## 2 Materials and Methods
### Statistical Analysis
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline
**Level** & **Effect** & **Cover** & **Richness** & **Assemblages** & **Beta** \\ \hline Type & M-F & \(-\)10.43 ** & \(-\)0.90 *** & *** & 0.01 NS \\ \hline Type + Slope & MW-FW & \(-\)8.85 ** & \(-\)0.95 *** & * & 0.04 NS \\ Type + Slope & MC-FC & \(-\)10.77 *** & \(-\)1.01 *** & * & \(-\)0.01 NS \\ Type + Slope & MS-FS & \(-\)11.63 *** & \(-\)0.75 *** & * & \(-\)0.02 NS \\ Type + Slope & MW-MC & \(-\)0.52 NS & \(-\)0.14 NS & NS & 0.02 NS \\ Type + Slope & MW-MS & \(-\)1.32 NS & \(-\)0.44 ** & NS & 0.04 NS \\ Type + Slope & MC-MS & \(-\)0.81 NS & \(-\)0.30 NS & NS & 0.03 NS \\ Type + Slope & FW-FC & \(-\)2.44 NS & \(-\)0.20 NS & NS & \(-\)0.04 NS \\ Type + Slope & FW-FS & \(-\)4.11 NS & \(-\)0.23 * & NS & \(-\)0.02 NS \\ Type + Slope & FC-FS & \(-\)1.67 NS & \(-\)0.04 NS & NS & 0.02 NS \\ \hline Type + Patch & MO-FO \(-\)15.26 *** & \(-\)0.81 *** & ** & 0.00 NS \\ Type + Patch & MB-FB & \(-\)5.66 NS & \(-\)1.03 *** & ** & 0.01 NS \\ Type + Patch & MO-MB & 1.08 NS & 0.41 *** & NS & \(-\)0.02 NS \\ Type + Patch & FO-FB & 10.68 *** & 0.18 * & ** & \(-\)0.02 NS \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Estimates and significance levels when comparing vegetation cover, species richness, species assemblages (i.e., species composition) and beta diversity, among dune types (“Type”), dune type and slope combinations (“Type + Slope”), and dune type and patch combinations (“Type + Patch”). The “Effect” column specifies the pairwise comparisons; for example, an M-F cover estimate of \(-\)10.43 means that vegetation cover was higher by 10.43, on average, for fixed dunes compared to mobile dunes (M = mobile dune; F = fixed dune; W = windward; C = crest; S = slipface; O = open; B = bush). (*** \(p\) < 0.001, ** \(p\) < 0.01, * \(p\) < 0.05, NS = not significant). Indicator species were identified using the indicator value method [55], using three levels of grouping of samples: by dune types, by dune type and slope type combinations and by dune type and patch type combinations (Table 2). Figure 4: Species turnover (\(\beta_{I}\)) of the transition from mobile to stabilized dunes, when considering the species composition in all samples combined (“Type”), separately in each slope type (“Slope”), or separately in each patch type (“Patch”) (M = mobile dune; F = fixed dune; W = windward; C = crest; S = slipface; O = open; B = bush). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c l} \hline
**Level** & **Ind.** & **Species** \\ \hline Type & M & _Trisetariu koeleroides_ \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Type} & & _Anagallis arrenis, Arenaria leptoclados, Asplodelus tentiofilus, Arena_ \\  & & _Barbalta, Brassica tournerofvii, Bromus rigidus, Bromus sterilis, Camparnula sulphura, Daucus glaber, Eridium laciniatum, Gallium aparine,_ \\  & F & _Geranium robertianum, Hormuzakia sp., Lagurus ovatus, Lotus_ \\  & & _halophilius, Lupinus angustifolius, Lupinus palastiinus, Maresia pulchella, Ononis serrata, Phieum caratum, Plantago sarcophulla, Rumex bucphaplorpus, Rumex pictus, Torilis arrensis, Irospermium picroides_ \\ \hline Type + Slope & MW & _Crepis aculeata, Cutandia memplitica, Tristeria koelerioides_ \\ \hline Type + Slope & MC & _Cutandia mempitica, Tristeria koelerioides_ \\ \hline Type + Slope & MS & _Corynephorus articulatus, Crepis aculeata, Launaea fragilis, Lotus halophilius, Tristeria koelerioides_ \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Type + Slope} & & _Asplodelus tentiofilus, Avena barbata, Brassica tournerofvii, Bromus rigidus, Corynephorus articulatus, Crepis aculeata, Daucus glaber, Gallium aparine, Hormuzakia sp., Lotus halophilius, Maresia pulchella, Rumex bucphaplorpus, Rumex pictus_ \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Significant (\(p<0.05\)) indicator species of dune types (“Type”), dune type and slope type combinations (“Type + Slope”), and of dune type and patch type combinations (“Type + Patch”) (M = mobile dune; F = fixed dune; W = windward; C = crest; S = slipface; O = open; B = bush).