Variations in species diversity patterns and community assembly rules among vegetation types in the karst landscape

Front Plant Sci. 2024 Feb 22:15:1338596. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1338596. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

The various vegetation types in the karst landscape have been considered the results of heterogeneous habitats. However, the lack of a comprehensive understanding of regional biodiversity patterns and the underlying ecological processes limits further research on ecological management. This study established forest dynamic plots (FDPs) of the dominant vegetation types (shrubland, SL; mixed tree and shrub forest, MTSF; coniferous forest, CF; coniferous broadleaf mixed forest, CBMF; and broadleaf forest, BF) in the karst landscape and quantified the species diversity patterns and potential ecological processes. The results showed that in terms of diversity patterns, the evenness and species richness of the CF community were significantly lower than other vegetation types, while the BF community had the highest species richness. The other three vegetation types showed no significant variation in species richness and evenness. However, when controlling the number of individuals of FDPs, the rarefied species richness showed significant differences and ranked as BF > SL > MTSF > CBMF > CF, highlighting the importance of considering the impacts of abundance. Additionally, the community assembly of climax communities (CF or BF) was dominated by stochastic processes such as species dispersal or species formation, whereas deterministic processes (habitat filtering) dominated the secondary forests (SL, MTSF, and CBMF). These findings proved that community assembly differs mainly between the climax community and other communities. Hence, it is crucial to consider the biodiversity and of the potential underlying ecological processes together when studying regional ecology and management, particularly in heterogeneous ecosystems.

Keywords: community assembly; karst landscape; species abundance distribution; species diversity; vegetation types.

Grants and funding

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work was supported by the Basic Research Program in Guizhou Province (Foundation-ZK [2021] General 094, ZK [2022] General 098, ZK [2022] General 036, ZK [2022] General 079), the Guizhou Provincial Key Technology R&D Program (General [2023]111) and the National Natural Science Fund (32360380, 32360278) and the Guizhou University Talent Introduction project ([2019]45).