[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 3, Issue 7 (3-2016) ::
PEC 2016, 3(7): 145-160 Back to browse issues page
Investigating the relation of functional diversity and biomass of plant communities in the central Zagross
Ali Goharnezhad *, Pezhman Tahmasebi, Esmaeil Asadi, Javad Motamedi
Rangeland Sciences, Sharekord University, goharnejad.a@gmail.com , goharnejad.a@gmail.com
Abstract:   (4376 Views)

Functional diversity is directly related to ecosystem services, biomass contains most of them such as food, conservation, tourism and pollination. This study attempted to test such assumptions as (i) The existence of close relationship between plant production and the community-weighted mean trait values (CWM), as expected from the “production ratio hypothesis” (ii) existence of close relationship between Rao’s functional diversity index with plant production according to “Tilmann hypothesis of diversity” to predict plant production and to find the best relation between plant production with environmental factors in the wooded rangeland of central Zagros. The results showed that among value of CWM, the most R² was related to functional diversity index of weighted mean of leaf index equal to %37. Also the amount of this index for Rao’s functional diversity index was %18 showing that this index only is able to explain about 18 percent of plant production variations. The most community-weighted mean values showed increasing trend with increasing plant production. It was observed that a combination of abiotic factors, Functional diversity (FDQ) and CWM index including of rainfall, temperature, CWM-ME, CWM-Long Leaf, and CWM-Height variables explains about 76% of plant production variations and can be regarded as the most appropriate model to forecast plant production. The results indicate the functional identity of plant community as proposed by Grime is the main driver of ecosystem function compared to niche complementrity hypothesis.

Keywords: Functional diversity, Plant production, Environmental factors, CWM index, Central Zagros
Full-Text [PDF 1050 kb]   (1586 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2016/05/14 | Accepted: 2016/05/14 | Published: 2016/05/14
1. Almeida-Cortez J.S., Shipley B., Arnason J.T. 1999. Do plant species with high relative growth rates have poorer chemical defences. Func Ecol 13(6):819–827.
2. Arias D. 2007. Calibration of LAI- 2000 to estimate leaf area index and assessment of its relationship with stand productivity in six native and introduced tree species in Costa Rica. Forest Ecology and Management, 247: 185-193.
3. Arzani H., Sahragard P., Torkan J., Saedi K. 2010. Comparison of Phenological Stages on Forage Quality of Rangelands Species in Rangeland of Saral Kordestan. Journal of Rangeland. 4(2): 160-167.
4. Bradley J., Butterfield T., Katharine N.S. 2013. Single-trait functional indices outperform multi-trait indices in linking environmental gradients and ecosystem services in a complex landscape. Journal of Ecology 10: 9–17.
5. Chanteloup, P., Bonis A. 2013. Functional diversity in root and above-ground traits in a fertile grassland shows a detrimental effect on productivity. Basic and Applied Ecology. 14(3): 208–216.
6. Conti, G., Diaz, S. 2013. Plant functional diversity and carbon storage – an empirical test in semi-arid forest ecosystems. Journal of Ecology, 101: 18–28.
7. Cornelissen J.H.C., Lavorel S, Garnier E., Díaz S., Buchmann N., Gurvich D.E.,Reich P.B., Ter Steege H., Morgan H.D., Heijden M.G.A., van der Pausas J.G.,Poorter H. .2003. A handbook of protocols for standardised and easy measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Aust. J. Bot. 51: 335–380.
8. CSIRO. 1990. Feeding standards for Australian livestock: ruminants. Standing Committee on Agriculture and Resource Management. Ruminants subcommittee. Melbourne, 266 p.
9. Diaz, S., Cabido, M. 2001. Vive la difference: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol. 16(11): 646–655.
10. Díaz S., Lavorel S., De Bello F., Quétier F., Grigulis K., Robson, M. 2007.Incorporating plant functional diversity effects in ecosystem service assessments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104:20684–20689.
11. Diaz S., Lavorel S., Stuart Chapin F., Tecco P.A., Gurvich D.E., Grigulist K. 2007 Functional diversity—at the crossroads between ecosystem functioning and environmental filters. In: Canadell JG, Pataki DE, Pitelka LF (eds) Terrestrial ecosystems in a changing world.
12. Garnier E., Cortez J., Billeos G., Navas M.L., Roumet C., Debussche M., Laurent G., Blanchard A., Aubry D., Bellmann A., Neill C., Toussaint J.P. 2004. Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession.Ecology 85(9): 2630–2637.
13. Garnier E., Shipley B., Roumet C., Laurent G. 2001. A standardized protocol for the determination of specific leaf area and leaf dry matter content. Func Ecol 15:688–695
14. Grime J.P. 1998. Benefits of plant diversity to ecosystems: Immediate, filter and founder effects. Journal of Ecology, 86: 891–899.
15. Hector A., Schmid B., Beierkuhnlein C.1999. Plant diversity and productivity experiments in European grasslands. Science, 286: 1123–1127.
16. Hooper D.U.F., Chapin S., Ewel J.J., Hector A., Inchausti P., Lavorel S., Lawton J.H., Lodge D.M., Loreau M., Naeem S., Schmid B., Setälä H., Symstad A.J.,Vandermeer J., Wardle D.A. 2005. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecol.Monogr. 75: 3–35.http://www.orchidsflora.com/medicinalherbsseed.html
17. Hu Y., Li, K., Gong H., Yin W. 2009. Plant diversity-productivity patterns in the alpine steppe environment. Journal of arid land, VOL. 1, NO. 1, 43−48.
18. Jangjo M., Khajee H., Anvarkhan S., Sanjni S. 2013. Seed germination and dormancy tests of some rangeland species of Northern Khorasan province, Iran.Intl. J. Agri. Crop Sci. 5(1): 21-29.
19. Lavorel S., Diaz S., Cornelissen J.H, Garnier E., Harrison S.P., McIntyre S., Pausas J., Pérez N., Roumet C., Urcelay C. 2007. Plant functional types: Are we getting any closer to the Holy Grail? In: Canadell J.G., Pataki D., Pitelka L.Springer, New York
20. Lavorel S., Grigulis K.., Lamarque P., Colace M.P., Garden D., Girel J., Pellet G.,Douzet R. 2011. Using plant functional traits to understand the landscape distribution of multiple ecosystem services. Journal of Ecology 99: 135–147.
21. Loreau M., Naeem S., Inchausti P., Bengtsson J., Grime J.P., Hector, A. 2001.Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges. Science, 294, 804–808.
22. Magurran, A.E. 1988. Ecological diversity and its measurement. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
23. Mazandarani M., Kassaei M., Rezaee B. 2003. Medicinal plants in Ziarat Mountain Gorgan. Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Research. 20: 40-58.
24. Mokany K., Ash J., Roxburgh S. 2008. Functional identity is more important than diversity in influencing ecosystem processes in a temperate native grassland.Journal of Ecology, 96: 884–893.
25. Mouillot D., Villéger S., Scherer-Lorenzen M., Mason N.W.H. 2011. Functional structure of biological communities predicts ecosystem multi functionality.PLoS ONE, 6, e17476.
26. Niromand E., Jami M., Zamani, G. 2012. Responses of quality Lathyrus sativus L.in Birjand. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research Vol. 9, No.4,. 678-684.
27. Oddy, V.H., Robards, G.E., Low, S.G. 1983. Prediction of invivo dry matter digestibility from the fiber nitrogen content of a feed, In Feed Information and Animal Production, eds. G.E. Robards, and R.G. Pakham ommonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Australia, pp. 395-398.
28. Pla L., Casanoves F., Rienzo J.D. 2012. Quantifying Functional Biodiversity. ISBN 978-94-007-2647-5.
29. Rao CR. 1982. Diversity and dissimilarity coefficients: a unified approach. Theor Popul. Biol. 21: 24–43.
30. Schumacher J., Roscher C. 2009. Differential effects of functional traits on aboveground biomass in semi-natural grasslands. Oikos, 118: 1659-1668.
31. Tilman D., Knops J., Wedin D., Reich P., Ritchie M., Siemann E. 1997. The influence of functional diversity and composition on ecosystem processes.Science, 277: 1300–1302.
32. Van Soest P.J. 1982. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant Books, Ins. Corvallis,375 p.
33. Walker B.H., Kinzig A., Langridge J.L. 1999. Plant attribute diversity, resilience,and ecosystem function: the nature and significance of dominant and minor species. Ecosystems 2: 95–113.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:


XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Goharnezhad A, Tahmasebi P, Asadi E, Motamedi J. Investigating the relation of functional diversity and biomass of plant communities in the central Zagross. PEC. 2016; 3 (7) :145-160
URL: http://pec.gonbad.ac.ir/article-1-204-en.html

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 3, Issue 7 (3-2016) Back to browse issues page
مجله حفاظت زیست بوم گیاهان Journal of Plant Ecosystem Conservation
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4414