An Account of Research Being Done in ITE. Cambridge, NERC/Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, 41-44
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Chapter (non-refereed) Brown, A.H.F.. 1981 The recovery of ground vegetation in coppicewood: the significance of buried seed. In: Last, F.T.; Gardiner, A.S., (eds.) Forest and woodland ecology: an account of research being done in ITE. Cambridge, NERC/Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, 41-44. (ITE Symposium, 8). Copyright © 1981 NERC This version available at http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/7038/ NERC has developed NORA to enable users to access research outputs wholly or partially funded by NERC. Copyright and other rights for material on this site are retained by the authors and/or other rights owners. Users should read the terms and conditions of use of this material at http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/policies.html#access This document is extracted from the publisher’s version of the volume. If you wish to cite this item please use the reference above or cite the NORA entry Contact CEH NORA team at [email protected] 41 8. THE RECOVERYOF GROUND VEGETATION Because of changing economic and social condi- IN COPPICE WOOD: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF tions many coppices have been neglected or have BURIED SEED been planted with conifers. As a result, the diversity of the ground flora has decreased, with losses of up BROWN to 70% occurring (Table 12), the losses being less in neglected coppice than in woodlands planted with conifers (Brown & Pearce, 1976). Many of the ancient woods of lowland England have been managed as coppice for hundreds of However, to what extent are these changes rever- years. These coppice woods have distinctive, sible? It has, for long, been recognised that some diverse, and ecologically interesting assemblages of recovery of the ground vegetation occurs when plants, some being more-or-less confined to these neglected coppice is felled; similarly, ground habitats, eg Carex pendula, Galeobdolon luteum vegetation diversifies as conifer stands age and are and Oxalis acetosella (Peterken, 1974). The rela- thinned, and especially after clear-felling. To tively frequent alternation of light and shade, as a what extent does this vegetation represent the result of coppicing, has favoured the development original flora? Where do the plants come from? of a shade flora (including, for example, Anemone Some will undoubtedly be attributable to the few nemorosa, Endymion non-scriptus and Mercurialis remaining shade tolerant plants, and others may perennis), which persists for the whole coppice have immigrated from elsewhere. However, the cycle, and a marginal flora, whose light-demanding existence of a seed-bank in the soil might also be species persist in rides and glades. Species of the of some importance. marginal flora (such asCirsium palustre, Lysimachia nemorum and Stachys sylyatica) also recolonise 1. Experimental observations the 'body' of the wood for the first few years after coppicing before being eliminated as shading It is well known that weed seeds in agricultural again intensifies. Salisbury (1924) wrote: soils can persist in a dormant but viable condition for many years (eg Roberts, 1970) or even for "The story of the Coppice woods is thus a centuries (Odum, 1965). Much less is known about continual rise and fall in the vigour of the dormant seed populations in forest and woodland shade flora accompanied by an ebb and flow of soils, and most published information refers to the marginal flora. At each coppicing, the North America (eg Kellman, 1970). To gain an latter, as it were, floods the sparsely occupied insight into the situation in the UK, 27 soil samples ground and then, as the shade increases, were examined from 5 overgrown, neglected flows back to its original position". coppice woodlands in East Anglia whose current TABLE 12 Mean numbers, per 200 m2, of different types of ground flora species found in 11 differently managed East Anglian woods. System of managment Species type Worked Neglected Coppice planted Coppice Coppice with conifers Shade 11.0 8.3 5.5 (75%) (50%) Marginal 13.5 6.3 3.9 (47%) (29%) Woody seedlings 3.6 2.6 2.5 (72%) (69%) Others 1.9 0.8 0.1 Total 30.0 18.0 12.0 (60%) (40%) Species indicative of ancient woodland 3.4 2.5 1.0 (74%) (29%) (Percentages refer to comparisons with worked coppice) 42 vegetation had already been surveyed. Samples Mean numbers of seedlings per tray ranged from were taken at random from heavily shadedareas in 130 to 178 at Chalkney/Weeley and Fe!sham which ground cover waseither absentor consisted of respectively (Plate 9). Endymion non-scriptus or Mercurialis perennis and occasional Rubus fruticosus, Anemone nemorosa In total, 68 different plant speciesgerminated. For or Lonicera periclymenum. Litter and humus individual woods, numbers averaged 31 with 24 layers were discarded from each 30 cm x 30 cm and 23 occurring in the 0-5 and 5-15 cm soil layers sample area, before collecting the underlying respectively (Table 14). soil, separated into 2 horizons, 0-5 and 5-15 cm below ground level. Subsequently, the soils were The seedlings that emerged were classified into 3 transferred to plastic seed-trays in an unheated categories (i) light-demanding species, and those glasshouse, allowing germination and hence the tolerant of (ii) some or (iii) heavyshade, accounting subsequent identification, of the buried seeds. for 87%, 6% and 7% respectively of the total of Although the trays were retained for 30 months, 8073 (Table 15). The viable seedswere not repre- most seedlings had emerged within 2-3 months. sentative of the current ground flora of neglected TABLE 13 Mean numbers of seedlingsgerminating in 2 horizons of soil taken from neglected coppices at 5 sites in East Anglia Name of Wood Nos. of Soil horizons, cm below ground level replicate samplesat 0-5 cm 5-15 cm each site (numbers of seedlingsper 4,500 cm3 of soil) Chalkney 6 178 83 Weeley 7 104 155 Felsham 4 181 174 Groton 4 185 128 Parkhall 6 203 133 Combined Woods 27 166 133 Some seedlings emerged in all trays, numbers coppice which consists predominantly of deep- in surface (0-5 cm) soil averaging 166, equivalent shade species, with a few marginal species. In to 1844 rif2 or 18.4 million ha-1 compared with contrast, the soil seed-bank contains mainly 133 per tray at a depth of 5-15 cm (Table 13). marginal species, but very few species of deep- TABLE 14 Total numbers of plant speciesemerging from different soil horizons taken from 5 neglected coppices in East Anglia. Name of Wood Soil horizons, cm below ground level 0-5 cm 5-15 cm 0-15 cm ia the 2 horizons combined Chalkney 32 31 41 Weeley 23 20 28 Felsham 19 24 27 Groton 23 13 26 Parkhall 24 27 34 Total nos. of species for all woods, combined 61 57 68 Average no. of speciesper wood 24 23 31 43 TABLE 15 Numbers of seedlingsof different species (grouped according to shade tolerance) emerging after keeping soil samplesfrom 5 neglected coppices in East Anglia for 2 years in an unheated glasshouse. (Nos. of seedlingsfrom 27 replicate 30 cm x 30 cm samples) No. of No. of seedlings seedlings Light-demanding species Agrostis canina 113 Plantago major 1 Agrostis stolonifera 327 Polygonum aviculare 1 Anthoxanthum odoratum 105 Polygonum convolvulus 23 Betula sp 1335 Polygonum lapathifolium 1 Carex pallescens 71 Polygonum nodusum 2 Carex pilulifera 50 Polygonum persicaria 1 Centauriurn erythraea 11 Ranunculus flarnmula 6 Chenopodium album 39 Rumex obtusifolius 26 Cirsium palustre 28 Saginaprocumbens 11 Digitalis purpurea 276 Salix sp 4 Epilobium adenocaulon 42 Sarothamnus scoparius 2 Epilobium sp 10 Solanum nigrum 34 Festuca sp 34 Trifolium sp 1 Gnaphalium uliginosum 1 Tripleurospermum Hypericum hirsutum 3 maritimum inodorum 1 Hypericum humifusum 34 Veronica chamaedrys 6 Hypericum pulchrum 20 Veronica officinalis 60 Hypericum tetrapterum 54 Veronica serpyllifolia 7 Isolepis setacea 68 Juncus bufonius 139 Juncus effusus 4205 Lotus corniculatus 15 Speciestolerant of some shade Carex pendula 10 Ranunculus repens 8 Deschampsiacespitosa 2 Rosa sp Euphorbia amygdaloides 1 Rubus idaeus 9 Fragaria vesca 3 Sambucusnigra 11 Holcus lanatus 26 Scrophularia nodosa 4 Luzula pilosa 19 Silene dioica 18 Lysimachia nemorum 57 Solidago virgaurea 1 Poa nemoralis 5 Stachys sylvatica 1 Poa trivialis 27 Stellaria media 1 Potentilla sterillis 8 Veronica montana 45 Speciestolerant of heavy shade Ajuga reptans 32 Primula vulgaris 3 Carex remota 14 Rubus caesius 1 Carex sylvatica 1 Rubus fruticosus 446 Corydalis claviculata 13 Viola sp 16 Moehringia trinervia 33 shade; Endymion non-scriptus,Anemone nemorosa, from elsewhere?The evidence supports the former Lonicera periclymenum, Circaea lutetiana and alternative, with some seeds remaining viable for Mercurialis perennis are notable absentees. the 30 or 40 years since the woods were last coppiced. Seedsof many speciesof open, unshaded This lack of correspondence between the buried habitats have (or acquire) a requirement for light in seedsand the current composition of the vegeta- order to germinate—thusremaining dormant while tion is not unusual (eg Harper, 1977). However, it buried. In contrast, seeds of species of closed calls into question the origin of the seed-banks: vegetation (including the shade speciesof forests), have they survived from the vegetation of an although possibly requiring a chilling or other earlier more open phase, or have they immigrated pre-treatment, seem to germinate equally readily 44 in light or dark conditions (Grime 6Jarvis, 1975), References and are therefore not incorporated into the seed- bank. The paucity of shade species in seed-banks inBrown, A.H.F. 1979. Management effects in lowland coppice woods matches observations on North coppice woods. Viable seed content of soils of conifer- American (Leavitt, 1963; Kellman, 1974) and on planted areas in ancient coppice woods. Natural Environ- Russian forest soils (Karpov, 1960).