Spontaneous regeneration as a possible way of restoration of …restorationcourse.okologia.mta.hu/sites/restorationcourse.okologia.mta... · • Kiskun-LTER field site network •

Spontaneous regeneration as a possible way of restoration of sandy grasslands in Central-Hungary

Anikó Csecserits, Melinda Halassy, Barbara Lhotsky, Tamás Rédei & Zoltán Botta-DukátMTA Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany, Vácrátót

SER Europe Summer School on Ecological Restoration, 20-24. 08. 2018.

1. Introduction

- old-fields in Kiskunság and succession as a process

2. Situation of old-fields in Kiskunság – large scale study

- regeneration success

- level of invasion on old-fields

3. Small-scale study of old-fields between 2000 and 2017 –description of the processes

- Process description with traits

- Effect of an invasive species on succession

4. Experience and suggestions

Short content

Dry sandy habitats in Hungary*

In Hungary (ha) In Danubial Lowland (ha)

Open sand steppes 10 700 9 440

Closed sand steppes 28 000 20 500

Closed lowland steppe oak woodland

~6 000 1 200

Open sand steppe oak woodland whith opening

290 190

Poplar-juniper steppe woodland 3 000 2 990

Uncharacteristic dry/semi-dry grasslands

157 000 34 000

Old-fields (estimation !) 350 000 data for Danubial and Tisza Lowland:

164 000

*source: MÉTA-program - Actual habitat Map of Hungary (2008!)*http://www.novenyzetiterkep.hu

1. Introduction

Old fields in Hungary according to META survey, in 2008

Introduction

Old-fields in the Kiskunság region

Amount and distribution: - no exact data,- estimation: 3,3 % of the Great Plain,

cc. 164 000 ha old-field and 68 000 ha secondary, uncharacteristicgrassland

Environmental conditions of Kiskunság: • coarse calcareous sand or sandy sill

loam, pH (H2O): 7,9-8,3, sand content95-97%

• decreasing water table, • many invasive species in the

landscape: e.g. Asclepias syriaca, Robinia pseudo-acacia, Ambrosiaartemisiifolia

Introduction

Neophyte species:21 annuals9 perennial herbs17 woody species

Asclepias syriaca

Ambrosia artemisiifolia

Robinia pseudoacacia

Introduction

Introduction

Landscape-changes in Kiskunság (Biró et al. 2013 Community Ecology)

Abandonmentand spontaneoussuccession

Tree plantation

Introduction

• Spontaneous succession as a process driven by assembly rules• Assembly rules AR (Diamond 1975, Keddy 1992): rules working during ecological

processes selecting species from regional species pool and thus determining local community composition (HilleRisLambers et al. 2012, Götzenberger et al. 2012)

• Rules ~ filters • Main types: dispersal, environmental and biotic filters

• Aiming to detect the working rules (and possible main processes) from observed data, in order to describe and restore the vegetation

HilleRisLambers et al. 2012

Study of assembly rules

• AR working: non-random species selection, no random pattern

• Detect the assembly rule = detect the departure from random pattern,

• Species-based or trait-based approach

• At different spatial scale, along environmental gradient, habitats, different site history

• An example: Lhotsky et al. 2016, J of Ecology – trait based, long environmental gradient

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

-3-2

-10

12

3

NDVI

Eff

ect

siz

e

Less productive end, ~dry grassland More productive end, ~wetland

Convergence in trait distribution→Environmental filter is present

Divergence in trait distribution →Biotic filter

Specific Leaf Area

New: Succession can be also an environmental gradient

• Hypothesis: Community composition assembling during the succession isalso partly non-random, there are assembly rules forming the new community and these rules change with time

• After overcoming the dispersal limitation, environmental filtering will be dominant at the beginning of succession

• Biotic interactions will be important later in the succession

• Use of traits help in generalization

Divergence

Convergence

Time since abandonment

Dep

artu

re f

rom

ex

pe

cted

FD

,ES

random

meadow crosseyed (réti kancsalka), pipe-tree (pipafa), bug juniper (bogárboróka) , wild marzipan (vadmarcipán), cactus-banana shrub (kaktuszbanán-bokor)

Why traits?

Easily understandable, comparable and refers to the function

- How does the plant species community composition and trait compostition change during succession?Became it similary to the reference habitats?

- Are there detectable assembly rules really and do theychange during succession?

- How does the non-native species perform duringsuccession? What factors have an effect on their perform? What effect have these species on other plant speciesperform?

Our questions

Methods

• KISKUN-longterm field site network

• 16 site, 5x5 km large,

• 555 relevés, 20x20m4 habitat-groups:• agricultural (75)• old-fields (117)• tree plantations (207)• semi-natural habitats (156)

• Compare the plant composition and diversity of different habitats

• spontaneous occurence of neophytespecies

• Used environmental factors:

- past and present land-use,

- landscape context,

- local environment: soil, climate


Species composition of different habitats

PCA of the releve’s

• A: arable field, fruit and vineyards,

• O1, O2, O3: age-group of old-fields

• GO: open grassland, GC: closed grassland,

• FO: open forest, FC: sandy closed forest

Ref: Csecserits et al. 2011, Plant Biosystems


Some pictures about the old-fields

Effect of surroundign landscape on the old-fields:more grassland – more grassland specialist species on old-fields(GLM model)


Non-native plant species performance – level of invasion (species number %) indifferent habitats

AC, AV: agricultural fields, PO: oak plantation, PN, PE: poplar plantation, PL: black locust, PP: Pinus sp, PY: young tree plantation, O1, O2, O3: old-fieldsGO, GC: sandy grasslands, WO, WC: semi-natural forests

Csecserits et al. 2016., AgricEcosysEnv


Non-native plant species performance – level of invasion (cover %) in differenthabitats

AC, AV: agricultural fields, PO: oak plantation, PN, PE: poplar plantation, PL: black locust, PP: Pinus sp, PY: young tree plantation, O1, O2, O3: old-fieldsGO, GC: sandy grasslands, WO, WC: semi-natural forests


Factors determining the performance of perennial neophyte species

• Most important factor: type of habitat• Largest level of invasion: old-field and

tree plantation


AG AS O1 O2 O3 TG TN TP TZ UA UF UH UN US UT

02

04

06

08

0

habitat

éve

lő n

eo

fita

bo

rítá

s,

%b

3. Small-scale study of old-fields between 2000 and 2017 –description the process

• Kiskun-LTER field site network

• 40 permanent vegetation plot, 4x4 m

• 4 age – group (10 plot/AG),• abandoned between 1994-

1999 • abandoned between 1994-

1989• abandoned between 1988-

1975• abandoned between 1965-

1974

• Sampling: 2000, 2008, 2010, 2015, 2017

• Vascular plant species and traits

• Functional diversity of plots comparedto random

• Effect sizes from the comparision forevery plot

• Changes of CWM and effect sizes werechecked by linear mixed effect modell

3. Shortly about the studied traits

Describing regeneration: • Seed weight• Start, end and long of flowering (in months)

Describing vegetative performance:• SLA (specific leaf area, mm2/mg)• LDMC (leaf dry matter content, mg/g)• Leaf area, mm2

• Generative height• Life span• Lateral spreading (3 type)

Source of data: • LEDA, Hungarian Flora book, • Török et al. 2013, 2016 – seed weight, • Own measurements ~ 150 species - SLA, LDMC, height, partly in: Lhotsky et al. 2016

3. Result of local study

• Every traits shows at least partly non-random pattern!• Two traits: seed-mass and pollination type were permantly more diverse as

random

• Changing assembly rules – most traits• As expected: From convergent to divergent through random patternMost of the traits (8) showed this pattern


Changing assembly rules – opposite pattern, increasing convergence: Two traits: SLA, life forms


20

00

.1

20

00

.2

20

00

.3

20

00

.4

20

08

.1

20

08

.2

20

08

.3

20

08

.4

20

10

.1

20

10

.2

20

10

.3

20

10

.4

20

15

.1

20

15

.2

20

15

.3

20

15

.4

0

20

40

60

Év és korcsoport

Ne

ofi

ton

bo

rítá

s, %

Neophyte species on old-fields – changes of cover• Neophyte species• Milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) cover

20

00

.1

20

00

.2

20

00

.3

20

00

.4

20

08

.1

20

08

.2

20

08

.3

20

08

.4

20

10

.1

20

10

.2

20

10

.3

20

10

.4

20

15

.1

20

15

.2

20

15

.3

20

15

.4

0

20

40

60

Év és korcsoport

Se

lye

mk

óró

bo

rítá

s, %

Neo

ph

yte

cove

r, %

Effect of Asclepias syriaca

4. Conclusion and suggestions

• Old-field could regenerate well in few decades, became similarto primary grasslands

• Surrounding landscape has important effect on theestablishment of grassland specialist species

• However the species number and abundance of neophyte(mostly invasive) species remain large

• Also in the Kiskunság (Hungary) the habitat, thus the land-use is the main factor determining the level of invasion

• Habitat with more intensive land use (disturbance) have largerlevel of invasion

• Thus the surrounding landscape of old-fields (or of restorationplots) is important

Suggestion:

• avoiding frequent habitat conversion by long-term land-use planning

• restricting habitat conversion from primary and secondary grassland into arable land or tree plantation

• limiting the amount of ecosystem disturbance, especially in semi-natural habitats to prevent establishment of invasive plants


Összefoglalás

• Assembly rules are there during succession

• Changing environment – many changing assembly rules – butnot every

• Seed weight, pollination type – connected to regeneration - is divergent, no changes

• Most changes as expectet: from environment filter to limiting similarity

• Establishment of a new grassland, a new community is a longprocess


• Invasion is everywhere, regeneration of grassland is hampered by invasive species

• More study needed about the effect in order to focus on the really problematic situations

• Recent propagule sources are different –should be the recent grassland be also?


Take home message

• Quite good regeneration potential in Kiskunság

• Land-use effect – tree plantation instead of regeneration

• Landscape effect – dispersal limitation and many seeds of neophyte

• Invasive species – changing succession processes, effect on species composition

Need of management

Participant: Árvai Ágnes, Somay László, Szabó Rebeka, Gabriella Toulu

Funds: „Természetes és mesterséges ökoszisztémák kölcsönhatásai: a biodiverzitás, az

ökoszisztéma funkciók és a tájhasználat értékelése az Alföldre, 2002-2008" című projekt

(NKFP6-0013/2005)

MTA posztdoctor scholarship 2015-2017

Acknowledgement:

References:

• Biró, M., Szitár, K., Horváth, F., Bagi, I., & Molnár, Z. (2013). Detection of long-term landscape changes and trajectories in a Pannonian sand region: comparing land-cover and habitat-based approaches at two spatial scales. Community ecology, 14(2), 219-230.

• Csecserits, A., Botta-Dukát, Z., Kröel-Dulay, G., Lhotsky, B., Ónodi, G., Rédei, T., ... & Halassy, M. (2016). Treeplantations are hot-spots of plant invasion in a landscape with heterogeneous land-use. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 226, 88-98.

• Csecserits, A., Czúcz, B., Halassy, M., Kröel-Dulay, G., Rédei, T., Szabó, R., ... & Török, K. (2011). Regeneration of sandyold-fields in the forest steppe region of Hungary. Plant Biosystems-An International Journal Dealing with all Aspects of Plant Biology, 145(3), 715-729.

• Götzenberger, L., de Bello, F., Bråthen, K. A., Davison, J., Dubuis, A., Guisan, A., ... & Pellissier, L. (2012). Ecologicalassembly rules in plant communities—approaches, patterns and prospects. Biological reviews, 87(1), 111-127.

• HilleRisLambers, J., Adler, P. B., Harpole, W. S., Levine, J. M., & Mayfield, M. M. (2012). Rethinking community assembly through the lens of coexistence theory. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 43.

• Lhotsky, B., Kovács, B., Ónodi, G., Csecserits, A., Rédei, T., Lengyel, A., ... & Botta‐Dukát, Z. (2016)a. Changes inassembly rules along a stress gradient from open dry grasslands to wetlands. Journal of Ecology, 104(2), 507-517.T

• Lhotsky, B., Csecserits, A., Kovács, B., & Botta-Dukát, Z. (2016).b New plant trait records of the Hungarian flora. ActaBotanica Hungarica, 58(3-4), 397-400.

• Török, P., Miglécz, T., Valkó, O., Tóth, K., Kelemen, A., Albert, Á. J., ... & Deák, B. (2013). New thousand-seed weightrecords of the Pannonian flora and their application in analysing social behaviour types. Acta BotanicaHungarica, 55(3-4), 429-472.

• Török, P., Tóth, E., Tóth, K., Valkó, O., Deák, B., Kelbert, B., ... & Miglécz, T. (2016). New measurements of thousand-seed weights of species in the Pannonian flora. Acta Botanica Hungarica, 58(1-2), 187-198.

Sorurce of drawings:

• Dániel, András: Egy kupac kufli (cc. One cop of „crescent”) 2013. Pozsonyi Pagony Kft, Budapest, ISBN 9786155291999

Documents

Spontaneous regeneration as a possible way of restoration of …restorationcourse.okologia.mta.hu/sites/restorationcourse.okologia.mta... · • Kiskun-LTER field site network •