Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Empirical realised niche models for British coastal plant species

  • Published:
Journal of Coastal Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Coastal environments host plant taxa adapted to a wide range of salinity conditions. Salinity, along with other abiotic variables, constrains the distribution of coastal plants in predictable ways, with relatively few taxa adapted to the most saline conditions. However, few attempts have been made to quantify these relationships to create niche models for coastal plants. Quantification of the effects of salinity, and other abiotic variables, on coastal plants is essential to predict the responses of coastal ecosystems to external drivers such as sea level rise. We constructed niche models for 132 coastal plant taxa in Great Britain based on eight abiotic variables. Paired measurements of vegetation composition and abiotic variables are rare in coastal habitats so four of the variables were defined using community mean values for Ellenberg indicators, i.e. scores assigned according to the typical alkalinity, fertility, moisture availability and salinity of sites where a species occurs. The remaining variables were the canopy height, annual precipitation, and maximum and minimum temperatures. Salinity and moisture indicator scores were significant terms in over 80 % of models, suggesting the distributions of most coastal species are at least partly determined by these variables. When the models were used to predict species occurrence against an independent dataset 64 % of models gave moderate to good predictions of species occurrence. This indicates that most models had successfully captured the key determinants of the niche. The models could potentially be applied to predict changes to habitats and species-dependent ecosystem services in response to rising sea levels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Batriu E, Pino J, Rovira P, Ninot JM (2011) Environmental control of plant species abundance in a microtidal Mediterranean saltmarsh. Appl Veg Sci 14:358–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaumont NJ, Jones L, Garbutt A, Hansom JD, Toberman M (2014) The value of carbon sequestration and storage in coastal habitats. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 137:32–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boorman LA (1992) The environmental consequences of climatic change on British salt marsh vegetation. Wetl Ecol Manag 2:11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter W, Goodenough AE (2014) How robust are community-based plant bioindicators? Empirical testing of the relationship between Ellenberg values and direct environmental measures in woodland communities. Community Ecology 15:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curreli A, Wallace H, Freeman C, Hollingham M, Stratford C, Johnson H, Jones L (2013) Eco-hydrological requirements of dune slack vegetation and the implications of climate change. Sci Total Environ 443:910–919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries W, Wamelink GWW, van Dobben H, Kros J, Reinds GJ, Mol-Dijkstra JP, Smart SM, Evans CD, Rowe EC, Belyazid S, et al. (2010) Use of dynamic soil–vegetation models to assess impacts of nitrogen deposition on plant species composition: an overview. Ecol Appl 20:60–79

  • Diekmann M (2003) Species indicator values as an important tool in applied plant ecology - a review. Basic and Applied Ecology 4:493–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly JP, Bertness MD (2001) Rapid shoreward encroachment of salt marsh cordgrass in response to accelerated sea-level rise. Proc Natl Acad Sci 98:14218–14223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudík M, Ferrier S, Guisan A, Hijmans RJ, Huettmann F, Leathwick JR, Lehmann A, et al. (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellenberg H (1991) Zeigerwerte von pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobotanica 18:1–248

  • Emery NC, Ewanchuk PJ, Bertness MD (2001) Competition and salt-marsh plant zonation: stress tolerators may be dominant competitors. Ecology 82:2471–2485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford H, Garbutt A, Jones DL, Jones L (2012) Impacts of grazing abandonment on ecosystem service provision: coastal grassland as a model system. Agric Ecosyst Environ 162:108–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grime JP, Hodgson JG (1988) Comparative plant ecology: a functional approach to common British species. Unwin Hyman, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hill MO, Roy DB, Mountford JO, Bunce RG (2000) Extending Ellenberg’s indicator values to a new area: an algorithmic approach. J Appl Ecol 37:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill MO, Preston CD, Roy D (2004) PLANTATT - attributes of British and Irish plants: status, size, life history, geography and habitats. Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Abbotts Ripton

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Valverde A (2012) Insights into the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) as a discrimination measure in species distribution modelling. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21:498–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones MLM, Wallace HL, Norris D, Brittain SA, Haria S, Jones RE, Rhind PM, Reynolds BR, Emmett BA (2004) Changes in vegetation and soil characteristics in coastal sand dunes along a gradient of atmospheric nitrogen deposition. Plant Biol 6:598–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones L, Angus S, Cooper A, Doody P, Everad M, Garbutt A, Gilchrist P, Hansom J, Nicholls R, Pye K, et al (2011a) Coastal Margins. UK National Ecosystem Assessment. Understanding nature’s value to society. Technical Report. Cambridge, UK: UK National Ecosystem Assessment, UNEP-WCMC, 411–457.

  • Jones L, Wallace H, M Prosser (2011b) Baseline botanical monitoring and establishing permanent quadrats in embryo primary slack, Whiteford burrows, 7th and 8th July 2011. Report to the Countryside Council for Wales

  • Latour JB, Reiling R (1993) A multiple stress model for vegetation (‘move’): a tool for scenario studies and standard-setting. Sci Total Environ 134:1513–1526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lobo JM, Jiménez-Valverde A, Real R (2008) AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17:145–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe JAH, Reynolds B, Fowler D, Brittain SA, Hughes S (1996) Orographic enhancement of acidic deposition in snowdonia. Final report to Welsh office. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Bangor

    Google Scholar 

  • Malpas LR, Smart J, Drewitt A, Sharps E, Garbutt A (2013) Continued declines of redshank Tringa totanus breeding on saltmarsh in Great Britain: is there a solution to this conservation problem? Bird Study 60:370–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manel S, Williams HC, Ormerod SJ (2001) Evaluating presence–absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence. J Appl Ecol 38:921–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maun MA, Perumal J (1999) Zonation of vegetation on lacustrine coastal dunes: effects of burial by sand. Ecol Lett 2:14–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza-González G, Martínez ML, Rojas-Soto OR, Vázquez G, Gallego-Fernández JB (2013) Ecological niche modeling of coastal dune plants and future potential distribution in response to climate change and sea level rise. Glob Chang Biol 19:2524–2535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meynard CN, Quinn JF (2007) Predicting species distributions: a critical comparison of the most common statistical models using artificial species: comparison of species-distribution models. J Biogeogr 34:1455–1469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plassmann K, Edwards-Jones G, Jones MLM (2009) The effects of low levels of nitrogen deposition and grazing on dune grassland. Sci Total Environ 407:1391–1404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston CD, Pearman DA, Dines TD (2002) New atlas of the British and Irish flora: An atlas of the vascular plants of Britain, Ireland, The Isle of Man and the channel islands. Oxford University Press, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Randin CF, Dirnböck T, Dullinger S, Zimmermann NE, Zappa M, Guisan A (2006) Are niche-based species distribution models transferable in space? J Biogeogr 33:1689–1703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranwell DS (1972) Ecology of salt marshes and sand dunes. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Real R, Barbosa AM, Vargas JM (2006) Obtaining environmental favourability functions from logistic regression. Environ Ecol Stat 13:237–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Foundation for Statistical Computing (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria.

  • Rhymes J, Wallace H, Fenner N, Jones L (2014) Evidence for sensitivity of dune wetlands to groundwater nutrients. Sci Total Environ 490:106–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe EC, Emmett BA, Smart SM, Frogbrook ZL (2011) A new net mineralizable nitrogen assay improves predictions of floristic composition. J Veg Sci 22:251–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sing T, Sander O, Beerenwinkel N, Lengauer T (2005) ROCR: visualizing classifier performance in R. Bioinformatics 21:3940–3941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart SM, Henrys PA, Scott WA, Hall JR, Evans CD, Crowe A, Rowe EC, Dragosits U, Page T, Whyatt JD, et al. (2010a) Impacts of pollution and climate change on ombrotrophic Sphagnum species in the UK: analysis of uncertainties in two empirical niche models. Clim Res 45:163–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart SM, Scott AW, Whitaker J, Hill MO, Roy DB, Critchley NC, Marini L, Evans C, Emmett BA, Rowe EC, et al. (2010b) Empirical realised niche models for British higher and lower plants – development and preliminary testing. J Veg Sci 21:643–656

    Google Scholar 

  • Stace C (2010) New flora of the British isles. Cambridge University Press, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner M, Kahmen A, Schlumprecht H, Audorff V, Perner J, Buchmann N, Weisser WW (2007) Prediction of herbage yield in grassland: how well do Ellenberg N-values perform? Appl Veg Sci 10:15–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan X, Ma K, Wang D (2012) Partitioning the effects of environmental and spatial heterogeneity on distribution of plant diversity in the yellow river estuary. Science China Life Sciences 55:542–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelený D, Schaffers AP (2012) Too good to be true: pitfalls of using mean Ellenberg indicator values in vegetation analyses. J Veg Sci 23:419–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu G, Gao Y, Zhu L (2013) Delimiting the coastal geographic background to predict potential distribution of Spartina alterniflora. Hydrobiologia 717:177–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Niall Phelan from the Environment Agency for providing the extensive saltmarsh test dataset and to Annette Burden for help collecting saltmarsh datasets in the field. This study was funded by Natural Environmental Research Council Centre for Ecology & Hydrology through the Ecological Processes and Resilience Science programme; Project Code NEC04654.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan G. Jarvis.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Online Resource 1

Receiver operator characteristic plots for all coastal plant niche models a) with the full model b) without the salinity term. (PDF 1.22 mb)

Online Resource 2

Table of model coefficients for 132 niche models of coastal plant species (PDF 797 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jarvis, S.G., Rowe, E.C., Henrys, P.A. et al. Empirical realised niche models for British coastal plant species. J Coast Conserv 20, 107–116 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-016-0422-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-016-0422-3

Keywords

Navigation