Next Article in Journal
Efficient Fingerprinting of the Tetraploid Salix psammophila Using SSR Markers
Previous Article in Journal
Deforestation and Connectivity among Protected Areas of Tanzania
 
 
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 2
10.3390/f11020171
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

Plant Diversity Along the Urban–Rural Gradient and Its Relationship with Urbanization Degree in Shanghai, China

by
Meng Wang
1,
Junxiang Li
1,2,3,*,
Shengjian Kuang
1,†,
Yujuan He
1,
Guojian Chen
1,‡,
Yue Huang
1,
Conghe Song
4,
Pippin Anderson
5 and
Damian Łowicki
6
1
School of Ecological and Environmental Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China
2
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Urbanization and Eco-restoration, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China
3
Institute of Eco-Chongming, 3663 North Zhongshan Road, Shanghai 200062, China
4
Department of Geography, CB# 3220, 205 Saunders Hall, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
5
Department of Environmental and Geographical Science, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch 7707, South Africa
6
Faculty of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poznań 61-712, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
Shengjian Kuang now is a Research Scientist in the Guizhou Institute of Soil and Fertilizer, Jinnong road, Huaxi District, Guiyang City, Guizhou Province, China.
‡
Guojian Chen now is a PhD student in the Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Science, Beijing, China.
Forests 2020, 11(2), 171; https://doi.org/10.3390/f11020171
Submission received: 13 November 2019 / Revised: 28 January 2020 / Accepted: 31 January 2020 / Published: 4 February 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Ecology and Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Urbanization is one of the major causes for plant diversity loss at the local and regional scale. However, how plant species distribute along the urban–rural gradient and what the relationship between urbanization degree and plant diversity is, is not very clear. In this paper, 134 sample sites along two 18 km width transects that run across the urban center of Shanghai were investigated. We quantified the spatial patterns of plant diversity along the urban–rural gradient and measured the relationship between plant diversity and urbanization degree, which was calculated using a land use land cover map derived from high spatial resolution aerial photos. We recorded 526 vascular plant species in 134 plots, 57.8% of which are exotic plant species. Six spatial distribution patterns of species richness were identified for different plant taxa along the rural to urban gradient. The native plant species richness showed no significant relationship to urbanization degree. The richness of the all plants, woody plants and perennial herbs presented significant positive relationship with urbanization degree, while the richness of annual herbs, Shannon-Wiener diversity and Heip evenness all exhibited a negative relationship to urbanization degree. Urbanization could significantly influence plant diversity in Shanghai. Our findings can provide insights to understand the mechanism of urbanization effects on plant diversity, as well as plant diversity conservation in urban areas.

1. Introduction

Urbanization has been accelerating for several decades at an alarming rate around the world. The world’s population was nearly 7.6 billion as of mid-2017, and it was projected that 70% of the world’s population increase would be concentrated in urban areas [1]. The urbanization level in China exceeded population by 54% at the end of 2018 (National Population Development Strategy Report). Cities have become increasingly important habitats for preserving biodiversity and homes for threatened and rare species [2,3]. However, urbanization associated with the habitat degradation and fragmentation, intense human activities and disturbances has led to biodiversity loss even extinction [4]. The urbanization impact on plant diversity is bringing about more and more concerns and has become a hot topic in urban ecology [5,6,7,8].
Urban–rural gradient manifests from the outer edge of a city towards the city’s center, and it has been widely used to measure the variations of physical variables, habitat types, and biodiversity of cities and towns [9,10]. Spatial distribution patterns of plant species along the urban–rural gradient varies with different taxon in different cities: Some studies showed that non-native plant richness was higher in urban areas than that in rural areas [11], while some other studies found that total plant richness, native plant richness, and non-native species richness are lowest in urban areas [12,13]. Meanwhile, there also exists a phenomenon of a peak of weed richness between urban and rural areas [14,15], which tends to follow the intermediate disturbance hypotheses [16,17]. These results suggest that the distribution pattern of different plant taxon is not consistent along the urban–rural gradient. Therefore, how the plant species diversity of different taxon (e.g., life form, origin) vary along the urban to rural gradient needs further study.
Although urbanization is known to influence the distribution of plant diversity [18,19], the patterns of the plant diversity distribution vary significantly from study to study. Some studies found that the richness of total plants, including trees, shrubs and herbs are all highest in the areas with a moderate urbanization degree [20,21,22]. Wang et al. [23] found that the number of total species, native species and exotic species were all lowest in the areas with mid-urbanization degree, while the number of total and native plants are all highest in lowest urbanization degree, and exotic plant richness is highest in the areas with high urbanization degree. Other studies found that the total species richness and native species richness are all the highest in highly urbanized areas [24,25]. McDonnell and Hahs [26] reviewed studies on gradient analysis and summarized that there were at least six patterns of organism distribution along the urbanization gradient, i.e., no response, negative, punctuated, intermediate, positive, and bimodal responses, respectively (Figure 1). However, these are conceptual models derived mainly from the taxon of arthropods, insects, amphibians, birds, etc., and have seldom quantitatively been tested. There are relatively few studies showing only a linear relationship between urbanization degree and plant diversity. For instance, the richness of native plant and exotic plant species were shown to be positively related to urbanization degree [27,28]. However, Burton and Samuelson [29] found that woody plant species richness is negatively related to urbanization degree. Therefore, how different plant species diversity responds to urbanization needs further study.
As the largest and most urbanized city in China, Shanghai experienced huge landscape transformation and drastic land use/cover change in the past three decades [30]. Therefore, it is an ideal place to study the impacts of urbanization on plant diversity. In this paper, we aim to address the following questions: (1) What is the distribution pattern of plant species richness along the urban–rural gradient? (2) What is the relationship between plant diversity and urbanization degree?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Shanghai lies in the eastern part of the Yangtze River Delta region and borders the East China Sea, located between 30°40′–31°53 N and 120°52′–122°12′ E with a territory area of 6340.5 km2 and average elevation of 4 m above sea level (Figure 2). The registered population was 24.19 million by the end of 2016 [31]. Shanghai has a typical north subtropical monsoon climate with an annual mean air temperature of 16 °C and precipitation of 1200 mm. The original natural vegetation in shanghai is mixed forest composed of subtropical evergreen and deciduous broad-leaved trees, but it has been destroyed due to long-term intense human activities. Only a few remnant natural forest patches were left and distributed on hills such as Sheshan, Tianma, etc., and the offshore island of Dajinshan [32,33]. The current vegetation is mainly artificial forest and urban green spaces [34]. According to “the plants of Shanghai” summarized in 1999, there are 500 native plant species and 350 non-native species distributed in the city. However, in the past few decades, the non-native plant species has increased greatly due to the introduction of alien species into urban green spaces, while the number of native species has reduced rapidly, which can be attributed to urbanization [35].

2.2. Sampling Design and Plant Field Survey

To get spatially well represented and unbiased samples, the dual-density, randomized, tessellation-stratified design was used to obtain the samples [36], consisting of a grid of 3 km × 3 km squares. To the tessellation, the outer ring road as the boundary was superimposed to divide shanghai into high and lower developed urban areas. Considering the greater landscape heterogeneity within the urban core area, we use a sampling density of 3:1 inside/outside the urban core area, i.e., a random sample taken in every square inside and one sample in every third square outside the urban core area along two 18 km-width transects that run across the urban center in north–south and east–west directions, respectively. A total of 134 plots were sampled, of which 68 samples were inside and 66 samples were outside the urban core area (Figure 2).
A plant field survey was conducted from July to October 2014 using a further modified Whittaker sample plot on each sample site [37] (Figure 3). For those sample sites where there is less, even no vegetation to satisfy the minimum sample area (20 m × 50 m), we found another similar site to replace them within a 500 m radius circle. In the heterogeneous urban landscape, especially in the dense residential urban core area, it is not easy to find a place to set a sample plot with suitable size, such as 30 m × 30 m, 20 m × 20 m, or a 12 m radius circular plot [38], so we employed the modified Whittaker sample plot proposed by Stohlgren et al. [37], which was widely used to investigate plant diversity [39,40]. To make it more flexible in the dense residential urban area, we further modified the plot design to split the central subplot of 5 m × 20 m into two subplots of 2.5 m × 20 m (Figure 3). Each sample plot was located using a portable GPS; once the plot was set, it was fixed onto the high spatial resolution aerial photos to ensure the revisit. Species richness and their abundance or coverage of all vascular plants founded in each plot were recorded. Plant species was identified in reference to the Flora of shanghai [34], the Checklist of Shanghai Vascular Plants [41] and Flora of China [42]. When the records of plant species were not the same in different plant reference books, the Flora of China was used as the standard reference. Plant species were categorized into different taxa, i.e., woody and herbaceous plant, and the herbaceous was further classified into annual and perennial species in terms of life form, and native and exotic species according to their origin.

2.3. Plant Diversity Index Calculation

Three plant diversity indexes were calculated for each sample plot including species richness, Shannon-Wiener diversity and Heip evenness. The Shannon-Weiner index is a widely used measure of diversity [43]. Wilsey and Stirling [44] suggested that evenness and richness could be affected by different ecological processes and suggest that both indices should be measured in plant diversity studies. Meanwhile, Heip evenness index measures how well the abundance distributed among species within a community [45,46], especially in highly heterogenous urban areas. As suggested by Jost [47], the value of Shannon-Wiener diversity gives uncertainty. So the exponential conversion of Shannon-Wiener diversity was calculated to intuitively measure the effective numbers of species in this paper. Further, Heip evenness was also exponentially transformed. The Shannon-wiener diversity indices and the Heip evenness of plant species were calculated using the following formulations [47,48]:
H′ = exp (− Pi lnPi)
where, H′ is Shannon-Wiener diversity, and Pi is the relative abundance of each species.
E h e i p = H ′ − 1 S − 1
where, Eheip is Heip evenness, and S is the sum of the total species abundance.

2.4. Urbanization Degree Calculation

Urbanization degree can be measured by the percentage of urban population or the proportion of total urban land use types, such as traffic road, residential areas, industrial land, public facilities, etc. Here we used the latter as the indicator of urbanization degree in Shanghai. To calculate the urbanization degree of each sample site, we used a 1km-radius circle to overlap upon the land use land cover map, which was derived from high spatial resolution aerial photos of Shanghai in 2013, according to the land use land cover classification system proposed by Li et al. [30]. We combined the land use types of industry, traffic road, public facilities, residential, and the construction site into the type of urban land use; and finally five land use land cover types were obtained (Table 1) and used to calculate the urbanization degree (UD) around each sample site using Equation (3):
UD   S u r b a n   l a n d S
where, Surban land is the area of urban land use type, and S refers to the total area of the 1 km radius circle around each sample plot.

2.5. Data Analyses

Gradient analysis, which was proposed by Whittaker and Niering [49], has been widely used to investigate the effect of urbanization on plant distribution [50], ecosystems characteristics [51], and landscape patterns [30,52]. In this paper, gradient analysis was employed to examine the distribution pattern of plant species diversity along the four rural-to-urban transects. Regression analysis was used to explore the relationship between urbanization degree and plant diversity. When several fitting models existed, to well quantify the relationship between urbanization degree and plant diversity, the minimum Akaike information criterion (AIC) was used to select the best one. This was calculated in R 3.4.1 [53]. The figures were produced using the SigmaPlot (version 12.5) and Origin (version 8.0).

3. Results

3.1. General Plant Species Composition

We recorded 526 vascular plant species that belong to 114 families and 364 genera in our 134 sample plots. There were 183 woody plants and 343 herbaceous plants, among which annual and perennial herbs were 192 and 151, respectively. Among these vascular plants, there are 222 native species, and 304 exotic species including the cultivated plant species, accounting for 44.4% and 93.4% of the total native and exotic species in Shanghai, respectively. The exotic plant species exceeds the native ones and accounts for 57.8% of the total recorded species.

3.2. The Distribution Pattern of Plant Diversity along the Urban to Rural Gradient

For easy comparison, polynomial curve fitting was utilized to quantify the spatial distribution patterns of plant species of different taxa along the urban–rural gradient. Urbanization degree showed approximately a symmetric pattern along the west–east and the south–north urban-rural transects where the urbanization degree peaked in the urban center and decreased gradually from urban to rural areas, except for a little valley near the east and south rural end, respectively (Figure 4).
Plant species richness of different growth forms exhibited different patterns along the four urban–rural transects (Figure 4). For the total plant species richness, there are no significant changes along the urban–rural gradient on the west, south and north parts of the transects, respectively, only a bimodal pattern exhibited along the eastern urban–rural gradient and a fourth-order polynomial were presented (Figure 4A,a). The woody plant species richness presented a cubic polynomial and linear decreasing pattern from the urban to rural area along the west, east and south transects, but no particular quantitative patterns along the north transect (Figure 4B,b). The annual herbaceous species richness showed up as a unimodal spatial pattern along the western and eastern urban–rural transects, and as a linear increasing pattern from urban to rural on the northern transect (Figure 4C,c). The perennial herbaceous species richness exhibited a linear, quadratic and fourth-order distribution pattern on the western, southern and eastern transects, respectively (Figure 4D,d). All the fitting equations of the spatial pattern are presented in Table 2.
The native plant species richness did not show an evident pattern along any of the four urban–rural transects (Figure 5A,a). The exotic plant species richness showed a cubic and four-order pattern along the west and east urban–rural transect, respectively, but not any significant pattern along the south and north transects (Figure 5B,b). The fitting models are shown in Table 3.

3.3. The Relationship between Plant Diversity and Urbanization Degree

The relationship between plant diversity and urbanization degree show that the species richness of total plants increased linearly with urbanization degree (R2 = 0.0321, p < 0.05); however, the urbanization degree has very limited capability to explain the variation of the total species richness (Figure 6a). Woody plant species richness quadratically increases with urbanization degree (R2 = 0.3596, p < 0.01) and urbanization degree explains nearly 36% of the variations of woody species richness (Figure 6b). Among the herbaceous plants, the annual herb species richness quadratically decreases with the increase of urbanization degree (R2 = 0.2499, p < 0.01) (Figure 6c). On the contrary, the perennial herb species richness linearly increases with urbanization degree (R2 = 0.2805, p < 0.01) (Figure 6d). There is a positive quadratic relationship between exotic plant species richness and urbanization degree (R2 = 0.0896, p < 0.01), but no significant relationship exists between native species richness and urbanization degree (Figure 6e,f). The Shannon-Wiener diversity index declines quadratically with urbanization degree (R2 = 0.0699, p < 0.01), while the Heip evenness decreases linearly with urbanization degree (R2 = 0.1463, p < 0.01) (Figure 6g,h).

4. Discussion

4.1. Multiple Patterns of Plant Species Diversity along the Urban-rural Gradient

Our study reveals several spatial distribution patterns of plants, i.e., no responses, linear increasing, linear decreasing, unimodal, bimodal, and punctuated increasing co-existed for different plant taxon along the rural–urban gradient in Shanghai, which has never been reported before. This coexistence of multiple spatial patterns of plant diversity along the urbanization gradient may be due to the following reasons: First, Urban landscape is of high heterogeneity, which provides numerous habitats for various plant species [30,54,55,56]. Second, urban areas, especially along the urban–rural transect, usually have diversified land use land cover types, and the diverse land use land cover types and their spatial compositions undoubtedly enhance plant diversity [57,58,59,60]. Third, urban socioeconomic conditions, cultural diversity and land use management are important factors that influence plant diversity patterns along the urban–rural gradient [36,61,62,63,64,65]. All these factors may simultaneously function to determine plant diversity [66]. Fourth, the heterogeneous urban areas could have a hierarchical filtering effect on plant diversity [67], which could occur on plant functional, taxonomic, and polygenetic levels [68] through various mechanisms, such as land use and habitats, and even landscape [69,70,71] and environmental factors [72,73,74].
There is a general trend that plant species richness is higher in areas with higher urbanization degrees than rural areas in our study. This may due to the pre-existing biodiversity hotspots in the city [75] and/or intentional or unintentional import of exotic plants in the central urban areas throught urban landscape management [11,76,77]. Each plant taxon exhibited a specific spatial distribution pattern along the urban–rural transect in Shanghai. The woody and perennial herbaceous plants exhibited highest species richness in the central urban area (Figure 4), which is similar to what was found in Beijing [78]. Compared to the rural area, the urban green spaces usually dominated by artificial vegetation in Shanghai, and similarly more woody plant species and perennial herbs have been found in European cities because of the human and landscape architect’s preference and landscape designs [79,80]. The annual herbaceous plants exhibit unimodal distribution with the peak occurring in urban to rural transition zones, the so-called ecotone where intermediate disturbances and highly fragmented and heterogeneous landscape existed [30]. This is similar with the previous report where ruderal species presented highest richness in the transition areas between urban and rural interfaces in the same city of Shanghai due to high diversity of habitat and environmental factors [14]. Furthermore, many annual herbs are crop species, which were mainly recorded in agriculture land in the suburbs, while the majority of annual herbs in central urban areas are weed and exotic flowers, which are frequently removed by intensive green space management activities, resulting in lower species richness. We found no evident spatial pattern for native plants in shanghai probably because native plant species have evolved and proved to be more adaptive and competitive than the non-natives which colonized or were artificially introduced in the urban areas [81]. In addition, the exotic plant species along the north and south urban–rural gradient also exhibited no distinct patterns. This may be due to a decades old landscaping policy in Shanghai that allows the new green to utilize both the indigenous plant and the introduced alien plant species [82].

4.2. The Impacts of Urbanization on Plant Diversity

Urbanization could influence plant diversity, such as reduce native plant species richness, increase exotic plant species richness, structural and functional alteration [83,84,85,86], etc. at local, regional and global scales [87,88], ultimately leading to biota homogenization [25,89,90,91]. This study showed how the urbanization degree influences plant diversity of different taxon. It is very necessary and important to understand the underlying process of urbanization on plant diversity, which was less well addressed before. Previous studies founded a positive linear relationship [27] and negative linear relationship between urbanization and plant diversity. We found a diversity of relationships (linear model, quadratic polynomial model, and no relationship) between urbanization and plant diversity in this study, which deeply enriches the theory of plant responses to urbanizations.
Our study reveals that spatial relationships existed between urbanization degree and a diversity of different plant taxa except for native plant species. The relationship between woody plant species richness and urbanization degree follows a binomial pattern. The richness of woody plant increased sharply with the increase of urbanization degree. This is mainly due to a high demand for urban greenspaces, where big woody plants are preferred by planners or local governments to quickly create greening landscapes. This was a very common phenomenon during urban greening in other cities in China in the past decades. Perennial herbaceous species richness increased with urbanization degree and may be due to the following mechanisms: (1) perennial herbs’ survival strategies are more adaptive and persistent to the highly disturbed urban environment, and (2) some of the perennial herbs are ornamental species preferred by landscape managers in urban residential areas in Shanghai. The annual herb richness quadratically changed with urbanization degree and the highest value occurred at the moderate urbanization degree. This can be explained by intermediate disturbance hypothesis or other urban-related disturbances, similar to previous studies in Chinese cities [14,92,93]. In addition, the majority of the annual herbs we recorded are ruderal species, which evolve with different survival strategies to diverse habitats and multiple disturbances [94,95,96]. Exotic plant species richness exhibited a slightly negative quadratic relationship with urbanization degree, which means the introduction of an exotic plant could increase the total plant species richness associated with the urbanization process, which was also demonstrated by previous studies [75,97]. All these patterns of different plant taxa work together to result in a weak but significant linear increase of total plant species richness with urbanization degree. The Shannon-wiener diversity and evenness that both decreased with urbanization degree may be due to landscape fragmentation [30]. A similar result was reported by Lopez et al. [68] who utilized the structural equation model to analyze and found that most diversity indices decline with urbanization, which could be explained by four biodiversity filters of habitat transformation, fragmentation, the urban environment, and human preference. However, further study is needed to compare the situation in Shanghai with the Lopez et al.’s work in the Research Triangle area of North Carolina, USA.
Many previous studies, which aim to quantify the impacts of urbanization on urban plant diversity, have encountered the question of how to quantitatively measure the urbanization degree. For example, Hahs and McDonnell [98] selected four indices, i.e., combined Index, the ratio of people per unit urban land area, landscape shape index, and dominant land-cover from 17 commonly used variables of covering demographic, physical and landscape variables, to capture and quantify the urbanization patterns along Melbourne’s urban–rural gradient. Some studies only coarsely divided urbanization into three levels of urban, suburban and peri-urban based on landscape composition in Strasbourg, eastern France [24], or into urban, suburban and exurban using human density and a proportion of the built-up area by Wang et al. [23] in Beijing, China. Some other studies used the surrogate index, such as distance from urban center [11,99] or ring road surrounding urban areas [14,22] to indirectly measure the urbanization degree. All these indices are an indirect representation of urbanization degree. However, the most frequently used measurement of urbanization is quantified by the urban population percentage and/or urban land use proportion, which also reflects the percent of impervious surface in the city. The former mainly links to the socio-economic dimension of urbanization and the latter focuses more on urban biophysical and environmental factors. These two kinds of indices are more straightforward and easily obtained from urban census data or retrieved from remotely sensed data, which have been widely utilized to study urbanization and their relationships to, or impacts on urban biodiversity [72,100,101,102,103]. Compared with most of the previous studies, our study directly used the urban land use proportion to quantify the urbanization degree and established a quantitative relationship to plant species diversity that can help easily understand and predict the influences of urbanization on plant diversity; therefore, this study can provide insight to optimize ecosystem services in future urban green space planning and design [104,105,106]. Apart from urbanization degree, several mechanisms such as social-economic factors (e.g., population density) [66]; landscape factors, such as land use types [107] or the type of building, especially for residential use (high-rise buildings, city blocks, attached or individual houses, etc.) [82]; and environmental factors, such as climate variables [108] or soil conditions [109] could have a considerable influence on both the distribution pattern and plant species richness, and even the relationship between the plant diversity and urbanization degree; therefore, future studies are still needed to quantitatively explore the underlying mechanisms.

5. Conclusions

We investigated 134 plots along four urban–rural transects in Shanghai to explore the spatial patterns of plant diversity and their relationship with urbanization degree. We recorded 526 vascular plant species from these plots, nearly 60% of which are exotic species. We found that six kinds of spatial distribution patterns of different plant taxa co-existed along the urban–rural gradient. The total plant, woody, perennial herbs, and exotic plant richness positively increase with urbanization degree, while annual herb richness, measured by Shannon-Wiener diversity and Heip evenness, decreased with urbanization degree. The relationships can be classified into linear, quadratic polynomial, or random for different plant taxa. These findings could provide insights for urban green space planning and plant biodiversity conservation in urban areas in Shanghai. However, the underlying mechanisms of the urbanization degree and plant diversity need further study.

Author Contributions

J.L. conceive and design the research; S.K., Y.H. (Yujuan He), G.C. and Y.H. (Yue Huang) performed field investigation and data collection, S.K., M.W., J.L. analyzed the data; M.W. and S.K. write the manuscript; J.L., C.S., P.A. and D.Ł. improved the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2017YFC0505701 to J. Li), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31870453 to J. Li and No. 31528004 to C. Song), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 2017ECNU-HWFW029) to J. Li.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables; No. ESA/P/WP/248; Working Paper; United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  2. Knapp, S.; Kcohn, I.; Bakker, J.P.; Kleyer, M.; Klotz, S.; Ozinga, W.A.; Poschlod, P.; Thompson, K.; Thuiller, W.; Rcemermann, C. How species traits and affinity to urban land use control large-scale species frequency. Divers. Distrib. 2009, 15, 533–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ives, C.D.; Lentini, P.E.; Threlfall, C.G.; Ikin, K.; Shanahan, D.F.; Garrard, G.E.; Bekessy, S.A.; Fuller, R.A.; Mumaw, L.; Rayner, L.; et al. Cities are hotspots for threatened species. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2016, 25, 117–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. McKinney, M.L. Effects of urbanization on species richness: A review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosyst. 2008, 11, 161–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Singh, A.K.; Singh, H.; Singh, J. Plant diversity in cities: Call for assessment and conservation. Curr. Sci. 2018, 115, 428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Soanes, K.; Lentini, P.E. When cities are the last chance for saving species. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2019, 17, 225–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Piana, M.R.; Aronson, M.F.; Pickett, S.T.; Handel, S.N. Plants in the city: Understanding recruitment dynamics in urban landscapes. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2019, 17, 455–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Filazzola, A.; Shrestha, N.; MacIvor, J.S. The contribution of constructed green infrastructure to urban biodiversity: A synthesis and meta-analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 2019, 56, 2131–2143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mckinney, M.L. Urbanization, Biodiversity, and Conservation. Bioscience 2002, 52, 883–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. McDonnell, M.J.; Pickett, S.T.A.; Groffman, P.; Bohlen, P.; Pouyat, R.V.; Zipperer, W.C.; Parmelee, R.W.; Carreiro, M.M.; Medley, K. Ecosystem processes along an urban-to-rural gradient. Urban Ecosyst. 1997, 1, 21–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Vakhlamova, T.; Rusterholz, H.-P.; Kanibolotskaya, Y.; Baur, B. Changes in plant diversity along an urban–rural gradient in an expanding city in Kazakhstan, Western Siberia. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2014, 132, 111–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ranta, P.; Viljanen, V. Vascular plants along an urban-rural gradient in the city of Tampere, Finland. Urban Ecosyst. 2011, 14, 361–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lippe, M.V.D.; Kowarik, I. Do cities export biodiversity? Traffic as dispersal vector across urban-rural gradients. Divers. Distrib. 2008, 14, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Tian, Z.; Song, K.; Da, L. Distribution patterns and traits of weed communities along an urban–rural gradient under rapid urbanization in Shanghai, China. Weed Biol. Manag. 2015, 15, 27–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Stenchly, K.; Lippmann, S.; Waongo, A.; Nyarko, G.; Buerkert, A. Weed species structural and functional composition of okra fields and field periphery under different management intensities along the rural-urban gradient of two West African cities. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2017, 237, 213–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Shea, K.; Roxburgh, S.H.; Rauschert, E.S.J. Moving from pattern to process: Coexistence mechanisms under intermediate disturbance regimes. Ecol. Lett. 2004, 7, 491–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Connell, J.H. Intermediate-disturbance hypothesis. Science 1979, 204, 1345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Aronson, M.F.; Handel, S.N.; La Puma, I.P.; Clemants, S.E. Urbanization promotes non-native woody species and diverse plant assemblages in the New York metropolitan region. Urban Ecosyst. 2015, 18, 31–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wang, Y.; Meng, D.; Zhu, Y.; Zhang, F. Impacts of regional urbanization development on plant diversity within boundary of built-up areas of different settlement categories in Jinzhong Basin, China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2009, 91, 212–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. White, R.J.; Carreiro, M.M.; Zipperer, W.C. Woody plant communities along urban, suburban, and rural streams in Louisville, Kentucky, USA. Urban Ecosyst. 2014, 17, 1061–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Moffatt, S.F.; McLachlan, S.M.; Kenkel, N.C. Impacts of land use on riparian forest along an urban-rural gradient in southern Manitoba. Plant Ecol. 2004, 174, 119–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhang, D.; Zheng, H.; He, X.; Ren, Z.; Zhai, C.; Yu, X.; Mao, Z.; Wang, P. Effects of forest type and urbanization on species composition and diversity of urban forest in Changchun, Northeast China. Urban Ecosyst. 2016, 19, 455–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wang, G.; Jiang, G.; Zhou, Y.; Liu, Q.; Ji, Y.; Wang, S.; Chen, S.; Hui, L. Biodiversity conservation in a fast-growing metropolitan area in China: A case study of plant diversity in Beijing. Biodivers. Conserv. 2007, 16, 4025–4038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Schwoertzig, E.; Poulin, N.; Hardion, L.; Trémolières, M. Plant ecological traits highlight the effects of landscape on riparian plant communities along an urban–rural gradient. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 61, 568–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kühn, I.; Klotz, S. Urbanization and homogenization—comparing the floras of urban and rural areas in Germany. Biol. Conserv. 2006, 127, 292–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. McDonnell, M.J.; Hahs, A.K. The use of gradient analysis studies in advancing our understanding of the ecology of urbanizing landscapes: Current status and future directions. Landsc. Ecol. 2008, 23, 1143–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ricketts, T.; Imhoff, M. Biodiversity, Urban Areas, and Agriculture: Locating Priority Ecoregions for Conservation. Conserv. Ecol. 2003, 8, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Heckmann, K.E.; Manley, P.N.; Schlesinger, M.D. Ecological integrity of remnant montane forests along an urban gradient in the Sierra Nevada. For. Ecol. Manag. 2008, 255, 2453–2466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Burton, M.L.; Samuelson, L.J. Influence of urbanization on riparian forest diversity and structure in the Georgia Piedmont, US. Plant Ecol. 2008, 195, 99–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Li, J.; Li, C.; Zhu, F.; Song, C.; Wu, J. Spatiotemporal pattern of urbanization in Shanghai, China between 1989 and 2005. Landsc. Ecol. 2013, 28, 1545–1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Shanghai Municipal Statistics Bureau. ShangHai Statistical Yearbook 2017; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2017.
  32. Zhou, X. The main natural vegetation types of Shanghai and their distribution. Acta Phytoecol. Et Geobot. Sin. 1984, 8, 189–198. [Google Scholar]
  33. Gao, J. Study on the basic characteristics of natural vegetation, vegetation regionalization and protection of Shanghai. Geogr. Res. 1997, 61, 891–895. [Google Scholar]
  34. Science and Technology Academy of Shanghai. The Plants of Shanghai; Shanghai Scientific and Technological Literature Publishing House: Shanghai, China, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhao, S.; Da, L.; Tang, Z.; Fang, H.; Song, K.; Fang, J. Ecological consequences of rapid urban expansion: Shanghai, China. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2006, 4, 341–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hope, D.; Gries, C.; Zhu, W.; Fagan, W.F.; Redman, C.L.; Grimm, N.B.; Nelson, A.L.; Martin, C.; Kinzig, A. Socioeconomics drive urban plant diversity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 8788–8792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Stohlgren, T.J.; Falkner, M.B.; Schell, L.D. A Modified-Whittaker nested vegetation sampling method. Plant Ecol. 1995, 117, 113–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. He, R.; Yang, J.; Song, X. Quantifying the Impact of Different Ways to Delimit Study Areas on the Assessment of Species Diversity of an Urban Forest. Forests 2016, 7, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Stohlgren, T.J.; Coughenour, M.B.; Chong, G.W.; Binkley, D.; Kalkhan, M.A.; Schell, L.D.; Buckley, D.J.; Berry, J.K. Landscape analysis of plant diversity. Landsc. Ecol. 1997, 12, 155–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Rüter, S.; Matthies, S.A.; Zoch, L. Applicability of Modified Whittaker plots for habitat assessment in urban forests: Examples from Hannover, Germany. Urban For. Urban Green. 2017, 21, 116–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ma, J. The Checklist of Shanghai Vascular Plants; Higher Education Press: Beijing, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  42. Flora of China. Available online: http://www.iplant.cn/foc/ (accessed on 4 February 2020).
  43. Magurran, A.E. Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1988; pp. 81–99. [Google Scholar]
  44. Wilsey, B.; Stirling, G. Species richness and evenness respond in a different manner to propagule density in developing prairie microcosm communities. Plant Ecol. 2007, 190, 259–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Wilsey, B.J.; Potvin, C. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Importance of Species Evenness in an Old Field. Ecology 2000, 81, 887–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Smith, B.; Wilson, J.B. A Consumer’s Guide to Evenness Indices. Oikos 1996, 76, 70–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Jost, L. Entropy and diversity. Oikos 2006, 113, 363–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Macarthur, R.H. Patterns of species diversity. Biol. Rev. 1965, 40, 510–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Whittaker, R.H.; Niering, W.A. Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona: A Gradient Analysis of the South Slope. Ecology 1965, 46, 429–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kowarik, I. Some responses of flora and vegetation to urbanization in central Europe. In Urban Ecology: Plants and Plant Communities in Urban Environments; Sukopp, H., Hejny, S., Kowarik, I., Eds.; SPB Academic Publishing bv: The Hague, The Netherlands, 1990; pp. 45–74. [Google Scholar]
  51. Mcdonnell, M.J.; Pickett, S.T.A. Ecosystem Structure and Function along Urban-Rural Gradients: An Unexploited Opportunity for Ecology. Ecology 1990, 71, 1232–1237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Luck, M.; Wu, J. A gradient analysis of urban landscape pattern: A case study from the Phoenix metropolitan region, Arizona, USA. Landsc. Ecol. 2002, 17, 327–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. R Development Core Team. R: A Language And Environment for Statistical Computing, Reference Index version 2.2.1. In R Foundation for Statistical Computing; R Development Core Team: Vienna, Austria, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  54. Hammill, E.; Hawkins, C.P.; Greig, H.S.; Kratina, P.; Shurin, J.B.; Atwood, T.B. Landscape heterogeneity strengthens the relationship between β-diversity and ecosystem function. Ecology 2018, 99, 2467–2475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Redon, M.; Bergès, L.; Cordonnier, T.; Luque, S. Effects of increasing landscape heterogeneity on local plant species richness: How much is enough? Landsc. Ecol. 2014, 29, 773–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Fahrig, L.; Baudry, J.; Brotons, L.; Burel, F.G.; Crist, T.O.; Fuller, R.J.; Sirami, C.; Siriwardena, G.M.; Martin, J.-L. Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecol. Lett. 2011, 14, 101–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Haines-Young, R. Land use and biodiversity relationships. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, S178–S186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Velázquez, A.; Durán, E.; Ramírez, I.; Mas, J.-F.; Bocco, G.; Ramírez, G.; Palacio, J.-L. Land use-cover change processes in highly biodiverse areas: The case of Oaxaca, Mexico. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2003, 13, 175–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Gerstner, K.; Dormann, C.F.; Stein, A.; Manceur, A.M.; Seppelt, R. Effects of land use on plant diversity – A global meta-analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 2014, 51, 1690–1700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Jentsch, A.; Steinbauer, M.J.; Alt, M.; Retzer, V.; Buhk, C.; Beierkuhnlein, C. A systematic approach to relate plant-species diversity to land use diversity across landscapes. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 107, 236–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Luck, G.; Smallbone, L.; O’Brien, R. Socio-Economics and Vegetation Change in Urban Ecosystems: Patterns in Space and Time. Ecosystems 2009, 12, 604–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Martin, C.A.; Warren, P.S.; Kinzig, A.P. Neighborhood socioeconomic status is a useful predictor of perennial landscape vegetation in residential neighborhoods and embedded small parks of Phoenix, AZ. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2004, 69, 355–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Hanspach, J.; Loos, J.; Dorresteijn, I.; Abson, D.J.; Fischer, J. Characterizing social–ecological units to inform biodiversity conservation in cultural landscapes. Divers. Distrib. 2016, 22, 853–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Huang, Y.; Chen, Y.; He, Y.; Wang, M.; Kuang, S.; Chen, G.; Li, J. Effects of socioeconomic factors on urban plant diversity of residential areas in Shanghai, China. J. Appl. Ecol. 2019, 30, 3403–3410. [Google Scholar]
  65. Kinzig, A.P.; Warren, P.; Martin, C.; Hope, D.; Katti, M. The effects of human socioeconomic status and cultural characteristics on urban patterns of biodiversity. Ecol. Soc. 2005, 10, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Uchiyama, Y.; Kohsaka, R. Spatio-temporal Analysis of Biodiversity, Land-use Mix and Human Population in a Socio-ecological Production Landscape: A Case Study in the Hokuriku Region, Japan. Procedia Eng. 2017, 198, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Aronson, M.F.J.; Nilon, C.H.; Lepczyk, C.A.; Parker, T.S.; Warren, P.S.; Cilliers, S.S.; Goddard, M.A.; Hahs, A.K.; Herzog, C.; Katti, M.; et al. Hierarchical filters determine community assembly of urban species pools. Ecology 2016, 97, 2952–2963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Lopez, B.E.; Urban, D.; White, P.S. Testing the effects of four urbanization filters on forest plant taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity. Ecol. Appl. 2018, 28, 2197–2205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Carvajal-Endara, S.; Hendry, A.P.; Emery, N.C.; Davies, T.J. Habitat filtering not dispersal limitation shapes oceanic island floras: Species assembly of the Galápagos archipelago. Ecol. Lett. 2017, 20, 495–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Jakovac, C.C.; Bongers, F.; Kuyper, T.W.; Mesquita, R.C.G.; Peña-Claros, M. Land use as a filter for species composition in Amazonian secondary forests. J. Veg. Sci. 2016, 27, 1104–1116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Poff, N.L. Landscape filters and species traits: Towards mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream ecology. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 1997, 16, 391–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Evans, B.S.; Reitsma, R.; Hurlbert, A.H.; Marra, P.P. Environmental filtering of avian communities along a rural-to-urban gradient in Greater Washington, D.C., USA. Ecosphere 2018, 9, e02402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Hough-Snee, N.; Laub, B.G.; Merritt, D.M.; Long, A.L.; Nackley, L.L.; Roper, B.B.; Wheaton, J.M. Multi-scale environmental filters and niche partitioning govern the distributions of riparian vegetation guilds. Ecosphere 2015, 6, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Batriu, E.; Ninot, J.M.; Pino, J. Filtering of plant functional traits is determined by environmental gradients and by past land use in a Mediterranean coastal marsh. J. Veg. Sci. 2015, 26, 492–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Kühn, I.; Brandl, R.; Klotz, S. The flora of German cities is naturally species rich. Evol. Ecol. Res. 2004, 6, 749–764. [Google Scholar]
  76. Mack, R.N.; Lonsdale, W.M. Humans as Global Plant Dispersers: Getting More Than We Bargained For. Bioscience 2001, 51, 95–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Kowarik, I. On the Role of Alien Species in Urban Flora and Vegetation. In Urban Ecology: An International Perspective on the Interaction Between Humans and Nature; Marzluff, J.M., Shulenberger, E., Endlicher, W., Alberti, M., Bradley, G., Ryan, C., Simon, U., ZumBrunnen, C., Eds.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2008; pp. 321–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Wang, H.-F.; MacGregor-Fors, I.; López-Pujol, J. Warm-temperate, immense, and sprawling: Plant diversity drivers in urban Beijing, China. Plant Ecol. 2012, 213, 967–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Knapp, S.; Kühn, I.; Stolle, J.; Klotz, S. Changes in the functional composition of a Central European urban flora over three centuries. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2010, 12, 235–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Clarke, L.W.; Jenerette, G.D.; Davila, A. The luxury of vegetation and the legacy of tree biodiversity in Los Angeles, CA. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 116, 48–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Sukopp, H. Human-caused impact on preserved vegetation. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2004, 68, 347–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Wang, H.; Qin, J.; Zhao, B.; Chen, J.; Dong, L.; Hu, Y. Spatiotemporal dynamics of plant diversity in response to farmers’ evolved settlements in Shanghai. Urban For. Urban Green. 2017, 22, 64–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Knapp, S.; Dinsmore, L.; Fissore, C.; Hobbie, S.E.; Jakobsdottir, I.; Kattge, J.; King, J.Y.; Klotz, S.; McFadden, J.P.; Cavender-Bares, J. Phylogenetic and functional characteristics of household yard floras and their changes along an urbanization gradient. Ecology 2012, 93, S83–S98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Walker, J.S.; Grimm, N.B.; Briggs, J.M.; Gries, C.; Dugan, L. Effects of urbanization on plant species diversity in central Arizona. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7, 465–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Yang, Y.; Fujihara, M.; Li, B.; Yuan, X.; Hara, K.; Da, L.; Tomita, M.; Zhao, Y. Structure and diversity of remnant natural evergreen broad-leaved forests at three sites affected by urbanization in Chongqing metropolis, Southwest China. Landsc. Ecol. Eng. 2014, 10, 137–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Palma, E.; Catford, J.A.; Corlett, R.T.; Duncan, R.P.; Hahs, A.K.; McCarthy, M.A.; McDonnell, M.J.; Thompson, K.; Williams, N.S.G.; Vesk, P.A. Functional trait changes in the floras of 11 cities across the globe in response to urbanization. Ecography 2016, 40, 875–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Seto, K.C.; Güneralp, B.; Hutyra, L.R. Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 16083–16088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Grimm, N.B.; Faeth, S.H.; Golubiewski, N.E.; Redman, C.L.; Wu, J.; Bai, X.; Briggs, J.M. Global Change and the Ecology of Cities. Science 2008, 319, 756–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Zeeman, B.J.; McDonnell, M.J.; Kendal, D.; Morgan, J.W. Biotic homogenization in an increasingly urbanized temperate grassland ecosystem. J. Veg. Sci. 2017, 28, 550–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. McKinney, M.L. Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization. Biol. Conserv. 2006, 127, 247–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Qian, S.; Qi, M.; Huang, L.; Zhao, L.; Lin, D.; Yang, Y. Biotic homogenization of China’s urban greening: A meta-analysis on woody species. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 18, 25–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Peng, Y.; Mi, K.; Wang, H.; Liu, Z.; Lin, Y.; Sang, W.; Cui, Q. Most suitable landscape patterns to preserve indigenous plant diversity affected by increasing urbanization: A case study of Shunyi District of Beijing, China. Urban For. Urban Green. 2019, 38, 33–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Cui, Y.C.; Song, K.; Guo, X.Y.; van Bodegom, P.M.; Pan, Y.J.; Tian, Z.H.; Chen, X.S.; Wang, J.; Da, L.J. Phylogenetic and functional structures of plant communities along a spatiotemporal urbanization gradient: Effects of colonization and extinction. J. Veg. Sci. 2019, 30, 341–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Johnson, A.L.; Tauzer, E.C.; Swan, C.M. Human legacies differentially organize functional and phylogenetic diversity of urban herbaceous plant communities at multiple spatial scales. Appl. Veg. Sci. 2015, 18, 513–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Youngsteadt, E.; Dale, A.G.; Terando, A.J.; Dunn, R.R.; Frank, S.D. Do cities simulate climate change? A comparison of herbivore response to urban and global warming. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2015, 21, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Jiang, Z.; Ma, K.; Liu, H.; Tang, Z. A trait-based approach reveals the importance of biotic filter for elevational herb richness pattern. J. Biogeogr. 2018, 45, 2288–2298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Wania, A.; Kuhn, I.; Klotz, S. Plant richness patterns in agricultural and urban landscapes in Central Germany—spatial gradients of species richness. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2006, 75, 97–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Hahs, A.K.; Mcdonnell, M.J. Selecting independent measures to quantify Melbourne’s urban–rural gradient. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2006, 78, 435–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Dallimer, M.; Rouquette, J.R.; Skinner, A.M.J.; Armsworth, P.R.; Maltby, L.M.; Warren, P.H.; Gaston, K.J. Contrasting patterns in species richness of birds, butterflies and plants along riparian corridors in an urban landscape. Divers. Distrib. 2012, 18, 742–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Pautasso, M. Scale dependence of the correlation between human population presence and vertebrate and plant species richness. Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Luck, G.W. A review of the relationships between human population density and biodiversity. Biol. Rev. 2007, 82, 607–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Just, M.G.; Dale, A.G.; Long, L.C.; Frank, S.D. Urbanization drives unique latitudinal patterns of insect herbivory and tree condition. Oikos 2019, 128, 984–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Concepción, E.D.; Obrist, M.K.; Moretti, M.; Altermatt, F.; Baur, B.; Nobis, M.P. Impacts of urban sprawl on species richness of plants, butterflies, gastropods and birds: Not only built-up area matters. Urban Ecosyst. 2016, 19, 225–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Nilon, C.H.; Aronson, M.F.J.; Cilliers, S.S.; Dobbs, C.; Frazee, L.J.; Goddard, M.A.; O’Neill, K.M.; Roberts, D.; Stander, E.K.; Werner, P.; et al. Planning for the Future of Urban Biodiversity: A Global Review of City-Scale Initiatives. BioScience 2017, 67, 332–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Manhães, A.P.; Mazzochini, G.G.; Oliveira-Filho, A.T.; Ganade, G.; Carvalho, A.R. Spatial associations of ecosystem services and biodiversity as a baseline for systematic conservation planning. Divers. Distrib. 2016, 22, 932–943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Botzat, A.; Fischer, L.K.; Kowarik, I. Unexploited opportunities in understanding liveable and biodiverse cities. A review on urban biodiversity perception and valuation. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2016, 39, 220–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Bourne, K.S.; Conway, T.M. The influence of land use type and municipal context on urban tree species diversity. Urban Ecosyst. 2014, 17, 329–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  108. Martin, Y.; Dyck, H.V.; Dendoncker, N.; Titeux, N.J.G.E. Testing instead of assuming the importance of land use change scenarios to model species distributions under climate change. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2013, 22, 1204–1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Jankovska, I.; Brūmelis, G.; Nikodemus, O.; Kasparinskis, R.; Amatniece, V.; Straupmanis, G. Tree Species Establishment in Urban Forest in Relation to Vegetation Composition, Tree Canopy Gap Area and Soil Factors. Forests 2015, 6, 4451–4461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Forests 11 00171 g001 550
Figure 1. Responses of organisms to urbanization gradient. (a) no response, (b) negative response, (c) punctuated response, (d) intermediate response, (e) positive response, and (f) bimodal responses (Redraw from McDonnell & Hahs [26]).
Figure 1. Responses of organisms to urbanization gradient. (a) no response, (b) negative response, (c) punctuated response, (d) intermediate response, (e) positive response, and (f) bimodal responses (Redraw from McDonnell & Hahs [26]).
Forests 11 00171 g001
Forests 11 00171 g002 550
Figure 2. Study area, urban-rural transects and the distribution of sampling plots. The two transects are oriented east–west and oriented north–south, both cutting across the urban center (People Square).
Figure 2. Study area, urban-rural transects and the distribution of sampling plots. The two transects are oriented east–west and oriented north–south, both cutting across the urban center (People Square).
Forests 11 00171 g002
Forests 11 00171 g003 550
Figure 3. Modified Whittaker Sampling plot. (a) Our further modified plot based upon Stohlgren et al.’s modification; (b) Stohlgren et al. [37] modified Whittaker plot.
Figure 3. Modified Whittaker Sampling plot. (a) Our further modified plot based upon Stohlgren et al.’s modification; (b) Stohlgren et al. [37] modified Whittaker plot.
Forests 11 00171 g003
Forests 11 00171 g004 550
Figure 4. The spatial pattern of plant species richness along the urban–rural gradient. (A,a) All plants, (B,b) Woody plant, (C,c) Annual herb, (D,d) Perennial herb.
Figure 4. The spatial pattern of plant species richness along the urban–rural gradient. (A,a) All plants, (B,b) Woody plant, (C,c) Annual herb, (D,d) Perennial herb.
Forests 11 00171 g004
Forests 11 00171 g005 550
Figure 5. The spatial patterns of native and exotic plant species richness along the urban–rural transects. (A,a) Native plant, (B,b) Exotic plant.
Figure 5. The spatial patterns of native and exotic plant species richness along the urban–rural transects. (A,a) Native plant, (B,b) Exotic plant.
Forests 11 00171 g005
Forests 11 00171 g006a 550Forests 11 00171 g006b 550
Figure 6. The relationship between urbanization degree and plant species richness. (a) All plants, (b) Woody plants, (c) Annual herb, (d) Perennial herb, (e) Native plant, (f) Exotic plant, (g) Shannon-Wiener diversity, (h) Heip evenness.
Figure 6. The relationship between urbanization degree and plant species richness. (a) All plants, (b) Woody plants, (c) Annual herb, (d) Perennial herb, (e) Native plant, (f) Exotic plant, (g) Shannon-Wiener diversity, (h) Heip evenness.
Forests 11 00171 g006aForests 11 00171 g006b
Table
Table 1. Classification of land use land cover (LULC) type.
Table 1. Classification of land use land cover (LULC) type.
LULC TypeSubtype of LULC
Urban landIndustry land, traffic land, public facility land, residential land, in construction land, etc.
Green landPark, botanic garden, zoo garden, forest
Agriculture landFarmland, orchard, nursery
Water River, lake, pond and wetland
Other landUnused land and Wasted land
Table
Table 2. The fitting equation’s spatial patterns of different plant growth forms along the urban–rural gradient.
Table 2. The fitting equation’s spatial patterns of different plant growth forms along the urban–rural gradient.
VariablesEquationParameters
Urbanization (W - E)y = 73.81 − 3.71x − 0.81x2 + 0.07x3 + 0.006x4 − 2.35e−4x5 − 1.54e−5x6R2 = 0.89, p= 2.08e−07
Urbanization (S - N)y = 74.47 + 0.68x − 0.59x2 − 0.002x3 + 0.002x4R2 = 0.86, p = 3.80e−08
All plant - Ey = 54.85 + 11.64x − 4.95x2 + 0.68x3 − 0.03x4R2 = 0.79, p = 0.032
Woody plant - Wy = 23.07 + 3.87x + 0.37x2 + 0.01x3R2 = 0.74, p = 0.005
Woody plant - Ey = 22.15 − 2.41x + 0.13x2R2 = 0.50, p = 0.015
Woody plant - Sy = 20.50 + 1.11xR2 = 0.48, p = 0.002
Annual herb - Wy = 13.54 − 3.55x − 0.2x2R2 = 0.54, p = 0.020
Annual herb - Sy = 14.60 − 4.11x − 0.20x2R2 = 0.56, p = 0.003
Annual herb - Ny = 12.82 + 2.54xR2 = 0.71, p = 0.004
Perennial herb - Wy = 15.31 + 0.53xR2 = 0.67, p = 0.0006
Perennial herb - Ey = 14.52 + 6.60x − 2.77x2 + 0.35x3 − 0.01x4R2 = 0.79, p = 0.032
Perennial herb - Sy = 17.37 + 0.84x + 0.04x2R2 = 0.36, p = 0.046
W: West; E: East; S: South; N: North.
Table
Table 3. The fitting models of native and exotic along the urban–rural gradient.
Table 3. The fitting models of native and exotic along the urban–rural gradient.
VariablesEquationParameters
Exotic plant - Wy = 25.93 + 2.29x + 0.4x2 + 0.02x3R2 = 0.67, p = 0.016
Exotic plant - Ey = 25.73 + 6.95x − 3.14x2 + 0.43x3 − 0.02x4R2 = 0.75, p = 0.047

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, M.; Li, J.; Kuang, S.; He, Y.; Chen, G.; Huang, Y.; Song, C.; Anderson, P.; Łowicki, D. Plant Diversity Along the Urban–Rural Gradient and Its Relationship with Urbanization Degree in Shanghai, China. Forests 2020, 11, 171. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11020171

AMA Style

Wang M, Li J, Kuang S, He Y, Chen G, Huang Y, Song C, Anderson P, Łowicki D. Plant Diversity Along the Urban–Rural Gradient and Its Relationship with Urbanization Degree in Shanghai, China. Forests. 2020; 11(2):171. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11020171

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Meng, Junxiang Li, Shengjian Kuang, Yujuan He, Guojian Chen, Yue Huang, Conghe Song, Pippin Anderson, and Damian Łowicki. 2020. "Plant Diversity Along the Urban–Rural Gradient and Its Relationship with Urbanization Degree in Shanghai, China" Forests 11, no. 2: 171. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11020171

APA Style

Wang, M., Li, J., Kuang, S., He, Y., Chen, G., Huang, Y., Song, C., Anderson, P., & Łowicki, D. (2020). Plant Diversity Along the Urban–Rural Gradient and Its Relationship with Urbanization Degree in Shanghai, China. Forests, 11(2), 171. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11020171

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