River systems with respective streams, abbreviations (abbr.), and number of sampling sites (no.).

<p>River systems with respective streams, abbreviations (abbr.), and number of sampling sites (no.).</p

Analyzed contaminants.

<p>Analyzed contaminants.</p

Number of EPT taxa (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera) correlating with the first component of the PCA with organic contaminants (OC1).

<p>Displayed are results for sampling campaign in spring (A) and autumn (B). Please note different scaling of y-axes in A and B.</p

Multiple linear regression models testing the effect of environmental parameters and contaminants on biotic response variables: the total number of individuals and taxa, Simpson and Shannon diversity, number of EPT taxa and the saprobic index.

<p>Given are df-, R²-, F- and p-values for full models after stepwise deletion of non-significant terms (n.s.) and of significant model parameters.</p>★<p>, p<0.05;</p>★★<p>, p<0.01;</p>★★★<p>, p<0.001; n.a., not available.</p

NMDS biplot of taxa and environmental variables.

<p>Displayed are variables with a significant impact (p<0.05) for sampling campaign in spring (A) and autumn (B). HM, components of the principal component analysis (PCA) with heavy metals; OC, components of the PCA with organic contaminants; structure, structural degradation. Spring: two convergent solutions, two dimensions, stress = 0.17; autumn: two convergent solutions, two dimensions, stress = 0.21).</p

Effects of forest disturbance, forest loss, and spatial trends (easting and northing of the study plots) on the taxonomic and phylogenetic α-diversity of species groups.

<p>Separate models were calculated for (a) plants and (b) birds. The coefficients from model averaging of equivalently likely models (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0118722#sec002" target="_blank">Methods</a>) are shown. Akaike weights yield information on the relative importance of multiple predictors per model. Statistically significant predictors (p < 0.050) are shown in boldface type. With the exception of life stage, all predictors were Z-transformed to facilitate comparisons of effect sizes.</p><p>^a Note that these are t-values from the single “best” multiple linear regression model; no model averaging was necessary and Z-values are reported for averaged models only.</p><p>Effects of forest disturbance, forest loss, and spatial trends (easting and northing of the study plots) on the taxonomic and phylogenetic α-diversity of species groups.</p

Results from partial mantel tests investigating the effects of forests disturbance and forests loss on the taxonomic and phylogenetic β-diversity among species groups.

<p>Correlations were conditioned on a spatial distance matrix of the study plots. The correlation coefficients are shown; asterisks indicate the significance level.</p><p>*** p < 0.001;</p><p>** p < 0.010;</p><p>* p < 0.050;</p><p>^mar = p < 0.100;</p><p>^ns = not significant.</p><p>Results from partial mantel tests investigating the effects of forests disturbance and forests loss on the taxonomic and phylogenetic β-diversity among species groups.</p

Phylogenetic α-diversity of plant life stages and of birds with increasing forest disturbance.

<p>The coefficients (lines) after model averaging are shown, as are the raw data (circles) of species groups (green color: trees; yellow: saplings; black: seedlings and birds). Note that phylogenetic diversity is based on standardized effect sizes (SES) and that the scaling of the y-axes differs. Forest loss has been scaled to zero mean and unit variance.</p

Differences in the taxonomic and phylogenetic α- and β-diversity between species groups.

<p>Significant differences of between-diversity facets for the successive life stages of trees (after Bonferroni correction) are indicated by stars. No significant differences were found for taxonomic α-diversity. Different colors show the five types of forest modification (NFor = large natural scarp forests; NFra = natural scarp forest fragments; PFra = scarp forest fragments within eucalyptus plantations; AFra = scarp forest fragments within sugarcane plantations; SFor = secondary forests). The β-diversity facets are shown as boxplots; for phylogenetic β-diversity, the raw data are presented as well. Note that phylogenetic diversity (gray circles) is based on standardized effect sizes (SES). Triangles (α-diversity) and black circles (β-diversity) indicate significant deviation from the null expectation.</p

Variation partitioning of taxonomic and phylogenetic β-diversity of species groups.

<p>Venn diagrams illustrate the variation explained by forest disturbance (yellow), forest loss (red), and spatial trends (gray). The combined and separate effects of environmental variables are depicted. Values < 0.010 are not shown. No spatial eigenvectors significantly described the variation in the phylogenetic β-diversity of birds. Statistical significance levels are indicated for separate effects of environmental variables (significances cannot be calculated for joint effects): ** p < 0.010; * p < 0.050; ^mar = p < 0.100; ^ns = not significant.</p