Hedges Cardigan

download Hedges Cardigan

of 37

Transcript of Hedges Cardigan

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    1/37

    1

    A Survey of Hedges and their Woody Species in Mid-Wales

    A.T.Jones and A.O.Chater*

    The Jordans, Mill Hill, Brockweir, Chepstow NP16 7NW.

    *Pen Yr Anchor, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion

    Summary

    (1) A survey of the woody species and physical attributes of 2223 hedge sample lengths from 752

    individual hedges in Ceredigion, mid-Wales was made between 1974 and 1979. Most hedges

    occurred on banks. Although 56% of the hedges were dense and impenetrable, the remainder

    needed at least some renovation; only 39% had clearly been managed in the previous decade.

    Hedges along lanes were in the best condition; the condition of hedges and the proportion managed

    declined significantly with altitude.

    (2) A tentative grouping of hedges by woody species based on ordination analysis is as follows: 1,

    common planted species only; 2, typically unplanted and moisture loving species; 3, gappy hedges

    with Ulex europea and Vaccinium myrtillus; 4, hedges with Fagus sylvatica.

    (3) Hedge species diversity was positively related to (i) presence of semi-natural habitats e.g.

    marshy grassland, (ii) aspect, e.g. north facing slopes, unrelated to (i) age, (ii) length, (iii) altitude

    and negatively related to (i) presence of dominance species, (ii) poor condition.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    2/37

    2

    (4) Hedges on marshy ground had the highest species diversity and a higher frequency of native

    woodland species than hedges adjacent only to pasture and\or lanes; marshy ground also had the

    highest proportion of old hedges.

    (5) For each species the species diversity of hedge samples where it was present was calculated. For

    colonist and common planted species, mean hedge species diversity was lower than for rarer

    species typical of native woodland.

    (6) There were differences between species in the relationship between their physical dominance of

    hedge samples and hedge species diversity. Diversity was much lower in hedges where dominance

    was exhibited relative to hedges where it was not for colonist and common planted species than for

    woodland species.

    (7) Hedges in Ceredigion were more diverse than in lowland England. Key words: diversity,

    dominance, hedge-dereliction, shrubs, trees.

    Keywords: hedge, landscape, woody, diversity, land-use

    Introduction

    Hedges are a widespread linear landscape feature in north-west Europe, including the UK, Eire andFrance (Brittany and Normandy in particular) and the eastern USA of interlocking shrubs and trees

    arranged along field-boundaries. They also occur as field boundary features in tropical areas

    including the Caribbean, but the term is also used to describe cropping systems. Their original

    primary function has been to form a barrier to livestock and in northern Europe and there is

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    3/37

    3

    evidence of their deliberate planting and management since at least Roman times (Caesar, 55). They

    can also be casual formations as is often the case in the USA (Forman, 1995) growing up alongside

    fence-lines in the area that escapes ploughing. Another class of hedge, termed an assart, has been

    created over many century and possibly millennia from the gradual encroachment into woodlands

    on two sides, with a strip of the original cover left to define a boundary (Pollard, Hooper and Moore

    1974). In terms of habitat, hedges are often considered akin to scrub rather than woodland

    depending on prevailing levels of grazing and hedgerow management which can maintain a

    juvenile phase as a plagioclimax. Under the UK system of vegetation habitat classification, they are

    described within scrub, e.g. Crataegus monogyna-Hedera helix scrub community (Rodwell et al,

    1991). As many can be dated accurately from records, hedge can be considered living experiments

    in a range of processes which may determine woody species diversity including dispersal of seed

    and pollen through their lattice like arrangement, colonization and competitive ability.

    From surveying 30m hedge sample lengths, Hooper (1970) found that hedges with the greatest

    diversity of woody plant species were often some of the oldest when dated with parish and estate

    records. This led to Hooper's hedgerow hypothesis (Pollard, Hooper and Moore 1974) which

    proposes that hedges `collect' new species through a process of colonization over time (and also the

    possibility that older hedges represent assarts). Thus a pure Crataegus monogyna (hawthorn) hedge

    established during the enclosures around the 18th century could eventually consist of a mixture of

    species. The relationship between hedge diversity and age was summarised in a linear model based

    on hedges sampled from a large area of lowland England. This species number age relationship hasbeen compared by Cameron and Pannett (1980) for hedges in Shropshire and Willmot (1980) for

    Derbyshire hedges and only in the latter was a significant positive relationship found.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    4/37

    4

    Surveys of hedges in mid-Wales were carried out in the growing season between the years of 1974

    and 1979 to examine the applicability of Hooper's linear model there. In a preliminary analysis

    (Chater 1985; 1993) Hooper`s hedgerow hypothesis was not found to be supported in the area

    sampled. In fact the converse held, with older hedges being poorer in woody species than

    demonstrably younger ones.

    The hedge data set contained much more information, allowing in particular the relationship

    between the following physical and ecological factors and hedge species richness and composition

    to be examined:

    1. Management and condition

    2. Altitude and aspect

    3. Hedge length

    4. Adjoining land-use

    5. Species interaction and competition

    It is also possible to determine the broad ecological niche requirements of a range of hedge species

    in terms of their association in the form of hedge communities.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    5/37

    5

    Methods

    Hedge Survey

    Between April 1974 and July 1979, a total of 2223 samples were surveyed from a total of 752

    hedges in the Ceredigion district of mid-Wales, a geographical area extending from the Dyfi estuary

    to the Teifi (Figure 1). The total length of samples surveyed was 66.7km. Each sample comprised a

    30m length of hedge, in which all the woody species were recorded together with a wide range of

    physical and in many cases historical data (Table 1).

    Hedges were chosen for sampling in some cases because they were in areas where estate maps and

    other documentary evidence enabled the hedges to be dated; in such cases every hedge in the area

    was sampled. In other cases hedges were chosen because they were on parish or property

    boundaries or seemed otherwise to be of historical interest. Many more were chosen to include as

    wide a range as possible of hedge types within the district. The survey in all probability gives a

    reasonable picture of the character of hedges in Ceredigion. To determine sample lengths, a new

    hedge was taken to start wherever a junction with another hedge occurs, or where a hedge abruptly

    changes direction.

    Existing management refers to that management which from observation of the hedge has taken

    place in the last decade. Previous management refers to evidence of management which had taken

    place more than a decade previously and may be indicated by signs of former laying, often of

    substantial laid tree-stools of considerable age. The traditional methods of hedge management inCeredigion have been described by Scourfield (1977).

    The condition of each hedge was assessed in relation to the measures which would be needed for its

    renovation.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    6/37

    6

    Dating of hedges

    Dating of hedges was done from manuscript estate maps and also from parish tithe maps of the

    1840`s in the National Library of Wales, and from Ordnance Survey maps at 6 inch/mile and 25

    inch/mile scales for the 1885, 1887 and 1905 editions.

    Results

    Hedge species richness in relation to condition and management

    Hedge samples in poor condition showed lower diversity than those in good condition (Table 2).

    Using Cochranes approximate t-test (Snedecor and Cochrane, 1980), diversity was found to be

    significantly different (probability < 0.05) between all pairs of condition categories. Variance in

    diversity was much greater for the poor hedge condition categories despite these representing

    smaller samples. Most species were less frequent in the poor hedge condition categories (2-4)

    compared with hedge samples in good condition (1). Vaccinium myrtillus,Betula pendula and Ulex

    europea were significantly more frequent in hedge samples in condition category 3, i.e. hedges

    needing intensive renovation. The light demanding heathland species, Calluna vulgaris and Ulex

    gallii were also significantly more frequent in this category.Betula pubescens andAlnus glutinosa

    (the later only of borderline significance) were most frequent in hedge samples of condition

    category 4, i.e. those hedges grown up to a line of trees.

    Sambucus nigra which is often considered an indicator of poor hedge management showed in thissurvey the same pattern of lower frequencies in poor hedges as most other species.

    There was a highly significant Chi-square association (P < 0.001) between poor condition, i.e.

    increasing gappiness, and lack of management in the hedges sampled.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    7/37

    7

    Hedge species richness and altitude

    There was no significant relationship between hedges species diversity and altitude using regression

    analysis, species diversity being highly variable at all altitudes, and the correlation coefficient being

    -0.212. When we consider, however, only the poorer hedges with 3 or less species which were

    surveyed (which accounted for 5% of all the hedges), 85% occurred above 180m.

    Many species showed differences in frequency at different altitudes. Most species (Table 12),

    including the hedge dominants and climbers, Corylus avellana, Prunus spinosa, Lonicera

    periclymenum and Hedera helix declined in frequency as hedge altitude increased. Crataegus

    monogyna was exceptional amongst species in being equally frequent (C90%) at all altitudes and

    even above 240m. Some species which were rare or absent at lower altitudes were frequent in

    hedges above 240m, notably Vaccinium myrtillus, Sorbus aucuparia, Rubus idaeus and Cytisus

    scoparius. Fagus sylvatica, the most widely planted species that is not native in the study area, was

    most frequent above 240m, probably because it was planted more for shelter than for stockproofing

    (Chater 1985).

    The percentage of dense hedges declined significantly from 64% below 60m in altitude to 21.6%

    above 240m (Table 3). The percentage of recently managed hedges also declined significantly from

    64.1% below 60m to 12.1% above 240m.

    Species richness and hedge aspect

    The Ceredigion area consists of a plateau dissected by deep valleys and there must be considerabledifferences in microclimate including humidity, temperature and soil moisture between north and

    south facing slopes which may affect hedges. Hedges on north-facing slopes (including north-east

    and north-west facing slopes) were, therefore, compared with those on south-facing slopes

    (including south-east and south-west slopes).

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    8/37

    8

    There was a significant difference in species diversity between the two different hedge aspect

    classes, with north-facing hedges having more species (Table 4). Several species were significantly

    more frequent on north facing slopes, most notably Vaccinium myrtillus, Quercus petraea and

    Sorbus aucuparia but no species showed higher frequency on south-facing slopes.

    Species richness and hedge length

    The species diversity of a particular hedge may be dependant on its length (which is related to field

    size and hedge density) as proximity to other hedges across fields and differences in distances to

    hedge junctions will affect dispersal distances involved in the colonization process (Baudry 1984;

    Baudy 1987). There will be smaller dispersal distances to shorter hedges and they may, therefore,

    be expected to have more species than the mean.

    To examine this relationship hedge length and diversity was analyzed by regression for the hedge

    samples. There was, however, no significant relationship between hedge length and diversity, the

    correlation coefficient being -0.021. Four species, however, showed significant differences in

    frequencies between hedges below and above 120m in length. Alnus glutinosa and Salix aurita

    were significantly more frequent in hedges below 120m in length andLonicera periclymenum and

    Vaccinium myrtillus in hedges above this length.

    Hedge species richness and hedge land-use category

    The hedges were classified into 23 categories according to land-use combinations found on either

    side of them. Most hedges (94%), however, occur in six categories (Table 1). The commonesthedge category was lanes\pasture, accounting for 50% of the samples. Hedges with pasture on both

    sides accounted for 30% and the remainder were mainly arable\lanes (2%), stream\pasture (2.5%),

    pastures\marshy pastures (7%) or marshy pastures on both sides (2.4%). Hedges bordering

    woodland were rare and have not been included in analyses but are described later in the text.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    9/37

    9

    Of the major land-use categories, diversity of species was greatest (Table 5a) in hedge samples on

    marshy ground on one or both sides, i.e. marsh/pasture and marsh/marsh, followed by hedge

    samples adjacent to lanes, i.e. lane/pasture and lane/arable. Pasture/pasture and stream/pasture

    hedge samples had the lowest numbers of species. However, a subset of a pasture/pasture hedges

    with ditches had a high diversity and were similar to marsh hedges. Diversity was significantly

    different between marsh hedges and other hedges using Cochrans approximate t-test (Snedecor and

    Cochrane 1980) for unequal variances (Table 5b). Marsh hedges were distinctive in having the

    lowest frequencies of those species that are often planted e.g. Crataegus monogyna and Prunus

    spinosa and highest frequency of unplanted species and those commonly forming natural plant

    communities e.g. Salix aurita,Betula pubescens and Sorbus aucuparia.

    Those hedges bordering woodland were rare and together represented approximately 2% of

    samples. Two hedge categories, lane/deciduous woodland and pasture/ deciduous woodland both

    had 22 samples and had a mean species diversity of 8.56 and 8.41 respectively. Marshy

    pastures/deciduous woodland hedge samples with only 6 samples had a mean of 11.83 species. In

    this later category Corylus avellana andAlnus glutinosa were frequent where Crataegus monogyna

    and Prunus spinosa were more frequent in the previous two woodland categories. It appears,

    therefore, that hedge samples adjacent to marshy pastures (as indicated above) rather than to

    woodland are associated with a high diversity of species in the Ceredigion area.

    When the percentages of hedges dated in 1791 in each land-use category were compared (Table 4a),marsh hedges had higher percentages than pasture/pasture or lane/pasture hedges. These differences

    were significant statistically (Table 4b). There was also a greater percentage of hedges dated in

    1791 in the pasture/pasture category compared with the lane/pasture category but this was not

    statistically significant.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    10/37

    10

    Analysis of species relationships

    The species frequencies are presented in table 6. The total data was ordinated using correspondence

    analysis (Digby and Kempton 1987) for the 25 species with an overall frequency of greater than

    5%. In the scatterplot of the first two iterations, Fagus sylvatica was separated spatially from all

    other species and so was eliminated from the data and a re-analysis made. Most species (Figure 2)

    are aligned in a continuum roughly parallel with correspondence axis 1. The common planted hedge

    and associated species, e.g. Sambucus nigra and Crataegus monogyna are situated at one end of the

    continuum and species which are constituents of natural woodland and wet soils, e.g. Alnus

    glutinosa and Salix aurita at the other end.

    Correspondence axis 1 may represent disturbance of woody vegetation at a landscape level with at

    the one extreme hedges comprising mainly planted species where farming is intensive and local

    woody-species diversity is low. At the other extreme hedges are colonized by or formed of

    woodland/carr species where relict, undrained and unimproved landscapes occur. Vaccinium

    myrtillus and Ulex europea and to a lesser extent Sambucus nigra occur as outliers to the main

    grouping and appeared to be separated along correspondence axis 2 which may be related to

    dereliction of hedges, particularly in upland areas.

    A tentative grouping of hedges by species consists of: 1, hedges dominated by the commonly

    planted species; 2, marshland relict landscape hedges with Alnus glutinosa and Salix aurita; 3,

    derelict hedges, particularly in upland areas with Vacciniummyrtillus and Ulex europea; 4, uplandplanted windbreak hedges with Fagus sylvatica.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    11/37

    11

    Relationships between individual species and hedge species richness

    For each species recorded, the mean diversity of hedge samples where it was present was

    calculated. For comparison of species, the mean diversity values are plotted against overall

    frequency for each species (Figure 3). This relationship gives three broad groupings of 1, common

    and planted species planted, 2, mostly unplanted and rare species typical of natural woodland; 3,

    rarer species typical both of disturbed and derelict hedges. Group 2 may include some indicators of

    assart type hedgerows with indicator species such as aspen, Populus tremula, present in the most

    diverse hedges of all species. Tamus communis was also present in diverse hedges and possibly

    represents some effect of soil pH on diversity, as it is a distinct calcicole, though calcareous soils

    are rare in the survey area.

    Species diversity in relation to species dominance

    In order to examine the effect of species dominance on hedge species diversity, the mean species

    diversity of all hedge samples with at least one species dominating the sample (i.e. such species

    comprising at least 50% of sample length) was compared with that of all hedge samples where no

    dominants were present (Figure 4). This was also carried out for individual species so that mean

    species diversity was compared in hedge samples where a particular species was dominant with

    those where it was not dominant.

    Overall, mean species diversity was depressed for those hedge samples where any species exhibited

    dominance. There were wide differences between individual species, however, in how much lowermean diversity was in hedge samples where they exhibited dominance compared with those where

    there was no dominance. Hedge samples in which Crataegus monogyna, Fagus sylvatica, and

    Laburnum anagyroides were dominant had the lowest scores for mean species diversity relative to

    hedge samples where they were non-dominant. This may be so because the dominance score for

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    12/37

    12

    these species will in many cases indicate their planting as a pure hedge which may be difficult sites

    for colonization by other species. Where dominance ofAlnus glutinosa, Salix cinerea and Corylus

    avellana occurs, mean species diversity was not very much lower than in hedges where they were

    not dominant, and this was especially true ofQuercus spp..

    Discussion

    The hedge survey and analysis, though restricted to a small part of Wales and carried out 30 years

    ago, exhibits patterns of woody species interaction, particularly with respect to land-use which

    should be investigated in other hedged landscapes, with the objectives of uncovering the processes

    involved in historical ecology and landscape ecology. Some hedge land-use/species associations

    may be candidates for conservation efforts, e.g. in this study some of the marsh hedges and those

    with aspen (one very diverse hedge sampled with this species in the survey area has been

    designated a UK Site of Special Scientific Interest) and within rural development programmes

    given their economic significance to landscapes and tourism. Cherrill et al (2001) looked at an area

    of northern England found other land-uses associated with more diverse hedges, including

    arable/woodland edge and arable/road hedges. Hedges have in the recent past been subject to

    significant changes in composition and diversity because of large scale changes to farming and

    hedge management practice (Carey et al, 2008) not all of it negative, despite a recent history of

    hedge removal or neglect of hedges.

    The species diversity of hedges in this survey was seen to show significant differences in relation tothe variation in many factors including dominance by a particular species, aspect, adjoining land-

    use and condition of hedge but not the age of hedge reported previously by several authors in other

    areas (see above). The most frequent species such as hawthorn and blackthorn Prunus spinosa were

    found in relatively species poor hedges. Where the later species are planted as pure hedges, they

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    13/37

    13

    may dominate and consequently exclude other species. Hedges on marshy ground were the most

    diverse possibly because extra niches are present for moisture-loving species to occupy in addition

    to representing possible relict landscapes (below). Excess soil moisture may also be equally

    important in promoting diversity by restricting potentially competitive species, in particular

    hawthorn which is considered to be sensitive to waterlogging.

    The highest proportion ofold hedges occur on marshy ground. Marsh hedges may indicate areas

    of relict landscapes, their high diversity being representative of a generally high biodiversity

    maintained because of the intractability of these areas to agricultural improvement, including

    drainage works.

    Further work needs to be carried out, particularly on competition between hedges woody species,

    and also on the process of colonization of woody species into an established hedge to enable a

    model of hedge species diversity and dynamics to be developed.

    Hedges in Ceredigion were generally more diverse in woody species compared with lowland

    England (Pollard Hooper and Moore 1974; Moore, Hooper and Davis 1967), even though

    calcicolous species were mainly absent. Diversity was similar to that found in Shropshire (Cameron

    and Pannet 1980) for mainly mixed hedges and higher than hedges in Derbyshire for mainly

    hawthorn Crataegus monogyna enclosure hedges (Willmot 1980). The relatively high diversity of

    Ceredigion hedges could be a result of high colonization rates in new or reformed hedges because

    of high hedge densities and consequently low dispersal distances, though hedge length showed no

    relationship with diversity. An example of the high colonization rates in the survey area may be

    indicated by the high frequency of hazel Corylus avellana in `new' field-boundaries first recorded in1845-85, whereas in surveys carried out in England (see above), this species tends to be restricted to

    old hedges including assarts. There is also, however, the strong possibility that hazel has been a

    major planted species in the past. Hedge banks, on which most hedges in the survey occur, may

    present relatively easy sites for colonization by shrubs and trees particularly as competition from

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    14/37

    14

    grasses on the bank-crest may not be as severe as in hedges on the flat, and light intensities will be

    higher, though drought stress will be more common. Birds often use banks as look-out posts and

    may disperse seed preferentially to these sites in droppings.

    Acknowledgements

    Thanks are due to the Department of Food and Rural Affairs (was Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries

    and Food) for funding the open contract in which this work was carried out, to Professor Roger

    Haggar for his advice and to Andrew Parry, Sheila Grant and Cameron Pope of the Institute of

    Grassland and Environmental Research computer unit for help with computer systems.

    References

    Baudry, J. (1984). Effects of landscape structures on biological communities: the case of hedgerow

    network landscapes.Methodology in Landscape Ecological Research and Planning, Vol. 1

    Landscape Ecological Concepts. Proceedings of the first international seminar of the International

    Association of Landscape Ecology, Poskilde, Denmark.

    Baudry, J. (1987). Hedgerows and hedgerow networks as wildlife habitat in agricultural

    landscapes.Environmental Management in Agriculture. ADAS, MAFF. Belhaven Press, London.

    Brooks, A. (1980). Hedging a practical conservation handbook. British Trust for Conservation

    Volunteers, Berkshire.

    Barr, B., Benefield, C., Bunce, B., Risdale, H. & Whittaker, M. (1984). Landscape Changes in

    Britain. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Monks Wood Experimental Station, Monks Wood,Hungtingdon. Natural and Environmental Research Council.

    Buchanan, J. & Fuller, M. (1980). Pembrokeshire ancient woodland. Nature Conservancy

    Council/West Wales Naturalist's Trust.

    Caesar, J. (55BC). Gallic Wars. Roman Empire Press.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    15/37

    15

    Cameron, R.A.D. & Pannett, D.J.(1980). Hedgerow shrubs and landscape history: some

    Shropshire examples. Field studies, 5, 177-194

    Carey, P.D., Wallis, S., Chamberlain, P.M., Cooper, A., Emmett, B.A., Maskell, L.C.,

    McCann, T., Murphy, J., Norton, L.R., Reynolds, B., Scott, W.A., Simpson, I.C., Smart, S.M.,

    Ullyett, J.M. (2008) Countryside Survey: UK Results from 2007. Centre for Ecology &

    Hydrology, November 2008.

    Cherrill, A., Mercer, C. McClean, C. & Tudor, G. (2001) Assessing the Floristic Diversity of

    Hedge Networks: a landscape perspective. Landscape Research, Vol. 26, No. 1, 5564.

    Clapham, A.R., Tutin, T.G. & Moore, D.M. (1987). Flora of the British Isles. 3rd ed. Cambridge

    University Press, Cambridge.

    Chater, A.O.(1985). Perthi`r llain. Y Naturiaethwr, 14, 2-15.

    Chater, A.O.(1993). The higher plants and vegetation of Cardiganshire, in Davies, J.L. & Kirby,

    D.P.(eds.), Cardiganshire county history. Volume 1: From the earliest times to the coming of the

    Normans. National Library of Wales, Aberystwyth.

    Davies, W. (1815). General View of the Agriculture and Domestic Economy of South Wales, vol 2,

    226. London.

    Forman, R.T.T. 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge

    University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Genstat 5 Committee (1987). Genstat 5 Reference Manual. Statistics Department, Rothamstead.

    CLarendon Press, Oxford.

    Hooper, M.D. (1970). Hedges and history.New Scientist, 48, 598-600.

    Hoskins, W.G. (1971). Historical sources for hedge dating.

    Hedges and Local History. Standing Conference for Local History.

    National Council of Social Service, London

    Linnard, W. (1982). Welsh Woods and Forests : their History and Utilisation. Cardiff, National

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    16/37

    16

    Museum of Wales.

    Lister, J. & Whitbread, A. (1987). Ceredigion Inventory of Ancient Woodlands. The Nature

    Conservancy Council, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire/Countryside Council for Wales, Aberystwyth,

    Dyfed.

    Moore, N.W. ,Hooper, M.D. & Davis, B.N.K. (1967). Hedges. 1. Introduction and

    Reconnaissance studies.Journal of Applied Ecology, 4, 201-220.

    Ordnance Survey. First series 1:25000 maps 1845-85, Landranger Series 1:50000 maps 1969.

    Peterken, G. F. (1981). Woodland Conservation and Management. London. Chapman and Hall.

    Peterken & Allinson (1989). Woods, trees and hedges: a review of changes in the British

    countryside. (Focus on nature conservation no.22), Peterborough: Nature Conservancy Council.

    Pollard, E. (1973). Hedges. VII. Woodland relic hedges in Huntingdon and Peterborough. Journal

    of Ecology, 61, 343-352.

    Pollard, E., Hooper, M. D. & Moore, N. W. (1974). Hedges. London, Collins.

    Rackham, O. (1976). Trees and Woodland in the British Landscape. London. Dent

    Rackham, O. (1980). Ancient Woodland. London. Edward Arnold.

    Rodwell, J.S. (Editor)(1991). British Plant Communities. Vol 1. Woodlands and scrub.University

    press, Cambridge.

    Ruderforth, C.C. (1984). Soils and their Uses in Wales. Harpenden, Soil Survey of England and

    Wales. (Bulletin No.10).

    Scourfield, E. (1977). Regional variation of hedging styles in Wales. Folk Life, 15, 106-115.

    Snedecor, G. & Cochrane, W.G. (1980). Statistical Methods. 7th edition, Iowa State University,Iowa.

    Willmot, A. (1980). The woody species of hedges with special reference to age in Church

    Broughton parish, Derbyshire.Journal of Ecology, 68, 269-285.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    17/37

    17

    Figure 1. Map showing location of survey area (a) and more detailed map of area (b).

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    18/37

    18

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    19/37

    19

    Figure 2. Correspondence analysis scatterplot for the first two iterations for all species with

    frequency greater than 5%. Tentative groupings of species are: 1, common planted species and

    associated species; 2, mostly unplanted species typical of natural woodland; 3, species typical of

    derelict hedges, particularly in upland areas.

    Abbreviations: c.m., Crataegus monogyna; p.s., Prunus spinosa; a.c., Acer pseudoplatanus; m.s.,

    Malus sylvestris; r.f., Rubus fructicosus agg.; f.e., Fraxinus excelsior; b.p., Betula pendula; b.u.,

    Betula pubescens; q.r., Quercus robur; q.p., Quercus petraea; s.a., Sorbus aucuparia; h.h.,Hedera

    helix; s.n., Sambucus nigra; r.c.,Rosa canina; c.a., Coryllus avellana; i.a.,Ilex aquifolia; r.s.;Rosa

    sherardii; l.p., Lonicera periclymenum; v.m., Vaccinium myrtillus; s.c., Salix cinerea; s.u., Salix

    aurita; a.g.,Alnus glutinosa; u.e., Ulex europaeus.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    20/37

    20

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    21/37

    21

    Figure 3. Graph of frequency by mean diversity of hedge samples where present for each

    species.

    Tentative groupings of species are: 1, common planted species and associated species; 2, mostly

    unplanted species typical of natural woodland; 3, species typical both of disturbed and derelict

    hedges.

    Abbreviations: h.h., Hedera helix; l.p., Lonicera periclymenum; r.a., Rosa arvensis; r.s., Rosa

    sherardii; r.f., Rubus fructicosus; t.c., Tamus communis; c.v., Calluna vulgaris; v.a., Vaccinium

    myrtillus; a.c., Acer pseudoplatanus; b.p., Betula pendula; b.u., Betula pubescens; c.a., Corylus

    avellana; c.m., Crataegus monogyna; f.e., Fraxinus excelsior; i.a., Ilex aquifolia; p.c., Prunus

    cerasus; p.s., Prunus spinosa; q.p., Quercus petraea; q.r., Quercus robur; r.c., Rosa canina; r.i.,

    Rubus idaeus; s.c., Salix cinerea; s.p., Salix caprea; s.n.; Salix nigra; s.a., Sorbus aucuparia; t.b.,

    Taxus baccata; u.e., Ulex europaeus; u.g., Ulex gallii; u.p., Ulmus procera; a.g.,Alnus glutinosa;

    f.s., Fagus sylvativa; l.a., Laburnum anagyroides; l.v., Ligustrum vulgaris; m.s.,Malus sylvestris;

    p.t., Populus tremula; p.a., Prunus avium; p.i., Prunus institia; r.p.,Rhododendron ponticum; r.u.,

    Ribes uva-crispa; r.n.,Ribes nigrum; s.u., Salix aurita; c.s., Cytisus scoparius; u.g., Ulmus glabra;

    v.o., Viburnum opulus; c.b., Carpinus betulus.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    22/37

    22

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    23/37

    23

    Figure 4. For each species exhibiting dominance in hedge samples- the mean diversity of

    hedges samples where dominant by that where non-dominant (dominance indicates a species

    occupying 50% or more of a hedge sample). Abrreviations: o., mean for all species; q.p.,

    Quercus petraea; q.r., Quercus robur; f.e., Fraxinus excelsior; a.g.,Alnus glutinosa; c.a., Corylus

    avellana; s.c., Salix cinerea; p.s., Prunus spinosa; c.m., Crataegus mongyna; c.b., Carpinus

    betulus; f.s., Fagus sylvatica; l.a., Laburnum anagyroides; u.e., Ulex europaeus; u.p., Ulmus

    procera.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    24/37

    24

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    25/37

    25

    Table 1. Hedgerow physical data

    1. Altitude in metres.

    2. Catchment locality,- 10 catchments represented (Figure 1).3. Situation of hedge:

    1.earth bank

    2.stony bank

    3.level ground.

    4. Height of hedge in metres.

    5. Existing management:

    1.clipping

    2.laying

    3.clipping and laying

    4.not managed

    6. Past management; scores-as for previous character

    7. Age category:

    1.recorded in 1791 and subsequently

    2.recorded in 1845-85 and subsequently

    3.recorded in 1905 and subsequently

    8. Total length of hedge in metres; length of hedge between junctions, major breaks or major

    changes in direction from which sample was taken

    9. Condition of hedge:

    1. very well managed, dense and impenetrable to stock

    2. hedge open but some impenetrable sections; has got gaps but can be renovated by laying

    or minimal planting

    3. interrupted line of shrubs; not stockproof and needs replanting from scratch

    4. line of scattered trees.

    10. Direction of slope on which hedge is situated (8 directions,

    i.e north, north west etc.)

    11. Major land-use categories on either side of hedge (lane includes both metalled roads and

    un-surfaced but permanent vehicular tracks or green lanes)

    1. pasture/pasture

    2. lane/pasture

    3. lane/arable

    4. stream/pasture

    5. marshy pasture/marshy pasture

    6. pasture/marshy pasture

    12. Trees present in hedge

    13. Ash or other large tree stools present in hedge

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    26/37

    26

    Table 2a. A comparison of each land-use category for the % of hedge samples present in each

    condition category

    Condition

    category

    Pasture/

    pasture

    Lane/

    pasture

    Lane/

    arable

    Stream/

    pasture

    Marsh/

    pasture

    Marsh/

    marsh

    1 53 64 88 16 41 22

    2 22 20 12 31 25 30

    3 17 13 0 45 20 23

    4 8 3 0 7 14 25

    Sample

    no.

    646 1066 43 55 150 53

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    27/37

    27

    Table 2b. A comparison of the proportion of dense hedge samples (in condition category 1 of

    Table 3a) in each major land-use categories using the Chi-square test.

    Lane/

    pasture

    Lane/

    arable

    Stream/

    pasture

    Marsh/

    pasture

    Marsh/

    marsh

    Pasture/pasture *** *** *** * ***

    Lane/pasture ** *** *** ***

    Lane/arable *** *** ***

    Stream/pasture ** n.s.

    Marsh/pasture *

    N.B. Condition categories are as follows: 1, dense and impenetrable; 2, hedge with some gaps; 3,

    interrupted and non-stockproof line of shrubs; 4, line of scattered trees.

    Probabilities to significances are represented in all tables as follows: n.s., non-significant

    probability; *, probability < 0.05; **, probability < 0.01; ***, probability < 0.001.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    28/37

    28

    Table 3. A comparison of each altitude class for the % of hedge samples in each condition

    category and the % of hedge samples having received management

    Altitude groups

    0-60 60-120 120-180 180-240 240-

    % in each

    condition

    category

    1 67 68 57 50 23

    2 22 20 20 23 12

    3 8 6 15 21 42

    4 3 6 8 6 23

    Sample

    no.

    196 288 1019 548 104

    %managed 64 54 38 33 12

    Sample

    no.

    206 288 1035 560 111

    N.B. Condition categories are as follows: 1, dense and impenetrable; 2, hedge with some gaps; 3,

    interrupted and non-stockproof line of shrubs; 4, scattered line of trees.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    29/37

    29

    Table 4a. A comparison of each land-use category for the % of hedge samples present in each

    date group

    Land-use category

    Pasture/

    pasture

    Lane/

    pasture

    Marsh/

    pasture

    Marsh/

    marsh

    1791 69 61 87 77

    1845-85 31 35 13 17

    1905 0 4 0 6

    Sample no. 310 343 114 47

    Table 4b. A comparison of the proportion of hedges first dated in 1791 in each of the 4 major

    land-use categories using the Ch- square test

    Lane/pasture Marsh/pasture Marsh/marsh

    Pasture/pasture n.s. *** n.s

    Lane/pasture * ***

    Marsh/pasture n.s.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    30/37

    30

    Table 5a. The overall % frequency of commonest species in descending order

    Rubus fruticosus agg. 92.2

    Crataegus monogyna 90.3

    Hedera helix 79.0Corylus avellana 74.8

    Prunus spinosa 68.9

    Rosa canina 56.3

    Lonicera periclymenum 46.8

    Sorbus aucuparia 46.4

    Fraxinus excelsior 42.1

    Salix cinerea 39.8

    Quercus robur 28.7

    Rosa arvensis 25.3

    Betula pubescens 23.5

    Acer pseudoplatanus 22.8

    Quercus petraea 21.8

    Fagus sylvatica 15.5

    Ilex aquifolium 14.7

    Ulex europeaus 14.2

    Alnus glutinosa 13.4

    Sambucus nigra 9.7

    Salix aurita 9.0

    Betula pendula 8.5

    Malus sylvestris 6.0

    Table 5b. Species with an overall frequency of less than 5%

    Tamus communis Calluna vulgaris Vaccinium myrtillus

    Ulex gallii Acer campestre Aesculus hippocastaneum

    Berberis vulgaris Buxus sempervirens Carpinus betulus

    Castanea sativa Cytisus scoparius Laburnum anagyroides

    Ligustrum vulgare Lonicera nitida Pinus sylvestris

    Populus tremula Prunus avium Prunus cerasus

    Prunus domestica ssp.domestica Prunus domestica ssp.insititia

    Prunus laurocerasus Quercus cerris Rhododendron ponticum

    Ribes nigrum Ribes rubrum Ribes uva-crispa

    Rosa sherardii Rubus idaeus Salix caprea

    Salix caprea x viminalis Salix cinerea Salix cinerea x viminalis

    Sorbus aria Sorbus torminalis Spiraea spp.

    S ymphoricarpos rivularis Taxus sempervirens Tilia cordata

    Ulmus carpinifolia Ulmus glabra Ulmus glabra x plotii

    Ulmus procera Viburnum opulus

    N.B. Dominance was recorded where a species comprised 50% or more of the hedge sample.

    For the interspecific hybrids ofQuercus andBetula the sample was credited with the species which

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    31/37

    31

    the hybrid most resembled. All exotic conifer genera and species except for Pinus sylvestris were

    lumped together and recorded as one species- (Cupressus sp., Cupressocyparis leylandii,

    Chamaecyparis spp.,Larix spp., Picea abies)

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    32/37

    32

    Table 6a. A comparison of the hedge samples in the 6 commonest land-use categories both for

    those species showing the greatest differences in % frequency between them and also mean

    species diversity

    Species %

    frequency

    Pastur

    e

    Pastur

    e

    di Stream

    /

    pasture

    Lane/

    arable

    Lane/

    pasture

    a Marsh/

    pasture

    Marsh/

    marsh

    Vaccinium

    myrtillus

    2 0 11 11 9 ns 9 19

    Betula

    pubescens

    25 45 20 33 16 *** 47 64

    Corylus

    avellana

    73 85 65 80 77 ns 81 83

    Crataegus

    monogyna

    95 86 87 96 91 *** 76 75

    Prunus

    spinosa

    74 75 78 59 71 *** 57 40

    Quercus

    petraea

    14 33 9 20 26 ns 23 45

    Quercus robur 25 21 16 28 29 *** 44 52Salix cinerea 39 80 91 30 31 *** 77 94

    Sorbus

    aucuparia

    48 72 49 57 43 *** 59 79

    Alnus

    glutinosa

    10 24 20 7 8 *** 47 57

    Salix aurita 8 9 18 20 5 *** 21 47

    Sample no 649 58 55 46 1118 150 53

    diversity 8.7 9.9 8.7 9.1 9.2 10.3 11.3

    Variance 11.3 6.9 6.0 5.5 8.7 3.4 6.5

    N.B. The category di. represents a subset of pasture/pasture hedges where ditches were present.

    A=comparisons of proportional frequency of species in lane/pasture and marsh/pasture using Chi-

    square test.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    33/37

    33

    Table 6b. A comparison of species diversity of hedge samples in each landuse category using

    the t-test

    Marsh/

    pasture

    Lane/

    pasture

    Lane/

    arable

    Stream/

    pasture

    Pasture/

    pasture

    Marsh/marsh * * * * *

    Marsh/pasture * * * *

    Lane/pasture n.s. n.s. n.s.

    Lane/pasture n.s. n.s.

    Stream/pasture n.s.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    34/37

    34

    Table 7. A comparison of hedge samples in the two main datings (1791 and 1845-85) both for

    the those species showing the greatest differences in % frequency between them and also

    mean species diversity

    First recorded 1791 onwards 1845-85 Chi-squared between

    Species more frequent in 1791 hedges

    Quercus petraea 24.3 16 **

    Alnus glutinosa 21.6 14.5 *

    Corylus avellana 94.0 85.1 ***

    Species more frequent in 1845-85 hedges

    Betula pubescens 31.9 42.8 **

    Quercus robur 35.4 46.5 **

    Rosa arvensis 31.5 44.9 ***

    Acer pseudoplatanus 17.5 24.2 ***

    Fraxinus excelsior 39.1 46.4 *

    Sorbus aucuparia 57.6 73.6 ***

    Prunus domestica 1.5 4.5 *

    Malus sylvestris 6.2 11.2 *

    diversity 9.9 10.5 n.s.variance 6.1 9.4

    No of samples 601 269

    N.B. Species diversity of the two datings was compared using the t-test.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    35/37

    35

    Table 8. A comparison of hedge samples in each condition categories both for those species

    showing the greatest differences in % frequency between them and for mean species diversity

    Hedge conditions 1 A 2 B 3 C 4

    Alnus glutinosa 12.6 13.6 13.7 18.5

    Betula pubescens 22.8 23.1 22.4 * 31.8

    Betula pendula 6.3 * 9.3 *** 15.4 7.3

    Vaccinium myrtillus 3.1 *** 0 *** 15.2 * 7.3

    Ulex europaeus 11.7 *** 18.0 *** 18.0 15.0Calluna vulgaris 1.2 * 0 *** 4.4 1.9

    Ulex gallii 0.8 0.2 * 2.6 0.6

    Mean diversity 9.82 9.19 7.8 6.4

    No of sampes 1210 450 344 151

    variance 7.82 7.87 10.44 12.44

    N.B. Hedge condition categories as follows: 1, dense and impenetrable; 2, open but with some

    impenetrable sections; 3, non-stockproof line of scattered shrubs; 4, line of scattered trees.Comparisons of species proportional frequencies between categories are by Chi-square.

    Comparisons A, B and C are of 1 vs 2, 1 vs 3 and 1 vs 4 respectively. Only those comparisons of

    species proportional frequency showing significant differences

    (P < 0.05) are shown. All pair-wise comparisons of condition category species diversity were

    significantly different for t-test (P < 0.05).

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    36/37

    36

    Table 9. A comparison of hedge samples on north and south facing slopes both for those

    species showing the greatest differences in % frequency between them and for mean species

    diversity

    Species % north south significance

    Vaccinium myrtillus 14.5 3.2 ***

    Betula pendula 10.5 5.7 *

    Betula pubescens 24.8 17.0 **

    Fraxinus excelsior 46.7 36.4 **

    Ilex aquififolium 16.5 9.4 **

    Quercus petraea 30.4 19.4 ***Sorbus aucuparia 51.8 35.9 ***

    Salix aurita 9.8 5.4 *

    Rosa sherardii 21.4 13.5 *

    Salix cinerea 39.5 31.6 *

    diversity 9.3 8.2 ***

    Sample no. 552 371 ***

    variance 9.076 10.195

    N.B. Comparisons of species proportional frequency were made using Ch-square test. Species

    diversity of hedge sample aspect classes was compared using the t-test.

  • 8/8/2019 Hedges Cardigan

    37/37

    37

    Table 10. A comparison of hedge samples in each altitude class for those species showing the

    greatest differences in % frequency between them

    Altitude class and significances

    Species % 0-60 a 60-120 120-180 b 180-240 240+

    Hedera helix 91 ns 91 88 *** 63 22

    Lonicera

    periclymenum

    73 *** 62 52 *** 29 5

    Corylus

    avellana

    61 *** 87 82 *** 70 27

    Prunus

    spinosa

    81 *** 74 68 *** 72 30

    Crataegus

    monogyna

    91 ns 94 88 ns 92 89

    Vaccinium

    myrtillus

    0 *** 0 8 *** 7 40

    Sorbus

    aucuparia

    8 *** 20 56 ** 58 41

    Rubus idaeus 1 ns 2 4 ** 7 10

    Cytisus

    scoparius

    0 ns 0 1 *** 4 6

    Fagus

    sylvaticus

    12 ns 12 16 ns 12 40

    N.B. The symbol A refers to comparisons of species proportional frequency of the 0-60m and 120-

    180m altitude classes using Chi-square test. The symbol B refers to a similar statistical comparison

    between 120-180m and above 240m altitude classes.