How plot shape and spatial arrangement affect plant species richness counts: implications for sampling design and rarefaction analyses

Abstract

Questions How does the spatial configuration of sampling units influence recorded plant species richness values at small spatial scales? What are the consequences of these findings for sampling methodology and rarefaction analyses? Location Six semi‐natural grasslands in Western Eurasia (France, Germany, Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Turkey). Methods In each site we established six blocks of 40 cm × 280 cm, subdivided into 5 cm × 5 cm micro‐quadrats, on which we recorded vascular plant species presence with the rooted (all sites) and shoot (four sites) presence method. Data of these micro‐quadrats were then combined to achieve larger sampling units of 0.01, 0.04 and 0.16 m² grain size with six different spatial configurations (square, 4:1 rectangle, 16:1 rectangle, three variants of discontiguous randomly placed micro‐quadrats). The effect of the spatial configurations on species richness was quantified as relative richness compared to the mean richness of the square of the same surface area. Results Square sampling units had significantly lower species richness than other spatial configurations in all countries. For 4:1 and 16:1 rectangles, the increase of rooted richness was on average about 2% and 8%, respectively. In contrast, the average richness increase for discontiguous configurations was 7%, 17% and 40%. In general, increases were higher with shoot presence than with rooted presence. Overall, the patterns of richness increase were highly consistent across six countries, three grain sizes and two recording methods. Conclusions Our findings suggest that the shape of sampling units has negligible effects on species richness values when the length–width ratio is up to 4:1, and the effects remain small even for more elongated contiguous configurations. In contrast, results from discontiguous sampling units are not directly comparable with those of contiguous sampling units, and are strongly confounded by spatial extent. This is particularly problematic for rarefaction studies where spatial extent is often not controlled for. We suggest that the concept of effective area is a useful tool to report effects of spatial configuration on richness values, and introduce species–extent relationships (SERs) to describe richness increases of different spatial configurations of sampling units.

landscapemetrics: an open‐source R tool to calculate landscape metrics

“…Most likely, rectangular plots captured more spatial heterogeneity. A similar effect can be observed for species richness counts, where more species can be found in elongated plots (Güler et al 2016). Both regular and random arrangements of sampling plots were able to capture landscape properties similarly well.…”

Comparing ultra‐high spatial resolution remote‐sensing methods in mapping peatland vegetation

“…The 2006 field work data were sampled with circular plots, whereas in the 2017 inventory, square plots were used. In previous studies, it has been found that plot shape has an effect on how many species are observed within the plot (Bacaro et al., ; Güler et al., ). Thus, the differently shaped plots might have had an effect on the observed species and PFTs, their percentage coverages and modeled clusters, but as indicator species and PFTs were closely similar for both data sets (see ), we do not see that the differing plot shapes had any major impact on our results.…”

Moderate grazing sustains plant diversity in Afromontane grassland

“…We calculated the cumulative richness of 24 discontinuous 1‐m 2 quadrats within a 1000‐m 2 area, and used it as proxy for site‐level richness (Güler et al. ). Analyses were conducted separately for the two grassland types, DBERG and MBELT.…”