Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T11:56:21.129Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using Species-Area Curves to Examine Weed Communities in Organic and Conventional Spring Wheat Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Fredric W. Pollnac ,
Bruce D. Maxwell  and
Fabian D. Menalled
Fredric W. Pollnac
Affiliation:
Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717
Bruce D. Maxwell
Affiliation:
Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717
Fabian D. Menalled*
Affiliation:
Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: menalled@montan.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ecological significance of species diversity within agroecosystems has become a point of interest in recent years. Although the time and spatial scale at which diversity is measured may influence the interpretation of its functional importance, little research has been conducted on methodological approaches to assess the number and relative abundance of agricultural plant species. In this study, we (1) evaluated the applicability of the species-area curve to examine plant species richness and α and β diversity in conventional no-tillage and organically managed spring wheat systems, and (2) assessed temporal changes in plant species richness across systems. Measurements were obtained at three times during two growing seasons in experimental plots and at three times during one growing season on commercial farms in Montana. In accordance with previous studies, management system affected species richness and diversity. In eight of nine studied cases, we detected a positive relationship between species richness and sampled area. In these eight cases, intercepts (α diversity) were higher for the organic systems than for the conventional no-tillage systems. Slopes (β diversity) were higher for the organic system in six of nine cases studied. Species richness declined as the season progressed for both systems, with the organic systems consistently having more species than the conventional no-tillage systems. Despite differences in the species composition and between the experimental plots and commercial farm field size, the patterns of species richness and α and β diversity were relatively constant, suggesting that the processes responsible for the assembly of plant communities in agroecosystems of the Northern Great Plains are similar at a range of spatial scales.

Keywords

Wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Species-area curveα diversityβ diversityspring wheatorganic agricultureweed communitydiversityspecies richness
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 57 , Issue 3 , June 2009 , pp. 241 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

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

Literature Cited

Adler, P. B. and Lauenroth, W. K. 2003. The power of time: spatiotemporal scaling of species diversity. Ecol. Lett. 6:749–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albrecht, H. 2003. Suitability of arable weeds as indicator organisms to evaluate species conservation effects of management in agricultural ecosystems. Agr. Ecosys. Environ. 98:201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrhenius, O. 1921. Species and area. J. Ecol. 9:95–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronec, R. L. 2003. Soil Survey of Chouteau County Area. Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service.Google Scholar
Cannone, N. 2004. Minimum area assessment and different sampling approaches for the study of vegetation communities in Antarctica. Antarct. Sci. 16:157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, C. O. 1988. Soil Survey of Fergus County. Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service.Google Scholar
Connor, E. F. and McCoy, E. D. 1979. Statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Am. Nat. 113:791–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, A. S., Renner, K. A., and Gross, K. L. 2005. Weed seedbank and community shifts in a long-term cropping systems experiment. Weed Sci. 53:296–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Bello, F., Leps, J., and Sebastia, M. 2007. Grazing effects on the species-area relationship: variation along a climatic gradient in NE Spain. J. Veg. Sci. 18:25–34.Google Scholar
Draper, N. and Smith, H. 1981. Applied Regression Analysis. New York John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Fried, G., Norton, L. R., and Reboud, X. 2008. Environmental and management factors determining weed species composition and diversity in France. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 128:68–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabriel, D., Roschwewitz, I., Tscharntke, T., and Thies, C. 2006. Beta diversity at different spatial scales: plant communities in organic and conventional agriculture. Ecol. Appl. 16:2011–2021.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gering, J. C., Crist, T. O., and Veech, J. A. 2003. Additive partitioning of species diversity across multiple spatial scales: implications for regional conservation of biodiversity. Conserv. Biol. 17:488–499.Google Scholar
Gray, J. S., Ugland, K. I., and Lambshead, J. 2004. Species accumulation and species area curves—a comment on Scheiner (2003). Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 13:473–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiltbrunner, J., Scherrer, C., Streit, B., Jeanneret, P., Zihlmann, U., and Tschachtli, R. 2008. Long-term weed community dynamics in Swiss organic and integrated farming systems. Weed Res. 48:360–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulting, A. G. 2004. Weed Population Dynamics in Diversified Cropping Systems of the Northern Great Plains. Ph.D. dissertation. Bozeman, MT Montana State University.Google Scholar
Hyvönen, T., Ketoja, E., Salonen, J., Jalli, H., and Tiainen, J. 2003. Weed species diversity and community composition in organic and conventional cropping of spring cereals. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 97:131–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Légère, A., Stevenson, F. C., and Benoit, D. L. 2005. Diversity and assembly of weed communities: contrasting responses across cropping systems. Weed Res. 45:303–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Letourneau, D. K. and Bothwell, S. G. 2008. Comparison of organic and conventional farms: challenging ecologists to make biodiversity functional. Front. Ecol. Environ. 6:430–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manhoudt, A. G. E., de Haes, H. A. U., and de Snoo, G. R. 2005. An indicator of plant species richness of semi-natural habitats and crops on arable farms. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 109:166–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menalled, F. D., Gross, K. L., and Hammond, M. 2001. Weed aboveground and seedbank community responses to agricultural management systems. Ecol. Appl. 11:1586–1601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulugeta, D., Stoltenberg, D. E., and Boerboom, C. M. 2001. Weed species-area relationships as influenced by tillage. Weed Sci. 49:217–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, S. D., Clements, D. R., Belaoussoff, S., Kevan, P. G., and Swanton, C. J. 2006. Promotion of weed species diversity and reduction of weed seedbanks with conservation tillage and crop rotation. Weed Sci. 54:69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team 2005. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Ricotta, C., Carranza, M. L., and Avena, G. 2002. Computing beta-diversity from species-area curves. Basic Appl. Ecol. 3:15–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenzweig, M. L. 1995. Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheiner, S. M. 2003. Six types of species-area curves. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 12:441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheiner, S. M. 2004. A melange of curves—further dialogue about species-area relationships. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 13:479–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. G. and Gross, K. L. 2007. Assembly of weed communities along a crop diversity gradient. J. Appl. Ecol. 44:1046–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stohlgren, T. J., Chong, G. W., Kalkhan, M. A., and Schell, L. D. 1997. Multiscale sampling of plant diversity: effects of minimum mapping unit size. Ecol. Appl. 7:1064–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, K., Hodgson, J. G., Smith, R. M., Warren, P. H., and Gaston, K. J. 2004. Urban domestic gardens (III): composition and diversity of lawn floras. J. Veg. Sci. 15:373–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tjørve, E. 2003. Shapes and functions of species-area curves: a review of possible models. J. Biogeogr. 30:827–835.Google Scholar
Wagner, H. H., Wildi, O., and Ewald, K. C. 2000. Additive partitioning of plant species diversity in an agricultural mosaic landscape. Landsc. Ecol. 15:219–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weibull, A-C., Ostman, O., and Granqvist, A. 2002. Species richness in agroecosystems: the effect of landscape, habitat, and farm management. Biodivers. Conserv. 12:1335–1355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, C. B. 1943. Area and number of species. Nature. 152:264–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, M. V. and Schmida, A. 1984. Measuring beta diversity with presence absence data. J. Ecol. 72:1055–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar