Artikel CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
referiert
Veröffentlicht

Two sides of one medal: Arable weed vegetation of Europe in phytosociological data compared to agronomical weed surveys

Zugehörigkeit
University of Rostock, Crop Health, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Germany
Bürger, Jana;
Zugehörigkeit
Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts (ZRC SAZU), Jovan Hadži Institute of Biology, Slovenia
Küzmič, Filip;
Zugehörigkeit
Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts (ZRC SAZU), Jovan Hadži Institute of Biology, Slovenia
Šilc, Urban;
Zugehörigkeit
University of Rostock, Landscape Ecology, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Germany
Jansen, Florian;
Zugehörigkeit
Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Vegetation and Phytodiversity Analysis, Germany
Bergmeier, Erwin;
Zugehörigkeit
Masaryk University, Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Science, Czech Republic
Chytrý, Milan;
Zugehörigkeit
Plant Protection, Agrifood Research and Technology Centre of Aragón (CITA), Spain
Cirujeda, Alicia;
Zugehörigkeit
University of Torino, Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences (DISAFA), Italy
Fogliatto, Silvia;
Zugehörigkeit
Plant Health Laboratory, France
Fried, Guillaume;
Zugehörigkeit
National Centre for Plant Genetic Resources, Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute –National Research Institute, Poland
Dostatny, Denise F.;
Zugehörigkeit
University of Rostock, Crop Health, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Germany
Gerowitt, Bärbel;
Zugehörigkeit
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Germany
Glemnitz, Michael;
Zugehörigkeit
Instituto de Agricultura Sostenible, Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), Spain
González‐Andújar, José L.;
Zugehörigkeit
Instituto de Agricultura Sostenible, Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), Spain
Hernández Plaza, Eva;
Zugehörigkeit
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Department of Agri-food Engineering and Biotechnology, Spain
Izquierdo, Jordi;
Zugehörigkeit
Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Department of Agroecology and Crop Production, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech Republic
Kolářová, Michaela;
Zugehörigkeit
Masaryk University, Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Science, Czech Republic
Lososová, Zdeňka;
Zugehörigkeit
14Sustainable Agricultural Sciences, Rothamsted Research, United Kingdom
Metcalfe, Helen;
Zugehörigkeit
Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, Institute for Plant Protection Research ‘Agrihorts’, Latvia
Ņečajeva, Jevgenija;
Zugehörigkeit
Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Agroécologie, AgroSup Dijon, INRAE, France
Petit, Sandrine;
Zugehörigkeit
Széchenyi István University, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Hungary
Pinke, Gyula;
Zugehörigkeit
Nature Research Centre, Institute of Botany, Lithuania
Rašomavičius, Valerijus;
GND
1193271819
Zugehörigkeit
Julius Kühn-Institute (JKI), Institute of Plant Protection in Field Crops and Grassland, Germany
von Redwitz, Christoph;
Zugehörigkeit
University of Hohenheim, Department of Weed Science, Institute of Phytomedicine, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Germany
Schumacher, Matthias;
GND
144040743
Zugehörigkeit
Julius Kühn-Institute (JKI), Institute of Plant Protection in Field Crops and Grassland, Germany
Ulber, Lena;
Zugehörigkeit
University of Torino, Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences (DISAFA), Italy
Vidotto, Francesco

Questions Two scientific disciplines, vegetation science and weed science, study arable weed vegetation, which has seen a strong diversity decrease in Europe over the last decades. We compared two collections of plot-based vegetation records originating from these two disciplines. The aim was to check the suitability of the collections for joint analysis and for addressing research questions from the opposing domains. We asked: are these collections complementary? If so, how can they be used for joint analysis? Location Europe. Methods We compared 13 311 phytosociological relevés and 13 328 records from weed science, concerning both data collection properties and the recorded species richness. To deal with bias in the data, we also analysed different subsets (i.e., crops, geographical regions, organic vs conventional fields, center vs edge plots). Results Records from vegetation science have an average species number of 19.0 ± 10.4. Metadata on survey methodology or agronomic practices are rare in this collection. Records from weed science have an average species number of 8.5 ± 6.4. They are accompanied by extensive methodological information. Vegetation science records and the weed science records taken at field edges or from organic fields have similar species numbers. The collections cover different parts of Europe but the results are consistent in six geographical subsets and the overall data set. The difference in species numbers may be caused by differences in methodology between the disciplines, i.e., plot positioning within fields, plot sizes, or survey timing. Conclusion This comparison of arable weed data that were originally sampled with a different purpose represents a new effort in connecting research between vegetation scientists and weed scientists. Both collections show different aspects of weed vegetation, which means the joint use of the data is valuable as it can contribute to a more complete picture of weed species diversity in European arable landscapes.

Vorschau

Zitieren

Zitierform:
Zitierform konnte nicht geladen werden.

Zugriffsstatistik

Gesamt:
Volltextzugriffe:
Metadatenansicht:
12 Monate:
Volltextzugriffe:
Metadatenansicht:

Rechte

Rechteinhaber: 2022 International Association for Vegetation Science

Nutzung und Vervielfältigung: