Journal of Life Science (생명과학회지)

Korean Society of Life Science (한국생명과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Changes in Species Diversity and Spatiotemporally Fluctuation across Human-modified Ecosystems

도시화로 인한 생태계에서 종 다양성의 변화와 공간시기적 변동

  • Received : 2012.08.02
  • Accepted : 2012.10.20
  • Published : 2012.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The changes of plant communities at Angol valley and Baetgol valley in Geoje-do were studied. Both ${\alpha}$-diversity and ${\gamma}$-diversity decreased with the sizes and degrees of habitat fragmentations. The mean number of winner species decreased with habitat fragmentation. All Quercus species, including Quercus acutissima, significantly declined in importance, while the many introduced species, including Trifolium pretense, all increased in importance. As the proportional change in adult survival rate increased, the absolute value of the bias in the elasticity prediction also increased from 2003 to 2011 at undisturbed forests. However, the bias was low for decreases in disturbed populations. Moran's I values showed overall decreases for habitat fragmentation and for the periods of habitat conversion. Eventually, plant communities, due to urbanization in Goeje-do, might have led to decreased chances of common species when the environment was disturbed.

거제도 안골 골짜기와 뱃골 골짜기에서 식물 군락의 변화를 조사하였다. 알파-다양도와 감마-다양도는 서식지 단절의 크기와 정도에 따라 감소하였다. 우세종의 평균 종수도 서식지 단절에 따라 감소하였다. 상수리나무를 비롯한 참나무과 종들은 붉은토끼풀 같은 도입된 귀화식물의 증가에 따라 주요도가 감소하였다. 교란이 일어나지 않은 숲에서 성체 생존율의 몫이 증가함에 따라 탄력 예상치의 절대적 비는 2003년부터 2011년까지 증가하였다. 그러나 교란 집단에서는 비가 낮았다. Moran의 I값은 전반적으로 서식지 단절지역과 서식지전환 시기에서는 감소하였다. 결국 거제도에서 도시화에 따른 식물 군락은 환경이 교란되었을 때 보편종의 감소를 유발하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Baillie, J. E. M., Collen, B., Amin, R., Akcakaya, H. R., Butchart, S. H. M., Brummitt, N., Meagher, T. R., Ram, M., Hilton-Taylor, C. and Mace, G. M. 2008. Towards monitoring global biodiversity. Conser. Lett. 1, 18-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2008.00009.x
  2. Carrier, J. and Beebee, T. 2003. Recent, substantial, and unexplained declines of the common toad Bufobufo in lowland England. Biol. Conser. 111, 395-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(02)00308-7
  3. Chapin, F. S., Zavaleta, E. S., Evine, V. T., Naylor, R. L., Vitousek, P. M., Reynolds, H. L., Hooper, D. U., Lavorel, S., Sala, O. E., Hobbie, S. E., Mack, M. C. and Diaz, S. 2000. Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405, 234-242. https://doi.org/10.1038/35012241
  4. Clavel, J., Julliard, R. and Devictor, V. 2011. Worldwide decline of specialist species: toward a global functional homogenization? Front. Eco. Environ. 9, 222-228. https://doi.org/10.1890/080216
  5. Cliff, A. D. and Ord, J. K. 1971. Spatial autocorrelation. Pion, London.
  6. Conrad, K., Warren, M., Fox, M., Parsons, M. and Woiwod, I. 2006. Rapid declines of common, widespread British moths provide evidence of an insect biodiversity crisis. Biol. Conser. 132, 279-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.04.020
  7. Devictor, V., Mouillot, D., Meynard, C., Jiguet, F., Thuiller, W. and Mouquet, N. 2010. Spatial mismatch and congruence between taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity: the need for integrative conservation strategies in a changing world. Ecol. Lett. 13, 1030-1040.
  8. Dewey, S. E. and Heywood, J. S. 1988. Spatial genetic structure in a population of Psychotria nervosa. I. Distribution of genotypes. Evolution 42, 834-838. https://doi.org/10.2307/2408877
  9. Donald, P., Green, R. and Heath, M. 2001. Agricultural intensification and the collapse of Europe's farmland bird populations. Proc. Royal Soc. London Ser. B-Biol. Sci. 268, 25-29. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1325
  10. Dowing, A. l. and Leibold, M. A. 2002. Ecosystem consequences of species richness and composition in pond food webs. Nature 416, 837-841. https://doi.org/10.1038/416837a
  11. Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI). 2000. ArcView 3.2. ESRI, Redlands, CA.
  12. Elkie, P., Rempel, R. and Carr, A. 1999. Patch analyst User's Manual, a Tool for Quantifying Landscape Structure. Northeast Science and Technology, Ontario.
  13. Ellenberg, H, Weber, H. E., Düll, R., Wirth, V., Werner, W. and Paulissen, D. 1992. Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa.
  14. Franklin, J. 1993. Preserving biodiversity - species, ecosystems, or landscapes. Ecological Applications 3, 202-205. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941820
  15. Gaston, K. and Fuller, R. 2008. Commonness, population depletion and conservation biology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 14-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2007.11.001
  16. Jost, L. 2007. Partitioning diversity into independent alpha and beta components. Ecology 88, 2427-2439. https://doi.org/10.1890/06-1736.1
  17. Kuhn, I., Brandl, R. and Klotz, S. 2004. The flora of German cities is naturally species rich. Evol. Ecol. Res. 6, 749-764.
  18. Lambdon, P., Lloret, F. and Hulme, P. 2008. Do non-native species invasions lead to biotic homogenization at small scales? The similarity and functional diversity of habitats compared for alien and native components of Mediterranean floras. Diver. Distri. 14, 774-785. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00490.x
  19. Leon-Cortes, J., Cowley, M. and Thomas, C. 1999. Detecting decline in a formerly widespread species: how common is the common blue butterfly Polyommatus icarus? Ecography 22, 643-650. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1999.tb00513.x
  20. Marchetti, M., Lockwood, J. and Light, T. 2006. Effects of urbanization on California's fish diversity: differentiation, homogenization and the influence of spatial scale. Biol. Conser. 127, 310-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.04.025
  21. McKinney, M. 2008. Do humans homogenize or differentiate biotas? It depends. J. Biogeo. 35, 1960-1961. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2008.02011.x
  22. McKinney, M. and Lockwood, J. 1999. Biotic homogenization: a few winners replacing many losers in the next mass extinction. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14, 450-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(99)01679-1
  23. Oksanen, J., Blanchet, F., Kindt, R., O'Hara, R., Simpson, G., Solymos, P., Steven, M. and Wagner, H. 2010. Vegan: Community Ecology Package, R package version 1.17-4. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
  24. R Development Core Team. 2004. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
  25. Rogers, D., Rooney, T., Olson, D. and Waller, D. 2008. Shifts in southern Wisconsin forest canopy and understory richness, composition, and heterogeneity. Ecology 89, 2482-2492. https://doi.org/10.1890/07-1129.1
  26. Rooney, T., Wiegmann, S., Rogers, D.and Waller, D. 2004. Biotic impoverishment and homogenization in unfragmented forest understory communities. Conser. Biol. 18, 787-798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00515.x
  27. Qian, H. and Ricklefs, R. 2006. The role of exotic species in homogenizing the North American flora. Ecol. Lett. 9, 1293-1298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00982.x
  28. Sokal, R. R. and Oden, N. L. 1978a. Spatial autocorrelation in biology 1. methodology. Biol. Linn. Soc. 10, 199-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1978.tb00013.x
  29. Sokal, R. R. and Oden, N. L. 1978b. Spatial autocorrelation in biology 2. some biological implications and four applications of evolutionary and ecological interest. Biol. Linn. Soc. 10, 229-249. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1978.tb00014.x
  30. Wiegmann, S. and Waller, D. 2006. Fifty years of change in northern upland forest understories: identity and traits of ''winner'' and ''loser'' plant species. Biol. Conser. 129, 109-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.10.027