Variation in phylogenetic structure of forest communities along a human disturbance gradient in Gutianshan forest, China

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1003.2011.07030

Abstract

Abstract:

Community phylogenetic structure contains information about evolutionary relationships among coexisting species in a community. Studies on community phylogenetic structure provide new insights into ecological processes and the mechanisms underlying community restoration. We compared the phylogenetic structure of forest communities along a human disturbance gradient using data from 12 1-ha plots in secondary forests within the Gutianshan National Nature Reserve, Zhejiang Province, China. We found that, at the 20 m×20 m scale, the plantation forest community (I) was phylogenetically overdispersed. Forest communities II (naturally-restored forest 50 years after clear cutting and 20 years after heavy selective cutting), III (naturally-restored forest 50 years after clear cutting), and IV (old-growth forest) were phylogenetically clustered. Forest types II and IV were the most clustered. We also conducted the same analyses for four forest types grouped into different DBH classes, and found that forests II, III, IV with DBH less than 5 cm and 5-10 cm were phylogenetically clustered, but forest I was overdispersed. In contrast, all the forests with DBH more than 10 cm were phylogenetically overdispersed except the forest IV. Our results suggest that seed dispersal is the main process resulting in phylogenetic overdispersion at early stage of succession, and habitat filtering is main process leading to phylogenetic clustering when habitat heterogeneity increases during succession. Possibly as a result of habitat filtering, forest IV was always phylogenetically clustered regardless of which size class was examined.

Key words: community composition, phylogenetically overdispersed, phylogenetically clustered, diameter classes, seed dispersal, habitat filter

Kai Song, Xiangcheng Mi, Qi Jia, Haibao Ren, Dan Bebber, Keping Ma. Variation in phylogenetic structure of forest communities along a human disturbance gradient in Gutianshan forest, China[J]. Biodiv Sci, 2011, 19(2): 190-196.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.biodiversity-science.net/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1003.2011.07030

https://www.biodiversity-science.net/EN/Y2011/V19/I2/190

Figures/Tables 8

Table 1 Community types and species richness of 12 1-ha plots

样地 Plot	群落类型 Community type	物种数 Species richness
样地 Plot	群落类型 Community type	总数 Total	DBH≤5 cm	5 cm <DBH≤ 10 cm	DBH> 10 cm
1	I	81	77	31	22
2	IV	114	96	56	73
3	II	100	100	66	25
4	IV	89	83	50	39
5	III	105	96	53	43
6	III	123	113	68	46
7	I	90	86	32	18
8	II	95	89	58	25
9	II	85	76	53	19
10	IV	118	96	68	72
11	I	98	90	40	16
12	III	87	80	45	34

Table 2 The S?rensen index between different community types

群落类型 Community type	I	II	III
II	0.2146
III	0.2239	0.1910
IV	0.2920	0.2161	0.2177

Table 3 LSD’s one-way ANOVA for Net Relatedness Index of communities with different disturbance types

变异来源 Source	df	SS	s²	F	Pr>F
干扰类型 Disturbance type	3	64.5689	21.5230	19.09	<0.0001
误差 Error	296	333.7407	1.1275
总变异 Corrected total	299	398.3096

Table 4 Two-way ANOVA for Net Relatedness Index of communities with different disturbance types and DBH classes

变异来源 Source	df	SS	S²	F	Pr>F
干扰类型 Disturbance type (DT)	3	210.0901	70.03	42.76	<.0001
径级结构 DBH	2	489.0633	244.5317	149.31	<.0001
干扰类型× 径级结构 DT× DBH	6	69.703	11.6172	7.09	<.0001
误差 Error	859	1406.8081	1.6377
总变异 Corrected total	870	2175.6645

Fig. 1 The mean value of Net Relatedness Index of communities of different human disturbance types. I, II, III, IV, see Table 1. The letters on bars are the results of multiple comparison for different community types.

Table 5 Effects of different topographical factors on Net Relatedness Index of communities

地形因子 Topographical factor	海拔 Elevation	坡向 Aspect	坡度 Slope	凹凸度 Convexity
P	0.3916	0.1153	0.3711	0.043^*
R²	0.0025	0.0083	0.0027	0.0137

Fig. 2 The mean value Net Relatedness Index of communities of different DBH classes. The letters on bars are the results of multiple comparison for different community types for the same DBH class. I, II, III, IV, see Table 1.

Fig. 3 The mean value of Net Relatedness Index of communities with different human disturbance after excluding Cunninghamia lanceolata from plantation forest. The letters on bars are the results of multiple comparison for different community types. I, II, III, IV, see Table 1.

References 30

[1]	Belsky AJ (1986) Regeneration of artificial disturbance in grasslands of the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania: II. Five years of successional change. Journal of Ecology, 74, 937-952.
[2]	Brown KA, Gurevitch J (2004) Long-term impacts of logging on forest diversity in Madagascar. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 101, 6045-6049.
[3]	Buckley DS, Crow TR, Nauertz EA (2003) Influence of skid trails and haul roads on understory plant richness and composition in managed forest landscapes in Upper Michigan, USA. Forest Ecology and Management, 175, 509-520.
[4]	Cannon CH, Peart DR, Leighton M (1998) Tree species diversity in commercially logged Bornean rainforest. Science, 281, 1366-1368. URL PMID
[5]	Cavender-Bares J, Ackerly DD, Baum DA, Bazzaz FA (2004) Phylogenetic overdispersion in Floridian oak communities. The American Naturalist, 163, 823-843. URL PMID
[6]	Cavender-Bares J, Adrienne K, Brianna M (2006) Phylogenetic structure of Floridian plant communities depends on taxonomic and spatial scale. Ecology, 87, S109-S122. URL PMID
[7]	Chazdon RL (2003) Tropical forest recovery: legacies of human impact and natural disturbances. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 6, 51-71.
[8]	Collins SL, Barber SC (1985) Effects of disturbance on diversity on mixed grass prairie. Vegetatio, 64, 87-94.
[9]	Gong GQ (宫贵权), Cheng JM (程积民), Mi XC (米湘成), Chen SW (陈声文), Fang T (方腾) (2007) Habitat association of wood species in the Gutianshan subtropical broad-leaved evergreen forest. Science of Soil and Water Conservation (中国水土保持科学), 5(3), 79-83. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	Helmus MR, Keller W, Paterson MJ (2009) Communities contain closely related species during ecosystem disturbance. Ecology Letters, 13, 162-174. URL PMID
[11]	Huang JX (黄建雄), Zheng FY (郑凤英), Mi XC (米湘成) (2010) Influence of environmental factors on phylogenetic structure at multiple spatial scales in an evergreen broad- leaved forest of China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology (植物生态学报), 34, 309-315. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	Hubbell SP (2001) The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
[13]	Kembel SW, Hubbell SP (2006) The phylogenetic structure of a neotropical forest tree community. Ecology, 87, S86-S99. URL PMID
[14]	Koleff P, Gaston KJ, Lennon JJ (2003) Measuring beta diversity for presence-absence data. Journal of Animal Ecology, 72, 367-382.
[15]	Letcher SG (2009) Phylogenetic structure of angiosperm communities during tropical forest succession. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277, 97-104. URL PMID
[16]	Liu ZM (刘志民), Zhao XY (赵晓英), Liu XM (刘新民) (2002) Relationship between disturbance and vegetation. Acta Prataculturae Sinica (草业学报), 11(4), 1-9. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	Losos JB (2008) Phylogenetic niche conservatism, phylogenetic signal and the relationship between phylogenetic relatedness and ecological similarity among species. Ecology Letters, 11, 995-1007. DOI URL PMID
[18]	Lou LH (楼炉焕), Jin SH (金水虎) (2000) Spermatophyta flora of Gutianshan Nature Reserve in Zhejiang. Journal of Beijing Forestry University (北京林业大学学报), 22(5), 33-39. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	Pickett S TA, White PS (1985) The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. Academic Press, London.
[20]	R Development Core Team (2009) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org. (accessed 2010-09)
[21]	Swenson NG, Enquist BJ, Pither J, Thompson J, Zimmerman JK (2006) The problem and promise of scale dependence in community phylogenetics. Ecology, 87, 2418-2424. URL PMID
[22]	Swenson NG, Enquist BJ, Thompson J, Zimmerman JK (2007) The influence of spatial and size scale on phylogenetic relatedness in tropical forest communities. Ecology, 88, 1770-1780. URL PMID
[23]	Verdu M, Rey PJ, Alcantara JM, Siles G, Valiente-Banuet A (2009) Phylogenetic signatures of facilitation and competition in successional communities. Journal of Ecology, 97, 1171-1180.
[24]	Webb CO, Ackerly DD, Kembel S (2008a) Phylocom: software for the analysis of phylogenetic community structure and character evolution. Version 4.0. http://phylodiversity.net/ phylocom. (accessed 2010-09)
[25]	Webb CO, Ackerly DD, McPeek MA, Donoghue MJ (2002) Phylogenies and community ecology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 33, 475-505.
[26]	Webb CO, Cannon CH, Davies SJ (2008b) Ecological organization, biogeography, and the phylogenetic structure of tropical forest tree communities. In: Tropical Forest Community Ecology (eds Carson WP, Schnizer SA). Wiley Blackwell, Oxford.
[27]	Webb CO, Donoghue MJ (2005) Phylomatic: tree assembly for applied phylogenetics. Molecular Ecology Notes, 5, 181-183.
[28]	Wiens JJ, Graham CH (2005) Niche conservatism: integrating evolution, ecology and conservation biology. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 36, 519-539.
[29]	Wikstrom N, Savolainen V, Chase MW (2001) Evolution of the angiosperms: calibrating the family tree. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 268, 2211-2220. DOI URL PMID
[30]	Ye LQ (叶林奇) (2000) The relationship between disturbance and biodiversity. Journal of Guizhou University (Natural Science)(贵州大学学报自然科学版), 17(2), 129-134. (in Chinese with English abstract)