What is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation?

Nondestructive estimations of plant community characteristics are essential to vegetation monitoring programs. However, there is no universally accepted method for this purpose in the Arctic, partly because not all programs share the same logistical constraints and monitoring goals. Our aim was to d...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Arctic Science
Main Authors: Mamet, Steven D., Young, Nathan, Chun, Kwok P., Johnstone, Jill F.
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Canadian Science Publishing 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/as-2015-0020
https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1139/as-2015-0020
https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/as-2015-0020
id crcansciencepubl:10.1139/as-2015-0020
record_format openpolar
spelling crcansciencepubl:10.1139/as-2015-0020 2024-06-23T07:48:17+00:00 What is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation? Mamet, Steven D. Young, Nathan Chun, Kwok P. Johnstone, Jill F. 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/as-2015-0020 https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1139/as-2015-0020 https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/as-2015-0020 en eng Canadian Science Publishing http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/page/about/CorporateTextAndDataMining Arctic Science volume 2, issue 3, page 127-141 ISSN 2368-7460 2368-7460 journal-article 2016 crcansciencepubl https://doi.org/10.1139/as-2015-0020 2024-06-13T04:10:52Z Nondestructive estimations of plant community characteristics are essential to vegetation monitoring programs. However, there is no universally accepted method for this purpose in the Arctic, partly because not all programs share the same logistical constraints and monitoring goals. Our aim was to determine the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation. To achieve this, we established 12 vegetation-monitoring plots on a south-facing slope in the alpine tundra of southern Yukon Territory, Canada. Four observers assessed these plots for vascular plant species abundance employing three methods: visual cover (VC) and subplot frequency (SF) estimation and modified point-intercept (PI) (includes rare species present but not intersected by a pin). SF performed best in terms of time required per plot and sensitivity to variations in species richness. All methods were similarly poor at estimating relative abundance for rare species, but PI and VC were substantially better at high abundances. Differences among methods were larger than among observers. Our results suggest that SF is best when the monitoring focus is on rare species or species richness across extensive areas. However, when the focus is on monitoring changes in relative abundance of common species, VC or PI should be preferred. Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Arctic Tundra Yukon Canadian Science Publishing Arctic Canada Yukon Arctic Science 2 3 127 141
institution Open Polar
collection Canadian Science Publishing
op_collection_id crcansciencepubl
language English
description Nondestructive estimations of plant community characteristics are essential to vegetation monitoring programs. However, there is no universally accepted method for this purpose in the Arctic, partly because not all programs share the same logistical constraints and monitoring goals. Our aim was to determine the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation. To achieve this, we established 12 vegetation-monitoring plots on a south-facing slope in the alpine tundra of southern Yukon Territory, Canada. Four observers assessed these plots for vascular plant species abundance employing three methods: visual cover (VC) and subplot frequency (SF) estimation and modified point-intercept (PI) (includes rare species present but not intersected by a pin). SF performed best in terms of time required per plot and sensitivity to variations in species richness. All methods were similarly poor at estimating relative abundance for rare species, but PI and VC were substantially better at high abundances. Differences among methods were larger than among observers. Our results suggest that SF is best when the monitoring focus is on rare species or species richness across extensive areas. However, when the focus is on monitoring changes in relative abundance of common species, VC or PI should be preferred.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Mamet, Steven D.
Young, Nathan
Chun, Kwok P.
Johnstone, Jill F.
spellingShingle Mamet, Steven D.
Young, Nathan
Chun, Kwok P.
Johnstone, Jill F.
What is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation?
author_facet Mamet, Steven D.
Young, Nathan
Chun, Kwok P.
Johnstone, Jill F.
author_sort Mamet, Steven D.
title What is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation?
title_short What is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation?
title_full What is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation?
title_fullStr What is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation?
title_full_unstemmed What is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation?
title_sort what is the most efficient and effective method for long-term monitoring of alpine tundra vegetation?
publisher Canadian Science Publishing
publishDate 2016
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/as-2015-0020
https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1139/as-2015-0020
https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/as-2015-0020
geographic Arctic
Canada
Yukon
geographic_facet Arctic
Canada
Yukon
genre Arctic
Arctic
Tundra
Yukon
genre_facet Arctic
Arctic
Tundra
Yukon
op_source Arctic Science
volume 2, issue 3, page 127-141
ISSN 2368-7460 2368-7460
op_rights http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/page/about/CorporateTextAndDataMining
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1139/as-2015-0020
container_title Arctic Science
container_volume 2
container_issue 3
container_start_page 127
op_container_end_page 141
_version_ 1802638700017876992