Spatial patterns and coexistence of the native forb, Psathyrostachys fragilis (Asteracea) and the native invader, Gundelia tournefortii (Poaceae) in a semi-arid rangeland of Iran

• Autorzy: Khojasted F. , Chahouki M. A. Z.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In this study, we investigated the interactions between the dominant native invader, Gundelia tournefortii, and the dominant forage species, Psathyrostachys fragilis in rangelands of Taleghan (Iran). Four transects of 150 meters were considered as sampling unit. Using randomly-systematic method, 15 plots (1 × 1m) were placed along each transect with a distance of 10 m. List of species, the canopy cover and the numbers of plant species were determined in each plot. The spatial association of the two dominant species was assessed by studying association, covariation, and distribution pattern (using the Hopkins’ index) of plants. We found a clumped distribution pattern in both two dominant species. Results of this study revealed a strong competitive interaction between the dominant plant species in studied area with P. fragilis was more frequent and had more canopy cover than the native invader G. tournefortii. So, according to our findings, P. fragilis may present a suitable candidate for artificial re-vegetating and protecting against invaders to restore the biodiversity and ecological health of endangered rangelands.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

rengeland restoration; competition; spatial pattern; coexistence; invader; Gundelia tournefortii; Poaceae; forage species; Psathyrostachys fragilis; Compositae; Iran; semiarid region

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2013
• Tom: 61
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.373-377,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Khojasted F.

• Department of Reclamation of Arid and Mountain Regions, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Iran

autor

Chahouki M. A. Z.

• Department of Reclamation of Arid and Mountain Regions, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Iran

Bibliografia

• Azarnivand H., Zare Chahouki M.A. 2008 – Range Improvement – University of Tehren press, Iran, 354 pp. (in Persian).
• Blumenthal D.M., Norton A.P., Seastedt T.R. 2010 – Restoring competitors and natural enemies for long-term control of plant invaders – Rangelands, 32: 16–20.
• Brown C.S., Anderson V.J., Claassen V.P., Stannard M.E., Wilson L.M., Atkinson S.Y., Bromberg J.E., Grant III T.A., Munis M.D. 2008 – Restoration ecology and invasive plants in the semiarid west – Invasive Plant Sci. Manage. 1: 399–413.
• Bruno J.F., Fridley J.D., Bromberg K.D., Bertness M.D. 2005 – Insights into biotic interactions from studies of species invasions (In: Species Invasions: Insights into Ecology, Evolution, and Biogeography, Eds: D.F. Sax, J.J. Stachowicz, S.D. Gaines) – Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, pp. 13–40.
• Callaway R. 1995 – Positive interactions among plants – Bot. Rev. 61: 306–349.
• Casper B.B., Jackson R.B. 1997 – Plant competition underground – Ann Rev Ecol Syst. 28: 545–580.
• Connell J.H. 1983 – On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments – Am. Nat. 122: 661–696.
• Floyd M.L., Hanna D., Romme W.H., Crews T.E. 2006 – Predicting and mitigating weed invasions to restore natural post-fire succession in Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, USA – Int. J. Wildland Fire, 15: 247–259.
• Grace J.B., Tilman D. 1990 – Perspectives on Plant Competition – Academic Press, New York, USA, 483 pp.
• Grime J.P. 1979 – Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes – John Wiley, New York, USA, 222 pp.
• Krebs C.J. 1989 – Ecological Methodology – Harper and Row publishers, 653 pp.
• Ludwig J.A., Reynolds J.F. 1988 – Statistical Ecology: A Primer on Methods and Computing – John Wiley and Sons, New York, USA, 337 pp.
• Mangla S., Sheley R.L., James J.J., Radosevich S.R. 2011 – Intra and interspecific competition among invasive and native species during early stages of plant growth – Plant Ecol. 212: 531–542.
• Myers J.H., Bazely D. 2003 – Ecology and Control of Introduced Plants – Cambridge University Press, UK, 315 pp.
• Pugnaire F.I., Luque M.T. 2001 – Changes in plant interactions along a gradient of environmental stress – Oikos, 93: 42–49.
• Rodriguez L.F. 2006 – Can invasive species facilitate native species? Evidence of how, when, and why these impacts occur – Biol. Invasions, 8: 927–939.
• Sax D.F., Kinlan B.P., Smith K.F. 2005 – A conceptual framework for comparing species assemblages in native and exotic habitats – Oikos, 108: 457–464.
• Schoener T.W. 1983 – Field experiments on interspecific competition – Am. Nat. 122: 240–285.
• Shadkami-Til H., Bibalani G.H. 2011 – Over ground biomass characteristics of genera single species Iran (Cnicus benedictus) in northwest Iran (Till area of Shabestar) – Int. J. Acad. Res. 3: 698.
• Shirley H.L. 1945 – Reproduction of upland conifers in the Lake States as affected by root competition and light – Am. Mid. Nat. 33: 537–612.
• Tilman D. 1988 – Plant strategies and the dynamics and structure of plant communities – Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA, 376 pp.
• Valladares F., Niinmetes U. 2008 – Shade tolerance, a key plant trait of complex nature and consequences – Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. Evol. 39: 237–257.
• Wilson J.B., Steel J.B., Steel S.L.K. 2007 – Do plants ever compete for space? – Folia Geobot. 42: 431–436.