Variation Patterns and Affecting Factors of Plant Alpha Diversity, Beta Diversity and Its Components in Restoration Grasslands on Loess Plateau

IF 3.6 2区 农林科学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Chunxia Jian, Yang Luo, Junjie Zhou, Bingcheng Xu
{"title":"Variation Patterns and Affecting Factors of Plant Alpha Diversity, Beta Diversity and Its Components in Restoration Grasslands on Loess Plateau","authors":"Chunxia Jian,&nbsp;Yang Luo,&nbsp;Junjie Zhou,&nbsp;Bingcheng Xu","doi":"10.1002/ldr.5287","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Understanding spatiotemporal variation in diversity and identifying key external affecting factors are essential for biodiversity conservation. However, community assembly and species diversity in natural grassland (NG) restoration on the Loess Plateau remain unclear. In this study, we examined α diversity (species richness), β diversity (βtotal), and its components (βrepl and βrich) across 89 grassland communities, which were categorized into five restoration stages: recent grassland (RG), early restoration (ER), middle restoration (MR), later restoration (LR), and NG. Linear mixed models (LMM) were used to analyze the effects of topographic, soil, and landscape factors on diversity. Results showed that α diversity followed an increasing-decreasing trend across restoration stages (7–21 species m<sup>−2</sup>), peaking at the MR stage. In contrast, β diversity and its two components declined with duration, with βtotal and βrepl being notably higher in ER than in LR and NG. Differences in βtotal primarily resulted from species replacement (βrepl, 61%–70%), with a smaller contribution from species gain and loss (βrich, 30%–39%). The LMM also revealed that restoration stage was the most important factor affecting plant diversity, explaining 59.3%, 68.4%, 53.5%, and 58.8% of richness, βtotal, βrepl, and βrich, respectively. In comparison, landscape had weaker effects on diversity (17.2%, 24.2%, 46.5%, 39.8%), while topography and soil factors had the least effects. In summary, deterministic processes (restoration stage) dominate natural restoration, but substantial differences persist between restoration grassland and NG. This study provides valuable insights for assessing restoration progress, prioritizing conservation areas, and informing future grassland management in semi-arid and fragmented regions.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":203,"journal":{"name":"Land Degradation & Development","volume":"35 17","pages":"5162-5176"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land Degradation & Development","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ldr.5287","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Understanding spatiotemporal variation in diversity and identifying key external affecting factors are essential for biodiversity conservation. However, community assembly and species diversity in natural grassland (NG) restoration on the Loess Plateau remain unclear. In this study, we examined α diversity (species richness), β diversity (βtotal), and its components (βrepl and βrich) across 89 grassland communities, which were categorized into five restoration stages: recent grassland (RG), early restoration (ER), middle restoration (MR), later restoration (LR), and NG. Linear mixed models (LMM) were used to analyze the effects of topographic, soil, and landscape factors on diversity. Results showed that α diversity followed an increasing-decreasing trend across restoration stages (7–21 species m−2), peaking at the MR stage. In contrast, β diversity and its two components declined with duration, with βtotal and βrepl being notably higher in ER than in LR and NG. Differences in βtotal primarily resulted from species replacement (βrepl, 61%–70%), with a smaller contribution from species gain and loss (βrich, 30%–39%). The LMM also revealed that restoration stage was the most important factor affecting plant diversity, explaining 59.3%, 68.4%, 53.5%, and 58.8% of richness, βtotal, βrepl, and βrich, respectively. In comparison, landscape had weaker effects on diversity (17.2%, 24.2%, 46.5%, 39.8%), while topography and soil factors had the least effects. In summary, deterministic processes (restoration stage) dominate natural restoration, but substantial differences persist between restoration grassland and NG. This study provides valuable insights for assessing restoration progress, prioritizing conservation areas, and informing future grassland management in semi-arid and fragmented regions.

黄土高原恢复性草地植物阿尔法多样性、贝塔多样性及其成分的变异模式和影响因素
了解多样性的时空变化并确定关键的外部影响因素对于保护生物多样性至关重要。然而,黄土高原天然草地(NG)恢复过程中的群落组合和物种多样性仍不清楚。本研究考察了 89 个草地群落的 α 多样性(物种丰富度)、β 多样性(β 总)及其成分(β repl 和 β rich),并将其分为五个恢复阶段:近期草地(RG)、早期恢复(ER)、中期恢复(MR)、后期恢复(LR)和 NG。采用线性混合模型(LMM)分析地形、土壤和景观因素对多样性的影响。结果表明,α 多样性在不同恢复阶段(7-21 种 m-2)呈递增-递减趋势,在 MR 阶段达到顶峰。与此相反,β多样性及其两个分量随着时间的推移而下降,其中β总和和β复数在 ER 阶段明显高于 LR 和 NG 阶段。βtotal 的差异主要来自物种替换(βrepl,61%-70%),物种增减(βrich,30%-39%)的影响较小。LMM 还显示,恢复阶段是影响植物多样性的最重要因素,分别解释了 59.3%、68.4%、53.5% 和 58.8%的丰富度、β总计、β更新和 β丰富度。相比之下,景观对多样性的影响较弱(17.2%、24.2%、46.5%、39.8%),而地形和土壤因子的影响最小。总之,决定性过程(恢复阶段)在自然恢复中占主导地位,但恢复草地与 NG 之间仍存在巨大差异。这项研究为评估恢复进展、确定保护区的优先次序以及为半干旱和破碎化地区未来的草地管理提供了宝贵的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Land Degradation & Development
Land Degradation & Development 农林科学-环境科学
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
8.50%
发文量
379
审稿时长
5.5 months
期刊介绍: Land Degradation & Development is an international journal which seeks to promote rational study of the recognition, monitoring, control and rehabilitation of degradation in terrestrial environments. The journal focuses on: - what land degradation is; - what causes land degradation; - the impacts of land degradation - the scale of land degradation; - the history, current status or future trends of land degradation; - avoidance, mitigation and control of land degradation; - remedial actions to rehabilitate or restore degraded land; - sustainable land management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信