Aboveground community and species-specific plant biomass from the Jena Experiment (Main Experiment, year 2010)

This data set contains aboveground community biomass in 2010 (Sown plant community, Weed plant community, Dead plant material, and Unidentified plant material; all measured in biomass as dry weight) and species-specific biomass from the sown species of the main experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Plots were maintained by bi-annual weeding and mowing. Aboveground community biomass was harvested twice in 2010 just prior to mowing (during peak standing biomass in early June and in late August) on all experimental plots of the main experiment. This was done by clipping the vegetation at 3 cm above ground in two rectangles of 0.2 x 0.5 m per large plot. The location of these rectangles was assigned prior to each harvest by random selection of coordinates within the core area of the plots (i.e. the central 10 x 15 m). The positions of the rectangles within plots were identical for all plots. The harvested biomass was sorted into categories: individual species for the sown plant species, weed plant species (species not sown at the particular plot), detached dead plant material (i.e., dead plant material in the data file), and remaining plant material that could not be assigned to any category (i.e., unidentified plant material in the data file). All biomass was dried to constant weight (70°C, >= 48 h) and weighed. Sown plant community biomass was calculated as the sum of the biomass of the individual sown species. The data for individual samples and the mean over samples for all biomass measures are given. Overall, analyses of the community biomass data have identified species richness as well as functional group composition as important drivers of a positive biodiversity-productivity relationship.

Aboveground plant community and species-specific vegetation cover from the Jena Experiment (Main Experiment, year 2002)

This data set contains information on vegetation cover, i.e. the proportion of soil surface area that is covered by different categories of plants per estimated plot area. Data was collected on the plant community level (sown plant community, weed plant community, dead plant material, and bare ground) and on the level of individual plant species in case of the sown species. Data presented here is from the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Plots were maintained by bi-annual weeding and mowing. In 2002, vegetation cover was estimated only once in Septemper just prior to mowing (during peak standing biomass) on all experimental plots of the Main Experiment. Cover was visually estimated in a central area of each plot 3 by 3 m in size (approximately 9 m²) using a decimal scale (Londo). Cover estimates for the individual species (and for target species + weeds + bare ground) can add up to more than 100% because the estimated categories represented a structure with potentially overlapping multiple layers. In 2002, cover on the community level was only estimated for the sown plant community, weed plant community and bare soil. In contrast to later years, cover of dead plant material was not estimated.

Aboveground plant community and species-specific vegetation cover from the Jena Experiment (Main Experiment, year 2003)

This data set contains information on vegetation cover, i.e. the proportion of soil surface area that is covered by different categories of plants per estimated plot area. Data was collected on the plant community level (sown plant community, weed plant community, dead plant material, and bare ground) and on the level of individual plant species in case of the sown species. Data presented here is from the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Plots were maintained by bi-annual weeding and mowing. In 2003, vegetation cover was estimated twice in May and August just prior to mowing (during peak standing biomass) on all experimental plots of the Main Experiment. Cover was visually estimated in a central area of each plot 3 by 3 m in size (approximately 9 m²) using a decimal scale (Londo). Cover estimates for the individual species (and for target species + weeds + bare ground) can add up to more than 100% because the estimated categories represented a structure with potentially overlapping multiple layers. In 2003, cover on the community level was only estimated for the sown plant community, weed plant community and bare soil. In contrast to later years, cover of dead plant material was not estimated.

Aboveground plant community and species-specific vegetation cover from the Jena Experiment (Main Experiment, year 2005)

This data set contains information on vegetation cover, i.e. the proportion of soil surface area that is covered by different categories of plants per estimated plot area. Data was collected on the plant community level (sown plant community, weed plant community, dead plant material, and bare ground) and on the level of individual plant species in case of the sown species. Data presented here is from the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Plots were maintained by bi-annual weeding and mowing. In 2005, vegetation cover was estimated twice in May and August just prior to mowing (during peak standing biomass) on all experimental plots of the Main Experiment. Cover was visually estimated in a central area of each plot 3 by 3 m in size (approximately 9 m²) using a decimal scale (Londo). Cover estimates for the individual species (and for target species + weeds + bare ground) can add up to more than 100% because the estimated categories represented a structure with potentially overlapping multiple layers. In 2005, dead plant material was found only in a few plots. Therefore, cover of dead plant material is zero for most of the 82 plots.

Aboveground plant community and species-specific vegetation cover from the Jena Experiment (Main Experiment, year 2006)

This data set contains information on vegetation cover, i.e. the proportion of soil surface area that is covered by different categories of plants per estimated plot area. Data was collected on the plant community level (sown plant community, weed plant community, dead plant material, and bare ground) and on the level of individual plant species in case of the sown species. Data presented here is from the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Plots were maintained by bi-annual weeding and mowing. In 2006, vegetation cover was estimated twice in June and August just prior to mowing (during peak standing biomass) on all experimental plots of the Main Experiment. Cover was visually estimated in a central area of each plot 3 by 3 m in size (approximately 9 m²) using a decimal scale (Londo). Cover estimates for the individual species (and for target species + weeds + bare ground) can add up to more than 100% because the estimated categories represented a structure with potentially overlapping multiple layers. In 2006, dead plant material was found only in a few plots. Therefore, cover of dead plant material is zero for most of the 82 plots.

Aboveground plant community and species-specific vegetation cover from the Jena Experiment (Main Experiment, year 2007)

This data set contains information on vegetation cover, i.e. the proportion of soil surface area that is covered by different categories of plants per estimated plot area. Data was collected on the plant community level (sown plant community, weed plant community, dead plant material, and bare ground) and on the level of individual plant species in case of the sown species. Data presented here is from the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Plots were maintained by bi-annual weeding and mowing. In 2007, vegetation cover was estimated twice in June and August just prior to mowing (during peak standing biomass) on all experimental plots of the Main Experiment. Cover was visually estimated in a central area of each plot 3 by 3 m in size (approximately 9 m²) using a decimal scale (Londo). Cover estimates for the individual species (and for target species + weeds + bare ground) can add up to more than 100% because the estimated categories represented a structure with potentially overlapping multiple layers. In 2007, dead plant material was found only in a few plots. Therefore, cover of dead plant material is zero for most of the 82 plots.

Aboveground plant community and species-specific vegetation cover from the Jena Experiment (Main Experiment, year 2004)

This data set contains information on vegetation cover, i.e. the proportion of soil surface area that is covered by different categories of plants per estimated plot area. Data was collected on the plant community level (sown plant community, weed plant community, dead plant material, and bare ground) and on the level of individual plant species in case of the sown species. Data presented here is from the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Plots were maintained by bi-annual weeding and mowing. In 2004, vegetation cover was estimated twice in May and August just prior to mowing (during peak standing biomass) on all experimental plots of the Main Experiment. Cover was visually estimated in a central area of each plot 3 by 3 m in size (approximately 9 m²) using a decimal scale (Londo). Cover estimates for the individual species (and for target species + weeds + bare ground) can add up to more than 100% because the estimated categories represented a structure with potentially overlapping multiple layers. In 2004, cover on the community level was only estimated for the sown plant community, weed plant community and bare soil. In contrast to later years, cover of dead plant material was not estimated.

Sampling environmental acoustic recordings to determine species richness : I

Acoustic sensors provide an effective means of monitoring biodiversity at large spatial and temporal scales. They can continuously and passively record large volumes of data over extended periods, however these data must be analysed to detect the presence of vocal species. Automated analysis of acoustic data for large numbers of species is complex and can be subject to high levels of false positive and false negative results. Manual analysis by experienced users can produce accurate results, however the time and effort required to process even small volumes of data can make manual analysis prohibitive. Our research examined the use of sampling methods to reduce the cost of analysing large volumes of acoustic sensor data, while retaining high levels of species detection accuracy. Utilising five days of manually analysed acoustic sensor data from four sites, we examined a range of sampling rates and methods including random, stratified and biologically informed. Our findings indicate that randomly selecting 120, one-minute samples from the three hours immediately following dawn provided the most effective sampling method. This method detected, on average 62% of total species after 120 one-minute samples were analysed, compared to 34% of total species from traditional point counts. Our results demonstrate that targeted sampling methods can provide an effective means for analysing large volumes of acoustic sensor data efficiently and accurately.

Life-history constraints in grassland plant species : a growth-defence trade-off is the norm

Plant growth can be limited by resource acquisition and defence against consumers, leading to contrasting trade-off possibilities. The competition-defence hypothesis posits a trade-off between competitive ability and defence against enemies (e.g. herbivores and pathogens). The growth-defence hypothesis suggests that strong competitors for nutrients are also defended against enemies, at a cost to growth rate. We tested these hypotheses using observations of 706 plant populations of over 500 species before and following identical fertilisation and fencing treatments at 39 grassland sites worldwide. Strong positive covariance in species responses to both treatments provided support for a growth-defence trade-off: populations that increased with the removal of nutrient limitation (poor competitors) also increased following removal of consumers. This result held globally across 4 years within plant life-history groups and within the majority of individual sites. Thus, a growth-defence trade-off appears to be the norm, and mechanisms maintaining grassland biodiversity may operate within this constraint.

Sampling environmental acoustic recordings to determine bird species richness

Acoustic sensors can be used to estimate species richness for vocal species such as birds. They can continuously and passively record large volumes of data over extended periods. These data must subsequently be analyzed to detect the presence of vocal species. Automated analysis of acoustic data for large numbers of species is complex and can be subject to high levels of false positive and false negative results. Manual analysis by experienced surveyors can produce accurate results; however the time and effort required to process even small volumes of data can make manual analysis prohibitive. This study examined the use of sampling methods to reduce the cost of analyzing large volumes of acoustic sensor data, while retaining high levels of species detection accuracy. Utilizing five days of manually analyzed acoustic sensor data from four sites, we examined a range of sampling frequencies and methods including random, stratified, and biologically informed. We found that randomly selecting 120 one-minute samples from the three hours immediately following dawn over five days of recordings, detected the highest number of species. On average, this method detected 62% of total species from 120 one-minute samples, compared to 34% of total species detected from traditional area search methods. Our results demonstrate that targeted sampling methods can provide an effective means for analyzing large volumes of acoustic sensor data efficiently and accurately. Development of automated and semi-automated techniques is required to assist in analyzing large volumes of acoustic sensor data. Read More: http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/12-2088.1

The use of acoustic indices to determine avian species richness in audio-recordings of the environment

Interpreting acoustic recordings of the natural environment is an increasingly important technique for ecologists wishing to monitor terrestrial ecosystems. Technological advances make it possible to accumulate many more recordings than can be listened to or interpreted, thereby necessitating automated assistance to identify elements in the soundscape. In this paper we examine the problem of estimating avian species richness by sampling from very long acoustic recordings. We work with data recorded under natural conditions and with all the attendant problems of undefined and unconstrained acoustic content (such as wind, rain, traffic, etc.) which can mask content of interest (in our case, bird calls). We describe 14 acoustic indices calculated at one minute resolution for the duration of a 24 hour recording. An acoustic index is a statistic that summarizes some aspect of the structure and distribution of acoustic energy and information in a recording. Some of the indices we calculate are standard (e.g. signal-to-noise ratio), some have been reported useful for the detection of bioacoustic activity (e.g. temporal and spectral entropies) and some are directed to avian sources (spectral persistence of whistles). We rank the one minute segments of a 24 hour recording in descending order according to an "acoustic richness" score which is derived from a single index or a weighted combination of two or more. We describe combinations of indices which lead to more efficient estimates of species richness than random sampling from the same recording, where efficiency is defined as total species identified for given listening effort. Using random sampling, we achieve a 53% increase in species recognized over traditional field surveys and an increase of 87% using combinations of indices to direct the sampling. We also demonstrate how combinations of the same indices can be used to detect long duration acoustic events (such as heavy rain and cicada chorus) and to construct long duration (24 h) spectrograms.

Priority threat management of invasive plant species in the Lake Eyre Basin

This project is led by scientists in conservation decision appraisal and brings together a group of experts working across the Lake Eyre Basin (LEB). The LEB covers a sixth of Australia, with an array of globally significant natural values that are threatened by invasive plants, among other things. Managers at various levels are investing in attempts to control, contain and eradicate these invasive plant species, under severe time and resources limitations. To date there has been no basin-wide assessment of which weed management strategies and locations provide the best investments for maximising outcomes for biodiversity per unit cost. Further, there has been no assessment of the extent of ecosystem intactness that may be lost without effective invasive plant species management strategies. Given that there are insufficient resources to manage all invasive plant species everywhere, this information has the potential to improve current investment decisions. Here, we provide a prioritisation of invasive plant management strategies in the LEB. Prioritisation was based on cost-effectiveness for biodiversity benefits. We identify the key invasive plant species to target to protect ecosystem intactness across the bioregions of the LEB, the level of investment required and the likely reduction in invasive species dominance gained per dollar spent on each strategy. Our focus is on strategies that are technically and socially feasible and reduce the likelihood that high impact invasive plant species will dominate native ecosystems, and therefore change their form and function. The outputs of this work are designed to help guide decision-making and further planning and investment in weed management for the Basin. Experts in weed management, policy-making, community engagement, biodiversity and natural values of the Basin, attended a workshop and agreed upon 12 strategies to manage invasive plants. The strategies focused primarily on 10 weeds which were considered to have a high potential for broad, significant impacts on natural ecosystems in the next 50 years and for which feasible management strategies could be defined. Each strategy consisted of one or more supporting actions, many of which were spatially linked to IBRA (Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation of Australia) bioregions. The first strategy was an over-arching recommendation for improved mapping, information sharing, education and extension efforts in order to facilitate the more specific weed management strategies. The 10 more specific weed management strategies targeted the control and/or eradication of the following high-impact exotic plants: mesquite, parkinsonia, rubber vine, bellyache bush, cacti, mother of millions, chinee apple, athel pine and prickly acacia, as well as a separate strategy for eradicating all invasive plants from one key threatened ecological community, the GAB (Great Artesian Basin dependant) mound springs. Experts estimated the expected biodiversity benefit of each strategy as the reduction in area that an invasive plant species is likely to dominate in over a 50-year period, where dominance was defined as more than 30% coverage at a site. Costs were estimated in present day terms over 50 years largely during follow up discussions post workshop. Cost-effectiveness was then calculated for each strategy in each bioregion by dividing the average expected benefit by the average annual costs. Overall, the total cost of managing 12 invasive plant strategies over the next 50 years was estimated at $1.7 billion. It was estimated that implementation of these strategies would result in a reduction of invasive plant dominance by 17 million ha (a potential 32% reduction), roughly 14% of the LEB. If only targeting Weeds of National Significance (WONS), the total cost was estimated to be $113 million over the next 50 years. Over the next 50 years, $2.3 million was estimated to eradicate all invasive plant species from the Great Artesian Basin Mound Springs threatened ecological community. Prevention and awareness programs were another key strategy targeted across the Basin and estimated at $17.5 million in total over 50 years. The cost of controlling, eradicating and containing buffel grass were the most expensive, over $1.5 billion over 50 years; this strategy was estimated to result in a reduction in buffel grass dominance of a million ha in areas where this species is identified as an environmental problem. Buffel grass has been deliberately planted across the Basin for pasture production and is by far the most widely distributed exotic species. Its management is contentious, having economic value to many graziers while posing serious threats to biodiversity and sites of high cultural and conservation interest. The strategy for containing and locally eradicating buffel grass was a challenge to cost based on expert knowledge, possibly because of the dual nature of this species as a valued pastoral grass and environmental weed. Based on our conversations with experts, it appears that control and eradication programs for this species, in conservation areas, are growing rapidly and that information on the most cost-effective strategies for this species will continue to develop over time. The top five most cost-effective strategies for the entire LEB were for the management of: 1) parkinsonia, 2) chinee apple, 3) mesquite, 4) rubber vine and 5) bellyache bush. Chinee apple and mother of millions are not WONS and have comparatively small populations within the semi-arid bioregions of Queensland. Experts felt that there was an opportunity to eradicate these species before they had the chance to develop into high-impact species within the LEB. Prickly acacia was estimated to have one of the highest benefits, but the costs of this strategy were high, therefore it was ranked 7th overall. The buffel grass strategy was ranked the lowest (10th) in terms of cost effectiveness. The top five most cost-effective strategies within and across the bioregions were the management of: 1) parkinsonia in the Channel Country, 2) parkinsonia in the Desert Uplands, 3) mesquite in the Mitchell Grass Downs, 4) parkinsonia in the Mitchell Grass Downs, and 5) mother of millions in the Desert Uplands. Although actions for several invasive plant species like parkinsonia and prickly acacia were concentrated in the Queensland part of the LEB, the actions involved investing in containment zones to prevent the spread of these species into other states. In the NT and SA bioregions of the LEB, the management of athel pine, parkinsonia and cacti were the main strategies. While outside the scientific research goals of study, this work highlighted a number of important incidental findings that led us to make the following recommendations for future research and implementation of weed management in the Basin: • Ongoing stakeholder engagement, extension and participation is required to ensure this prioritisation effort has a positive impact in affecting on-ground decision making and planning. • Short term funding for weed management was identified as a major reason for failure of current efforts, hence future funding needs to be secure and ongoing. • Improved mapping and information sharing is essential to implement effective weed management. • Due to uncertainties in the outcomes and impacts of management options, strategies should be implemented as part of an adaptive management program. The information provided in this report can be used to guide investment for controlling high-impact invasive plant species for the benefits of biodiversity conservation. We do not present a final prioritisation of invasive plant strategies for the LEB, and we have not addressed the cultural, socio-economic or spatial components necessary for an implementation plan. Cost-effectiveness depends on the objectives used; in our case we used the intactness of ecosystems as a surrogate for expected biodiversity benefits, measured by the extent that each invasive plant species is likely to dominate in a bioregion. When other relevant factors for implementation are considered the priorities may change and some actions may not be appropriate in some locations. We present the costs, ecological benefits and cost-effectiveness of preventing, containing, reducing and eradicating the dominance of high impact invasive plants through realistic management actions over the next 50 years. In doing so, we are able to estimate the size of the weed management problem in the LEB and provide expert-based estimates of the likely outcomes and benefits of implementing weed management strategies. The priorities resulting from this work provide a prospectus for guiding further investment in management and in improving information availability.

Diverse urban plantings managed with sufficient resource availability can increase plant productivity and arthropod diversity

Buildings structures and surfaces are explicitly being used to grow plants, and these “urban plantings” are generally designed for aesthetic value. Urban plantings also have the potential to contribute significant “ecological values” by increasing urban habitat for animals such as arthropods and by increasing plant productivity. In this study, we evaluated how the provision of these additional ecological values is affected by plant species richness; the availability of essential resources for plants, such as water, light, space; and soil characteristics. We sampled 33 plantings located on the exterior of three buildings in the urban center of Brisbane, Australia (subtropical climatic region) over 2, 6 week sampling periods characterized by different temperature and rainfall conditions. Plant cover was estimated as a surrogate for productivity as destructive sampling of biomass was not possible. We measured weekly light levels (photosynthetically active radiation), plant CO2 assimilation, soil CO2 efflux, and arthropod diversity. Differences in plant cover were best explained by a three-way interaction of plant species richness, management water regime and sampling period. As the richness of plant species increased in a planter, productivity and total arthropod richness also increased significantly—likely due to greater habitat heterogeneity and quality. Overall we found urban plantings can provide additional ecological values if essential resources are maintained within a planter such as water, light and soil temperature. Diverse urban plantings that are managed with these principles in mind can contribute to the attraction of diverse arthropod communities, and lead to increased plant productivity within a dense urban context.