Skip to main content
Log in

Post-fire succession indices performance in a Mediterranean ecosystem

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We sought to quantify early species succession (covering a 9 year period) after a natural wildfire in an unmanaged Mediterranean-type ecosystem across three different soil types. We examined different indices that are frequently used in literature as for their sensitivity and ability in tracing vegetation changes during a post-fire succession. Field data from a forest in Sithonia peninsula, northern Greece, during a period of 10 years after a fire event were used as a case study. In order to detect the best model fit of diversity and evenness indices we used pseudovalues generated with the jackknife method. The index of evenness and diversity with the lowest coefficient of variation scores were selected as the ones with the best model fit. In order to select the abundance model with the best model fit we compared the difference of the observed abundances data from the jackknife-predicted ones using the Akaike information criterion. According to our results, in rich and medium soil types, the best diversity ecosystem index from the ones examined was the (inverse) Berger–Parker one, while in poor soil types the Simpson or Brillouin diversity index. According to our results, in rich and medium soil type Mediterranean ecosystems, a good biodiversity ecosystem descriptor is based on how abundant is the most abundant species. In poor soil types where there are fewer species, and the percentage of cover is lower, indices that account for the relative representation of species within the community structure are better biodiversity ecosystem descriptors. All evenness indices examined but the Smith–Wilson were good ecosystem descriptors. The abundance model that showed the best model fit was the log series one. The poor fit of the Smith–Wilson’s index suggests that in species poor ecosystems the number of species is more important than species variance.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anscombe FJ (1950) Sampling theory of the negative binomial and logarithmic series distributions. Biometrika 37:358–382

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Arvesen JN (1969) Jackknifing U-statistics. Ann Math Stat 40:2076–2100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capitanio R, Carcaillet C (2008) Post-fire Mediterranean vegetation dynamics and diversity: a discussion of succession models. For Ecol Manage 255:431–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cary GJ, Morrison DA (1995) Effects of fire frequency on plant-species composition of sandstone communities in the Sydney Region—combinations of inter-fire intervals. Aust J Ecol 20:418–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements FE (1916) Plant succession: an analysis of the development of vegetation. Carnegie Institute of Washington, Washington

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen JE (1968) Alternative derivations of species abundance relation. Am Nat 102:165–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowles HC (1899) The ecological relations of the vegetation on sand dunes of Lake Michigan. Bot Gazette 27:95–117, 167–202, 281–308, 361–391

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowling RM, Rundel PW, Lamont BB, Arroyo MK, Arianoutsou M (1996) Plant diversity in mediterranean-climate regions. Trends Ecol Evol 11:362–366

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Di Castri F, Mooney AH (1973) Mediterranean type ecosystems. Origin and structure, ecological studies 7. Springer, Berlin

  • Dornelas M (2010) Disturbances and change in biodiversity. Philos Trans R Soc B 365:3719–3727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhauer N, Milcu A, Allan E, Nitschke N, Scherber C, Temperton V, Weigelt A, Weisser WW, Scheu S (2011) Impact of above- and below-ground invertebrates on temporal and spatial stability of grassland of different diversity. J Ecol 99:572–582

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira FC, Petrere M Jr (2008) Comments about some species abundance patterns: classic, neutral, and niche partitioning models. Braz J Biol 68:1003–1012

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Field A (2009) Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage, London. ISBN: 978-1847879073

  • Fineey MA, McHugh CW, Grenfell IC, Riley KL, Short KC (2011) A simulation of probabilistic wildfire risk components for the continental United States. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 25:973–1000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finegan B (1984) Forest Succession. Nature 312:109–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forster MA, Warton DI (2007) A metacommunity-scale comparison of species-abundance distribution models for plant communities of eastern Australia. Ecography 30:449–458

    Google Scholar 

  • Gitay H, Wilson JB (1995) Post-fire changes in community structure of tall tussock grasslands: a test of alternative models of succession and a new ‘Three-phase’ model. J Ecol 83:775–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosselin F (2006) An assessment of the dependence of evenness indices on species richness. J Theor Biol 242:591–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grime PJ (1979) Plant strategies and vegetation processes. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins CL, Strauss RE (2008) Modeling stream fish assemblages with niche apportionment models: patterns. processes, and scale dependence. Trans Am Fish Soc 137:696–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston A (1957) A comparison of the line interception vertical point quadrat and loop methods as used in measuring basal area of grass land vegetation. Can J Plant Sci 37:34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost L (2010) The relation between evenness and diversity. Diversity 2:207–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juan P, Mateu J, Saez M (2012) Pinpointing spatio-temporal interactions in wildfire patterns. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. doi:10.1007/s00477-012-0568-y

  • Kaltsas D, Trichas A, Mylonas M (2012) Temporal organization patterns of epigean beetle communities (Coleoptera: Carabidae, Tenebrionidae) in different successional stages of eastern Mediterranean maquis. J Nat Hist 46:495–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kempton RA, Taylor LR (1978) Q-statistic and diversity of floras. Nature 275:252–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konstantinidis P (1990) Examination and investigation of relations between physiographic units of forests of aleppo pine (pinus halepensis) in Sithonia Peninsula (Chalkidiki N. Greece) and presenting in plant communities. Scientific Yearbook of Department Forestry and Natural environment, Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki Volume LV’ No. 5

  • Koolaei SMV, Jalilvand H, Hodjati SM, Parsakhoo A (2011) Estimating the biodiversity of understory plant species in afforestation and land sliding areas of Alder stand. J Soil Sci Environ Manag 3:269–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs CJ (1999) Ecological methodology. Addison Wesley Longman, Menlo Park

    Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH (1957) On the relative abundance of species. Proc Nat Acad Sci 43:293–295

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE (1988) Ecological diversity and its measurement. Croom Helm, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE, Henderson PA (2003) Explaining the excess of rare species in natural species abundance distributions. Nature 422:714–716

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • May RM (1975) Patterns of species abundance and diversity. In: Cody ML, Diamond JM (eds) Ecology and evolution of communities. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 81–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles J (1979) Vegetation dynamics. Chapmann and Hall, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miles J (1987) Vegetation succession: past and present perceptions. In: Gray AJ, Crawley MJ, Edwards PJ (eds) Colonization, succession and stability. In: 26th symposium of The British Ecological Society, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford

  • Miller RG (1964) Trustworthy jackknife. Ann Math Stat 35:341–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motomura I (1947) Further notes on the law of geometrical progression of the population density in animal association. Physiol Ecol 1:55–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Moustakas A, Sakkos K, Wiegand K, Ward D, Meyer KM, Eisinger D (2009) Are savannas patch dynamic systems? A landscape model. Ecol Model 220:3576–3588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noble IR (1981) Predicting successional change. In: Mooney HA (ed) Fire regimes and ecosystem properties. Proceedings of the conference at Honolulu Hawaii, 1978. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report, WO-26, pp 278–300

  • Pausas J (2004) Post-fire regeneration variability of Pinus halepensis in the eastern Iberian Peninsula. For Ecol Manage 203:251–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peet RK (1974) The measurement of species diversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 5:285–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pielou EC (1969) The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J Theor Biol 13:131–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pielou EC (1975) Ecological diversity. John Wiley and Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro JC, Bates DM (2000) Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. Springer, New York

  • Preston FW (1948) The commonness, and rarity, of species. Ecology 29:254–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Raschke M (2011) Empirical behaviour of tests for the beta distribution and their application in environmental research. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 25:79–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Routledge RD (1980) Bias in estimating the diversity of large, uncensused communities. Ecology 61:276–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy J, Sonie L (1992) Germination and Population Dynamics of Cistus Species in Relation to Fire. J Appl Ecol 29:647–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholes RJ, Archer SR (1997) Tree-grass interactions in savannas. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:517–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schowalter TD (2006) Insect ecology: an ecosystem approach, 2nd edn. Academic Press, London. ISBN: 978-0120887729

  • Simpson GG, Roe A, Lewontin RC (1960) Quantitative zoology. Harcourt Brace and Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith B, Wilson JB (1996) A consumer’s guide to evenness indices. Oikos 76:70–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southwood TRE (1978) Ecological methods. Chapmann and Hall, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens MA (1974) EDF statistics for goodness-of-fit and some comparisons. J Am Stat Assoc 69:730–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiling P (1999) Ecology: theories and applications, 3rd edn. Chapman and Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Studeny AC, Buckland ST, Illian JB, Johnston A, Magurran AE (2011) Goodness-of-fit measures of evenness: a new tool for exploring changes in community structure. Ecosphere 2:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugihara G (1980) Minimal community structure—an explanation of species abundance patterns. Am Nat 116:770–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson MP, Calkin DE, Finney MA, Ager AA, Gilbertson-Day JW (2011) Integrated national-scale assessment of wildfire risk to human and ecological values. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 25:761–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (1985) The resource-ratio hypothesis of plant succession. Am Nat 125:827–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsitsoni T, Karagiannakidou V (2000) Site quality and stand structure in Pinus halepensis forests of north Greece. Forestry 73:51–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tukey J (1958) Bias and confidence in no quite large samples. Ann Math Stat 29:614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek P, Matson P, Cleve K (1989) Nitrogen availability and nitrification during succession: primary, secondary, and old-field seres. Plant Soil 115:229–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waite S (2000) Statistical ecology in practice. Prentice Hall, London

  • Wilson JB (1991) Methods for fitting dominance/diversity curves. J Veg Sci 2:35–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JB (1993) Would we recognize a Broken-Stick community if we found one? Oikos 67:181–183

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JB, Wells TCE, Trueman IC, Jones G, Atkinson MD, Crawley MJ, Dodd ME, Silvertown J (1996) Are there assembly rules for plant species abundance? An investigation in relation to soil resources and successional trends. J Ecol 84:527–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahl JH (1977) Jackknifing an index of diversity. Ecology 58:907–913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavala MA, Espelta JM, Retana J (2000) Constraints and trade-offs in Mediterranean plant communities: the case of holm oak-Aleppo pine forests. Bot Rev 66:119–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Panayiotis Dimitrakopoulos and Alexandros Galanidis for their constructive comments. Comments of two anonymous reviewers considerably improved an earlier manuscript draft.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aristides Moustakas.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 107 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Matossian, A.D., Matsinos, Y.G., Konstantinidis, P. et al. Post-fire succession indices performance in a Mediterranean ecosystem. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 27, 323–335 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-012-0593-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-012-0593-x

Keywords

Navigation