Search

Questions: Can a statistical model be designed to represent more directly the nature of organismal response to multiple interacting factors? Can multiplicative kernel smoothers be used for this purpose? What advantages does this approach have over more traditional habitat modelling methods? Methods: Non-parametric multiplicative regression (NPMR) was developed from the premises that: the response variable has a minimum of zero and a physiologically-determined maximum, species respond simultaneously to multiple ecological actors, he response to any one factor is conditioned by the values of other factors, and that if any of the factors is intolerable then the response is zero. Key features of NPMR are interactive effects of predictors, no need to specify an overall model form in advance, and built-in controls on overfitting. The effectiveness of the method is demonstrated with simulated and real data sets. Results: Empirical and theoretical relationships of species response to multiple interacting predictors can be represented effectively by multiplicative kernel smoothers. NPMR allows us to abandon simplistic assumptions about overall model form, while embracing the ecological truism that habitat factors interact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Question: How do spatial patterns and associations of canopy and understorey vegetation vary with spatial scale along a gradient of canopy composition in boreal mixed-wood forests, from younger Aspen stands dominated by Populus tremuloides and P. balsamifera to older Mixed and Conifer stands dominated by Picea glauca? Do canopy evergreen conifers and broad-leaved deciduous trees differ in their spatial relationships with understorey vegetation? Location: EMEND experimental site, Alberta, Canada. Methods: Canopy and understorey vegetation were sampled in 28 transects of 100 contiguous 0.5 m × 0.5 m quadrats in three forest stand types. Vegetation spatial patterns and relationships were analysed using wavelets. Results: Boreal mixed-wood canopy and understorey vegetation are patchily distributed at a range of small spatial scales. The scale of canopy and understorey spatial patterns generally increased with increasing conifer presence in the canopy. Associations between canopy and understorey were highly variable among stand types, transects and spatial scales. Understorey vascular plant cover was generally positively associated with canopy deciduous tree cover and negatively associated with canopy conifer tree cover at spatial scales from 5-15 m. Understorey non-vascular plant cover and community composition were more variable in their relationships with canopy cover, showing both positive and negative associations at a range of spatial scales. Conclusions: The spatial structure and relation of boreal mixed-wood canopy and understorey vegetation varied with spatial scale. Differences in understorey spatial structure among stand types were consistent with a nucleation model of patch dynamics during succession in boreal mixed-wood forests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]