Deviances from expected Ellenberg indicator values for nitrogen are related to N throughfall deposition in forests

Seidling, Walter; Fischer, Richard

doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2007.09.004

Cited by 44 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hawkes et al, 1997;Schaffers, and Sykora, 2000). This has been advocated over the use of medians 360 (which might be considered to be technically more correct given the ordinal nature of the indicator variables: Kowarik and Seidling, 1989;Seidling and Fischer, 2008) because of the lack of precision that can result from the course scales involved (Smart and Scott, 2004). For our study sites, there was generally a better correlation between direct environmental measures and unweighted indicator values, 364 rather than those weighted by plant abundance, regardless of which indicator system was used.…”

Section: Unweighted Versus Abundance-weighted Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

How robust are community-based plant bioindicators? Empirical testing of the relationship between Ellenberg values and direct environmental measures in woodland communities

Carpenter¹,

Goodenough²

2014

Community Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Unweighted Versus Abundance-weighted Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

How robust are community-based plant bioindicators? Empirical testing of the relationship between Ellenberg values and direct environmental measures in woodland communities

Carpenter¹,

Goodenough²

2014

Community Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, Ellenberg indicator values (Ellenberg et al 1991) are well-known tools to identify ecological conditions especially in plant communities. Ellenberg values have been developed to estimate the position of known communities along gradients of humidity, soil productivity, pH, continentality and other important factors, without taking direct measurements (see for example Dupouey et al 2002;Seidling & Fischer 2008;Simmel et al 2016). These approaches should be separated from biodiversity surrogate approaches because of their different focus and purpose, even if they are highly relevant in monitoring habitat quality, and not least changes in habitat quality over time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The history and future of fungi as biodiversity surrogates in forests

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity surrogates are commonly used in conservation biology. Here we review how fungi have been used as such in forest conservation, emphasizing proposed surrogate roles and practical applications. We show that many fungal surrogates have been suggested based on field experience and loose concepts, rather than on rigorously collected scientific data. Yet, they have played an important role, not only in forest conservation, but also in inspiring research in fungal ecology and forest history. We argue that, even in times of ecosystem oriented conservation planning and molecular tools to analyze fungal communities, fruit bodies of macrofungi have potential as convenient conservation shortcuts and easy tools to communicate complex biodiversity for a broader audience. To improve the reliability of future fungal surrogates we propose a three step protocol for developing evidence based schemes for practical application in forest conservation.

show abstract

“…В этом случае среднее и медианное существенно не различаются (Diekmann, 2003). Поэтому не существует практически значимых аргументов, которые бы запрещали применение средневзвешенных значений для целей фитоиндикации (Seidling, Fischer, 2008). Кроме того показано, что для кривых распределений, которые приближены к симметричному гауссовому, средневзвешенные значения дают надежные фитоиндикационные оценки (ter Braak, Looman, 1986).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Application of β-function in phytoindication to account for species response curves asymmetry

Жуков¹,

Кунах²,

Dubinina³

et al. 2018

abs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An approach for phytoindication assessment of the ecological factors based on diapasonal scales taking into account the cardinal points values and possible asymmetry of the plant species response was proposed. Ecological factors are modeled by phytoindicator scales with restricted range. In the central part of the factor range the species response curve has a shape that can be reliably approximated by the Gauss normal distribution. This allows completely grounded via cardinal points that are directly designated by diapasonal indicator values, calculate ecological optimum of the species. Average of species in community ecological optima scores weighted in accordance with their projective cover gives phytoindication estimation of an ecological factor. Species distribution asymmetry increases when approaching the marginal positions within gradient. This phenomenon is observed in the study of real gradients. These phenomena are also a result of the mathematical properties of ecological scales. To simulate the response of species distribution curves alternatively symmetric Gaussian model the β-function was used. This function can simulate both symmetric and asymmetric distributions. Since phytoindication performs the inverse problem in comparison with the modeling of the response curves, it is appropriate to β-function is also be used to solve phytoindication problems. Use of β-function is possible to estimate the species optimum zone based on its fundamental points with the probable distribution asymmetry of the response curve. Also, the simulation of distribution curve makes it possible to narrow the range of possible values of environmental factors, in terms of which species can exhibit the observed abundance in the community. Accordingly, this increases the informational value of species in the community and thus achieves greater reliability evaluations of the phytoindication.

show abstract

Deviances from expected Ellenberg indicator values for nitrogen are related to N throughfall deposition in forests

Cited by 44 publications

References 25 publications

How robust are community-based plant bioindicators? Empirical testing of the relationship between Ellenberg values and direct environmental measures in woodland communities

How robust are community-based plant bioindicators? Empirical testing of the relationship between Ellenberg values and direct environmental measures in woodland communities

The history and future of fungi as biodiversity surrogates in forests

Application of β-function in phytoindication to account for species response curves asymmetry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About