Next Article in Journal
Pinus sylvestris Breeding for Resistance against Natural Infection of the Fungus Heterobasidion annosum
Previous Article in Journal
Response of Photosynthesis and Chlorophyll Fluorescence Parameters of Castanopsis kawakamii Seedlings to Forest Gaps
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 11
Issue 1
10.3390/f11010022
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Soil pH and Organic Matter Content Affects European Ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) Crown Defoliation and Its Impact on Understory Vegetation

by
Krzysztof Turczański
1,*,
Paweł Rutkowski
1,
Marcin K. Dyderski
2,
Dorota Wrońska-Pilarek
3 and
Mirosław Nowiński
1
1
Department of Forest Sites and Ecology, Poznań University of Life Sciences, Wojska Polskiego 71f, 60-625 Poznań, Poland
2
Institute of Dendrology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Parkowa 5, 62-035 Kórnik, Poland
3
Department of Forest Botany, Poznań University of Life Sciences, Wojska Polskiego 71d, 60-625 Poznań, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2020, 11(1), 22; https://doi.org/10.3390/f11010022
Submission received: 25 November 2019 / Revised: 16 December 2019 / Accepted: 19 December 2019 / Published: 22 December 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Ecology and Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
European ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) dieback caused by the fungus Hymenoscyphus fraxineus (T. Kowalski) Baral, Queloz, and Hosoya has been affecting European forests since 1992. The disease drives severe crown defoliation, branch loss, and finally tree mortality in European ash. The environmental factors affecting the disease process are still not fully recognized. We hypothesized that the level of crown defoliation in ash, as well as its impact on understory vegetation, will differ along the pH gradient in soil. We examined 27 ash stands in western Poland. We assessed the crown defoliation of 15 dominant and co-dominant trees, soil parameters (pH and soil organic matter contents; SOM), and also recorded the understory vegetation species composition. Most moderately and severely damaged trees occurred within the plots with a high SOM content (>7.5%) and neutral to slightly alkaline soil pH (>7.0) in the A horizon. We noted significantly lower crown defoliation in mesic sites with acidic soils and lower SOM contents. The results also showed the influence of ash crown defoliation on the species functional composition. Ash dieback led to the creation of gaps, and their colonization by other species frequently found in forest sites, especially forest-edge tall herbs.

1. Introduction

Global changes in the environment induce novel phenomena that change the distributions of tree species [1,2]. The Fraxinus genus is one of the most visible examples of retreat. In North America, the trees are threatened by the Emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire) which primarily infest and can cause significant damage to ash species, including Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marsh., F. nigra Marsh., F. americana L., and F. quadrangulata Michx. [3]. This beetle has also been noted in Europe and is suggested as the main potential pest of European ash (F. excelsior L.) [4]. Moreover, ash is threatened by climate change; the increase in average temperatures during the growing season and reduced atmospheric precipitation especially cause the disappearance of ash from its typical sites [5]. Another factor threatening ash is the fungal disease caused by the ascomycete Hymenoscyphus fraxineus (T. Kowalski) Baral, Queloz and Hosoya [6]. The disease causes ash loss or severe crown defoliation. Consequently, it can cause an ecological cascade effect in ash sites, resulting in the retreat of dependent organisms, e.g., invertebrates, epiphytic bryophytes, and lichens [7], as well as understory vegetation [8]. Changes in the understory are thought to be driven initially by increased light because of the opening up of the canopy as the ash overstory disappears, followed by increases in the shrub layer or canopy closure by other tree species [9].
The first symptoms of ash dieback were observed in 1992 in NE Poland [10]. Within a few years, the disease had spread to all Polish populations of ash, causing the dieback of nearly 10,800 ha of ash stands [11]. In 1995–1996, similar symptoms appeared in Lithuania. This led to a decrease in the area of ash stands from 50,800 ha in 1995 to 36,300 ha in 2011 [12,13]. By 2016, the disease had spread to more than 25 European countries, with up to 85% and 69% mortality rates recorded in plantations and woodlands, respectively [14,15,16]. The fungus infection starts during the summer when the ascospores land on the leaves. The ascospores germinate on the rachis and petioles [17,18]. In the further stadium, the fungal spores infect stems and branches, causing local necrosis [19]. These necrotic lesions then enlarge and stretch causing perennial cankers on branches, leaves shedding and wilting, and finally death of the top of the crown [20,21,22].
The origin of the pathogen in Europe has been associated with its introduction from F. mandshurica Rupr. and F. chinensis Roxb. [23,24,25]. The highest rates of damage were recorded on F. excelsior and F. angustifolia Vahl. Significantly lower damage rates were found on other ash species introduced to Europe [26]. Additionally, in vitro studies have shown that the fungus develops best in moist conditions, in a temperature range of 15–25 °C [27].
Studies across Europe associate ash dieback with moist and fertile soils, as well as the dominance of ash in forest [22]. For instance, in Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Ukraine, the highest mortality rates were reported in moist and floodplain forests [13,28,29,30]. In Latvia, ash dieback and its natural regeneration varies significantly depending on the soil conditions. The lowest decline was observed in dry and mineral soils [31,32]. This is in accordance with a few studies stating that trees are more infected in optimal ash sites, characterized by calcareous (pH values above 5–6) and organic soils with shallow groundwater [33,34,35]. In contrast, ash can also grow in suboptimal growth conditions, on mesic sites, with more acidic mineral soils with lower groundwater levels [36]. In such conditions, ash trees revealed less symptoms of disease [11]. Other studies have shown that the development of the fungus and the intensity of symptoms also decreased in dry conditions, except in extremely dry and low-temperature sites [37].
The literature shows that H. fraxineus spread is still ongoing, and the large scale of its occurrence in different site conditions makes it difficult to assess the importance of environmental parameters on its performance. It also suggests that soil parameters might be an important factor influencing the impact of fungus on ash stands. Considering this, we are aware that the referenced studies usually used abstract units, such as soil types and forest site categories, rather than strict measurements of soil characteristics. That is why in our study we present strict values of chosen soil factors that may have an effect on ash crown defoliation. This brings a new perspective to the ash dieback process and expands the results of Erfmeier et al. [38], who investigated the impact of forest types on the condition of ash. The authors studied a wide habitat gradient, and the forest type could outweigh the actual soil parameters. In our study, we have chosen a more continuous gradient of forest types in which ash is found; hence, we expect to see the impact of soil factors that have a biological effect on ash dieback.
In this study, we assessed whether the ash condition may depend on soil parameters. We hypothesized that (1) tree crown defoliation will be lower in more acidic soils and (2) in soils with lower organic matter contents, similar to broad-scale studies based on forest types [11,28,29,30,31,37,38]. Moreover, we also hypothesized (3) that crown defoliation will affect understory species change and functional composition, by increasing the proportion of competitive forest-edge tall herbs.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The study was conducted in July and August 2016 in the Babki, Konstantynowo, and Łopuchówko forest districts in the Wielkopolska Region (western Poland). The average annual rainfall recorded at the meteorological station at Zielonka (17°6’25” E, 52°33’18” N) was 525 mm for the years 1986–2008. Although the trend line for precipitation is relatively constant, the annual sum of rainfall differed significantly in individual years (from 312 mm in 1989 to 724 mm in 1993). The average annual air temperature was 8.3 °C [39]. The vegetation period lasts 220–230 days [40]. The landscape is shaped mostly by glacial and postglacial formations affecting the soil properties and plant species composition [41]. Within our study plots, we described a few groups of soils: Phaeozems, Umbrisols, Luvisols, Gleyosols, Cambisols, and Arenosols (Table 1). Such environmental conditions affect the proportion of ash in the stand species composition. In the studied area, ash is an important forest-forming component of mixed stands along the river valleys and lakesides (Figure 1). It grows in riparian forests as the dominant and co-dominant species. Its occurrence within such sites is associated in various proportions with Alnus glutinosa Gaertn., Ulmus laevis Pall., U. glabra Huds., or Quercus robur L. As an admixture, it grows additionally within moist and mesic broadleaved forests, with a higher proportion of Q. robur and Tilia cordata Mill. (Table 1). The study was carried out in 27 plots. The age of ash stands, according to forest management plans, ranged from 48 to 144 years (Table 1; Figure 1).

2.2. Study Design

We located the study plots within the part of the stands with at least 80% proportion of ash in the stand species composition. The size of each plot was 2500 m2. In the central part of each study plot, we chose 15 ash trees. Trees were selected according to the biosocial position, assessed using Kraft’s classification [43]. We randomly selected only dominant and co-dominant trees, excluding trees where we could not assess the defoliation.
Because of high level of ash trees infestation by ash dieback in Poland and lack of other potential drivers of defoliation we assumed that ash defoliation in the study area was caused by ash dieback. Although this assumption is not based on detection of disease and compromise only indirect measure of ash dieback, we decided to focus on manifestation of the disease rather than its presence. We assessed the crown defoliation visually with 5% precision [44,45]. Subsequently, we assigned the crown defoliation to the damage classes described by Hanisch and Kilz [46]. As a response variable describing the level of defoliation, we used the mean crown defoliation and proportions of moderately damaged trees (third class of damage, with defoliation between 25–60%) and severely damaged trees (fourth class of damage, with defoliation >60%).

2.3. Soil Characteristics

We assessed the soil characteristics by digging a pit in the middle of each study plot. The depth of the soil pit was 2 m, or in case of moist soils, the depth to the groundwater level. We studied the soil profile and sampled 500 g of soil from each soil horizon. We determined the soil pH measured in distilled water (potentiometric method) in the laboratory. Moreover, we analyzed the percentage content of organic carbon (Tiurin’s method), which was recalculated into the percentage content of SOM using the factor 1.724 [47].

2.4. Vegetation Characteristics

Within each plot, we noted covers of all vascular plants and bryophytes species using the Braun-Blanquet scale. The survey was conducted on an area of 400 m2 in the middle of each study plot. The cover of plant species was assessed separately for each forest strata in April and July, and then pooled, to account for all species occurring in the understory by the year. These two dates are representative for floodplain forests, as Czapiewska et al. [48] revealed that April and July are close to the centroid points representing seasonal shifts in understory vegetation seasonal composition; the above-mentioned study was conducted in our study area. During the study, we tallied only the understory layer, as shrubs and trees in parts of the forests were artificially planted and thus did not account for the spontaneous process of plant community assembly. In Figure 3, the abbreviations of the names of the following plant species are given: Adoxmosc, Adoxa moschatelina; Aegopoda, Aegopodium podagraria; Allipeti, Alliaria petiolata; Anemnemo, Anemone nemorosa; Anemranu, A. ranunculoides; Arctnemo, Arctium nemorosum; Asareuro, Asarum europaeum; Bracsylv, Brachypodium sylvaticum; Carexacut, Carex acutifolia; Chaetemu, Chaerophyllum temulum; Cirsoler, Cirsium oleraceum; Convmaja, Convallaria majalis; Dryomas, Dryopteris filix-mas; Festgiga, Festuca gigantea; Ficavern, Ficaria verna; Fraxexce, Fraxinus excelsior; Galiapar, Galium aparine; Gerarobe, Geranium robertianum; Geumurba, Geum urbanum; Glechhede, Glechoma hederacea; Humulupu, Humulus lupulus; Impaparv, Impatiens parviflora; Maiabifo, Majanthemum bifolium; Mercpere, Mercurialis perennis; Mohetrin, Moheringia trinervia; Oxyrhian, Oxyrrhynchium hians; Pariquad, Paris quadrifolia; Plagundu, Plagiomnium undulatum; Poanemo, Poa nemoralis; Rubufrut, Rubus fruticosus; Rubuidae, R. idaeus; Stacsylv, Stachys sylvatica; Stelmedia, Stellaria media; and Urtidioi, Urtica dioica.
We used ecological indicator values (EIVs) of light, moisture, soil reaction, and fertility, provided by Ellenberg and Leuschner [49], to describe the understory vegetation. EIVs describe species ecological requirements, which may reflect their reaction to an increased or decreased availability of resources. We also described the understory vegetation in terms of its species functional traits: height, leaf mass, size, dry matter content, specific leaf area (SLA), growth form, seed mass, and seed number per shoot and life strategy. These data were obtained from the LEDA database, covering the values of these traits for each species [50]. All of the traits and EIVs were used to calculate two components of functional diversity: functional evenness (FEve) and functional dispersion (FDis). FEve describes the regularity of spacing between species in the trait space, while FDis describes the range of species dispersion within trait hypervolumes [51,52,53]. We calculated FEve and FDis using the FD::dbFD() function [54]. We used the community-weighted mean (CWM) values of height, seed mass, and SLA to assess potential shifts in community functional composition along with gradients of defoliation or soil pH. We chose these three traits as they most clearly describe the economical spectrum and life strategies of plants [55,56,57]. We also calculated the indices of taxonomic diversity: the species richness and Shannon diversity indices.

2.5. Data Analysis

All analyses were conducted using R software (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing Platform; Vienna, Austria, version 3.5.3) [58]. We assessed the impact of soil pH and SOM content on defoliation using generalized linear models assuming the beta distribution of the dependent variable and logit link function, implemented in the betareg::betareg() function [59]. In the case that there were fractions of severely defoliated species, which were absent in five of 27 study plots, we used a zero-inflated model, implemented in the gamlss::gamlss() function [60]. We decided to use models assuming beta distribution, as this better reflects the proportional data (fraction of trees meeting the given condition) than Gaussian distribution. We started with models containing all three predictors and using Akaike information criterion with small-sample correction (AICc) we choose the most parsimonious model. AICc is a metric showing ratio of variance explained by the model to number of independent variables. For that reason including additional variables not increasing amount of explained variance (predictive power) of the model is penalized, as log-likehood of the model is divided by the number of predictors. To assess its fitness, we reported the AICc of the final model, AICc of the null model (intercept-only; AICc0), log-likelihood, and pseudo-coefficient of determination as an estimation of the proportion of explained variance [61]. Before analyses, we ensured that there were no high intercorrelations between variables using variance inflation factors (all < 2). In the models we did not account for the stand age, as we did not find a significant impact of age on the mean defoliation (effect size = 0.0027 ± 0.0053 per year, according to the beta regression model), nor on the proportions of moderately and severely damaged trees and severely damaged trees (0.0064 ± 0.0064 and −0.0002 ± 0.0094, respectively). We did not include spatial autocorrelation in the models as close neighboring study plots differed in terms of soil or stand parameters (Table 1), which are major drivers of ash growth [5,35,36].
We assessed the impact of soil variables and defoliation on species composition using redundancy analysis (RDA), implemented in the vegan::rda() function [62]. RDA is the extension of principal component analysis, where the results (site and species scores) are constrained by environmental variables. We chose RDA instead of other ordination methods because of the short and linear gradient of species composition, revealed by preliminary unconstrained ordinations. Prior to analyses, we transformed species cover using Hellinger’s square-root transformation, implemented in the vegan::decostand() function [62]. We selected constraining environmental variables using Akaike information criterion (AIC) (as AICc is not available in the vegan package) and we tested their goodness of fit using permutation analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) implemented in the vegan::anova.cca() function [62]. To assess whether vegetation characteristics differ along species composition gradients we projected them passively (i.e., without influencing the site and species scores) onto the RDA result using the vegan::envfit() function [62]. We did not use these features as constraints, as all of them are derived from species composition; thus, their usage would lead to circular reasoning.

3. Results

Mean crown defoliation, as well as the proportion of moderately and severely damaged trees, were positively correlated with the soil pH and SOM content in the A horizon (Table 2 and Table 3; Figure 2). However, in case of defoliation, soil pH had almost half the effect in terms of the proportions of moderately and severely damaged trees. Mean defoliation reached values over 50% in soils with pH values above 7.0. However, in the model explaining proportion of moderately and severely damaged trees, such trend was less clear than that in case of the model explaining mean defoliation. According to AICc of models, the final model explaining the proportion of severely damaged trees only comprised the SOM content (Table 4; Figure 2). Mean defoliation was the most explained model among the studied depended variables, while proportion of severely damaged trees was the least explained.
The analysis of understory vegetation species composition revealed that the RDA model constrained by the soil pH and mean defoliation was worse than the model with soil pH only (Table 5; Figure 3). This indicated that only soil pH drove species composition of vegetation. The main gradient revealed by the analysis (soil pH) was similar to the gradient of defoliation. Study plots divided the RDA space into three clusters: two of them grouped along the RDA1 axis, and a remote cluster of three plots at the bottom of the ordination space. The most numerous cluster in the left part of the RDA covered plots with higher mean defoliation, EIVs, positively correlated with soil pH. However, FDis, seed mass, and height CWMs, higher in the second cluster, were negatively correlated with soil pH. The bottom cluster was characterized by low values of SLA CWM and high species richness, as well as high EIVs of moisture and light.

4. Discussion

4.1. Impact of soil pH and SOM Content on Crown Defoliation

The results of our study show that ash crown defoliation is correlated with the soil pH and SOM content in the A horizon. The crown defoliation was the highest in soils with pH > 7.0, and with a high SOM content (>7.5%). Such soils correspond with fertile, moist, and calcareous sites where, according to Dobrowolska et al. ash finds optimal growth conditions [35]. These sites are highly dependent on soil moisture and especially vulnerable to decreases in the groundwater table level which affects the soil pH [63]. It particularly concerns the moist sites susceptible to changes in soil moisture. This is in accordance with studies conducted in Latvia, revealing the high damage of ash stands mostly in mineral soils with decreased pH and lower Ca contents. The authors stated that the decrease in soil moisture could negatively affect trees in the research sites [31]. Our results are also in one line with recently conducted studies by Chumanová et al. who determined that the fertile lowlands and humid areas bordering Poland and Slovakia were the most endangered regions for ash disease. Areas at the lowest risk of damage were concentrated in dry areas and in highland and mountain areas in the western part of the country, usually with poor soils on acid bedrock [30].
In our study, ash crown defoliation was significantly lower within the plots with lower SOM contents, and at the same time with higher soil acidity in the A horizon. Such results were found mostly in mesic sites, which are less susceptible to fluctuations in soil moisture. It suggests that changes in soil moisture may increase tree stress, and thus the susceptibility to external factors. This is in accordance with Schütt’s hypothesis [64], which states that forest tree dieback is also the result of disturbances in the functioning of fine roots and mycorrhizae because of water stress. However, in mesic sites, the soil moisture usually remains low and constant. The groundwater level is below the range of the fine roots; therefore, ash draws moisture from the atmospheric air supplied from adjacent water reservoirs. Additionally, in such sites, the density of fine roots (up to 15 cm) significantly increases [65]. In such mesic soils, water stress does not affect trees and may also impede the growth of fungal disease.
Studies conducted in northern Germany revealed that the forest type was the most important significant predictor of adult ash crown defoliation [38]. The highest proportion of damaged trees was found in wet alder-ash forests, while the lowest in ash-rich beech forests and hornbeam-ash forests [38]. However, the study did not show significant effects of chemical soil parameters on ash defoliation. This might be connected with the long environmental gradient used in this study and discontinuity among studied types of ecosystems. In contrast, our approach covered forest types sharing more common dominant tree species, comprising the usual toposequences along the moisture gradients in wetland and floodplain landscapes [66,67,68]. This is partly in accordance with our results. We noted the highest proportion of moderately and severely damaged trees in the plots located within the moist sites, which correspond to moist broadleaved forests, floodplain forests, and alder-ash forests (with alkaline and neutral soil pH).
Our results indicate that soil may indirectly affect ash defoliation by the promotion or inhibition of fungus development because of moisture and pH variability. As H. fraxineus overwinters in the form of pseudosclerotia in leaf litter, its quantity and decomposition rate might be important for the spring infestation level. F. excelsior leaf litter decomposition can cross 50% decay during the first year, and its rate is faster in moist sites than in dry ones [69,70,71]. In contrast, soil pH influence differs with the biotic factor, such as the biomass composition and growth of fungi or bacteria, both in forest and agricultural soils [72,73]. Fungi dominate in low pH or slightly acidic soils where the soils tend to be undisturbed [74]. Fungal growth increases with decreasing pH from 8.3 to 4.5, and decreases sharply below pH 4.5 [75]. Moreover, in moist and fertile conditions, ash dieback is also associated with a higher occurrence of other pathogens. In Denmark and Lithuania, Armillaria species, particularly A. gallica and A. cepistipes, were associated with declining ash trees, acting as secondary pathogens on weakened individuals [76,77]. In addition, the soilborne pathogens Phytophthora spp. were also suggested to be an additional ash decline agent [78]. These reports suggest that H. fraxineus development can be limited by lower ash leaf litter decomposition in mesic sites with more acidic soils. In fact, our results state that the lowest proportion of moderately and severely damaged trees was found in mesic and more acidic soils. Probably, such a soil reaction can be a limiting factor for the fungus only in mesic sites with stable low moisture in the topsoil. This topic requires further study to determine the detailed site requirements of the fungus H. fraxineus. For instance, in Latvia, the smallest symptoms of juvenile ash decline were observed also in mesic and mineral-potentially more acidic soils; more than 76% of trees were healthy. In contrast, in moist-potentially more fertile soils, the share of healthy trees was significantly smaller at 54% [32]. In general, more infected ash trees occur mostly on calcareous, organic soils, with the occurrence of a high groundwater level or moisture content [11,28,29,30,31,34,35,37].

4.2. Effect of Ash Crown Defoliation on Understory Vegetation

Understory vegetation occurrence and abundance in forest sites is influenced by the soil, climate factors, and nature of the tree canopy [79]. Different plant species also have various effects on light availability [80]. Ash canopies have higher light penetration than many other tree canopies, resulting in a greater amount of light being available to the understory vegetation. Ash dieback causes increased canopy gaps, and in the gap microsites with increased light availability, further replacement by other tree species [81,82,83]. The changing conditions are likely to lead to changes in the associated understory vegetation [8,84]. The same concern can be seen in sites disturbed by salvage logging. A comparison of the species composition of logged and unlogged sites in Białowieża revealed the great potential of affected sites for a spontaneous recovery toward light-demanding species [85].
In our study, the highest defoliation was found in neutral to slightly alkaline soils with higher SOM contents: Phaeozems, Gleyosols, and Fluvisols. Such sites usually have high species richness, soil fertility, and soil moisture [86]. Indeed, the EIVs showed that such plots were characterized by high species richness, as well as high soil fertility and moisture. However, the results of studies conducted in Germany did not show a significant effect of adult tree crown defoliation on the species richness in alder-ash forests, ash-beech forests, and hornbeam-ash forests [38]. Only the damage of juvenile ash trees was positively correlated with the total species richness; plots with a higher species richness had higher fungal damage. We assume that these differences result from the analysis of different site conditions in their study and discontinuity among the studied types of ecosystems.
We assumed that a higher EIV of light is a result of ash loss or crown defoliation that affected understory species and functional composition by increasing the proportion of competitive forest-edge species. In such plots, we noted more species typical of fertile sites, but at the same time more species with high light and moisture requirements. It is possible that their high abundance might have resulted from increased light availability, caused by ash crown defoliation that led to a shift in the understory species composition [8], as well as the composition of epiphytic lichens [7]. This resulted in a reduced functional richness and dispersion of the species composition. Within the plots with a higher crown defoliation, we found a lower proportion of the species with shade requirements, and higher proportion of species with higher light, moisture, and fertility requirements, especially tall herbs. Similar tendencies were observed in Picea abies Karst. forests after windthrows [87]. In contrast, we observed lower proportions of light- and moisture-demanding species in less defoliated plots, with higher CWMs of height and seed mass.
We found the highest FDis values in less fertile and more acidic soils (Cambisols, Luvisols, and Arenosols) with lower SOM contents. In such sites, we did not observe any severe ash defoliation or significant ash loss. The light conditions were also more stable, because of the lack of ash mortality-driven gaps in the overstory. Within such plots, we have noted lower EIVs of light and moisture than those in the more defoliated ash stands. Positive correlation between light and moisture requirements in riparian and wetland forests was also confirmed by Czapiewska et al. [68]. Increased cover of species with high light requirements, as well as forest edge species contributes to loss of shade-tolerant wetland specialists. In consequence, species composition of defoliated forests would resemble other vegetation types, leading to loss of vegetation distinctiveness and biotic homogenization [88].

5. Conclusions

Our study provided the first assessment of ash dieback effects (expressed by the defoliation) intensity related to soil characteristics along a continuous vegetation gradient. We found that ash crown defoliation is positively correlated with soil pH and SOM content in the A horizon. The highest proportion of moderately and severely damaged trees occurred in moist sites with high SOM contents (>7.5%) and pH (>7.0). In contrast, in mesic sites with acidic soils and lower SOM contents, we noted significantly lower crown defoliation. To identify whether these factors or other soil parameters are associated with H. fraxineus, it is necessary to plan more detailed further studies. In ash silviculture, we recommend, as opposed to general recommendations, to introduce ash as an admixture to mesic sites and promote its natural regeneration, even within less fertile and more acidic soils. We expect that in such conditions, ash will have a higher opportunity to survive.
Our study also revealed that the impact of ash dieback on the forest understory is indirect and unclear. Although we did not confirm the relationship between the mean defoliation level and species composition with RDA, we found more light- and moisture-demanding species in more defoliated stands. Probably, ash dieback leads to gap creation, and their colonization by other species common in these forest site, leading to a shift in the species and functional composition. Species benefiting from ash dieback are usually forest-edge tall herbs.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.T. and P.R.; methodology, K.T. and P.R.; investigations: assessment of crown defoliation and vegetation surveys, K.T.; soil analysis, K.T. and M.N.; formal analysis, M.K.D.; writing original draft, K.T.; review and editing, K.T., P.R., M.K.D., D.W.-P., and M.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

We thank the authorities of the forest districts of Babki, Konstantynowo, Łopuchówko, and Poznań Municipal Forests for allowing us to conduct our research. We would also like to thank Wiley Editing Services c/o Research Square, LLC. 601 W. Main Street Ste. 102 Durham, NC 27701, USA for language editing.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Dyderski, M.K.; Paź, S.; Frelich, L.E.; Jagodziński, A.M. How much does climate change threaten European forest tree species distributions? Glob. Chang. Biol. 2018, 24, 1150–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Fan, Z.; Fan, B. Shifts of the mean centers of potential vegetation ecosystems under future climate change in Eurasia. Forests 2019, 10, 873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Poland, T.; McCullough, D. Emerald ash borer: Invasion of the urban forest and the threat to North America’s ash resource. J. For. 2006, 104, 118–124. [Google Scholar]
  4. Valenta, V.; Moser, D.; Kapeller, S.; Essl, F. A new forest pest in Europe: A review of Emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) invasion. J. Appl. Entomol. 2017, 141, 507–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Marigo, G.; Peltier, J.P.; Girel, J.; Pautou, G. Success in the demographic expansion of Fraxinus excelsior L. Trees 2000, 15, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Baral, H.O.; Queloz, V.; Hosoya, T. Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, the correct scientific name for the fungus causing ash dieback in Europe. IMA Fungus 2014, 5, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Łubek, A.; Kukwa, M.; Czortek, P.; Jaroszewicz, B. Impact of Fraxinus excelsior dieback on biota of ash-associated lichen epiphytes at the landscape and community level. Biodivers. Conserv. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Mitchell, R.J.; Beaton, J.K.; Bellamy, P.E.; Broome, A.; Chetcuti, J.; Eaton, S.; Ellis, C.J.; Gimona, A.; Harmer, R.; Hester, A.J.; et al. Ash dieback in the UK: A review of the ecological and conservation implications and potential management options. Biol. Conserv. 2014, 175, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mitchell, R.J.; Hewison, R.L.; Hester, A.J.; Broome, A.; Kirby, K.J. Potential impacts of the loss of Fraxinus excelsior (Oleaceae) due to ash dieback on woodland vegetation in Great Britain. New J. Bot. 2016, 6, 2–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Kowalski, T. Chalara fraxinea sp. nov. associated with dieback of ash (Fraxinus excelsior) in Poland. For. Pathol. 2006, 36, 264–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gil, W.; Kowalski, T.; Kraj, W.; Zachara, T.; Łukaszewicz, J.; Paluch, R.; Nowakowska, J.A.; Oszako, T. Ash dieback in Poland—history of the phenomenon and possibilities of its limitation. In Dieback of European Ash (Fraxinus spp.)—Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management; Vasaitis, R., Enderle, R., Eds.; The Report on European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action FP1103 FRAXBACK: SLU Service, Uppsala, Sweden, 2017; pp. 176–184. [Google Scholar]
  12. Juodvalkis, A.; Vasiliauskas, A. The extent and possible causes of dieback of ash stands in Lithuania. LZUU Moksl. Darb. Biomed. Moksl. 2002, 56, 17–22, (In Lithuanian with English Summary). [Google Scholar]
  13. Douglas, G. Characteristics of Chalara disease, its status in Europe. In Proceedings of the Summary Report from a Meeting of European Experts, Based on Abstracts and Presentations of Reports from Various Countries Meeting in Cost Action fp1103 ‘Fraxback’, Vilnius, Lithuania, 13–14 November 2012; Available online: https://www.teagasc.ie/media/website/crops/forestry/advice/Chalara_workshop_Vilnius2012.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2019).
  14. Muñoz, F.; Marçais, B.; Dufour, J.; Dowkiw, A. Rising out of the ashes: Additive genetic variation for crown and collar resistance to Hymenoscyphus fraxineus in Fraxinus excelsior. Phytopathology 2016, 106, 1535–1543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Turczański, K. Occurrence and spread of Chalara fraxinea on common ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) in the selected countries of Northern Europe. Sylwan 2016, 160, 539–546, (In Polish with English Summary). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Coker, T.; Rozsypálek, J.; Edwards, A.; Harwood, T.; Butfoy, L.; Buggs, R. Estimating mortality rates of European ash (Fraxinus excelsior) under the ash dieback (Hymenoscyphus fraxineus) epidemic. Plants People Planet 2019, 1, 48–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Kirisits, T. Ascocarp formation of Hymenoscyphus fraxineus on several-year-old pseudosclerotial leaf rachises of Fraxinus excelsior. For. Pathol. 2015, 45, 254–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kräutler, K.; Treitler, R.; Kirisits, T. Hymenoscyphus fraxineus can directly infect intact current-year shoots of Fraxinus excelsior and artificially exposed leaf scars. For. Pathol. 2015, 45, 274–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kowalski, T.; Czekaj, A. Disease symptoms and fungi on dying ash trees (Fraxinus excelsior L.) in Staszów Forest District stands. For. Res. Pap. 2010, 71, 357–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kowalski, T.; Holdenrieder, O. Pathogenicity of Chalara fraxinea. For. Pathol. 2009, 39, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Bakys, R.; Vasaitis, R.; Barklund, P.; Ihrmark, K.; Stenlid, J. Investigations concerning the role of Chalara fraxinea in declining Fraxinus excelsior. Plant Pathol. 2009, 58, 284–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gross, A.; Holdenrieder, O.; Pautasso, M.; Queloz, V.; Sieber, T.N. Hymenoscyphus pseudoalbidus, the causal agent of European ash dieback. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2014, 15, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Drenkhan, R.; Sander, H.; Hanso, M. Introduction of Mandshurian ash (Fraxinus mandshurica Rupr.) to Estonia: Is it related to the current epidemic on European ash (F. excelsior L.)? Eur. J. For. Res. 2014, 133, 769–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zheng, H.D.; Zhuang, W.Y. Hymenoscyphus albidoides sp. nov. and H. pseudoalbidus from China. Mycol. Prog. 2014, 13, 625–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Timmermann, V.; Børja, I.; Hietala, A.M.; Kirisits, T.; Solheim, H. Ash dieback: Patogen spread and diurnal patterns of ascospore dispersal, with special emphasis on Norway. EPPO Bull. 2011, 41, 14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Drenkhan, R.; Hanso, M. New host species for Chalara fraxinea. New Dis. Rep. 2010, 22, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Kowalski, T.; Bartnik, C. Morphological variation in colonies of Chalara fraxinea isolated from ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) stems with symptoms of dieback and effects of temperature on colony growth and structure. Acta Agrobot. 2010, 63, 99–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Keßler, M.; Cech, T.; Brandstetter, M.; Kirisits, T. Dieback of ash (Fraxinus excelsior and Fraxinus angustifolia) in Eastern Austria: Disease development on monitoring plots from 2007 to 2010. J. Agric. Ext. Rural Dev. 2012, 4, 223–226. [Google Scholar]
  29. Vacek, S.; Vacek, Z.; Bulušek, D.; Putalová, T.; Sarginci, M.; Schwarz, O.; Šrůtka, P.; Podrázský, V.; Moser, W.K. European ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) dieback: Disintegrating forest in the mountain protected areas, Czech Republic. Austrian J. For. Sci. 2015, 132, 203–223. [Google Scholar]
  30. Chumanová, E.; Romportl, D.; Havrdová, L.; Zahradník, D.; Pešková, V.; Černý, K. Predicting ash dieback severity and environmental suitability for the disease in forest stands. Scand. J. For. Res. 2019, 34, 254–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Cekstere, G.; Laivins, M.; Osvalde, A. Destruction of young Fraxinus excelsior L. stands and mineral nutrition status in Latvia, a pilot study. Acta Biol. Univ. Daugavp. 2013, 13, 15–27. [Google Scholar]
  32. Pušpure, I.; Matisons, R.; Laiviņš, M.; Gaitnieks, T.; Jansons, J. Natural regeneration of common ash in young stands in Latvia. Balt. For. 2017, 23, 209–217. [Google Scholar]
  33. Zollner, A.; Kölling, C. Eschenkulturen auf ungeeigneten Standorten. Allg. Forstz. 1994, 2, 61–64, (In German with English Summary). [Google Scholar]
  34. Berger, R.; Heydeck, P.; Baumgart, A.; Roloff, A. Neue ergebnisse zum eschentriebsterben. AFZ-Wald 2010, 65, 18–21. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  35. Dobrowolska, D.; Hein, S.; Oosterbaan, A.; Wagner, S.; Clark, J.; Skovsgaard, J.P. A review of European ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.): Implications for silviculture. Forestry 2011, 84, 133–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Jaworski, A. Charakterystyka Hodowlana Drzew i Krzewów Leśnych, Hodowla lasu, 1st ed.; PWRiL: Warszawa, Poland, 2011. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  37. Koltay, A.; Szabó, I.; Janik, G. Chalara fraxinea incidence in Hungarian ash (Fraxinus excelsior) forest. J. Agric. Ext. Rural Dev. 2012, 4, 236–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Erfmeier, A.; Haldan, K.L.; Beckmann, L.M.; Behrens, M.; Rotert, J.; Schrautzer, J. Ash dieback and its impact in near-natural forest remnants—A plant community-based inventory. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Rutkowski, P.; Konatowska, M.; Wajsowicz, T. Tree-soil-water relationships in European black alder forest—Case study. Mech. Agric. Conserv. Resour. 2019, 65, 200–203. [Google Scholar]
  40. Zielony, R.; Kliczkowska, A. Regionalizacja Przyrodniczo-Leśna Polski 2010, 1st ed.; CILP: Warszawa, Poland, 2012; p. 356. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  41. Dzięciołowski, W. Środowisko glebotwórcze i gleby Niziny Wielkopolskiej. Rocz. Glebozn. 1979, 30, 11–33. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  42. IUSS Working Group WRB. World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014, Update 2015: International Soil Classification System for Naming Soils and Creating Legends for Soil Maps; World Soil Resources Reports No. 106; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015; p. 192. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i3794en/I3794en.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2019).
  43. Smith, D.M.; Larson, B.C.; Kelly, M.J.; Ashton, P.M.S. The Practice of Silviculture: Applied Forest Ecology, 9th ed.; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1997; p. 537. [Google Scholar]
  44. Dmyterko, E.; Tomusiak, R.; Wojtan, R.; Bruchwald, A. Comparative analysis of the degree of damage in common ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) and black alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.) growing in mixed or neighbour stands. Sylwan 2005, 149, 3–11, (In Polish with English Summary). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Dmyterko, E.; Bruchwald, A. The criteria for assessment of damage to important species of deciduous trees. For. Res. Pap. 2006, 3, 115–124, (In Polish with English Summary). [Google Scholar]
  46. Hanisch, B.; Kilz, E. Monitoring of Forest Damage: Spruce and Pine, 2nd ed.; Christopher Helm Pub Ltd.: Batsford, UK, 1991; p. 334. [Google Scholar]
  47. Jackson, M.L. Determinaciones de Materia Orgánica en los Suelos. Analisis Químico de Suelos, 1st ed.; Omega: Barcelona, Spain, 1964; pp. 282–310. (In Spanish) [Google Scholar]
  48. Czapiewska, N.; Dyderski, M.; Jagodziński, A.M. Seasonal dynamics of floodplain forest understory—Impacts of degradation, light availability and temperature on biomass and species composition. Forests 2019, 10, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Ellenberg, H.; Leuschner, C. Vegetation Mitteleuropas Mit Den Alpen in Ökologischer, Dynamischer Und Historischer Sicht, 6th ed.; UTB: Stuttgart, Germany, 2010; p. 1357. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  50. Kleyer, M.; Bekker, R.M.; Knevel, I.C.; Bakker, J.P.; Thompson, K.; Sonnenschein, M.; Poschlod, P.; Van Groenendael, J.M.; Klimeš, L.; Klimešová, J.; et al. The LEDA Traitbase: A database of life- history traits of the Northwest European flora. J. Ecol. 2008, 96, 1266–1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Mason, N.W.H.; Mouillot, D.; Lee, W.G.; Wilson, J.B. Functional richness, functional evenness and functional divergence: The primary components of functional diversity. Oikos 2005, 111, 112–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Pla, L.; Casanoves, F.; Di Rienzo, J. Quantifying Functional Biodiversity; Springer: Dordrecht, Germany, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  53. Laliberté, E.; Legendre, P. A distance-based framework for measuring functional diversity from multiple traits. Ecology 2010, 91, 299–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Laliberté, E.; Legendre, P.; Shipley, B. FD: Measuring Functional Diversity (FD) from Multiple Traits, and Other tools for Functional Ecology. 2014. Available online: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/FD/index.html (accessed on 21 November 2019).
  55. Westoby, M. A leaf-height-seed (LHS) plant ecology strategy scheme. Plant Soil 1998, 199, 213–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Pierce, S.; Brusa, G.; Vagge, I.; Cerabolini, B.E.L. Allocating CSR plant functional types: The use of leaf economics and size traits to classify woody and herbaceous vascular plants. Funct. Ecol. 2013, 27, 1002–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Díaz, S.; Kattge, J.; Cornelissen, J.H.C.; Wright, I.J.; Lavorel, S.; Dray, S.; Reu, B.; Kleyer, M.; Wirth, C.; Colin Prentice, I.; et al. The global spectrum of plant form and function. Nature 2016, 529, 167–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Core, R.; Team, R. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  59. Cribari-Neto, F.; Zeileis, A. Beta Regression in R. J. Stat. Softw. 2010, 34, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Rigby, R.A.; Stasinopoulos, D.M. Generalized additive models for location, scale and shape. J. R. Stat. Soc. 2005, 54, 507–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Nagelkerke, N.J.D. A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika 1991, 78, 691–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Oksanen, J.; Blanchet, F.G.; Kindt, R.; Legendre, P.; Michin, P.R.; O’Hara, R.B.; Simpson, G.L.; Solymos, P.; Henry, M.; Stevens, H.; et al. Community Ecology Package. vegan 2.3.3.. Available online: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/vegan/vegan.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2019).
  63. Van Lanen, H.A.J.; Peters, E. Definition, effects and assessment of groundwater droughts. In Drought and Drought Mitigation in Europe, Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research; Vogt, J.V., Somma, F., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, Germany, 2000; Volume 14, pp. 49–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Schütt, P. Erste Ausätze zur Experimentellen klärung des Tannensterbens. Schweiz. Z. Forstwes. 1981, 132, 443–452. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  65. Farfał, D. The effect of habitat on European ash root growth in the topsoil layers. For. Res. Pap. 2011, 72, 109–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Ellenberg, H. Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe, 4th ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1988; p. 499. [Google Scholar]
  67. Holeksa, J.; Woźniak, G. Biased vegetation patterns and detection of vegetation changes using phytosociological databases. A case study in the forests of the Babia Góra National Park (the West Carpathians, Poland). Phytocoenologia 2005, 35, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Czapiewska, N.; Paź, S.; Dyderski, M.K.; Jagodziński, A.M. Continuum of floristic composition between two plant communities—Carici elongatae-Alnetum and Fraxino-Alnetum. For. Res. Pap. 2017, 78, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Fleituch, T.; Leichtfried, M. Ash tree leaf litter (Fraxinus excelsior L.) breakdown in two different biotopes and streams. Int. Rev. Hydrobiol. 2004, 89, 508–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Jacob, M.; Viedenz, K.; Polle, A.; Thomas, F.M. Leaf litter decomposition in temperate deciduous forest stands with a decreasing fraction of beech (Fagus sylvatica). Oecologia 2010, 164, 1083–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  71. Horodecki, P.; Nowiński, M.; Jagodziński, A.M. Advantage of mixed tree stands in restoration of upper soil layers on post-mining sites: A five-year leaf litter decomposition experiment. Land Degrad. Dev. 2019, 30, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Arao, T. In Situ detection of changes in soil bacterial and fungal activities by measuring 13 C incorporation into soil phospholipid fatty acids from 13C acetate. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1999, 31, 1015–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Bååth, E.; Anderson, T.H. Comparison of soil fungal/bacterial ratios in a pH gradient using physiological and PLFA-based techniques. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2003, 35, 955–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Lavelle, P.; Spain, A.V. Soil Organisms. In Soil Ecology; Lavelle, P., Ed.; Springer: New Delhi, India, 2005; pp. 234–256. [Google Scholar]
  75. Rousk, J.; Brookes, P.C.; Bååth, E. Contrasting soil pH effects on fungal and bacterial growth suggest functional redundancy in carbon mineralization. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 75, 1589–1596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Skovsgaard, J.P.; Thomsen, I.M.; Skovgaard, I.M.; Martinussen, T. Associations between symptoms of dieback in even-aged stands of ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.). For. Pathol. 2010, 40, 7–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Bakys, R.; Vasiliauskas, A.; Ihrmark, K.; Stenlid, J.; Menkis, A.; Vasaitis, R. Root rot, associated fungi and their impact on health condition of declining Fraxinus excelsior stands in Lithuania. Scand. J. For. Res. 2011, 26, 128–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Orlikowski, L.B.; Ptaszek, M.; Rodziewicz, A.; Nechwatal, J.; Thinggaard, K.; Jung, T. Phytophthora root and collar rot of mature Fraxinus excelsior in forest stands in Poland and Denmark. For. Pathol. 2011, 41, 510–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Barbier, S.; Gosselin, F.; Balandier, P. Influence of tree species on understory vegetation diversity and mechanisms involved—A critical review for temperate and boreal forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 2008, 254, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Knight, K.S.; Oleksyn, J.; Jagodziński, A.M.; Reich, P.B.; Kasprowicz, M. Overstorey tree species regulate colonization by native and exotic plants: A source of positive relationships between understorey diversity and invasibility. Divers. Distrib. 2008, 14, 666–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Denslow, J.S.; Spies, T. Canopy gaps in forest ecosystems. Can. J. For. Res. 1990, 20, 617–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Jonášová, M.; Matìjková, I. Natural regeneration and vegetation changes in wet spruce forests after natural and artificial disturbances. Can. J. For. Res. 2007, 37, 1907–1914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Dobrowolska, D. The role of disturbances in forest regeneration. For. Res. Pap. 2010, 71, 391–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Czortek, P.; Delimat, A.; Dyderski, M.K.; Zięba, A.; Jagodziński, A.M.; Jaroszewicz, B. Climate change, tourism and historical grazing influence the distribution of Carex lachenalii Schkuhr—A rare arctic-alpine species in the Tatra Mts. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 618, 1628–1637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Orczewska, A.; Czortek, P.; Jaroszewicz, B. The impact of salvage logging on herb layer species composition and plant community recovery in Białowieża Forest. Biodivers. Conserv. 2019, 28, 3407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Tiessen, H.; Cuevas, E.; Chacon, P. The role of soil organic matter in sustaining soil fertility. Nature 1994, 371, 783–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Czortek, P.; Ratyńska, H.; Dyderski, M.K.; Jagodziński, A.M.; Orczewska, A.; Jaroszewicz, B. Cessation of livestock grazing and windthrow drive a shift in plant species composition in the Western Tatra Mts. Tuexenia 2018, 38, 177–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Olden, J.D.; Comte, L.; Giam, X. The Homogocene: A research prospectus for the study of biotic homogenisation. NeoBiota 2018, 37, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Forests 11 00022 g001 550
Figure 1. Location of the study plots in the background of the hypsometric map. The succession of colors reflects the relief from the highest places (white), through brown, yellow, to the lowest places marked in green (river valleys) and in light blue (rivers). Abbreviations of forest districts: B (Babki); K (Konstantynowo); L (Łopuchówko); P (Poznań Communal Forests). Coordinates of the study plots are placed in the Table 1.
Figure 1. Location of the study plots in the background of the hypsometric map. The succession of colors reflects the relief from the highest places (white), through brown, yellow, to the lowest places marked in green (river valleys) and in light blue (rivers). Abbreviations of forest districts: B (Babki); K (Konstantynowo); L (Łopuchówko); P (Poznań Communal Forests). Coordinates of the study plots are placed in the Table 1.
Forests 11 00022 g001
Forests 11 00022 g002 550
Figure 2. Relationships between soil pH (left side) and organic matter content (right side), and defoliation of Fraxinus excelsior (expressed as mean defoliation, proportion of moderately and severely damaged trees, and severely damaged trees only, based on 15 sample trees per study plot; upper, middle and lower rows, respectively), modeled using beta regression (Table 2 and Table 4, n = 27). In case of relationship between soil pH and proportion of severely damaged trees we did not draw line, as soil pH was not included in final model.
Figure 2. Relationships between soil pH (left side) and organic matter content (right side), and defoliation of Fraxinus excelsior (expressed as mean defoliation, proportion of moderately and severely damaged trees, and severely damaged trees only, based on 15 sample trees per study plot; upper, middle and lower rows, respectively), modeled using beta regression (Table 2 and Table 4, n = 27). In case of relationship between soil pH and proportion of severely damaged trees we did not draw line, as soil pH was not included in final model.
Forests 11 00022 g002
Forests 11 00022 g003 550
Figure 3. Results of redundancy analysis (RDA) of understory species composition at the background of mean defoliation within the study plots. Each point represent a study plot (n = 27), black names represent species scores (first four letters of genera and species name; for clarity, only species with total cover >20% were plotted; all plant species names are given in the Material and methods section). The red label indicates the constraining factor, soil pH (driver of species composition; goodness of fit test in Table 5), while blue labels indicate passively fitted vegetation features (i.e., correlated with species composition gradients; Table 6 for abbreviation and goodness of fit).
Figure 3. Results of redundancy analysis (RDA) of understory species composition at the background of mean defoliation within the study plots. Each point represent a study plot (n = 27), black names represent species scores (first four letters of genera and species name; for clarity, only species with total cover >20% were plotted; all plant species names are given in the Material and methods section). The red label indicates the constraining factor, soil pH (driver of species composition; goodness of fit test in Table 5), while blue labels indicate passively fitted vegetation features (i.e., correlated with species composition gradients; Table 6 for abbreviation and goodness of fit).
Forests 11 00022 g003
Table
Table 1. Basic characteristics of the study plots. Reference soil groups and their principal and supplementary qualifiers follow the IUSS Working Group WRB [42]. Forest districts: B (Babki); K (Konstantynowo); L (Łopuchówko); P (Poznań Communal Forests). Species abbreviations: A (A. glutinosa); F (F. excelsior); T (T. cordata); U (U. laevis, U. glabra); Q (Q. robur). Coordinates follow the World Geodetic System ’84.
Table 1. Basic characteristics of the study plots. Reference soil groups and their principal and supplementary qualifiers follow the IUSS Working Group WRB [42]. Forest districts: B (Babki); K (Konstantynowo); L (Łopuchówko); P (Poznań Communal Forests). Species abbreviations: A (A. glutinosa); F (F. excelsior); T (T. cordata); U (U. laevis, U. glabra); Q (Q. robur). Coordinates follow the World Geodetic System ’84.
No.District DivisionMain Tree Species Proportion (%)Ash AgeSoil Characteristic WRB 2015Coordinates of the Study Plots
NE
1.B 243c90 F, 10 Q79Arenic Gleyic Phaeozem52°26'37.692"17°4'6.244"
2.B 231l90 F, 10 U57Colluvic Greyzernic Phaeozem52°27'6.107"17°4'41.754"
3.B 225d80 F, 10 Q, 10 T100Ochric Brunic Arenosol52°27'30.791"17°4'19.11"
4.B 218b100 F114Colluvic Gleyic Phaeozem52°27'29.987"17°4'3.955"
5.B 226d80 F, 10 L, 10 Q87Colluvic Fluvic Cambisol52°26'58.596"17°3'39.512"
6.B 224i80 F, 10 U, 10 Q102Siltic Gleyic Phaeozem52°27'31.461"17°4'26.068"
7.B 224h80 F, 10 U, 10 Q120Colluvic Fluvic Cambisol52°27'33.842"17°4'24.141"
8.B 224c80 F, 20 Q52Arenic Calcaric Cambisol52°27'40.327"17°4'46.34"
9.B 223i90 F, 10 Q85Arenic Calcaric Cambisol52°27'44.637"17°4'48.887"
10.K 281c90 F, 10 U106Hyperhumic Gleyic Phaeozem52°13'11.121"16°43'39.585"
11.K 282b80 F, 20 A73Hyperhumic Gleyic Phaeozem52°13'24.06"16°43'25.671"
12.K 286a90 F, 10 U109Humic Mollic Gleysol52°13'9.247"16°44'25.939"
13.K 287d100 F52Humic Mollic Gleysol52°13'8.269"16°44'14.987"
14.K 287h90 F, 10 Q123Ochric Brunic Arenosol52°13'4.573"16°44'6.423"
15.K 288a90 F, 10 U119Hyperhumic Gleyic Phaeozem52°13'4.05"16°44'3.199"
16.K 288j90 F, 10 U79Hyperhumic Gleyic Phaeozem52°13'0.473"16°44'0.881"
17.K 59b80 F, 20 Q68Ochric Brunic Arenosol52°12'52.495"16°44'1.288"
18.L 257a90 F, 10 Q144Loamic Dystric Cambisol52°29'49.713"16°57'3.233"
19.L 255s100 F98Arenic Fluvic Cambisol52°29'30.49"16°57'53.237"
20.L 254h80 F, 20 A74Humic Gleyic Fluvisol52°29'46.855"16°57'53.582"
21.L 251c80 F, 10 U, 10 A69Humic Gleyic Fluvisol52°30'17.183"16°57'44.836"
22.L 217g90 F, 10 A68Humic Gleyic Fluvisol52°30'23.024"16°57'6.738"
23.L 205d80 F, 20 Q74Colluvic Fluvic Cambisol52°30'41.062"16°56'34.311"
24.P 475j (1)100 F83Siltic Gleyic Phaeozem52°25'23.309"16°52'58.823"
25.P 475j (2)90 F, 10 U83Siltic Gleyic Phaeozem52°25'27.169"16°52'36.643"
26.P 473d80 F, 10 T, 10 Q63Hyperhumic Gleyic Phaeozem52°26'1.955"16°52'39.371"
27.P 430k100 F73Clayic Haplic Luvisol52°24'16.2"17°1'30.72"
Table
Table 2. Beta regression model of the mean defoliation of Fraxinus excelsior (n = 27).
Table 2. Beta regression model of the mean defoliation of Fraxinus excelsior (n = 27).
TermEstimateSEZPr(>|z|)
(Intercept)−2.6270.776−3.3840.001
Soil pH0.2300.1271.8090.070
Soil organic matter0.0900.0312.9180.004
Precision parameter φ18.9555.0473.756<0.001
Pseudo-R2logLikAICcAICc0df of residuals
0.52523.146−36.474−22.40323
Abbreviations: SE – standard error, Z – empirical test statistic, Pr(>|z|) – p-value, based on comparison of empiric and tabular Z, logLik – log-likelihood, AICc – model’s Akaike’s Information Criterion corrected for small sample size, AICc0 – AICc of null model (intercept-only), df – degrees of freedom.
Table
Table 3. Beta regression model of the proportion of moderately and severely damaged Fraxinus excelsior trees within sets of 15 sampled trees per study plot (n = 27).
Table 3. Beta regression model of the proportion of moderately and severely damaged Fraxinus excelsior trees within sets of 15 sampled trees per study plot (n = 27).
TermEstimateSEZPr(>|z|)
(Intercept)−3.0230.948−3.1880.001
Soil pH0.4170.1572.6490.008
Soil organic matter0.0740.0411.8050.071
Precision parameter φ10.7572.8143.823<0.001
Pseudo-R2logLikAICcAICc0df of residuals
0.49615.483−21.148−8.12323
Abbreviations: SE – standard error, Z – empirical test statistic, Pr(>|z|) – p-value, based on comparison of empiric and tabular Z, logLik – log-likelihood, AICc – model’s Akaike’s Information Criterion corrected for small sample size, AICc0 – AICc of null model (intercept-only), df – degrees of freedom.
Table
Table 4. Zero-inflated beta regression model of the proportion of severely damaged Fraxinus excelsior trees within sets of 15 sampled trees per study plot (n = 27).
Table 4. Zero-inflated beta regression model of the proportion of severely damaged Fraxinus excelsior trees within sets of 15 sampled trees per study plot (n = 27).
TableEstimateSETPr(>|t|)
μ estimation, link function: logit (Intercept)−2.0240.308−6.581<0.001
Soil organic matter0.1400.0403.5030.002
σ estimation, link function: logit (Intercept)2.2210.2797.970<0.001
ν estimation, link function: log (Intercept)−1.4820.495−2.9910.006
Pseudo-R2logLikAICcAICc0df of residuals
0.2993.0913.63610.45323
Abbreviations: SE – standard error, T – empirical test statistic, Pr(>|t|) – p-value, based on comparison of empiric and tabular T, logLik – log-likelihood, AICc – model’s Akaike’s Information Criterion corrected for small sample size, AICc0 – AICc of null model (intercept-only), df – degrees of freedom.
Table
Table 5. PERMANOVA test of the influence of soil pH and mean defoliation on understory vegetation species composition in redundancy analysis (RDA) in a reduced space (Figure 3). AIC0 refers to the null model (unconstrained analysis). AIC, Akaike information criterion.
Table 5. PERMANOVA test of the influence of soil pH and mean defoliation on understory vegetation species composition in redundancy analysis (RDA) in a reduced space (Figure 3). AIC0 refers to the null model (unconstrained analysis). AIC, Akaike information criterion.
HypothesisTermdfVarianceFPr(>F)
Impact of soil pH and defoliationSoil pH10.078485.42430.001
Mean defoliation10.022161.56620.079
Residual250.33954--
AIC−24.18AIC0−24.48-
Impact of soil pH onlySoil pH10.078485.42430.001
Residual250.36170--
AIC−21.174AIC0−24.48-
Abbreviations: df – degrees of freedom, F – empirical test statistic, Pr(>|F|) – p-value, based on comparison of empiric and tabular F.
Table
Table 6. Goodness of fit of passive projection of species composition to RDA result (Figure 3).
Table 6. Goodness of fit of passive projection of species composition to RDA result (Figure 3).
VariableAbbreviationRDA1PC1r2Pr(>r)
Ecological indicator value—lightEIV_L−0.894−0.4470.2550.033
Ecological indicator value—moistureEIV_M−0.889−0.4570.7480.001
Ecological indicator value—soil reactionEIV_SR−0.9950.0990.8150.001
Ecological indicator value—soil fertilityEIV_N−0.8810.4730.7100.001
CWM of heightheight_CWM0.926−0.3770.5020.002
CWM of specific leaf areaSLA_CWM0.3880.9220.4550.003
CWM of seed massseed_mass_CWM0.976−0.2190.4760.001
Functional evennessFEve0.474−0.8800.2690.030
Functional dispersionFDis0.988−0.1560.2600.028
Species richnessRichness−0.278−0.9610.1180.251
Species diversity (Shannon index)Shannon0.141−0.9900.3580.008
CWM, community-weighted mean; r2 and p calculated using permutation tests with 999 iterations; RDA1 – coordinates of variables along the first constrained axis RDA1, PC1 – coordinates along first unconstrained axis PC1, PR(>r) – p-values of correlations between ordination and variables.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Turczański, K.; Rutkowski, P.; Dyderski, M.K.; Wrońska-Pilarek, D.; Nowiński, M. Soil pH and Organic Matter Content Affects European Ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) Crown Defoliation and Its Impact on Understory Vegetation. Forests 2020, 11, 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11010022

AMA Style

Turczański K, Rutkowski P, Dyderski MK, Wrońska-Pilarek D, Nowiński M. Soil pH and Organic Matter Content Affects European Ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) Crown Defoliation and Its Impact on Understory Vegetation. Forests. 2020; 11(1):22. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11010022

Chicago/Turabian Style

Turczański, Krzysztof, Paweł Rutkowski, Marcin K. Dyderski, Dorota Wrońska-Pilarek, and Mirosław Nowiński. 2020. "Soil pH and Organic Matter Content Affects European Ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) Crown Defoliation and Its Impact on Understory Vegetation" Forests 11, no. 1: 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11010022

APA Style

Turczański, K., Rutkowski, P., Dyderski, M. K., Wrońska-Pilarek, D., & Nowiński, M. (2020). Soil pH and Organic Matter Content Affects European Ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) Crown Defoliation and Its Impact on Understory Vegetation. Forests, 11(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11010022

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop