Multi-scale environmental filters and niche partitioning govern the distributions of riparian vegetation guilds

Across landscapes, riparian plant communities assemble under varying levels of disturbance, environmental stress, and resource availability, leading to the development of distinct riparian life-history guilds over evolutionary timescales. Identifying the environmental filters that exert selective pressures on specific riparian vegetation guilds is a critical step in setting baseline expectations for how riparian vegetation may respond to environmental conditions anticipated under future global change scenarios. In this study, we ask: (1) What riparian plant guilds exist across the interior Columbia and upper Missouri River basins? (2) What environmental filters shape riparian guild distributions? (3) How does resource partitioning among guilds influence guild distributions and co-occurrence? Woody species composition was measured at 703 stream reaches and each species\u27 morphological and functional attributes were extracted from a database in four categories: (1) life form, (2) persistence and growth, (3) reproduction, and (4) resource use. We clustered species into guilds by morphological characteristics and attributes related to environmental tolerances, modeling these guilds\u27 distributions as a function of environmental filters-regional climate, watershed hydrogeomorphic characteristics, and stream channel form- and guild coexistence. We identified five guilds: (1) a tall, deeply rooted, long-lived, evergreen tree guild, (2) a xeric, disturbance tolerant shrub guild, (3) a hydrophytic, thicket-forming shrub guild, (4) a low-statured, shadetolerant, understory shrub guild, and (5) a flood tolerant, mesoriparian shrub guild. Guilds were most strongly discriminated by species\u27 rooting depth, canopy height and potential to resprout and grow following biomass-removing disturbance (e.g., flooding, fire). Hydro-climatic variables, including precipitation, watershed area, water table depth, and channel form attributes reflective of hydrologic regime, were predictors of guilds whose life history strategies had affinity or aversion to flooding, drought, and fluvial disturbance. Biotic interactions excluded guilds with divergent life history strategies and/or allowed for the co-occurrence of guilds that partition resources differently in the same environment. We conclude that the riparian guild framework provides insight into how disturbance and bioclimatic gradients shape riparian functional plant diversity across heterogeneous landscapes. Multiple environmental filters should be considered when the riparian response guild framework is to be used as a decisionsupport tool framework across large spatial extents. Copyright: © 2015 Hough-Snee et al

The Blurred Line Between Form and Process: A Comparison of Stream Channel Classification Frameworks

Stream classification provides a means to understand the diversity and distribution of channels and floodplains that occur across a landscape while identifying links between geomorphic form and process. Accordingly, stream classification is frequently employed as a watershed planning, management, and restoration tool. At the same time, there has been intense debate and criticism of particular frameworks, on the grounds that these frameworks classify stream reaches based largely on their physical form, rather than direct measurements of their component hydrogeomorphic processes. Despite this debate surrounding stream classifications, and their ongoing use in watershed management, direct comparisons of channel classification frameworks are rare. Here we implement four stream classification frameworks and explore the degree to which each make inferences about hydrogeomorphic process from channel form within the Middle Fork John Day Basin, a watershed of high conservation interest within the Columbia River Basin, U.S.A. We compare the results of the River Styles Framework, Natural Channel Classification, Rosgen Classification System, and a channel form-based statistical classification at 33 field-monitored sites. We found that the four frameworks consistently classified reach types into similar groups based on each reach or segment’s dominant hydrogeomorphic elements. Where classified channel types diverged, differences could be attributed to the (a) spatial scale of input data used, (b) the requisite metrics and their order in completing a framework’s decision tree and/or, (c) whether the framework attempts to classify current or historic channel form. Divergence in framework agreement was also observed at reaches where channel planform was decoupled from valley setting. Overall, the relative agreement between frameworks indicates that criticism of individual classifications for their use of form in grouping stream channels may be overstated. These form-based criticisms may also ignore the geomorphic tenet that channel form reflects formative hydrogeomorphic processes across a given landscape

TRY plant trait database – enhanced coverage and open access

Plant traits - the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants - determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait‐based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits - almost complete coverage for ‘plant growth form’. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait–environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects. We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives

TRY plant trait database – enhanced coverage and open access

Plant traits—the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants—determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait-based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits—almost complete coverage for ‘plant growth form’. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait–environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects. We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives.Rest of authors: Decky Junaedi, Robert R. Junker, Eric Justes, Richard Kabzems, Jeffrey Kane, Zdenek Kaplan, Teja Kattenborn, Lyudmila Kavelenova, Elizabeth Kearsley, Anne Kempel, Tanaka Kenzo, Andrew Kerkhoff, Mohammed I. Khalil, Nicole L. Kinlock, Wilm Daniel Kissling, Kaoru Kitajima, Thomas Kitzberger, Rasmus Kjøller, Tamir Klein, Michael Kleyer, Jitka Klimešová, Joice Klipel, Brian Kloeppel, Stefan Klotz, Johannes M. H. Knops, Takashi Kohyama, Fumito Koike, Johannes Kollmann, Benjamin Komac, Kimberly Komatsu, Christian König, Nathan J. B. Kraft, Koen Kramer, Holger Kreft, Ingolf Kühn, Dushan Kumarathunge, Jonas Kuppler, Hiroko Kurokawa, Yoko Kurosawa, Shem Kuyah, Jean-Paul Laclau, Benoit Lafleur, Erik Lallai, Eric Lamb, Andrea Lamprecht, Daniel J. Larkin, Daniel Laughlin, Yoann Le Bagousse-Pinguet, Guerric le Maire, Peter C. le Roux, Elizabeth le Roux, Tali Lee, Frederic Lens, Simon L. Lewis, Barbara Lhotsky, Yuanzhi Li, Xine Li, Jeremy W. Lichstein, Mario Liebergesell, Jun Ying Lim, Yan-Shih Lin, Juan Carlos Linares, Chunjiang Liu, Daijun Liu, Udayangani Liu, Stuart Livingstone, Joan Llusià, Madelon Lohbeck, Álvaro López-García, Gabriela Lopez-Gonzalez, Zdeňka Lososová, Frédérique Louault, Balázs A. Lukács, Petr Lukeš, Yunjian Luo, Michele Lussu, Siyan Ma, Camilla Maciel Rabelo Pereira, Michelle Mack, Vincent Maire, Annikki Mäkelä, Harri Mäkinen, Ana Claudia Mendes Malhado, Azim Mallik, Peter Manning, Stefano Manzoni, Zuleica Marchetti, Luca Marchino, Vinicius Marcilio-Silva, Eric Marcon, Michela Marignani, Lars Markesteijn, Adam Martin, Cristina Martínez-Garza, Jordi Martínez-Vilalta, Tereza Mašková, Kelly Mason, Norman Mason, Tara Joy Massad, Jacynthe Masse, Itay Mayrose, James McCarthy, M. Luke McCormack, Katherine McCulloh, Ian R. McFadden, Brian J. McGill, Mara Y. McPartland, Juliana S. Medeiros, Belinda Medlyn, Pierre Meerts, Zia Mehrabi, Patrick Meir, Felipe P. L. Melo, Maurizio Mencuccini, Céline Meredieu, Julie Messier, Ilona Mészáros, Juha Metsaranta, Sean T. Michaletz, Chrysanthi Michelaki, Svetlana Migalina, Ruben Milla, Jesse E. D. Miller, Vanessa Minden, Ray Ming, Karel Mokany, Angela T. Moles, Attila Molnár V, Jane Molofsky, Martin Molz, Rebecca A. Montgomery, Arnaud Monty, Lenka Moravcová, Alvaro Moreno-Martínez, Marco Moretti, Akira S. Mori, Shigeta Mori, Dave Morris, Jane Morrison, Ladislav Mucina, Sandra Mueller, Christopher D. Muir, Sandra Cristina Müller, François Munoz, Isla H. Myers-Smith, Randall W. Myster, Masahiro Nagano, Shawna Naidu, Ayyappan Narayanan, Balachandran Natesan, Luka Negoita, Andrew S. Nelson, Eike Lena Neuschulz, Jian Ni, Georg Niedrist, Jhon Nieto, Ülo Niinemets, Rachael Nolan, Henning Nottebrock, Yann Nouvellon, Alexander Novakovskiy, The Nutrient Network, Kristin Odden Nystuen, Anthony O'Grady, Kevin O'Hara, Andrew O'Reilly-Nugent, Simon Oakley, Walter Oberhuber, Toshiyuki Ohtsuka, Ricardo Oliveira, Kinga Öllerer, Mark E. Olson, Vladimir Onipchenko, Yusuke Onoda, Renske E. Onstein, Jenny C. Ordonez, Noriyuki Osada, Ivika Ostonen, Gianluigi Ottaviani, Sarah Otto, Gerhard E. Overbeck, Wim A. Ozinga, Anna T. Pahl, C. E. Timothy Paine, Robin J. Pakeman, Aristotelis C. Papageorgiou, Evgeniya Parfionova, Meelis Pärtel, Marco Patacca, Susana Paula, Juraj Paule, Harald Pauli, Juli G. Pausas, Begoña Peco, Josep Penuelas, Antonio Perea, Pablo Luis Peri, Ana Carolina Petisco-Souza, Alessandro Petraglia, Any Mary Petritan, Oliver L. Phillips, Simon Pierce, Valério D. Pillar, Jan Pisek, Alexandr Pomogaybin, Hendrik Poorter, Angelika Portsmuth, Peter Poschlod, Catherine Potvin, Devon Pounds, A. Shafer Powell, Sally A. Power, Andreas Prinzing, Giacomo Puglielli, Petr Pyšek, Valerie Raevel, Anja Rammig, Johannes Ransijn, Courtenay A. Ray, Peter B. Reich, Markus Reichstein, Douglas E. B. Reid, Maxime Réjou-Méchain, Victor Resco de Dios, Sabina Ribeiro, Sarah Richardson, Kersti Riibak, Matthias C. Rillig, Fiamma Riviera, Elisabeth M. R. Robert, Scott Roberts, Bjorn Robroek, Adam Roddy, Arthur Vinicius Rodrigues, Alistair Rogers, Emily Rollinson, Victor Rolo, Christine Römermann, Dina Ronzhina, Christiane Roscher, Julieta A. Rosell, Milena Fermina Rosenfield, Christian Rossi, David B. Roy, Samuel Royer-Tardif, Nadja Rüger, Ricardo Ruiz-Peinado, Sabine B. Rumpf, Graciela M. Rusch, Masahiro Ryo, Lawren Sack, Angela Saldaña, Beatriz Salgado-Negret, Roberto Salguero-Gomez, Ignacio Santa-Regina, Ana Carolina Santacruz-García, Joaquim Santos, Jordi Sardans, Brandon Schamp, Michael Scherer-Lorenzen, Matthias Schleuning, Bernhard Schmid, Marco Schmidt, Sylvain Schmitt, Julio V. Schneider, Simon D. Schowanek, Julian Schrader, Franziska Schrodt, Bernhard Schuldt, Frank Schurr, Galia Selaya Garvizu, Marina Semchenko, Colleen Seymour, Julia C. Sfair, Joanne M. Sharpe, Christine S. Sheppard, Serge Sheremetiev, Satomi Shiodera, Bill Shipley, Tanvir Ahmed Shovon, Alrun Siebenkäs, Carlos Sierra, Vasco Silva, Mateus Silva, Tommaso Sitzia, Henrik Sjöman, Martijn Slot, Nicholas G. Smith, Darwin Sodhi, Pamela Soltis, Douglas Soltis, Ben Somers, Grégory Sonnier, Mia Vedel Sørensen, Enio Egon Sosinski Jr, Nadejda A. Soudzilovskaia, Alexandre F. Souza, Marko Spasojevic, Marta Gaia Sperandii, Amanda B. Stan, James Stegen, Klaus Steinbauer, Jörg G. Stephan, Frank Sterck, Dejan B. Stojanovic, Tanya Strydom, Maria Laura Suarez, Jens-Christian Svenning, Ivana Svitková, Marek Svitok, Miroslav Svoboda, Emily Swaine, Nathan Swenson, Marcelo Tabarelli, Kentaro Takagi, Ulrike Tappeiner, Rubén Tarifa, Simon Tauugourdeau, Cagatay Tavsanoglu, Mariska te Beest, Leho Tedersoo, Nelson Thiffault, Dominik Thom, Evert Thomas, Ken Thompson, Peter E. Thornton, Wilfried Thuiller, Lubomír Tichý, David Tissue, Mark G. Tjoelker, David Yue Phin Tng, Joseph Tobias, Péter Török, Tonantzin Tarin, José M. Torres-Ruiz, Béla Tóthmérész, Martina Treurnicht, Valeria Trivellone, Franck Trolliet, Volodymyr Trotsiuk, James L. Tsakalos, Ioannis Tsiripidis, Niklas Tysklind, Toru Umehara, Vladimir Usoltsev, Matthew Vadeboncoeur, Jamil Vaezi, Fernando Valladares, Jana Vamosi, Peter M. van Bodegom, Michiel van Breugel, Elisa Van Cleemput, Martine van de Weg, Stephni van der Merwe, Fons van der Plas, Masha T. van der Sande, Mark van Kleunen, Koenraad Van Meerbeek, Mark Vanderwel, Kim André Vanselow, Angelica Vårhammar, Laura Varone, Maribel Yesenia Vasquez Valderrama, Kiril Vassilev, Mark Vellend, Erik J. Veneklaas, Hans Verbeeck, Kris Verheyen, Alexander Vibrans, Ima Vieira, Jaime Villacís, Cyrille Violle, Pandi Vivek, Katrin Wagner, Matthew Waldram, Anthony Waldron, Anthony P. Walker, Martyn Waller, Gabriel Walther, Han Wang, Feng Wang, Weiqi Wang, Harry Watkins, James Watkins, Ulrich Weber, James T. Weedon, Liping Wei, Patrick Weigelt, Evan Weiher, Aidan W. Wells, Camilla Wellstein, Elizabeth Wenk, Mark Westoby, Alana Westwood, Philip John White, Mark Whitten, Mathew Williams, Daniel E. Winkler, Klaus Winter, Chevonne Womack, Ian J. Wright, S. Joseph Wright, Justin Wright, Bruno X. Pinho, Fabiano Ximenes, Toshihiro Yamada, Keiko Yamaji, Ruth Yanai, Nikolay Yankov, Benjamin Yguel, Kátia Janaina Zanini, Amy E. Zanne, David Zelený, Yun-Peng Zhao, Jingming Zheng, Ji Zheng, Kasia Ziemińska, Chad R. Zirbel, Georg Zizka, Irié Casimir Zo-Bi, Gerhard Zotz, Christian Wirth.Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry; Max Planck Society; German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig; International Programme of Biodiversity Science (DIVERSITAS); International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP); Future Earth; French Foundation for Biodiversity Research (FRB); GIS ‘Climat, Environnement et Société'.http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gcbhj2021Plant Production and Soil Scienc

Palustrine forested wetland vegetation communities change across an elevation gradient, Washington State, USA

Background Forested wetlands support distinct vegetation and hydrology relative to upland forests and shrub-dominated or open water wetlands. Although forested wetland plant communities comprise unique habitats, these ecosystems’ community structure is not well documented in the U.S. Pacific Northwest. Here I surveyed forested wetland vegetation to identify changes in community composition and structure across an elevation gradient that corresponds to flooding stress, asking: (1) How do forested wetland plant communities change across an elevation gradient that corresponds to flood frequency and duration? (2) At what relative elevations do different plant species occur within a wetland? Methods I measured overstory tree basal area and structure and understory vascular plant composition in three zones: wetland buffers (WB) adjacent to the wetland, an upper wetland (UW) extent, and a lower wetland (LW) extent, surveying individual trees’ root collar elevation relative to the wetland ordinary high-water mark (OHWM). I estimated understory plant species abundance in sub-plots and surveyed these plots’ height above the OHWM. I used non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination to identify patterns in vegetation communities relative to wetland elevation, and tested for compositional differences between the WB, UW and LW zones using PERMANOVA. I calculated overstory and understory indicator species for each wetland zone using indicator species analysis. Results Forest overstory composition changed across the elevation gradient, with broad-leaved trees occupying a distinct hydrologic niche in low-lying areas close to the OHWM. Conifer species occurred higher above the OHWM on drier microsites. Pseudotsuga menziesii (mean elevation = 0.881 m) and Tsuga heterophylla (mean elevation = 1.737 m) were overstory indicator species of the WB, while Fraxinus latifolia (mean elevation = 0.005 m) was an overstory indicator for the upper and lower wetland. Understory vegetation differed between zones and lower zones’ indicator species were generally hydrophytic species with adaptations that allow them to tolerate flooding stress at lower elevations. Average elevations above the OHWM are reported for 19 overstory trees and 61 understory plant species. By quantifying forested wetland plant species’ affinities for different habitats across an inundation gradient, this study illustrates how rarely flooded, forested WB vegetation differs from frequently flooded, LW vegetation. Because common management applications, like restoring forested wetlands and managing wetland responses to forest harvest, are both predicated upon understanding how vegetation relates to hydrology, these data on where different species might establish and persist along an inundation gradient may be useful in planning for anticipated forested wetland responses to restoration and disturbance

Multi-scale drivers of riparian vegetation across the interior Pacific Northwest: a case from the interior Columbia River basin

Riparian vegetation both shapes and responds to physical processes and instream properties that are also driven by larger-scale climatic, hydrologic and geomorphic processes. These processes may be thought of as environmental filters that restrict local riparian vegetation to those species that can colonize and persist through multiple and sometimes hierarchical filters. Accordingly, riparian vegetation is frequently monitored as an indicator of watershed integrity as the environmental filters that shape riparian vegetation may shift rapidly following land-use changes and/or disturbance. When assessing riparian vegetation across broad spatial scales, it is often difficult to decouple variation in vegetation communities caused by local filters such as fluvial disturbance and channel form from variation that is attributable to larger scale filters such as geology, climate and local plant species pools. We used low-order stream riparian vegetation data from across the interior Columbia River (CR) and Missouri River (MR) basins to ask four questions: (1) are there distinct riparian plant communities within low-order streams of the interior CR and upper MR basins? (2) What environmental filters correspond to these identified plant communities? (3) Of these filters, are large-scale processes more responsible for shaping the composition of riparian communities than watershed and stream level filters? (4) Do identified riparian plant communities correspond to distinct channel conditions? Clustering methods, indicator species analysis, PERMANOVA and ordination techniques were used to quantify how vegetation communities were correlated to landscape- and reach-scale variables, including channel habitat, watershed land-use and climate attributes. Landscape scale variables such as elevation and climate and watershed management parameters such as grazing and forest cover were strongly correlated to vegetation community composition. A suite of instream habitat variables was correlated to vegetation community composition while unique vegetation communities generally corresponded to unique channel forms and instream habitat. These vegetation-stream habitat relationships may be a product of vegetation itself or vegetation and filters that also shape geomorphic process. Based on the observed relationships between riparian vegetation and environmental filters, we conclude that when monitoring riparian status and trend or setting riparian management and restoration objectives, managers should attempt to account for multiple interactions between regional species pools, regional environmental variability and stream physical habitat

Riparian Vegetation Guilds: Applications to Small Streams of the Interior Pacific Northwest

Riparian flow guilds have been proposed as a method of measuring riparian ecosystem integrity in large alluvial rivers, especially rivers with regulated or overallocated instream flows, or strong potential for flows to be reduced by climate change. The riparian flow guild concept identifies groups of species with similar life-history strategies that result from similar physiological requirements and morphological attributes. These trait-based riparian guilds respond to common environmental stressors within the riparian environment such as flooding, drying, and soil moisture availability. In smaller streams however, where hillslopes often directly connect to stream corridors, fluvial and hydrologic processes may work in tandem with riparian and watershed management to influence guild abundance. Here, we build on the concept of riparian flow guilds by identifying riparian disturbance guilds - riparian guilds whose functional and morphological attributes correspond to multiple disturbance or resource axes. We used 26 environmental tolerance and morphological attributes in 30 species to identify five riparian disturbance guilds: a tall, deeply-rooted coniferous tree guild, a rapidly- growing, drought-plastic shrub guild, a low-stature hydrophytic shrub guild, vegetative reproduction guild, and a short-statured, shade-tolerant, understory shrub guild. We modeled these guilds’ presence and abundance, finding that each guild responded to a variety of climatic, disturbance, and watershed management attributes. Each guild corresponded to climatic and watershed disturbance attributes that were related to the traits most characteristic of that guild. Most notably, we found that complimentary coexisting guilds or mutually exclusive guilds were strong predictors of guild presence and abundance. From these observations, we conclude that riparian disturbance guilds respond not only to environmental variability tied to each guilds attributes, but also niche partitioning in which different life history strategies can coexist under comparable disturbance regimes

Riparian vegetation communities change rapidly following passive restoration at a northern Utah stream

<p>Hough-Snee, N., B.B. Roper, J.M. Wheaton, P. Budy and R.L. Lokteff. 2013. Riparian vegetation communities change rapidly following passive restoration at a northern Utah stream. Ecological Engineering 58: 371-377. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.07.042</p

Riparian Restoration

<p>Talks, papers, posters and data from projects that advance the scince and practice of riparian restoration.</p

Novel Ecosystem Restoration and Recovery Publications

<p>A series of peer-reviewed publications on the restoration and ecology of novel ecosystems in Western Washington. The data collected here include projects that restored highly-distrubed former extractive lands or heavily degraded urban ecosystems. Specifically, these papers come from a restored campsite in North Cascades National Park, Washington, USA, the Union Bay Natural Area - a restored landfill in Seattle, WA, USA.</p