Plant species as predictors of soil pH: Replacing expert judgement with measurements

Journal of Vegetation Science

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 461-470

  Wamelink, G W Wieger ^a   Goedhart, Paul W ^a   Van Dobben, Han F ^a   Berendse, Frank ^a  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Ellenberg indicator values; Optimum curve; Plant species response; Prediction method; Spline

Indexed keywords

BIOINDICATOR; ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS; ERROR ANALYSIS; PH; SOIL CHEMISTRY;

BENELUX; EASTERN HEMISPHERE; EURASIA; EUROPE; NETHERLANDS; WESTERN EUROPE; WORLD;

EID: 26444620062     PISSN: 11009233     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2005.tb02386.x     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Austin, M.P., Nicholls, A.O., Doherty, M.D. & Meyers, J.A. 1994. Determining species response functions to an environmental gradient by means of a beta-function. J. Veg. Sci. 5: 215-228.
2. Bobbink, R., Hornung, M. & Roelofs, J.G.M. 1998. The effects of air-borne nitrogen pollutants on species diversity in natural and semi-natural European vegetation. J. Ecol. 86: 717-738.
3. Bouriaud, O., Soudani, K. & Breda, N. 2003. Leaf area index from litter collection: impact of specific leaf area variability within a beech stand. Can. J. Remote Sens. 29: 371-380.
4. Campbell, B.D. & Grime, J.P. 1992. An experimental test of plant strategy theory. Ecology 73: 15-29.
5. de Vries, W., Reinds, G.J., van der Salm, C., Draaijers, G.P.J., Bleeker, A., Erisman, J.W., Auee, J., Gundersen, P., Kristensen, H.L., van Dobben, H., de Zwart, D., Derome, J., Voogd, J.C.H. & Vel, E.M. 2001. Intensive monitoring of forest ecosystems in Europe. Technical report 2001. EC-UN/ECE, Brussels, BE.
6. Diekmann, M. 1995. Use and improvement of Ellenberg's indicator values in deciduous forests of the Boreo-nemoral zone in Sweden. Ecography 18: 178-189.
7. Diekmann, M. 2003. Species indicator values as an important tool in applied plant ecology - a review. Basic Appl. Ecol. 4: 493-506.
8. Diekmann, M. & Falkengren-Grerup, U. 1998. A new species index for forest vascular plants, development of functional indices based on mineralization rates of various forms of soil nitrogen. J. Ecol. 86: 269-283.
9. Dzwonko, Z. 2001. Assessment of light and soil conditions in ancient and recent woodlands by Ellenberg indicator values. J. Appl. Ecol. 38: 942-951.
10. Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R.J. 1993. An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman & Hall, London, UK.
11. Ellenberg, H. 1979. Zeigerwerte der Gefässpflanzen Mitteleuropas. 2. Auflage. Scripta Geobot. 9: 9-97.
12. Ellenberg. H., Weber, H.E., Düll, R., Wirth, V., Werner, W. & Paulißen, D. 1991. Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobot. 18: 9-166.
13. Endels, P., Adriaens, D., Verheyen, K. & Hermy, M. 2004. Population structure and adult plant performance of forest herbs in three contrasting habitats. Ecography 27: 225-241.
14. Ertsen, A.C.D., Alkemade, J.R.M. & Wassen, M.J. 1998. Calibrating Ellenberg indicator values for moisture, acidity, nutrient availability and salinity in the Netherlands. Plant Ecol. 135: 113-124.
15. Eysink, W.D., Hug, P., Dijkema, K.S., Smit, C.J. & van Dobben, H.F. 1995. Monitoring the effects of subsidence of the coastal island Ameland in the Wadden sea. In: Barends, F.B.J., Brouwer, F.J.J. & Schröder, F.H. (eds.), Land subsidence, pp. 259-267. Balkema, Rotterdam, NL.
16. Fotyma, M. & Jadczyszyn, T. 1998. Hundredth molar calcium chloride extraction procedure. Part II, Calibration with conventional methods for pH. Comm. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 29: 1625-1632.
17. Gegout, J.C., Herve, J.C., Houllier, F. & Pierrat J.C. 2003. Prediction of forest soil nutrient status using vegetation. J. Veg. Sci. 14: 55-62.
18. Godefroid, S. & Koedam, N. 2004. Interspecific variation in soil compaction sensitivity among forest floor species. Biol. Conserv. 119: 207-217.
19. Green, P.J. & Silverman, B.W. 1994. Nonparametric regression and generalized linear models, a roughness penalty approach. Chapman & Hall, London, UK.
20. Grime, J.P., Hodgson, J.G. & Hunt, R. 1988. Comparative plant ecology, a functional approach to common British species. Unwin Hyman, London, UK.
21. Hastie, T.J. & Tibshirani, R.J. 1990. Generalized additive models. Chapman & Hall, London, UK.
22. Jongman, R.H.G., ter Braak, C.J.F. & van Tongeren, O.F.R. 1995. Data analysis in community and landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
23. Korvenpaa T., Von Numers, M. & Hinneri, S.A. 2003. Mesoscale analysis of floristic patterns in the south-west Finnish Archipelago. J. Biogeogr. 30: 1019-1031.
24. Kruijne, A.A., de Vries, D.D. & Mooi, H. 1967. Bijdrage tot de oecologie van de Nederlandse graslandplanten. Pudoc, Wageningen, NL.
25. Landolt, E. 1977. Oekologische Zeigerwerte zur Schweizer Flora. Veröff. Geobot. Inst. Eidg. Tech. Hochsch. Stift. Rübel Zür. 64.
26. Latour, J.B., Reiling, R. & Slooff, W. 1994. Ecological Standards for eutrophication and desiccation: perspectives for a risk assessment. Water Air Soil Pollut. 78: 265-279.
27. Lawesson, J.E. 2003. pH optima for Danish forest species compared with Ellenberg reaction values. Folia Geobot. 38: 403-418.
28. Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Inchausti, P., Bengtsson, J., Grime, J.P., Hector, A., Hooper, D.U., Huston, M.A., Raffaelli, D., Schmid, B., Tilman, D. & Wardle, D.A. 2001. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294: 804-808.
29. Maestre, F.T., Bautista, S. & Cortina, J. 2003. Positive, negative, and net effects in grass-shrub interactions in mediterranean semiarid grasslands. Ecology 84: 3186-3197.
30. Okruszko, H. 1989. Wirkung der Bodennutzung auf die Niedermoorbodenentwicklung. Ergebnisse eines langjährigen Feldversuches. Z. Kulturtech. Landentwickl. 30: 167-176.
31. Payne, R.W. & Ainsley, A.E. 2000. GenStat release 4.2 reference manual. Part 1. VSN International, Oxford, UK.
32. Pugnaire, F.I. & Luque, M.T. 2001. Changes in plant interactions along a gradient of environmental stress. Oikos 93: 42-49.
33. Rydgren, K., Økland, R.H. & Økland, T. 2003. Species response curves along environmental gradients. A case study from SE Norwegian swamp forests. J. Veg. Sci. 14: 869-880.
34. Schaffers, A.P. & Sýkora, K.V. 2000. Reliability of Ellenberg indicator values for moisture, nitrogen and soil reaction, comparison with field measurements. J. Veg. Sci. 11: 225-244.
35. Smart, S.M. & Scott, W.A. 2004. Bias in indicator values - problems with the detection of the effect of vegetation type. J. Veg. Sci. 15: 843-846.
36. Smart, S.M., Clarke, R.T., van de Poll, H.M., Robertson, E.J., Shield, E.R., Bunce, R.G.H. & Maskell, L.C. 2003. National-scale vegetation change across Britain; an analysis of sample-based surveillance data from the Countryside Surveys of 1990 and 1998. J. Environ. Manage. 67: 239-254.
37. ter Braak, C.J.F. & Gremmen, N.J.M. 1987. Ecological amplitudes of plant species and the internal consistency of Ellenberg's indicator values for moisture. Vegetatio 69: 79-87.
38. van Dobben, H.F. & ter Braak, C.J.F.. 1999. Ranking of epiphytic lichen sensitivity to air pollution using survey data: A comparison of indicator scales. Lichenologist 31: 27-39.
39. van Dobben, H.F., Vocks, M.J.M.R., Bouwma, I.M., Wamelink, G.W.W. & Joosten, V. 1997. Eerste opname van de ondergroei in het Meetnet Bosvitaliteit. IBN Rapport 321. IBN, Wageningen, NL. (In Dutch.)
40. van Dobben, H.F., Wolterbeek, H.T., Wamelink, G.W.W. & ter Braak, C.J.F. 2001. Relationship between epiphytic lichens, trace elements and gaseous atmospheric pollutants. Environ. Pollut. 112: 163-169.
41. van Hinsberg, A. & Kros, J. 2001. Dynamic modelling and the calculation of critical loads for biodiversity. In: Posch, M., De Smet, P.A.M., Hettelingh, J.P. & Downing, R.J. (eds.), pp. 73-80. Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu, Bilthoven, NL.
42. Verboom, J. & Wamelink, G.W.W. 2005. Spatial modelling in landscape ecology. In: Wiens J.A. & Moss M.R. (eds.) Issues and perspectives in landscape ecology, pp 79-89. International Association for Landscape Ecology. Pioneer Press, Greeley, CO, US.
43. Wamelink, G.W.W. & van Dobben, H.F. 2003. Validity and uncertainty of Ellenberg indicator values. Basic Appl. Ecol. 4: 515-523.
44. Wamelink, G.W.W., van Dobben, H.F. & van der Eerden, L.J.M. 1998. Experimental calibration of Ellenberg's indicator value for nitrogen. Environ. Pollut. 102 S1: 371-375.
45. Wamelink, G.W.W., Joosten, V., van Dobben, H.F. & Berendse, F. 2002. Validity of Ellenberg indicator values judged from physico-chemical field measurements. J. Veg. Sci. 13: 269-278.
46. Wamelink, G.W.W., van Dobben, H.F. & Berendse, F. 2003. Apparently we do need phytosociological classes to calibrate Ellenberg indicator values! J. Veg. Sci. 14: 619-620.
47. Wamelink, G.W.W., Goedhart, P.W. & van Dobben, H.F. 2004. Measurement errors and regression to the mean cannot explain bias in average Ellenberg indicator values. J. Veg. Sci. 15: 847-851.
48. Witte, J.P.M. & von Asmuth, J.R. 2003. Do we really need phytosociological classes to calibrate Ellenberg indicator values? J. Veg. Sci. 14: 615-618.
49. Wohlgemuth, T., Schutz, M., Keller, W. & Wildi, O. 1999. Computed ecograms of Swiss forests. Bot. Helv. 109: 169-191.
50. Zólyomi, B., Baráth, Z., Fekete, G., Jakucs, P., Kárpáti, I., Kovács, M. & Máthe, I. 1967. Einreihung von 1400 Arten der ungarischen Flora in ökologische Gruppen nach TWR-Zahlen. Fragm. Bot. Mus. Historico-Naturalis Hung. 4: 101-142.