Past landscape explains forest periphery-to-core gradient of understory plant communities in a reforestation context

Aim. To disentangle whether long-range periphery-to-core gradient of forest understory plants could be attributed to past forest landscape and/or to current environmental filtering processes. We investigated (i) whether species response to past land use (ancient vs. recent forest) was consistent wit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diversity & distributions 2016, Vol.22 (1), p.3-16
Hauptverfasser: Bergès, Laurent, Avon, C., Arnaudet, L., Archaux, Frédéric, Chauchard, S., Dupouey, J.L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 16
container_issue 1
container_start_page 3
container_title Diversity & distributions
container_volume 22
creator Bergès, Laurent
Avon, C.
Arnaudet, L.
Archaux, Frédéric
Chauchard, S.
Dupouey, J.L.
description Aim. To disentangle whether long-range periphery-to-core gradient of forest understory plants could be attributed to past forest landscape and/or to current environmental filtering processes. We investigated (i) whether species response to past land use (ancient vs. recent forest) was consistent with species response to distance to present forest edge (core vs. periphery) (ii) what life-history traits explained plant response to distance to present edge and past land use (iii) whether distance to past forest edge explained current species distribution better than distance to present forest edge.Location. Temperate forests in the northern half of France (80,000 km²).Methods. Local climate, soil and stand characteristics, past land use, and present and past landscape metrics were collected on 11,936 plots using National Forest Inventory data and historical maps from 1831. Logistic regressions were applied to determine the response patterns of 181 species to present and past landscape, while controlling for local habitat quality (soil, climate and stand).Results. Species response to distance to present edge very well matched response to past land use. Plant traits related to colonisation capacity explained species response to present edge and past land use. The spatial distribution of 42 species was better explained by distance to forest edge in 1831, 37 species were better explained by distance to present edge and 24 species were better explained by distance to present edge and past land use.Main conclusions. Two mechanisms were responsible for the long-range periphery-to-core gradient: (i) past landscape and colonisation processes and (ii) present edge-related mechanisms. This suggests that plant community differences between periphery and core zones are thus related to dispersal limitation and not only to environmental filters. Our results underline the need to combine landscape ecology and history and have important implications for forest plant dynamics and conservation in the context of climate change.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/ddi.12384
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>hal</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01318121v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>oai_HAL_hal_01318121v1</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01318121v13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVjD1PxDAMhiMEEsfHwD_wytAjTnrlGBEC3cDAwF5ZjcsZtUmU5ND13xMEf4B38avnsa3UDeo11tw5J2s0dtueqBW296Zpu9ac1m67rnnYYHeuLnL-1FpbuzErVd4oF5jIuzxQZOBjnEh8hjEkriZykrjntDQlNENl8JHICfsCYYSDd5xyCWmBelbZEOb54KUIZxAPBIl_H1GR4Kv2hY_lSp2NNGW-_puX6vbl-f1p1-xp6mOSmdLSB5J-9_ja_zCNFrdo8Avtf3a_ATKHVuE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Past landscape explains forest periphery-to-core gradient of understory plant communities in a reforestation context</title><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Bergès, Laurent ; Avon, C. ; Arnaudet, L. ; Archaux, Frédéric ; Chauchard, S. ; Dupouey, J.L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bergès, Laurent ; Avon, C. ; Arnaudet, L. ; Archaux, Frédéric ; Chauchard, S. ; Dupouey, J.L.</creatorcontrib><description>Aim. To disentangle whether long-range periphery-to-core gradient of forest understory plants could be attributed to past forest landscape and/or to current environmental filtering processes. We investigated (i) whether species response to past land use (ancient vs. recent forest) was consistent with species response to distance to present forest edge (core vs. periphery) (ii) what life-history traits explained plant response to distance to present edge and past land use (iii) whether distance to past forest edge explained current species distribution better than distance to present forest edge.Location. Temperate forests in the northern half of France (80,000 km²).Methods. Local climate, soil and stand characteristics, past land use, and present and past landscape metrics were collected on 11,936 plots using National Forest Inventory data and historical maps from 1831. Logistic regressions were applied to determine the response patterns of 181 species to present and past landscape, while controlling for local habitat quality (soil, climate and stand).Results. Species response to distance to present edge very well matched response to past land use. Plant traits related to colonisation capacity explained species response to present edge and past land use. The spatial distribution of 42 species was better explained by distance to forest edge in 1831, 37 species were better explained by distance to present edge and 24 species were better explained by distance to present edge and past land use.Main conclusions. Two mechanisms were responsible for the long-range periphery-to-core gradient: (i) past landscape and colonisation processes and (ii) present edge-related mechanisms. This suggests that plant community differences between periphery and core zones are thus related to dispersal limitation and not only to environmental filters. Our results underline the need to combine landscape ecology and history and have important implications for forest plant dynamics and conservation in the context of climate change.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1366-9516</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1472-4642</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12384</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Wiley</publisher><subject>Environmental Sciences</subject><ispartof>Diversity &amp; distributions, 2016, Vol.22 (1), p.3-16</ispartof><rights>Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0003-2694-5793 ; 0000-0003-0408-7900 ; 0000-0002-9996-0006 ; 0000-0003-2694-5793 ; 0000-0002-9996-0006 ; 0000-0003-0408-7900</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,4023,27922,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-01318121$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bergès, Laurent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Avon, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arnaudet, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Archaux, Frédéric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chauchard, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dupouey, J.L.</creatorcontrib><title>Past landscape explains forest periphery-to-core gradient of understory plant communities in a reforestation context</title><title>Diversity &amp; distributions</title><description>Aim. To disentangle whether long-range periphery-to-core gradient of forest understory plants could be attributed to past forest landscape and/or to current environmental filtering processes. We investigated (i) whether species response to past land use (ancient vs. recent forest) was consistent with species response to distance to present forest edge (core vs. periphery) (ii) what life-history traits explained plant response to distance to present edge and past land use (iii) whether distance to past forest edge explained current species distribution better than distance to present forest edge.Location. Temperate forests in the northern half of France (80,000 km²).Methods. Local climate, soil and stand characteristics, past land use, and present and past landscape metrics were collected on 11,936 plots using National Forest Inventory data and historical maps from 1831. Logistic regressions were applied to determine the response patterns of 181 species to present and past landscape, while controlling for local habitat quality (soil, climate and stand).Results. Species response to distance to present edge very well matched response to past land use. Plant traits related to colonisation capacity explained species response to present edge and past land use. The spatial distribution of 42 species was better explained by distance to forest edge in 1831, 37 species were better explained by distance to present edge and 24 species were better explained by distance to present edge and past land use.Main conclusions. Two mechanisms were responsible for the long-range periphery-to-core gradient: (i) past landscape and colonisation processes and (ii) present edge-related mechanisms. This suggests that plant community differences between periphery and core zones are thus related to dispersal limitation and not only to environmental filters. Our results underline the need to combine landscape ecology and history and have important implications for forest plant dynamics and conservation in the context of climate change.</description><subject>Environmental Sciences</subject><issn>1366-9516</issn><issn>1472-4642</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqVjD1PxDAMhiMEEsfHwD_wytAjTnrlGBEC3cDAwF5ZjcsZtUmU5ND13xMEf4B38avnsa3UDeo11tw5J2s0dtueqBW296Zpu9ac1m67rnnYYHeuLnL-1FpbuzErVd4oF5jIuzxQZOBjnEh8hjEkriZykrjntDQlNENl8JHICfsCYYSDd5xyCWmBelbZEOb54KUIZxAPBIl_H1GR4Kv2hY_lSp2NNGW-_puX6vbl-f1p1-xp6mOSmdLSB5J-9_ja_zCNFrdo8Avtf3a_ATKHVuE</recordid><startdate>2016</startdate><enddate>2016</enddate><creator>Bergès, Laurent</creator><creator>Avon, C.</creator><creator>Arnaudet, L.</creator><creator>Archaux, Frédéric</creator><creator>Chauchard, S.</creator><creator>Dupouey, J.L.</creator><general>Wiley</general><scope>1XC</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2694-5793</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0408-7900</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9996-0006</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2694-5793</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9996-0006</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0408-7900</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>2016</creationdate><title>Past landscape explains forest periphery-to-core gradient of understory plant communities in a reforestation context</title><author>Bergès, Laurent ; Avon, C. ; Arnaudet, L. ; Archaux, Frédéric ; Chauchard, S. ; Dupouey, J.L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01318121v13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Environmental Sciences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bergès, Laurent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Avon, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arnaudet, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Archaux, Frédéric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chauchard, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dupouey, J.L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><jtitle>Diversity &amp; distributions</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bergès, Laurent</au><au>Avon, C.</au><au>Arnaudet, L.</au><au>Archaux, Frédéric</au><au>Chauchard, S.</au><au>Dupouey, J.L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Past landscape explains forest periphery-to-core gradient of understory plant communities in a reforestation context</atitle><jtitle>Diversity &amp; distributions</jtitle><date>2016</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>3</spage><epage>16</epage><pages>3-16</pages><issn>1366-9516</issn><eissn>1472-4642</eissn><abstract>Aim. To disentangle whether long-range periphery-to-core gradient of forest understory plants could be attributed to past forest landscape and/or to current environmental filtering processes. We investigated (i) whether species response to past land use (ancient vs. recent forest) was consistent with species response to distance to present forest edge (core vs. periphery) (ii) what life-history traits explained plant response to distance to present edge and past land use (iii) whether distance to past forest edge explained current species distribution better than distance to present forest edge.Location. Temperate forests in the northern half of France (80,000 km²).Methods. Local climate, soil and stand characteristics, past land use, and present and past landscape metrics were collected on 11,936 plots using National Forest Inventory data and historical maps from 1831. Logistic regressions were applied to determine the response patterns of 181 species to present and past landscape, while controlling for local habitat quality (soil, climate and stand).Results. Species response to distance to present edge very well matched response to past land use. Plant traits related to colonisation capacity explained species response to present edge and past land use. The spatial distribution of 42 species was better explained by distance to forest edge in 1831, 37 species were better explained by distance to present edge and 24 species were better explained by distance to present edge and past land use.Main conclusions. Two mechanisms were responsible for the long-range periphery-to-core gradient: (i) past landscape and colonisation processes and (ii) present edge-related mechanisms. This suggests that plant community differences between periphery and core zones are thus related to dispersal limitation and not only to environmental filters. Our results underline the need to combine landscape ecology and history and have important implications for forest plant dynamics and conservation in the context of climate change.</abstract><pub>Wiley</pub><doi>10.1111/ddi.12384</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2694-5793</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0408-7900</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9996-0006</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2694-5793</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9996-0006</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0408-7900</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1366-9516
ispartof Diversity & distributions, 2016, Vol.22 (1), p.3-16
issn 1366-9516
1472-4642
language eng
recordid cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01318121v1
source JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Environmental Sciences
title Past landscape explains forest periphery-to-core gradient of understory plant communities in a reforestation context
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T12%3A26%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-hal&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Past%20landscape%20explains%20forest%20periphery-to-core%20gradient%20of%20understory%20plant%20communities%20in%20a%20reforestation%20context&rft.jtitle=Diversity%20&%20distributions&rft.au=Berg%C3%A8s,%20Laurent&rft.date=2016&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=3&rft.epage=16&rft.pages=3-16&rft.issn=1366-9516&rft.eissn=1472-4642&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/ddi.12384&rft_dat=%3Chal%3Eoai_HAL_hal_01318121v1%3C/hal%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true