TY - JOUR
T1 - Taxonomic distinctness poorly reflects floristic quality in a wetland study system
AU - Jog, Suneeti K.
AU - Bried, Jason T.
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank Lee Neighbors for helping with AvTD calculations and creating the funnel plots, and two anonymous reviewers for thoughtful comments on a previous version. The data collection was supported by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Wetland Program Development Grants awarded through Oklahoma State University, and by the Oklahoma Conservation Commission and EPA National Wetland Condition Assessment.
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Biomonitoring typically uses taxonomic diversity information while ignoring phylogenetic diversity. Evolutionary relatedness may offer deeper insight to how local assemblages relate with human disturbance and ecological degradation. Degradation of floristic quality may filter species with similar evolutionary traits, whereas intact floristic quality may limit phylogenetic clumping and increase representation of more distantly related taxa. We tested this hypothesis using average taxonomic distinctness (AvTD) and measures of floristic quality (mean ecological conservatism, native species richness, percent exotic species) in vascular plant assemblages of 115 wetlands in the US southern plains. In line with the hypothesis, we observed positive correlations with conservatism (r = 0.28, P = 0.0007) and native richness (r = 0.24, P = 0.0018) and a negative correlation (r = −0.21, P = 0.0169) with exotics, but the plotted relationships looked obscure. A strongly skewed AvTD distribution revealed a clear gradient in lower than expected AvTD. Responses along this gradient covaried with native richness (quadratic model R2 = 0.75) but showed no pattern with conservatism and a weak response to exotics. These results suggest that native richness has potential to predict lower than expected AvTD values. However, attributing these values to degraded floristic quality requires caution when richness is driven by sampling effects such as species-area relationships or has a non-linear relationship to human disturbance. Given the vague correlations and ambiguity of richness, plant taxonomic distinctness may not provide a clear bioindicator for wetlands. More work is needed to elucidate how evolutionary structure may play into bioassessment, which traditionally has been phylogenetically neutral.
AB - Biomonitoring typically uses taxonomic diversity information while ignoring phylogenetic diversity. Evolutionary relatedness may offer deeper insight to how local assemblages relate with human disturbance and ecological degradation. Degradation of floristic quality may filter species with similar evolutionary traits, whereas intact floristic quality may limit phylogenetic clumping and increase representation of more distantly related taxa. We tested this hypothesis using average taxonomic distinctness (AvTD) and measures of floristic quality (mean ecological conservatism, native species richness, percent exotic species) in vascular plant assemblages of 115 wetlands in the US southern plains. In line with the hypothesis, we observed positive correlations with conservatism (r = 0.28, P = 0.0007) and native richness (r = 0.24, P = 0.0018) and a negative correlation (r = −0.21, P = 0.0169) with exotics, but the plotted relationships looked obscure. A strongly skewed AvTD distribution revealed a clear gradient in lower than expected AvTD. Responses along this gradient covaried with native richness (quadratic model R2 = 0.75) but showed no pattern with conservatism and a weak response to exotics. These results suggest that native richness has potential to predict lower than expected AvTD values. However, attributing these values to degraded floristic quality requires caution when richness is driven by sampling effects such as species-area relationships or has a non-linear relationship to human disturbance. Given the vague correlations and ambiguity of richness, plant taxonomic distinctness may not provide a clear bioindicator for wetlands. More work is needed to elucidate how evolutionary structure may play into bioassessment, which traditionally has been phylogenetically neutral.
KW - Bioassessment
KW - Ecological conservatism
KW - Evolutionary relatedness
KW - Phylogenetic clumping
KW - Phylogenetic diversity
KW - Species richness
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85094148570&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85094148570&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107086
DO - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107086
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85094148570
SN - 1470-160X
VL - 121
JO - Ecological Indicators
JF - Ecological Indicators
M1 - 107086
ER -