DOI: 10.5061/dryad.f7m0cfz7g
title: Variation of seedling recruitment in wet meadow species over six years: positive effects of mowing and negative effects of fertilization

description: Germination and seedling recruitment are stages of the plant life cycle
 that are highly sensitive to biotic and abiotic filtering. Simultaneously,
 seedling regeneration is considered crucial for biodiversity maintenance
 in grasslands and is strongly affected by grassland management. The
 response of seedling regeneration to management and its interannual
 variability remains understudied. We studied the effects of mowing,
 fertilization, dominant removal, and their combinations on the seedling
 composition in a species-rich wet meadow community in Central Europe. We
 also measured litter and moss cover and analyzed their effect on
 seedlings. Firstly, we analyzed the total seedling numbers and species
 composition across six consecutive years. Secondly, we tested the spatial
 relationship between conspecific seedling–adult pairs and their strength,
 by comparing it against that of heterospecific seedling–adult pairs, and
 explained the observed pattern with species traits, namely the dispersal
 mode. Total seedling numbers were significantly decreased by
 fertilization, and significantly increased by mowing. Increased litter
 cover was an important mechanism causing the extremely low numbers of
 seedlings in fertilized plots. The association between conspecific
 seedling–adult pairs was always significantly positive and higher than for
 heterospecifics. The tightness of the relationship was determined by the
 individual species’ dispersal mode. We found that a key process of the
 plant species' life cycle, seedling regeneration, was overwhelmingly
 negatively affected by fertilization in experimental plots. Mowing is
 efficient in preserving species’ successful regeneration, but only in
 unfertilized plots. Large differences in both total seedling numbers and
 species proportions between individual years suggested that different
 species probably establish themselves in different years, which is a
 co-existence maintaining mechanism suggested by Grubb’s regeneration niche
 theory. Such high spatio-temporal variability in seedling recruitment
 forms the basis for niche partitioning and storage effects as mechanisms
 of biodiversity maintenance in wet meadow communities.
description: # Variation of seedling recruitment in wet meadow species over six years:
 Positive effects of mowing and negative effects of fertilization Dataset
 DOI: [10.5061/dryad.f7m0cfz7g](10.5061/dryad.f7m0cfz7g) ## Description of
 the data and file structure Our experiment consisted of 24 permanent
 plots, each 2 m × 2 m. Three treatments, mowing (M), fertilization (F),
 and dominant species *Molinia caerulea* removal (R), were applied within a
 central 1m x 1m plot in a factorial design, with three replicates for each
 treatment combination (eight treatment combinations x three replicates
 yielding 24 plots). Seedling composition was monitored in 25 subplots, 10
 cm x 10 cm, located within each plot for six years, from 2001 to 2006. The
 data consists of the 15 most abundant species at the seedling stage and
 the total number of seedlings (including unidentified species) present in
 subplots. Also, we used the cover of adult plants to calculate
 seedlings-adult associations, and we present the data on the cover of
 adult plants in subplots from 2001 to 2005. ### Files and variables ####
 File: Seedlings\_data.csv **Description:** Number of seedlings of the 15
 most abundant species at the seedling stage, cover of mosses, and litter
 cover in subplots 10 cm x 10 cm, located within plots with the given
 treatment combination. ##### Variables * **Plot ID** // *Identification of
 plot (numbered 1 – 24)* * **Subplot ID** // *Identification of subplot
 (numbered 1 –* *25)* * **Year** // *Year of data collection (2001–*
 *2006)* * **Treatment code** // *Treatment combination is coded as
 follows:* *F = Fertilized plot* *M = Mown plot* *R = Plot with removal of
 Molinia caerulea* *FM = Fertilized and mown plot* *FR = Fertilized and
 removal plot* *MR = Mown and removal plot* *FMR = Fertilized, mown, and
 removal plot* *C = Control plot, no treatment applied* * **E0 cover** //
 *Cover (in %) of mosses in a subplot* * **Litter cover** // *Cover (in %)
 of litter in a subplot* * **Species names** // *Numbers of seedlings of
 the species stated in the variable name in a subplot* * **number of all
 seedlings present** // *Numbers of all seedlings present in a subplot
 (includes both identified and unidentified species)* #### File:
 Adults\_data.csv **Description:** Cover of adult plants (of the same
 species which we monitored at the seedling stage) in subplots 10 cm x 10
 cm, located within plots with the given treatment combination. #####
 Variables * **Plot ID** // *Identification of plot (numbered 1 –* *24)* *
 **Subplot ID** // *Identification of subplot (numbered 1 –* *25)* *
 **Year** // *Year of data collection (2001–* *2005)* * **Treatment code**
 // *Treatment combination is coded as follows:* *F = Fertilized plot* *M =
 Mown plot* *R = Plot with removal of Molinia caerulea* *FM = Fertilized
 and mown plot* *FR = Fertilized and removal plot* *MR = Mown and removal
 plot* *FMR = Fertilized, mown, and removal plot* *C = control plot, no
 treatment applied* * **Species names** // *cover (in %) of the species
 stated in the variable name in a subplot* ## Code/software Microsoft Excel
 for opening csv. files