Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:02:44.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Plant communities of the British sand dunes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

A. J. C. Malloch
Affiliation:
Institute of Environmental and Biological Sciences, University of Lancaster, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, U.K.
Get access

Synopsis

The National Vegetation Classification has details of some 2000 samples of sand dune vegetation collected nationally. Analysis of these data has resulted in the recognition of about thirteen plant communities of the sand dune system. Details of these communities are presented, elaborating on their species composition, variability, ecological relationships and distribution. As might be expected, the major direction of variation is from strandline, through the vegetation of active dunes, to the fixed dune grasslands, heath and scrub. The precise pattern is affected by the calcium status of the dune and by its geographic location. The vegetation of dune slacks is also dependent on the calcium status of the sand, as well as the amount and persistence of standing water. Superimposed on this natural pattern of variation is the use of dune systems by the grazing of domestic animals as seen on the machair of the Hebrides in particular.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chapman, V. J. 1976. Coastal Vegetation, 2nd ed. Oxford: Pergamon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corley, M. F. V. & Hill, M. O. 1981. Distribution of Bryophytes in the British Isles. Cardiff: British Bryological Society.Google Scholar
Géhu, J. -M. & Géhu, J. 1969. Les associations végétales des dunes mobiles et des bordures des plages de le côte atlantique française. Vegetatio 18, 122166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gimingham, C. H. 1964. Maritime and Sub-maritime Communities. In The Vegetation of Scotland, ed. Burnett, J. H., pp. 67142. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
Harris, D. & Davy, A. J. 1986a. Strandline colonization by Elymus farctus in relation to sand mobility and rabbit grazing. Journal of Ecology 74, 10451056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, D. & Davy, A. J. 1986b. Regenerative potential of Elymus farctus from rhizome fragments and seed. Journal of Ecology 74, 10571067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, M. O. 1979. TWINSPAN – a FORTRAN program for arranging multivariale data in an ordered two-way table by classification of the individuals and attributes. Ithaca, N.Y.: Section of Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Huiskes, A. H. L. 1979. Biological Flora of the British Isles: Ammophila arenaria (L.) Link. Journal of Ecology 67, 363382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ignacuik, R. & Lee, J. A. 1980. The germination of four annual strandline species. New Phytologist 84, 581594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, P. S. & Etherington, J. R. 1989. Ecological and physiological studies of sand dune slack vegetation, Kenfig Pool and Dunes Local Nature Reserve, Mid-Glamorgan, Wales. In Perspectives in Coastal Dune Management, eds van der Meulen, F., Jungerius, P. D. & Visser, J., pp. 297303. The Hague: SPB Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
Malloch, A. J. C. 1988. VESPAN II: A computer package to handle and analyse multivariate species data and handle and display species distribution data. Lancaster: University of Lancaster.Google Scholar
Müller, T. 1962. Die Saumgesellschaften der Klasse Trifolio-Geranietea sanguinei. Mitteilungen der Floristisch-soziologischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft, N.F. 9, 95140.Google Scholar
Ranwell, D. S. 1972. Ecology of salt marshes and sand dunes. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Tansley, A. G. 1939. The British Islands and their vegetation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tutin, T. G. et al. 1964 et seq. Flora Europaea, Vols. 1–5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar