HERBACEOUS VEGETATION RESPONSE PATTERNS:

SPECIES VS FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY

Van Staden, Nanette¹, Siebert, F.¹, Siebert, S.J.¹,

Swemmer, A.M.² & Komape, D.¹

¹Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management,

North-West University

²SAEON, Ndlovu Node, Phalaborwa

INTRODUCTION

• Plant species diversity

— a proxy for conservation efforts & management practices (Fraser et al., 2014)

— limitations i.t.o. disturbance effects on ecosystem functioning &

stability (Lacroix & Abbadie, 1998; Mouillot et al., 2013; Mori et al., 2013)

• Species functional diversity

— useful tool to determine ecosystem function (Dı́az & Cabido, 2001; Mayfield et al.,

2005; Zhang et al., 2012; Kotschy, 2013)

• Plant traits

— explore prevailing relationships between species & their

environment (Wesuls et al., 2012)

— reliable indicators of adaptation (Dı́az & Cabido, 2001; Moretti & Legg, 2009; Pérez-

Harguindeguy et al., 2013)

— better predictors of ecosystem processes (Díaz et al., 1999; Pérez-Harguindeguy et al.,

2013)

INTRODUCTION

• The combination of species & functional diversity

— should provide a better understanding semi-arid savanna ecosystem

functionality

— will ultimately lead to improved management & conservation

practices (Dı́az & Cabido, 2001; Zhang et al., 2012; Moretti et al., 2013)

— the key to understand resilience in disturbed environments (Lavorel et al.,

1998)

— may assist decision-making to safeguard ecosystem services (Dı́az &

Cabido, 2001; McIntyre & Lavorel, 2007; Zhang et al., 2012; Moretti et al., 2013)

• Which measure of diversity best explains herbaceous response patterns

to land-use changes in a semi-arid savanna ecosystem?

Study area

The semi-arid Phalaborwa Timbavati Mopaneveld

— well conserved within the Kruger National Park & other nature

reserves

— classified as ‘Least threatened’ (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006)

Phalaborwa region exposed to

— urbanisation, agricultural & mining practices

— responsible for transformation of natural Mopaneveld outside

protected areas (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006; Rutherford et al., 2012; Davis et al., 2013)

— how well can Mopaneveld vegetation absorb such disturbances?

Lulekani: Communal area

Pompeye: Strip mines

Pompeye: Protected Mopaneveld

Land use types:

Strip mines >30 years & strip

mines <10 years (Pompeye

quarts strip mine).

Protected area (Pompeye).

Communal rangelands &

communal old fields

(Lulekani).

PERMANOVA = significance (p<0,05)

Species richness

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

Marg

alef

rich

ness

(1

m²)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

to

tal sp

eci

es

rich

ness

(1

m²) Protected area

*

*

— Higher on communal rangelands & –old fields (Shackleton, 2000; Otto et al., 2006;

Cramer et al., 2008; Rutherford & Powrie, 2011; Rutherford & Powrie, 2013)

—Strip mines>30 years surrounded by protected areas recovered well

—Lower on strip mines<10years

Diversity

*

*

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

Sh

an

no

n D

ivers

ity

(1m

²)

Protected area

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

Sim

pso

n d

ivers

ity

(1m

²)

— Strip mines<10 years significantly lower, deteriorated & loss of

ecosystem function= diversity-stability & insurance hypothesis (Chapin et

al., 2000; McCann, 2000; Hautier et al., 2015)

— More diverse ecosystems = more stable (Allan et al., 2011)

Evenness

* *

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

Pie

lou

's E

ven

ness

(1

m²)

Protected area

— Communal old fields & strip mines < 10 years deviated

significantly from protected areas

— Certain herbaceous species dominated

— Responds rapidly & sensitive to anthropogenic disturbances (Chapin

et al., 2000; Wittebolle et al., 2009; Crowder et al., 2010)

Trait richness

*

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

Marg

alef

trai

t ri

chn

ess

(1

m²)

*

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

to

tal tr

ait r

ich

ness

(1

m²)

Protected area

— No loss of traits despite loss of species

— Available resources used & species take advantage of

environmental conditions = buffering effect (Mason et al., 2005)

— Margalef trait richness indicated that communal old fields

& strip mines younger than 10 years deviated significantly

Trait diversity

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

Sh

an

no

n tra

it d

ivers

ity

(1m

²)

Protected area

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

Sim

pso

n tra

it d

ivers

ity

(1m

²)

— Maintained & no clear patterns observed (Flynn et al., 2013; Mandle &

Ticktin, 2015)

— No significant deviation from protected area

Trait evenness

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Communal

rangelands

Communal

old fields

Strip mines

>30yrs

Strip mines

<10 yrs

Mean

Pie

lou

tra

it e

ven

ness

Protected area

— No significant deviation

— Traits evenly distributed

— All parts of niche occupied and utilised (Mason et al., 2005)

— High evenness of traits contribute to same ecosystem function

— Functional redundant species (Wittebolle et al., 2009) & trait-based

redundancy (Mori et al.,2013)

Species

• Communal rangelands, old fields & strip mines>30years compared favorably

• Strip mines<10years deviated significantly from protected areas

Evenness

• Old fields & strip mines<10 years dominated by certain species (deviated from protected areas)

Traits

• No significant deviation

• Communal- and strip mine practices compares favorably to protected areas

Diversity

measures

Species richness decline & random loss of species with respect to

traits

Functional diversity insensitive to land use & remain constant =

high redundancy levels ecosystem functioning at high levels (Flynn et al., 2013)

Forbs vs. grasses

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Protected area Communal

rangelands

Communal old

fields

Strip mines>30yrs Strip mines<10yrs

To

tal h

erb

aceo

us

ind

icat

or

speci

es

Grass Forbs

Grass:Forb

1:2

Grass:Forb

1:4

Grass:Forb

1:8

Grass:Forb

1:5

Grass:Forb

2:1

Dominant plant functional groups & their traits

Grass:forb ratio

1

2

3

4

5

Protected area

1

2

3

4

5

Communal rangelands

1

2

3

4

5

Communal old fields

1

23

4

5

Strip mines > 30 years

1

2

3

4

5

Strip mines < 10 years

Dominant plant functional groups & their traits

Grass:forb ratio

•Weedy perennials

•Erect growth form

•Non-clonal

•Unassisted dispersal

•Sun tolerant

•G:F ratio =1:2

PFG 3

•Non-weedy perennials

•Erect growth form

•Non-clonal

•Unassisted dispersal

•Sun tolerant

•G:F ratio =1:2

PFG 4

•Non-weedy annuals

•Erect growth form

•Non-clonal

•Unassisted dispersal

•Sun tolerant

•G:F ratio =1:4

PFG 5

CONCLUSION

• Include both species & functional diversity measures

• Functional diversity measures better explain ecosystem resilience to

disturbances such as land use change

• Forbs fulfil important ecological role, contributing to redundancy &

resilience at species as well as group level

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

• South African Observation Network (SAEON; Ndlovu

Node)

• Palabora Mining Company (PMC) & field rangers

• Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-

West University & North-West University for additional

financial support

• Dedicated fieldworkers

Chapin, F.S., Zavaleta, E.S., Eviner, V.T., Naylor, R.L., Vitousek, P.M. et al. 2000. Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature, 405(6783):234-242.

Cramer, V.A. & Hobbs, R.J. 2007. Old fields: dynamics and restoration of abandoned farmland. Washington: Island Press.

Crowder, D.W., Northfield, T.D., Strand, M.R. & Snyder, W.E. 2010. Organic agriculture promotes evenness and natural pest control. Nature, 466(7302):109-112.

Davis, A.L.V., Swemmer, A.M., Scholtz, C.H., Deschodt, C.M. & Tshikae, B. 2013. Roles of environmental variables and land usage as drivers of dung beetle assemblage structure in mopane

woodland. Austral Ecology, 39(3):313-327.

Dı́az, S. & Cabido, M. 2001. Vive la difference: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 16(11):646-655.

Díaz, S., Cabido, M., Zak, M., Martínez Carretero, E. & Araníbar, J. 1999. Plant functional traits, ecosystem structure and land−use history along a climatic gradient in central−western Argentina.

Journal of Vegetation Science, 10(5):651-660.

Flynn, D.F.B., Gogol−Prokurat, M., Nogeire, T., Molinari, N., Richers, B.T., Lin, B.B., Simpson, N., Mayfield, M.M. & DeClerck, F. 2013. Loss of functional diversity under land use intensification

across multiple taxa. Ecology Letters, 12(1):22-33.

Fraser, L.H., Jentsch, A. & Sternberg, M. 2014. What drives plant species diversity? A global distributed test of the unimodal relationship between herbaceous species richness and plant biomass.

Journal of Vegetation Science, 25(5):1160-1166.

Hautier, Y., Tilman, D., Isbell, F., Seabloom, E.W., Borer, E.T. & Reich, P.B. 2015. Anthropogenic environmental changes affect ecosystem stability via biodiversity. Science, 348(6232):336-340.

Hillebrand, H., Bennett, D.M. & Cadotte, M.W. 2008. Consequences of dominance: a review of evenness effects on local and regional ecosystem processes. Ecology, 89(6):1510-1520.

Kotschy, K.A. 2013. Biodiversity, redundancy and resilience of riparian vegetation under different land management regimes. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand. (Thesis - PhD.

Lacroix, G. & Abbadie, L. 1998. Linking biodiversity and ecosystem function: an introduction. Acta Oecologica, 19(3):189-193.

Lavorel, S., Touzard, B., Lebreton, J. & Clément, B. 1998. Identifying functional groups for response to disturbance in an abandoned pasture. Acta Oecologica, 19(3):227-240.

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(5543):804-808.

Mandle, L. & Ticktin, T. 2015. Moderate land use changes plant functional composition without loss of functional diversity in India's Western Ghats. Ecological Applications, 25(6):1711-1724.

Mason, N.W.H., Mouillot, D., Lee, W.G. & Wilson, J.B. 2005. Functional richness, functional evenness and functional divergence: the primary components of functional diversity. Oikos,

111(1):112-118.

Mayfield, M.M., Boni, M.F., Daily, G.C. & Ackerly, D. 2005. Species and functional diversity of native and human-dominated plant communities. Ecology, 86(9):2365-2372.

McCann, K.S. 2000. The diversity–stability debate. Nature, 405(6783):228-233.

McIntyre, S. & Lavorel, S. 2007. A conceptual model of land use effects on the structure and function of herbaceous vegetation. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 119(1):11-21.

Moretti, M., Bello, F., Ibanez, S., Fontana, S., Pezzatti, G.B. et al. 2013. Linking traits between plants and invertebrate herbivores to track functional effects of land‐use changes. Journal of Vegetation

Science, 24(5):949-962.

Moretti, M. & Legg, C. 2009. Combining plant and animal traits to assess community functional responses to disturbance. Ecography, 32(2):299-309.

Mori, A.S., Furukawa, T. & Sasaki, T. 2013. Response diversity determines the resilience of ecosystems to environmental change. Biological Reviews, 88(2):349-364.

Mouillot, D., Graham, N.A.J., Villéger, S., Mason, N.W.H. & Bellwood, D.R. 2013. A functional approach reveals community responses to disturbances. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28(3):167-

177.

Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Pretoria: South African National Biodiversity Institute.

Otto, R., Krüsi, B.O., Burga, C.A. & Fernandez-Palacios, J.M. 2006. Old-field succession along a precipitation gradient in the semi-arid coastal region of Tenerife. Journal of Arid Environments,

65(1):156-178.

Pérez-Harguindeguy, N., Díaz, S., Garnier, E., Lavorel, S., Poorter, H., et al. 2013. New handbook for standardised measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Australian Journal of Botany,

61(3):167-234.

Purvis, A. & Hector, A. 2000. Getting the measure of biodiversity. Nature, 405(6783):212-219.

Rutherford, M.C. & Powrie, L.W. 2011. Can heavy grazing on communal land elevate plant species richness levels in the Grassland Biome of South Africa? Plant Ecology, 212(9):1407-1418.

Rutherford, M.C. & Powrie, L.W. 2013. Impacts of heavy grazing on plant species richness: A comparison across rangeland biomes of South Africa. South African Journal of Botany, 87:146-156.

Rutherford, M.C., Powrie, L.W. & Thompson, D.I. 2012. Impacts of high utilisation pressure on biodiversity components in Colophospermum mopane savanna. African Journal of Range &

Forage Science, 29(1):1-11.

Shackleton, C.M. 2000. Comparison of plant diversity in protected and communal lands in the Bushbuckridge lowveld savanna, South Africa. Biological Conservation, 94(3):273-285.

Van Noordwijk, M., Poulsen, J.G. & Ericksen, P.J. 2004. Quantifying off-site effects of land use change: filters, flows and fallacies. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 104(1):19-34.

Wesuls, D., Oldeland, J. & Dray, S. 2012. Disentangling plant trait responses to livestock grazing from spatio-temporal variation: the partial RLQ approach. Journal of Vegetation Science, 23(1):98-

113.

Wittebolle, L., Marzorati, M., Clement, L., Balloi, A., Daffonchio, et al. 2009. Initial community evenness favours functionality under selective stress. Nature, 458(7238):623-626.

Zhang, J., Fan, L. & Li, M. 2012. Functional diversity in plant communities: Theory and analysis methods. African Journal of Biotechnology, 11(5):1014-1022..

REFERENCES