Upload
trevor-jared-powers
View
282
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The epiphytes of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) in Irish
plantation forests
Linda Coote, Daniel L. Kelly, Paul Dowding
BIOFOREST project, Department of Botany, Trinity College Dublin.
CONTEXT
Forest cover in Rep. of Ireland 10% Aim to increase to 17% by 2030 Plantations of exotic conifers – Sitka
spruce 50% of estate Little information on Irish plantation
forest biodiversity BIOFOREST project – 5 year Impact of afforestation and
forest operations on flora and fauna
Epiphytes Component part of BIOFOREST project Epiphytes of mature and over-mature
Sitka spruce and larch (Larix spp.) Main epiphyte groups -
lichens, mosses and liverworts
Important part of native woodland diversity
Little published information© Sylvia Sharnoff
AIMS
To assess the diversity of epiphytes in Irish Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) plantations
To examine the effects of open spaces within these forestry plantations on this diversity
SW Cluster
E Cluster
SITES
KNOCCLEA
REAN
MEENGLAN
CARR
CURA
MUCK
STOEBMUT
ATHN
LUGG
SITES
METHODOLOGY 12 mature Sitka spruce sites 1 open space per site
- 9 glades- 2 roads- 1 ride
N side (S-facing) of open space
1 tree at edge, 1 in forest interior – 24 total
L: 130cm
B: 25cm
M: 1/3 height of tree
U: 2/3 height of tree
25cm x 50cm plots on N & S aspect
20 plots per tree
Total: 478 plots
4 branches
RESULTS
1. Geographical clusters – SW vs. E of Ireland
2. Effect of open space - Edge vs. Interior trees
3. Aspect - N and S side of tree4. Vertical distribution – B to U trunk5. Horizontal distribution – inner to
outer branch
1. Geographical clusters
Species richness
Species richness
31 25 19
58
45
32
2
2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Total SW cluster E cluster
Sp
p.
rich
nes
s
Vascular
Lichens
Bryophytes
(91) (51)(72)
Species richness
Total 91 species
26 found in only 1 of 478 plots
35 found on only 1 of 24 trees
Only 17 species in more than
5% of plots
Species richness
Species richness
10.005.42
10.67
10.17
0
5
10
15
20
25
SW cluster E cluster
Ave
rag
e sp
p.
rich
nes
s
Lichens
Bryophytes
Significant difference in bryophyte spp. richness (p = 0.009) and total spp. richness (p = 0.002) between SW
and E
Percentage cover
Percentage cover
32.30
19.77
3.35
1.94
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
SW cluster E cluster
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Lichens
Bryophytes
Significant difference in average bryophyte cover (p = 0.033)
Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling
(NMS) Ordination
2. Effect of open spaces
Species richness
Species richness
8.00 7.42
10.00 10.83
0
5
10
15
20
25
Edge Interior
Ave
rag
e sp
p.
rich
nes
s
Lichens
Bryophytes
No significant differences in species richness between edge and interior trees
Percentage Cover
No significant differences in average percentage cover between edge and interior
trees
Percentage cover
12.0310.14
1.39
1.41
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Edge Interior
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver Lichens
Bryophytes
NMS Ordination
3. Aspect
Species richness
Species richness
5.79 5.88
7.08 7.92
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
N S
Ave
rag
e sp
p.
rich
nes
s
Lichens
Bryophytes
No significant differences in species richness between N & S side of trees
Percentage cover
Significant difference in average lichen cover (p = 0.005) and total cover (p = 0.023)
Percentage cover
10.1512.01
1.870.93
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
N S
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Lichens
Bryophytes
4. Vertical distribution
Factors which change with height - Decrease in humidity Increase in light levels Decrease in age/time for
colonisation
Bryophytes on trunk
Bryophyte cover in trunk plots
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
BN BS LN LS MN MS UN US
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Lichens on trunk
Lichen cover in trunk plots
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
BN BS LN LS MN MS UN US
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Bryophytes vs. lichens
Most bryophytes restricted to or mainly occurring on trunks Exceptions
Ulota crispaFrullania dilatataColura calyptrifolia
Bryophytes vs. lichens Most lichens found only or more
frequently on branches Trunk only- Graphis scripta,
Cladonia spp. More frequent on trunk-
Dimerella luteaLecanora pulicarisLepraria incanaParmelia sulcata
Kindbergia praelonga
Kindbergia praelonga
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B L M U
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Hypnum jutlandicum
Hypnum jutlandicum
0
5
10
15
20
25
B L M U
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Metzgeria temperata
Metzgeria temperata
0
5
10
15
20
25
B L M U
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Ulota crispa
Ulota crispa
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
B L M U
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Hypotrachyna revoluta
Hypotrachyna revoluta
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
B L M U
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Dimerella lutea
0
1
2
3
4
5
B L M U
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Dimerella lutea
5. Horizontal Distribution
Factors which change with distance from trunk: Decrease in humidity Increase in light levels Decrease in age/time for
colonisation
Bryophytes on branches
Byophyte cover on branches
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Inner Mid Outer
Plot
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Lichens on branches
Lichens cover on branches
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Inner Mid Outer
Plot
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Hypnum jutlandicum
Hypnum jutlandicum
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
Inner Mid Outer
Plot
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Metzgeria temperata
Metzgeria temperata
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Inner Mid Outer
Plot
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Ulota crispa
Ulota crispa
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
Inner Mid Outer
Plot
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Dimerella lutea
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
Inner Mid Outer
Plot
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Dimerella lutea
Fuscidea lightfootii
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
Inner Mid Outer
Plot
Ave
rag
e %
co
ver
Fuscidea lightfootii
SUMMARY Significantly greater total spp. richness,
bryophyte spp. richness & average bryophyte % cover in SW compared to E
Separation of SW and E sites in NMS suggests differences in spp. composition
No significant differences in spp. richness and % cover between Edge and Interior trees
Some separation of Edge and Interior trees in NMS suggests differences in spp. composition
SUMMARY 2 No significant difference in species
richness between N and S side of tree but significantly greater average lichen cover and total cover on S
Difference in vertical distribution of bryophytes and lichens with overall bryophyte cover decreasing with height and overall lichen cover increasing
Bryophytes more common on trunk and lichens more common on branches with some exceptions
SUMMARY 3 Differences in Vertical distribution of
individual species on trunk and Horizontal distribution on branches, probably related to microhabitat requirements
Acknowledgements Dr Daniel L. Kelly, Dr Paul Dowding,
Dr George F. Smith, BIOFOREST project, Department of Botany, Trinity College Dublin
COFORD (National Council for Forest Research & Development)
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)