On the possible role of local effects on the species richness of acidic and calcareous rock grasslands in Northern Hungary

Folia Geobotanica

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 453-467

  Rédei, Tamás ^a   Botta Dukát, Zoltán ^a   Csiky, János ^b   Kun, András ^a   Tóth, Tibor ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Hungary)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PÉCS   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Dolomite; Regional scale; Rocky grasslands; Specialists; Species pool; Species area relationship

Indexed keywords

DOLOMITE; GRASSLAND; RABIES; SPECIES RICHNESS; SPECIES-AREA RELATIONSHIP;

CENTRAL EUROPE; EURASIA; EUROPE; HUNGARY;

EID: 0346304930     PISSN: 12119520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF02803252     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. ARRHENIUS O. (1921): Species and area. J. Ecol. 9: 95-99.
2. BARTHA S. & ITTZÉS P. (2001): Local richness - species pool ratio: a consequence of the species-area relationship. Folia Geobot. 36: 9-23.
3. BARTHA S., RÉDEI T., SZOLLÁT GY., BÓDIS J. & MUCINA L. (1998): Északi és déli kitettségu dolomitsziklagyepek térbeli mintázatainak összehasonlitása (Compositional diversity and fine-scale spatial pattern of dolomite grasslands on contrasting slopes). In: CSONTOS P. (ed.), Sziklagyepek szübotanikai kutatása (Synbotanical study of rock grasslands), Scientia Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 159-182.
4. BORHIDI A. (1995): Social behaviour types, the naturalness and relative ecological indicator values of the higher plants in the Hungarian Flora. Acta Bot. Hung. 39: 97-181.
5. BOTTA-DUKÁT Z. & RUPRECHT E. (1999): Using concentration analysis for operating with indicator values: effect of grouping species. Acta Bot. Hung. 42: 59-67.
6. CONNOR E.F. & MCCOY E.D. (1979): The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Amer. Naturalist 113: 791-833.
7. CSIKY J. (2002): A Nógrád-Gömöri bazaltvidék flórája és vegetációja (Flora and vegetation of the Nógrád-Gömör basalt area). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pécs, Pécs.
8. DAHL E. (1960): Some measures of uniformity in vegetation analysis. Ecology 41: 785-790.
9. EFRON B. (1982): The jack-knife, the bootstrap and other resampling plans. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia.
10. ELLENBERG H., WEBER H.E., DÜLL R., WIRTH V., WERNER W. & PAULISSEN D. (1991): Zeigewerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobot. 18: 1-248.
11. EWALD J. (2003): The calcareous riddle: Why are there so many calciphytic species in the Central European flora? Folia Geobot. 38: 357-366 (this issue).
12. FEOLI E. & ORLÓCI L. (1979): Analysis of concentration and detection of underlying factors in structured tables. Vegetatio 40: 49-54.
13. FISHER R.A., CORBER A.S. & WILLIAMS C.B. (1943): The relation between the number of species and the number of individuals in a random sample of an animal population. J. Anim. Ecol. 12: 42-58.
14. GAMS H. (1930): Über Reliktföhrenwälder und das Dolomitphänomen. Veröff. Geobot. Inst. Stiftung Rübel Zürich 6: 32-80.
15. GLEASON H.A. (1922): On the relation between species and area. Ecology 3: 158-162.
16. GOLDBERG D.H. & NOVOPLANSKY A. (1997): On the relative importance of competition in unproductive environments. J. Ecol. 85: 409-418.
17. GOUGH L., SHAVER G. R., CARROLL J., ROYER D.L. & LAUNDRE J.A. (2000): Vascular plant species richness in Alaskan arctic tundra: the importance of soil pH. J. Ecol. 88: 54-66.
18. GRACE J.B. (2001): Difficulties with estimating and interpreting species pool and the implications for understanding patterns of diversity. Folia Geobot. 36: 71-83.
19. GRIME J.P. (1979): Plant strategies and vegetation processes. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
20. GRUBB P.J. (1987): Global trends in species-richness in terrestrial vegetation: a view from the northern hemisphere. In: GEE J.H.R. & GILLER P.S. (eds.), Organization of communities, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 99-118.
21. HERBEN T. (2000): Correlation between richness per unit area and the species pool cannot be used to demonstrate the species pool effect. J. Veg. Sci. 11: 123-126
22. HORANSZKY A. (1964): Die Wälder des Szentendre-Visegráder Gebirges. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
23. HUSTON M. (1979): A general hypothesis of species diversity. Amer. Naturalist 113: 81-101.
24. JUHÁSZ-NAGY P. (1984): Beszélgetések az ökológiáról (Conversations on ecology). Mezogazdasági Kiadó, Budapest.
25. JUHÁSZ-NAGY P. (1986): Egy operatív ökológia hiánya, szükséglete és feladatai (Lack, need and tasks of an operative ecology). Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
26. KOVÁCSNÉ LÁNG E. (1966): Összehasonlító talaj- és növényanalízis dolomit- és mészkô-szikla-gyepekben (Comparative soil and plant analysis in dolomite and limestone rock swards). Bot. Közlem. 53: 175-184.
27. LEPŠ J. (2001): Species-pool hypothesis: limits to its testing. Folia Geobot. 36: 45-52.
28. LUCAS R.F. & DAVIES J.F. (1960): Relationships between pH values of organic soils and availabilities of 12 plant nutrients. Soil Sci. 92: 177-182.
29. MACARTHUR R.H. & WILSON E.O. (1967): The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
30. ORLÓCI L. & KENKEL N.C. (1985): Introduction to data analysis. International Co-operative Publ. House, Burtonsville.
31. PEET R.K. & CHRISTENSEN N.L. (1988): Changes in species diversity during secondary forest succession on the North Carolina piedmont. In: DURING H.J., WERGER M.J.A. & WILLEMS H.J. (eds.), Diversity and pattern in plant communities, Junk, The Hague, pp. 233-246.
32. PRÉCSÉNYI I. (1995): Relationship between the stages of succession series and the water indicator values. Bot. Közlem. 82: 59-66.
33. PRESTON F.W. (1948): The commonness and rarity of species. Ecology 29: 254-283.
34. PRESTON F.W. (1960): Time and space and variation of species. Ecology 41: 611-627.
35. PRESTON F.W. (1962): The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity. Ecology 43: 185-215.
36. SIMON T. (1977): Vegetationsuntersuchungen im Zempléner Gebirge. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
37. TÖRÖK K., HORANSZKY A. & KÓSA G. (1994): Long-term changes of species composition in an andesite grassland community of the Visegrád Mts., Hungary. Abstr. Bot. 18: 13-27.
38. TÖRÖK K. & ZÓLYOMI B. (1998): A Kárpát-medence öt sziklagyeptársulásának szüntaxonómiai reviziója (Syntaxonomical revision on five rocky grassland communities of the Carpathian Basin). In: CSONTOS P. (ed.), Sziklagyepek szünbotanikai kutatása (Synbotanical study of rock grasslands), Scientia Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 109-132.
39. WILLIAMS C.B. (1944): Some applications of the logaritmic series and the index of diversity to ecological problems. J. Ecol. 32: 1-44.
40. WILLIAMS C.B. (1947): The logaritmic series and its application to biological problems. J. Ecol. 34: 253-272.
41. ZAR J.H. (1999): Biostatistical analysis. Ed. 4. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.
42. ZOBEL M. (1997): The relative role of species pools in determining plant species richness: an alternative explanation of species coexistence? Trends Ecol. Evol. 12: 266-269.
43. ZOBEL, M., VAN DER MAAREL E. & DUPRÉ C. (1998): Species pool: the concept, its determination and significance for community restoration. Appl. Veg. Sci. 1: 55-66.
44. ZÓLYOMI B. (1942): A középdunai flóraválasztó és a dolomitjelenség (Die Mitteldonau-Florenscheide und das Dolomitphänomen). Bot. Közlem. 39: 209-223.
45. ZÓLYOMI B. (1950): Fitotsenozi i lesomelioratsii obnazhenii gor Budi (Les Phytocoenoses des montagnes de Buda et la reboisement des entroits dénudés). Acta Biol. Acad Sci. Hung. 1: 7-67.
46. ZÓLYOMI B. (1958): Budapest és környékének természetes növénytakarója (The natural vegetation of Budapest and its environs). In: PÉCSI M., MAROSI S. & SZILÁRD J. (eds.), Budapest Természeti Képe (The Nature of