...
首页> 外文期刊>Acta Societatis Botanicorum Poloniae >A performance comparison of sampling methods in the assessment of species composition patterns and environment–vegetation relationships in species-rich grasslands
【24h】

A performance comparison of sampling methods in the assessment of species composition patterns and environment–vegetation relationships in species-rich grasslands

机译:采样方法在物种丰富的草地物种组成模式和环境-植被关系评估中的性能比较

获取原文
           

摘要

The influence that different sampling methods have on the results and the interpretation of vegetation analysis has been much debated, but little is yet known about how the spatial arrangement of samples affect patterns of species composition and environment–vegetation relationships within the same vegetation type. We compared three data sets of the same sample size obtained by three standard sampling methods: preferential, random, and systematic. These different sampling methods were applied to a study area comprising of 36 ha of intermittently wet Molinia meadows. We compared the performance of the three methods under two management categories: managed (extensively mown) and unmanaged (abandoned for 10 years). A total of 285 vegetation-plots were sampled, with 95 plots recorded per sampling method. In preferential sampling, we sampled only patches of vegetation with an abundance of indicator species of the habitat type, while random and systematic plots were positioned independently from the researcher by using GIS. The effect of each sampling method on the patterns of species composition and species–environment relationships was explored by redundancy analysis and the significance of effects was tested by the randomization test. Preferential sampling revealed different patterns of species composition than random and systematic sampling methods. Random and systematic sampling methods have resulted in broader vegetation variability than with preferential sampling method. Preferential sampling revealed different relationship between soil parameters and species composition in contrast to random and systematic sampling methods. Although we have not found significant differences in vegetation–environment relationships between random and systematic sampling methods, random sampling revealed a more robust correlation of species data to soil factors than preferential and systematic sampling methods. Intentional restriction of vegetation variation sampled preferentially may be detrimental to statistical inference in studies of species composition patterns and vegetation–environment relationships.
机译:关于不同采样方法对结果的影响以及对植被分析的解释一直存在争议,但对于样品的空间排列如何影响同一植被类型内物种组成和环境-植被关系的模式知之甚少。我们比较了通过三种标准采样方法(优先,随机和系统)获得的三个样本量相同的数据集。将这些不同的采样方法应用于一个由36公顷间歇湿润的Molinia草地组成的研究区域。我们在两种管理类别下比较了这三种方法的性能:管理(广泛割裂)和未管理(废弃10年)。总共采样了285个植被图,每种采样方法记录了95个样地。在优先采样中,我们仅采样了具有丰富栖息地类型指示物种的植被斑块,而使用GIS则独立于研究人员而对随机和系统地块进行了定位。通过冗余分析探讨了每种采样方法对物种组成和物种-环境关系模式的影响,并通过随机检验检验了影响的重要性。与随机和系统抽样方法相比,优惠抽样揭示了物种组成的不同模式。与优先采样方法相比,随机和系统采样方法导致的植被变异性更大。与随机和系统抽样方法相比,优惠抽样揭示了土壤参数与物种组成之间的不同关系。尽管我们尚未发现随机和系统采样方法之间的植被-环境关系存在显着差异,但随机采样显示,物种数据与土壤因子的相关性比优先采样和系统采样方法更为牢固。优先采样的植被变化的有意限制可能不利于物种组成模式和植被-环境关系研究中的统计推断。

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