Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://hdl.handle.net/10532/5854
Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DC Valor Idioma
dc.contributor.authorBürger, Janaes_ES
dc.contributor.authorKüzmič, Filipes_ES
dc.contributor.authorCirujeda Ranzenberger, Aliciaes_ES
dc.contributor.authorKüzmič, Filipes_ES
dc.coverage.spatialSistemas Agrícolas, Forestales y Medio Ambiente - SAFMAes_ES
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-13T09:00:04Z-
dc.date.available2022-04-13T09:00:04Z-
dc.date.issued2022es_ES
dc.identifier.citationApplied vegetation science : official organ of the International Association for Vegetation Science, vol. 25, num. 1, (2022)-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10532/5854-
dc.description.abstractQuestions 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.en
dc.language.isoenes_ES
dc.relation.urihttps://www.openagrar.de/receive/openagrar_mods_00078506es_ES
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/*
dc.titleTwo sides of one medal: Arable weed vegetation of Europe in phytosociological data compared to agronomical weed surveysen
dc.typeJournal Contribution*
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume25(1)es_ES
dc.subject.agrovocMalezases
dc.subject.agrovocVegetaciónes
dc.subject.agrovocColecciones de material genéticoes
dc.subject.agrovocEncuestases
dc.description.statusPublishedes_ES
dc.type.refereedRefereedes_ES
dc.type.specifiedArticlees_ES
dc.bibliographicCitation.titleApplied Vegetation Scienceen
dc.relation.doi10.1111/avsc.12460es_ES
Aparece en las colecciones: [DOCIART] Artículos científicos, técnicos y divulgativos

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
2022_163.pdf2,19 MBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir


Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons

La información de este repositorio es indexada en: