首页> 外文期刊>Ecological indicators >Using the floristic quality concept to assess created and natural wetlands: Ecological and management implications
【24h】

Using the floristic quality concept to assess created and natural wetlands: Ecological and management implications

机译:使用植物质量概念评估人工湿地和自然湿地:生态和管理意义

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

We applied the floristic quality index (FQI) to vegetation data collected across a chronosequence of created wetland (CW) sites in Virginia ranging in age from one to 15 years post-construction. At each site, we also applied FQI to a nearby forested reference wetland (REF). We tested the performance of the index against a selection of community metrics (species richness, diversity, evenness, percent native species) and site attributes (age, soil physiochemical variables). FQI performed better when non-native species (C-value = 0) were removed from the index, and also when calculated within rather than across vegetation layers. A modified, abundance-weighted FQI showed significant correlation with community and environmental variables in the CW herbaceous layer and REF herbaceous and shrub-sapling layers based on Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) ordination output. These results suggest that a "natives only", layer-based version of the index is most appropriate for our region, and an abundance-weighted FQJ may be useful for assessing floristic quality in certain layers. The abundance-weighted format has the advantage of preserving the "heritage" aspect of the species conservatism concept while also entraining the "ecology" aspect of site assessment based on relative abundances of the inhabiting species. FQI did not successfully relate CW sites to REF sites, bringing into question the applicability of the FQI concept in comparing created wetlands to reference wetlands, and by analogy, the use of forested reference wetlands in general to assess vegetation development in created sites. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:我们将植物质量指数(FQI)应用于在弗吉尼亚州创建的湿地(CW)地点的时间序列上采集的植被数据,这些地点的年龄范围为施工后1至15年。在每个站点,我们还将FQI应用于附近的森林参考湿地(REF)。我们根据一系列社区指标(物种丰富度,多样性,均匀度,原生物种百分比)和站点属性(年龄,土壤理化变量)对指数的性能进行了测试。当从索引中删除非本地物种(C值= 0)时,以及在内部而不是跨植被层进行计算时,FQI的效果也更好。基于规范对应分析(CCA)排序输出,经过修改的,丰度加权的FQI与CW草本层以及REF草本和灌浆树苗层中的群落和环境变量显着相关。这些结果表明,该指数的“仅本地人”基于图层的版本最适合我们的地区,并且丰度加权的FQJ可能有助于评估某些图层的植物质量。丰度加权格式的优点是保留了物种保守性概念的“遗传”方面,同时还根据栖息物种的相对丰度进行了现场评估的“生态”方面。 FQI未能成功地将CW地点与REF地点相关联,这使FQI概念在将人工湿地与参考湿地进行比较时的适用性提出质疑,并以此类推,通常使用森林参考湿地来评估人工地点的植被发展。 (C)2015 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号