Herb layer changes (1954‐2000) related to the conversion of coppice‐with‐standards forest and soil acidification

Abstract

Question: Did the composition of the herb layer of a deciduous forest on loamy soils sensitive to soil acidification change between 1954 and 2000? How are these change related to the abandonment of traditional coppice-with-standards forest management and increased soil acidification? Location: Central Belgium (Europe). Methods: Twenty semi-permanent phytosociological quadrats from an ancient deciduous forest (Meerdaal forest) were carefully selected out of a total of 70 plots dating from 1954 and were revisited in 2000. Species composition and soil pH H2O were recorded using an analogous methodology. The studied period coincides with a period of forest conversion from coppice-with-standards towards a high forest structure and with an increase in acidifying and eutrophying deposition. Results: Between 1954 and 2000, species composition of the herb layer changed significantly. Redundancy analysis pointed to increased shade resulting from shifts in cover and species composition of the shrub and tree layer as the main driving force. Soil acidity increased and the majority of plots entered the aluminium buffer range, which potentially affected herb layer composition. Observations at the species level, especially a strong decrease in cover of the vernal species Anemone nemorosa supported this hypothesis. Conclusions: Our results show significant shifts in the forest herb layer in less than five decades. These shifts were related to an alteration in the traditional forest management regime and increased soil acidity. Whereas the effect of a changed management regime can be mitigated, soil acidification is less reversible. Testing the generality of these patterns on more extensive data sets is certainly needed

Distinguishing between turnover and nestedness in the quantification of biotic homogenization

“…The strong directionality of forest herb layer vegetation shifts is consistent with other resurvey studies ( Fig. 3a; e.g., Lameire et al 2000;Taverna et al 2005;Baeten et al 2009) and appeared to be mainly driven by species losses resulting in nested patterns rather than real species turnover within a plot. The considerable βnes dissimilarities between plot-pairs showed that the 2009 community was generally nothing more than an impoverished subset of the 1979 vegetation (Fig.…”

“…Previous studies have for instance found clear evidence for the importance of changes in forest management or canopy succession (e.g., Kirby and Thomas 2000;Van Calster et al 2008;Rogers et al 2008;Baeten et al 2009;Keith et al 2009), changed deer abundances (e.g., Kirby and Thomas 2000;Rooney et al 2004;Taverna et al 2005), increased atmospheric deposition of acidifying and eutrophying pollutants (e.g., Lameire et al 2000;Van Calster et al 2007;Baeten et al 2009;Keith et al 2009) or past habitat loss and fragmentation (e.g., Rogers et al 2009). For Lady Park Wood, canopy succession and deer (over)abundance are probably the main drivers.…”

“…In this way, several light-demanding forest herbs were lost (e.g., Hypericum spp., Epilobium angustifolium) and other shade-tolerant or shade-avoiding species could persist and expand (e.g., Mercurialis perennis, Allium ursinum, Dryopteris filix-mas) (cf. Van Calster et al 2008;Baeten et al 2009). …”

Spatial variability more influential than soil pH and land relief on thermophilous vegetation in overgrown coppice oak forests

“…The results of this investigation show a similar pattern of species ordination, where the themophilous oak forest species were placed between mesic and acidophilous species. However, the niche is probably only temporary, since succession processes have been observed after cessation of coppicing [6,7,9]. This could lead to a succession from species-rich to a typical mesic forest [5].…”

Comparison of assimilation parameters of coppiced and non-coppiced sessile oaks

“…Short-rotation coppices are often established for afforestation of unused agricultural soils and restoration of landfills (Nixon et al 2001). The most frequently claimed advantage of coppice is an increase in the overall biodiversity of the site, especially in terms of heliophile forest species (Spitzer et al 2008, Van Calster et al 2007, Baeten et al 2009). Due to its low managing costs, coppice seems a valuable alternative for small-and medium-sized-forest owners, as well as for the regeneration of stands where seedling establishment is difficult.…”