| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdf:type
| |
| label
| - Tájek <i>et al.</i> (2023)
|
| isDefinedBy
| |
| schema:datePublished
| |
| dct:title
| - Tájek <i>et al.</i> (2023)
|
| foaf:page
| |
| schema:identifier
| |
| dct:abstract
| - A selection of sites occupied by the EU-protected marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) in western Czech Republic were subjected to a vegetation survey 15 years ago and again recently. In the 66 time-replicated 25 m2 plots from 12 sites, representing the diversity of E. aurinia-occupied oligotrophic grasslands in the Slavkovský les Protected Landscape Area (and covering a fifth of the currently-occupied Czech sites), we recorded quantitative representation of vascular plants and mosses. We analysed the data using multivariate ordinations, asking how the vegetation changed between the surveys, how was it affected by the conservation management applied and how it affected occupancy by the butterfly larval nests; the vegetation patterns were interpreted using Ellenberg’s plant indicator values. Between the two surveys, the overall representation of the larval host plant, Succisa pratensis, did not change; tree and herbs layers (both grasses and forbs) increased and the moss layer decreased. Across surveys, the main driver of vascular plants’ species composition was moisture, followed by soil reaction and nitrogen, whereas in mosses, nitrogen was the main factor. The main change between the surveys was the increase of nitrogen accompanied by decreased light, probably due to increase of competitively strong plants. Butterfly occupancy declined at sites with high soil moisture and increased at sites with higher soil reaction. Mowing of moist nitrogen-rich sites, but not drier nitrogen-poor sites, increased occupancy, illustrating the need for context-dependent interventions. All the evidence thus shows that E. aurinia prefers drier, warmer and less acidic conditions within the generally moist acidic grasslands and that ongoing eutrophication represents a potential problem in the future.
|
| bibo:abstract
| - A selection of sites occupied by the EU-protected marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) in western Czech Republic were subjected to a vegetation survey 15 years ago and again recently. In the 66 time-replicated 25 m2 plots from 12 sites, representing the diversity of E. aurinia-occupied oligotrophic grasslands in the Slavkovský les Protected Landscape Area (and covering a fifth of the currently-occupied Czech sites), we recorded quantitative representation of vascular plants and mosses. We analysed the data using multivariate ordinations, asking how the vegetation changed between the surveys, how was it affected by the conservation management applied and how it affected occupancy by the butterfly larval nests; the vegetation patterns were interpreted using Ellenberg’s plant indicator values. Between the two surveys, the overall representation of the larval host plant, Succisa pratensis, did not change; tree and herbs layers (both grasses and forbs) increased and the moss layer decreased. Across surveys, the main driver of vascular plants’ species composition was moisture, followed by soil reaction and nitrogen, whereas in mosses, nitrogen was the main factor. The main change between the surveys was the increase of nitrogen accompanied by decreased light, probably due to increase of competitively strong plants. Butterfly occupancy declined at sites with high soil moisture and increased at sites with higher soil reaction. Mowing of moist nitrogen-rich sites, but not drier nitrogen-poor sites, increased occupancy, illustrating the need for context-dependent interventions. All the evidence thus shows that E. aurinia prefers drier, warmer and less acidic conditions within the generally moist acidic grasslands and that ongoing eutrophication represents a potential problem in the future.
|
| dct:issued
| |
| dct:bibliographicCitation
| - Tájek, P., Tenčík, A., Konvička, M. & John, V. 2023. Vegetation changes at oligotrophic grasslands managed for a declining butterfly. <em>Nature Conservation</em>, 52: 23-46.
|
| bibo:doi
| - 10.3897/natureconservation.52.90452
|
| schema:sameAs
| |
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)
