Community specialisation in vegetation succession on central‐European disturbed sites

Abstract

AbstractQuestionsConservation and restoration efforts can greatly benefit from understanding how plant community specialisation changes after disturbance. This paper addresses general successional patterns concerning the following questions: How does community specialisation change during succession? What are the general patterns in the occurrence of generalists and specialists? What are the general ecological strategies of generalists and specialists? Are threatened species better represented among specialists, as generally expected?LocationCzech Republic, central Europe.MethodsWe assessed trends in plant community specialisation as well as the participation of generalists and specialists in 12 types of successional series based on a large data set of dated plots of spontaneously established vegetation at various disturbed sites. We classified species into generalists and specialists using a co‐occurrence specialisation metric, determined overall community specialisation at the plot level, and assessed trends in response to successional age for each of the seres using regression analyses, community‐weighted means and the fourth‐corner approach. We also examined the differences between generalists and specialists during succession by comparing their ecological strategies (competitive, stress‐tolerant and ruderal) and conservation status.ResultsCommunity specialisation generally increased during succession, mainly due to a decline in generalists and an increase in typical species of particular habitats such as grasslands, woodlands and wetlands. Despite the general increase in community specialisation, specialists peaked in early and old successional stages and were always less abundant than generalists. During succession, generalists were more stable in their ecological strategies and were predominantly competitive. Specialists varied more, being mostly competitive stress tolerators but also ruderals in early successional stages. Specialists were proportionally more threatened than generalists.ConclusionsGeneralists and specialists differ in their successional patterns, ecological strategies and conservation status. Assessing the spatio‐temporal changes in community specialisation helps to evaluate and track successional trends, and to determine the conservation and restoration status of degraded areas.