veg Sci 4:591–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cadotte MW, Arnillas CA, Livingstone SW, Yasui SLE (2015) Predicting communities from functional traits. TREE 30:510–511PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Campetella G, Botta-Dukát Z, Wellstein C, Canullo R, Gatto S, Chelli S, Mucina L, Bartha S (2011) Patterns of plant trait-environment relationships along a forest succession chronosequence. Agric Ecosyst Environ 145:38–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Canullo R, Campetella G, Mucina L, Chelli S, Wellstein C, Bartha S (2011) Patterns of clonal growth modes along a chronosequence of post-coppice forest regeneration in beech forests of central Italy. Folia Geobotanica 46:271–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark JS, Mohan J, Dietze M, Ibanez I (2003) Coexistence: how to identify trophic trade-offs. Ecology 84:17–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cornwell WK, Schwilk DW, Ackerly DD (2006) A trait-based test for habitat filtering: convex hull volume. Ecology 87:1465–1471CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dale MRT (1999) Spatial pattern analysis in Plant Ecology. Cambridge studies in Ecology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dale MRT, Fortin MJ (2009) Spatial autocorrelation and statistical tests: some solutions. J Agric Biol Env Stat 14:188–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dale MRT, Blundon DJ, MacIsaac DA, Thomas AG (1991) Multiple species effects and spatial autocorrelation in detecting species associations. J Veg Sci 2:635–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Bello F, Lepš J, Sebastià MT (2006) Variations in species and functional plant diversity along climatic and grazing gradients. Ecography 29:801–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Bello F, Thuiller W, Lepš J, Choler P, Clément JC, Macek P, Sebastià MT, Lavorel S (2009) Partitioning of functional diversity reveals the scale and extent of trait convergence and divergence. J Veg Sci 20:475–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Didham RK, Watts CH (2005) Are systems with strong underlying abiotic regimes more likely to exhibit alternative stable states? Oikos 110:409–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fortin MJ, Dale MT (2005) Spatial ecology. A guide for ecologists. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Germishuizen G, Meyer NL (2003) Plants of southern Africa: an annotated checklist. Strelitzia 14. SANBI, PretoriaGoogle Scholar
  18. Grime JP (2006) Trait convergence and trait divergence in herbaceous plant communities: mechanisms and consequences. J Veg Sci 17:255–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. HilleRisLambers J, Adler PB, Harpole WS, Levine JM, Mayfield MM (2012) Rethinking community assembly through the lens of co-existence theory. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 43:227–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keddy PA (1992) Assembly and response rules: two goals for predictive community ecology. J Veg Sci 3:157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kleijn D, Van Groenendael JM (1999) The exploitation of heterogeneity by a clonal plant in habitats with contrasting productivity levels. J Ecol 87:873–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Klimeš L, Klimešová J, Hendriks R, Van Groenendael JM (1997) Clonal plant architecture: a comparative analysis of form and function. In: De Kroon H, Van Groenendael JM (eds) The ecology and evolution of clonal plants. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp 1–29Google Scholar
  23. Lavorel S, Garnier E (2002) Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits: revisiting the Holy Grail. Funct Ecol 16:545–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Legendre P (1993) Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm? Ecology 74:1659–1673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MacArthur R, Levins R (1967) The limiting similarity, convergence and divergence of coexisting species. Am Naturalist 101:377–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mason NWH, Wilson JB (2006) Mechanisms of species coexistence in a lawn community: mutual corroboration between two independent assembly rules. Comm Ecol 7:109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moreno García CA, Schellberg J, Ewert F, Brüser K, Canales-Prati P, Linstädter A, Oomen RJ, Ruppert JC, Perelman SB (2014) Response of community-aggregated plant functional traits along grazing gradients: insights from African semi-arid grasslands. Appl Veg Sci 17:470–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Narsai R, Whelan J (2013) How unique is the low oxygen response? An analysis of the anaerobic response and comparison with abiotic stress in rice and Arabidopsis. Front Plant Sci 4:1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Oborny B, Kun A, Czárán T, Bokros S (2000) The effect of clonal integration on plant competition for mosaic habitat space. Ecology 8:3291–3304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pekin BK, Wittkuhn RS, Boer MM, Macfarlane C, Grierson PF (2011) Plant functional traits along environmental gradients in a seasonally dry and fire-prone ecosystem. J Veg Sci 22:1009–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pillar VD, Duarte LS, Sosinski EE, Fernando J (2009) Discriminating trait-convergence and trait divergence assembly patterns in ecological community gradients. J Veg Sci 20:334–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. R development Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org. Accessed September 2015
  33. Shipley B (2010) Community assembly, natural selection and maximum entropy models. Oikos 119:604–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shipley B, Keddy PA, Moore DRJ, Lemky K (1989) Regeneration and establishment strategies of emergent macrophytes. J Ecol 77:1093–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shipley B, Vile D, Garnier E (2006) From plant traits to plant communities: a statistical mechanistic approach to biodiversity. Science 314:812–814CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Sieben EJJ (2012) Plant functional composition and ecosystem properties: the case of peatlands in South Africa. Plant Ecol 213:809–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Song M, Dong M (2002) Clonal plants and plant species diversity in wetland ecosystems in China. J Veg Sci 13:237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sosnová M, Van Diggelen R, Klimešová J (2010) Distribution of clonal growth forms in wetlands. Aquat Bot 92:33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Suding KN, Gross KL, Houseman GR (2003a) Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology. TREE 19:46–53Google Scholar
  40. Suding KN, Goldberg DE, Hartman KM (2003b) Relationships among species traits: separating levels of response and identifying linkages to abundance. Ecology 84:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Terer T, Muasya AM, Triest L (2015) Strong isolation by distance revealed among Cyperus papyrus populations in the Rift Valley lakes, Lake Victoria, and isolated wetlands of Kenya. Aquat Bot 121:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Violle C, Navas ML, Vile D, Kazakou E, Fortunel C, Hummel I, Garnier E (2007) Let the concept of trait be functional! Oikos 116:882–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weiher E, Keddy PA (1999) Ecological assembly rules. Perspectives, advances, retreats. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wellstein C, Campetella G, Spada F, Chelli S, Mucina L, Canullo R, Bartha S (2014) Context-dependent assembly rules and the role of dominating grasses in semi-natural abandoned sub-Mediterranean grasslands. Agric Ecosyst Environ 182:113–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wilson JB (1999a) Assembly rules in plant communities. In: Weiher E, Keddy PA (eds) Ecological assembly rules. Perspectives, advances, retreats. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 130–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wilson JB (1999b) Guilds, functional types and ecological groups. Oikos 86:507–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wilson JB, Roxburgh SH (1994) A demonstration of guild-based assembly rules for a plant community, and determination of Intrinsic Guilds. Oikos 69:267–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Xue W, Huang L, Dong BC, Zhang MX, Yu FH (2013) Patchy distributions of competitors affect the growth of a clonal plant when the competitor density is high. PLoS ONE 8:e78221CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Yan B, Zhang J, Liu Y, Li Z, Huang X, Yang W, Prinzig A (2012) Trait assembly of woody plants in communities across sub-alpine gradients: identifying the role of limiting similarity. J Veg Sci 23:698–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant SciencesUniversity of the Free StatePhuthaditjhabaSouth Africa
  2. 2.Department of Plant and Soil SciencesUniversity of PretoriaPretoriaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations