Spatial Patterns of Species Diversity in the Saline Vegetation of Central Anatolia, Türkiye

Abstract

Vegetation on saline soils thrives under extreme conditions. The saline vegetation of Central Anatolia is a key component of the Irano-Anatolian Biodiversity Hotspot, notable for its high habitat and species diversity. However, there has been a lack of quantitative assessments of plant diversity in these areas. To address this gap, this study aims to calculate and compare: 1) local species diversity (alpha diversity) across five vegetation alliances, 2) regional diversity (gamma diversity) for each alliance, and 3) the variation in species diversity within alliances (beta diversity). Data from 101 plots representing five alliances collected from Burdur Lake, Acıgöl, Salt Lake, Seyfe Lake, and Sultansazlığı were compiled from relevant publications. The results showed high species diversity in areas with high variation in salinity or humidity due to ecotone characteristics, at all spatial scales. Notably, diversity was highest in salt steppes (Achilleo wilhelmsii-Artemision santonici) and in slightly-saline summer-dry marshes (Lepidio caespitosi-Limonion iconici and Inulo aucheranae-Elymion salsi). Conversely, diversity was lower in non-saline steppes typical for gypsum soils (Astragalo karamasici-Gypsophilion eriocalysis) and in communities found on hypersaline soils (Salicornion fruticosae). Overall, beta diversity was high, reflecting significant species turnover. These findings numerically support existing literature, which suggests that plant community composition can change drastically over short distances. The results highlight the conservation priority of saline areas with ecotone characteristics.

Keywords

• beta diversity
• biodiversity
• halophyte
• steppe
• vegetation

Spatial Patterns of Species Diversity in the Saline Vegetation of Central Anatolia, Türkiye

Öz

Tuzlu alanlardaki bitki örtüsü ekstrem koşullar altında gelişir. İç Anadolu'nun tuzlu bitki örtüsü, yüksek habitat ve tür çeşitliliği ile İran-Anadolu Biyoçeşitlilik Sıcak Noktası' nın öne çıkan habitatlarındandır. Ancak, bu alanların tür çeşitliliğine yönelik nicel çalışma yapılmamıştır. Bu çalışmada 1) tuzlu alanlarda gelişen beş alyansın yerel tür çeşitliliği (alfa ölçeği), 2) her alyansın bölgesel çeşitliliği (gama ölçeği) ve 3) her alyansa ait parsellerde çeşitlilik farkları (beta çeşitlilik) hesaplanmıştır. Bu amaçla, bugüne kadar Burdur Gölü, Acıgöl, Tuz Gölü, Seyfe Gölü ve Sultan Sazlığı’ nda yapılan çalışmalarda tespit edilen beş alyansa ait 101 parselin verileri kullanılmıştır. Her alansal ölçekte tür çeşitliliğinin yüksek çıktığı alyanslar tuz oranı ya da nemlilik açısından geçiş özelliğindeki yerlerde gözlenir. Çeşitlilik tuza dayanıklı bozkırlar (Achilleo wilhelmsii-Artemision santonici) ve tuzluluk oranı düşük, yazın kuruyan bataklıklarda (Lepidio caespitosi-Limonion iconici ve Inulo aucheranae-Elymion salsi) yüksek çıkmıştır. Tuzcul alan temsiliyeti düşük, jipsli bozkırları temsil eden kurak bozkırlarda (Astragalo karamasici-Gypsophilion eriocalysis) ve tuz oranı yüksek topraklarda gelişen topululuklarda (Salicornion fruticosae) çeşitlilik düşük çıkmıştır. Genel anlamda beta çeşitlilik değerleri yüksektir ve bunun nedeni yüksek tür devridir. Bu bulgu, tuzlu alanlarda bitki örtüsünün kısa mesafelerde ciddi değişimler gösterdiğini belirten literatür bilgisini sayısal olarak desteklemektedir. Bulgular toprak özellikleri açısından geçiş özelliğinde, ekoton oluşturan tuzcul alanların koruma açısından öncelikli olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• beta çeşitlilik
• biyolojik çeşitlilik
• bozkır
• halofit
• vejetasyon

Kaynakça

1. Atalay İ. Türkiye'nin Ekolojik Bölgeleri - Ecoregions of Turkey. 2nd Ed. Ankara: Palme Yayıncılık; 2014.
2. Eken G, Bozdoğan M, İsfendiyaroğlu S, Kılıç DT, Lise Y. (ed.). Türkiye’nin Önemli Doğa Alanları. Ankara: Doğa Derneği; 2007.
3. Yildiztugay E, Ozfidan-Konakci C, Kucukoduk M. The role of antioxidant responses on the tolerance range of extreme halophyte Salsola crassa grown under toxic salt concentrations. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2014; 110:21-30.
4. Uzilday B, Özgür R, Sekmen AH, Yildiztugay E, Turkan İ. Changes in the alternative electron sinks and antioxidant defence in chloroplasts of the extreme halophyte Eutrema parvulum (Thellungiella parvula) under salinity. Ann Bot. 2015; 115(3):449–463.
5. Tuğ GN, Yaprak AE, Vural M. The floristical, ecological, and syntaxonomical characteristics of salt marshes and salt steppes in Turkey. In: Sabkha Ecosystems, vol VI: Asia/Pacific, Switzerland,: Springer; 2019. p. 413-446.
6. Şahin B. Vejetasyon Kaynakları. In: Güner A, editor. Resimli Türkiye Florası. Cilt 1. İstanbul: Nezahat Gökyiğit Botanik Bahçesi; 2014. p. 225-243.
7. Colwell RK, Coddington JA Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1994;345(1311):101-118.
8. Beck J, Schwanghart W. Comparing measures of species diversity from incomplete inventories: an update. Methods Ecol Evol. 2010;1(1):38-44.

9. Yilmaz KT, Akca E, Cakan H, Ünlükaplan Y, Kapur S. Relation between soil salinity and species composition of halophytic plant communities: A baseline data inventory for wetland monitoring. Turk J Bot. 2020;44(5):493-508.
10. Mittermeier RA, Turner WR, Larsen FW, Brooks TM, Gascon C. Global biodiversity conservation: the critical role of hotspots. In: Zachos FE, Habel JC, editors. Biodiversity hotspots—distribution and protection of conservation priority areas. Berlin: Springer; 2011. p. 3–22.
11. Chiarucci A, Bacaro G, Scheiner SM. Old and new challenges in using species diversity for assessing biodiversity. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011; 366(1576): 2426-2437.
12. Magurran AE, McGill BJ. Biological diversity: frontiers in measurement and assessment. Oxford: OUP; 2010.
13. Roswell M, Dushoff J, Winfree R. A conceptual guide to measuring species diversity. Oikos. 2021; 130(3):321-338.
14. Tuomisto H. A diversity of beta diversities: straightening up a concept gone awry. Part 1. Defining beta diversity as a function of alpha and gamma diversity. Ecography, 2010;33(1): 2-22.
15. Yurdakulol E, Öcel I, Demirörs M, Yıldız A, Keleş Y. Ecological and syntaxonomic investigation of salt marshes vegetation in the vicinity of Burdur and Acıgöl (Denizli/Turkey). Ecol Mediterr. 1996; XXII(1/2):51-61.
16. Aydoğdu M, Hamzaoğlu E, Kurt L. New halophytic syntaxa from Central Anatolia (Turkey). Isr J Plant Sci. 2002;50:313-323.
17. Aydoğdu M, Kurt L, Hamzaoğlu E, Ketenoğlu O, Cansaran A. Phytosociological studies on salty steppe communities of Central Anatolia, Turkey. Isr J Plant Sci. 2004;52:71-79.
18. Hamzaoğlu E, Aksoy A. Sultansazlığı Bataklığı halofitik toplulukları üzerine fitososyolojik bir çalışma (İç Anadolu-Kayseri). Ekoloji. 2006;15(60):8-15.
19. Birand H. Orta Anadolu bozkırında vejetasyon incelemelerinin ilk sonuçları: 1. Tuz Gölü Çorakçıl Bitki Bitlikleri. Konya: Selçuk Üniversitesi Yayınları; 1962.
20. Birand H. Die verwüstung der Artemisia-Steppe bei Karapınar in zentralanatolien. Vegetati. 1970; 20:21-47.
21. Serteser A, Acar H . Acıgöl (Afyonkarahisar) çevresinin halofitik vejetasyonu ve toprak ilişkisi. AKÜ FEMÜBİD. 2016; 16:495-506.
22. Meier ES, Hofer G. Effects of plot size and their spatial arrangement on estimates of alpha, beta and gamma diversity of plants in alpine grassland. Alp Bot. 2016;126(2): 167-176.
23. Ketenoğlu O, Vural M, Kurt L, Körüklü T. Vejetasyon. In: Güner A. editor. Resimli Türkiye Florası. Volume 1. İstanbul: Nezahat Gökyiğit Botanik Bahçesi; 2014.
24. Mucina L, Bültmann H, Dierßen K, Theurillat JP, Raus T, Čarni A, et al. Vegetation of Europe: hierarchical floristic classification system of vascular plant, bryophyte, lichen, and algal communities. Appl Veg Sci. 2016:19:3-264.
25. Aksoy A, Hamzaoğlu E. Vegetation zones in the salty marshes of Central Anatolia and natural borders of agricultural usage. In: Öztürk M, Waisel Y, Ajmal Khan M, Görk G, editors. Biosaline Agriculture and Salinity Tolerance in Plants. Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag; 2006.
26. Ketenoğlu O, Güzel P, Akman Y, Aydoğdu M. New syntaxa on the gypsaceous formations in the Central Anatolia. Ecol Mediterr. 1983; Tome IX, Fascicule 3-4.
27. Ketenoğlu O, Aydoğdu M, Kurt L, Akman Y, Hamzaoğlu E. Syntaxonomic research on the gypsicole vegetation in Cappadocia, Turkey. Isr J Plant Sci.2000;48:121–128.
28. Akman Y, Ketenoğlu O, Kurt L, Vural M. İç Anadolu Step Vejetasyonu. Ankara: Palme Yayıncılık; 2014.
29. Güner A, Aslan S, Ekim T, Vural M, Babaç MT. Türkiye Bitkileri Listesi (Damarlı Bitkiler). İstanbul: Nezahat Gökyiğit Bahçesi ve Flora Araştırmaları Derneği Yayını; 2012.
30. Večeřa M, Divíšek J, Lenoir J, Jiménez‐Alfaro B, Biurrun I, Knollová I, et al. Alpha diversity of vascular plants in European forests. J Biogeogr. 2019;46(9):1919-1935.
31. Braun-Blanquet J. Pflanzensoziologie-Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde. Wien and New York: Springer Verlag; 1964.
32. Barkman JJ, Doing H, Segal S. Kritische Bemerkungen und vorschläge zur quantitativen Vegetationsanalyse. Acta Bot Neerl. 1964:13:394-419.
33. Wildi O. Data analysis in vegetation ecology. London: Wiley-Blackwell; 2017.
34. Tichý L. JUICE, software for vegetation classification. J Veg Sci. 2002;13:451–453.
35. Google Earth Version: 7.3.6.9796 [Internet] 2024. [cited in October 2024] Available from https://earth.google.com/web/
36. QGIS.org (2024). QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. Available from http://qgis.org
37. Hill MO. Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology. 1973;54(2): 427-432.
38. Jost L. Entropy and diversity. Oikos. 2006;113(2): 363-375.
39. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, O’hara R, Simpson GL, et al. Vegan: community ecology package. R package version 1.17-4 2010
40. Kassambara, A. 2023. ggpubr: 'ggplot2' Based Publication Ready Plots. R package version 0.6.0.
41. Willner W. What is an alliance? VCS. 2020;1: 139-144.
42. Kurt L, Nilhan TG, Ketenoglu O. Synoptic view of the steppe vegetation of Central Anatolia, Turkey. Asian J Plant Sci. 2006; 5(4): 733-739.
43. Chao A, Gotelli NJ, Hsieh TC, Sander EL, Ma KH, Colwell RK, et al. Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species diversity studies. Ecol Monogr. 2014;84(1):45-67.
44. Chao A, Jost L. Coverage‐based rarefaction and extrapolation: standardizing samples by completeness rather than size. Ecology. 2012;93(12):2533-2547.
45. Baselga A. Partitioning the turnover and nestedness components of beta diversity. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2010;19(1):134-143.
46. Baselga A, Orme CDL. Betapart: an R package for the study of beta diversity. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2012;3(5):808-812.
47. Baselga A. Separating the two components of abundance-based dissimilarity: balanced changes in abundance vs. abundance gradients. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2013;4:552–557.
48. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing [Internet]. 2024 [cited in March 2024] Available from https://www.R-project.org/
49. Posit team. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. [Internet]. 2024. [cited in March 2024] Available from http://www.posit.co/.
50. Biurrun I, Burrascano S, Dembicz I, Guarino R, Kapfer J, Pielech R, et al. GrassPlot v. 2.00 – first update on the database of multi-scale plant diversity in Palaearctic grasslands. PG, 2019;44:26–47.
51. Sarr DA, Hibbs DE, Huston MA A Hierarchical perspective of plant diversity. Q Rev Biol. 2005;80(2):187-212.
52. De Bello F, Lepš J, Sebastià M-T. Variations in species and functional plant diversity along climatic and grazing gradients. Ecography. 2006;29:801-810.
53. Zhang Q, Hou X, Li FY, Niu, J, Zhou Y. Ding Y, et al. Alpha, beta and gamma diversity differ in response to precipitation in the Inner Mongolia grassland. PLoS One. 2014;9(3): e93518.
54. Eliáš Jr P, Sopotlieva D, Dítě D, Hájková P, Apostolova I, Senko D,et al. Vegetation diversity of salt‐rich grasslands in Southeast Europe. Appl Veg Sci. 2013;16(3):521-537.
55. Gaston KJ, Rodrigues ASL, van Rensburg, BJ, Koleff P, Chown SL. Complementary representation and zones of ecological transition. Ecol Lett. 2001;4:4-9.
56. Ambarlı D, Zeydanlı US, Balkız Ö, Aslan S, Karaçetin E, Sözen M. An overview of biodiversity and conservation status of steppes of the Anatolian Biogeographical Region. Biodivers Conserv. 2016; 25: 2491-2519.
57. Dengler J. Pitfalls in small-scale species-area sampling and analysis. Folia Geobot, 2008;43:269-287.
58. Cunillera-Montcus D, Beklioğlu M, Cañedo-Argüelles M, Jeppesen E, Ptacnik R, Amorim CA, et al. Freshwater salinisation: a research agenda for a saltier world. TREE.2022; 37(5):440-453.
59. Yılmaz G, Çolak MA, Özgencil İK, Metin M, Korkmaz M, Ertuğrul S, et al. Decadal changes in size, salinity, waterbirds, and fish in lakes of the Konya Closed Basin, Turkey, associated with climate change and increasing water abstraction for agriculture. Inland Waters. 2021;11(4):538-555.
60. Dönmez AA, Uğurlu Aydın Z; Yüzbaşıoğlu İS. On the border of extinction and speciation, Polygala seyfegoluensis (Polygalaceae), a new species from marshy habitat, Central Türkiye: Under the threat of climate change, water retreat, and subsequent degradation. Turk J Bot. 2024;48(1):44–56.
61. Dengler J, Boch S, Filibeck G, Chiarucci A, Dembicz I, Guarino R, et al. Assessing plant diversity and composition in grasslands across spatial scales: the standardised EDGG sampling methodology. PG. 2016;32,13−30.
62. De Cáceres M, Franklin SB, Hunter JT, Landucci F, Dengler J, Roberts DW. Global overview of plot-based vegetation classification approaches. Phytocoenologia. 2018;48(2).
63. Noriyuki M, Kondo H, Shitara T, Yoshikawa M, Hoshino Y. A new formal classification for Japanese forest vegetation based on traditional phytosociological concepts. Appl Veg Sci. 2021;24:e12611.