Abstract
The effect of a dominant species, the litter layer, and the moss layer on seedlings and established vegetation was evaluated in two manipulative experiments in an oligotrophic wet meadow (Molinion with some features ofViolion caninae according to phytosociological classification). In the first experiment, the dominant species (Nardus stricta), litter layer, and litter layer together with the moss layer were removed and the response of the established vegetation and seedlings were compared with a control. Results revealed that after one season there was no significant effect of the treatments on established vegetation, but seedling recruitment was significantly affected. The greatest increase of seedling recruitment for many species was observed in the plots with the moss layer removed. In the second experiment, seeds ofSelinum carvifolia were sown into plots subjected to the following treatments: complete vegetation removal, mowing, mowing combined with removal of the moss layer, and an untreated control. The highest number of seedlings was found in plots with the vegetation removed, but the seedling recruitment was nearly as high in plots with the moss layer removed. Low numbers were found in mown plots and the lowest in the untreated control. The results show that seedling recruitment is more sensitive to competition than the established vegetation, at least over one season. This supports the idea of the importance of the regeneration niche for the maintenance of diversity in grassland communities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bakker J.P. (1989):Nature management by grazing and cutting: Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht.
Csapody V. (1968):Keimlingsbestimmungsbuch der Dikotyledonen. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
During H.J. &van Tooren B.F. (1990): Bryophyte interactions with other plants.Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 104: 79–98.
Facelli J.M. &Facelli E. (1993): Interactions after death: plant litter controls priority effect in a successional plant community.Oecologia 95: 277–282.
Goldberg D. (1995): Generating and testing predictions about community structure: which theory is relevant and can it be tested with observational data?Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 511–519.
Grime J.P. (1979):Plant strategies and vegetation processes. Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Grime J.P., Godgson J.G. &Hunt R. (1988):Comparative plant ecology. Unwin Hyman, London.
Grubb P.J. (1977): The maintenance of species richness in plant communities: the importance of the regeneration niche.Biol. Rev. 52: 107–145.
Hillier S.H. (1990): Gaps, seed banks and plant species diversity in calcareous grassland. In:Hiilier S.H., Walton D.W.H. &Wells D.A. (eds.),Calcareous grasslands—Ecology and management, Bluntingsham Books, Bluntingsham, Huntingdon, pp. 57–66.
Jongman R.H., ter Braak C.J.F. &van Tongeren O.F.R. (1987):Data analysis in community and landscape ecology. Pudoc, Wageningen.
Keizer P.J., van Tooren B.F. &During H.J. (1985): Effects of bryophytes on seedling emergence and establishment of short lived forbs in chalk grassland.J. Ecol. 73: 493–504.
Klimeš L. (1995): Small-scale distribution of species richness in a grassland (Bílé Karpaty Mts., Czech Republic).Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 499–510.
Krahulec F. (1995): Species coexistence in temperate grasslands.Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 113–117.
Křenová Z. &Lepš J. (1996): Regneration of aGentiana pneumonanthe population in an oligotrophic wet meadow.J. Veg. Sci. 7: 107–112.
Kull K. &Zobel M. (1991): High species richness in an Estonian wooded meadow.J. Veg. Sci. 2: 711–714.
Lavorel S. &Chesson P. (1995): How species with different regeneration niches coexist in patchy habitats with local disturbances.Oikos 74: 103–114.
Lhotská M. &Kropáč Z. (1985):Atlas semen, plodů a klíčních rostlin (Atlas of seeds, fruits and seedlings) SPN, Praha.
Malmer N., Svensson B. &Wallén B. (1994): Interaction betweenSphagnum mosses and field layer vascular plants in the development of peat-forming systems.Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 29: 483–496.
McCullagh P. &Nelder J.A. (1989):Generalized linear models. Ed. 2. Chapman and Hall, London.
Perttula U. (1941): Untersuchungen über die generative und vegetative Vermehrung der Blütenpflanzen in den Wald-, Hainwiesen- und Hainfelsen-VegetationAnn. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. A. 58:1–388.
Rabotnov T.A. (1987):Eksperimental'naya fitotsenologiya (Experimental phytocoenology), Publ. House of Moscow University, Moscow.
Rejmánek M. &Lepš J. (1996): Interspecific associations can reveal competition:Cirsium vulgare andArctostaphylos patula in a clearcut succession.Oikos 76: 161–168.
Rothmaler W. (1976):Exkursionsflora für die Gebiete der DDR und der BRD. Kritischer Band. Volk und Wissen, Berlin.
Rusch G. &Fernández-Palacios J.M. (1995): The influence of spatial heterogeneity on regeneration by seed in a limestone grassland.J. Veg. Sci. 6: 417–427.
Ryser P. (1990): Influence of gaps and neighbouring plants on seedling establishment in limestone grassland. Experimental field studies in northern Switzerland.Veröff. Geobot. Inst. ETH Stiftung Rübel Zürich 104: 1–71.
Statistical Sciences (1995):S-Plus Guide to statistical and mathematical analysis, version 3.3, StatSci, Seatle.
Svensson B.M. (1995): Competition betweenSphagnum fuscum andDrosera rotundifolia: a case of ecosystem engineering.Oikos 74: 205–212.
Syrový S. (1958):Atlas podnebí Československé republiky (Atlas of the climate of Czechoslovak Republic). Ustřední Geodet. Kartogr. Ústav, Praha.
Šmilauer P. (1992):CANODRAW users guide v. 3.0 Microcomputer Power, Ithaca.
ter Braak C.J.F. (1990):CANOCO—a FORTRAN program for CANOnical Comunity Ordination by [partial] [detrended] [canonical] corespondence analysis and redundancy analysis, version 3.10. Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY.
Tilman D. (1993): Species richness of experimental productivity gradients: how important is colonization limitation?Ecology 74: 2179–2191.
van der Maarel E. &Sykes M.T. (1993): Small scale plant species turnover in a limestone grassland: the carousel model and some comments on the niche concept.J. Veg. Sci. 4: 179–188.
van Tooren B.F. (1988): The fate of seeds after dispersal in chalk grassland: the role of the bryophyte layer.Oikos 53: 41–48.
van Tooren B.F. (1990): Effect of bryophyte layer on the emergence of seedlings of chalk grassland species.Acta Oecol. 11: 155–163.
Wilson J.B. (1995): Testing for community structure: a Bayesian approach.Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 30: 461–469.
Wilson S.D. &Tilman D. (1993): Plant competition and resource availability in response to disturbance and fertilization.Ecology 74: 599–611.
Zittová J., Váňa J. &Herben T. (1982): Mechorosty/Bryophytes. In:Neuhäuslová Z. &Kolbek J. (eds.),Seznam vyšších rostlin, mechorostů a lišejníků střední Evropy, užitých v bance geobotanických dat BÚ ČSAV (List of names of higher plants used in a database of geobotanical data of Institute of Botany, ČSAV) BÚ ČSAV, Průhonice, pp. 134–178.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Špačková, I., Kotorová, I. & Lepš, J. Sensitivity of seedling recruitment to moss, litter and dominant removal in an oligotrophic wet meadow. Folia Geobot 33, 17–30 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02914928
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02914928