Open Access

Studying the patterns of alien and native floras of some habitats in Srinagar city, Kashmir, India

  • Syed Mubashir Andrabi1,
  • Zafar Ahmad Reshi1,
  • Manzoor Ahmad Shah1Email author and
  • Salman Qureshi2, 3
Ecological Processes20154:2

DOI: 10.1186/s13717-014-0030-9

Received: 6 October 2014

Accepted: 29 December 2014

Published: 31 January 2015

Abstract

Introduction

Urban flora is an important component of human-dominated ecosystems that links urban dwellers with nature. This study aims at compiling and analysing the alien and native vascular plant species of some selected habitats in the Srinagar city, Kashmir, India.

Methods

Bi-seasonal sampling was employed and each habitat type (viz., graveyards, grasslands, orchards and wastelands) was sampled at seven different sites.

Results

The number of species recorded from graveyards was 96; from grasslands 112; 141 from orchards and 110 from wastelands. The level of invasion among habitats varied from 67.27% to 68.75%, with a mean value of 67.86%; out of clubbed species list, 64.84% were alien. Asteraceae, Poaceae, Brassicaceae and Fabaceae were the biggest families in all four habitat types.

Conclusions

Our research shows that across habitats, alien plant species are the predominant part of their floras.

Keywords

Alien Flora Herbs Srinagar city Level of invasion

Introduction

Important environmental services in cities like removal of dust, mitigation of microclimatic extremes and modulation of humidity are being provided by biodiversity (Bolund and Hunhammar 1999; Haase et al. 2014). The latter also delivers amenity values, such as aesthetic enjoyment and recreation (Miller 2005 and Miller 2006; Qureshi et al. 2013) and psychological benefits resulting from human biophilia (Wilson 1984). Most people live and work in cities (Miller and Hobbs 2002), and access to urban nature and natural habitats improves their quality of life (Turner et al. 2004; Qureshi 2010, Qureshi et al. 2013). Even for these people, the biotas that survive in cities are their only contact with nature (Thompson and McCarthy 2008).

But urban areas are characterised by relatively intense stress levels associated with pollution by sewage, nutrients, toxic chemicals, heat and biological pathogens (including invasive species) (Pickett et al. 2001). With ever increasing urbanisation, natural areas are becoming increasingly fragmented (Qureshi et al. 2014; Saunders et al. 1991; Hobbs and Yates 2003), creating ever more urban/wildland interfaces. These urban/wildland interfaces facilitate access and opportunities for humans to disturb natural habitats (Bolger et al. 1997), and disturbance is recognised as an important determinant of invasibility (Hobbs and Huenneke 1992; Davis 2003). Increased isolation and proliferation of edges are some features which subject the remnant natural habitats lying inter-digitated within urban landscapes (Kupfer et al. 2006) to invasibility, and the theory of island biogeography predicts fewer plant species habitation on these relatively small and isolated habitat patches (Bastin and Thomas 1999; Guirado et al. 2006).

The advantageous ability of alien plant species to grow and survive in urban areas gives them an edge over native plants which are unable to survive there (Kühn and Klotz 2006). Many alien species thrive in urban environments probably due to the ‘urban heat island effect’ (Ricotta et al. 2009; Wang et al. 2011). Because of the considerable potential exhibited by alien plants to disperse propagules to long distances (Pyšek and Hulme 2005), there is an understandable concern that urban areas may act as source centres from which alien plant species will spread into the wider surrounding environments (Catling and Porebski 1994; Sullivan et al. 2005; Houlahan et al. 2006) and hence could become detrimental to regional biodiversity. A recent cross-continental comparison revealed that invasive plants significantly reduce native plant diversity in non-native habitats but not at home (Shah et al. 2014). The invasive species can do so through many mechanisms (Levine et al., 2003), and the role of urbanisation-driven changes in ecological settings to influence such mechanisms is yet poorly understood.

Given the fact that urbanisation facilitates alien plant invasion, we carried out floristic sampling in selected habitats in Srinagar city, India and its suburbs to compile alien and native floras of these habitat types to unravel which group of plants (alien or native) are selected by regional landscape and which habit/life form is selected by the habitats?

Methods

Study area, study sites and habitat types

Srinagar city is located at an average elevation of 1,600 m above mean sea level and it is spread over in the heart of the oval-shaped valley of Kashmir. It is situated between 74°56′ and 75°79′ east longitude and 33°18′ and 34°45′ north latitude. Srinagar is the largest urban centre in the lap of Himalayas and its landscape is adorned by the Dal, the world-famous freshwater lake. In the east, the city is bounded by Zabarwan Mountains, hillocks of ‘Takth-i-Suliman’ in the east and ‘Kohi-Maraan’ (Hariparbat) in the centre which adds to its beauty. The famous Dachigam National Park, the last abode of the Kashmir stag ‘Hanglu,’ lies on the eastern part of city.

All the study sites were located in Srinagar city and its suburbs. Any two study sites were at least 0.75 km apart. These habitats were surrounded by a typical urban matrix of residential, commercial, industrial and recreational land use. Four major terrestrial habitats selected were grasslands, graveyards, orchards and wastelands. Each habitat type (viz., graveyards, grasslands, orchards and wastelands) was sampled at seven different sites. Floristic sampling was conducted twice during the year 2010 to 2011.

Data collection

The first sampling was carried out in April and May and the second one in August 2010 and September 2011. During the present investigation, all spontaneously established vascular plant species, including garden escapes and seedlings of spontaneously regenerating planted trees and shrubs, were recorded using the stratified quadrat sampling technique (Figure 1). A quadrat size of 0.25 m × 0.25 m was used for herbaceous plant species, 5 m × 5 m for shrubs and 10 m × 10 m for trees. A total of 210 (0.25 m × 0.25 m) quadrats were randomly laid for herbs, 140 (5 m × 5 m) for shrubs and 140 (10 m × 10 m) for trees in each habitat type.
Figure 1

Schematic representation of the sequence of steps followed in the present study. Different habitat types were identified and surveyed in the Srinagar city and its suburbs. Habitat wise floras were generated using the stratified quadrant sampling approach that were further segregated into native and alien elements followed by growth form characterisation. Alien species were further categorised on the basis of stages of invasion.

Floristic element profiling: definitions and terminology

All the recorded species were classified as either native or alien according to their status in the region i.e. Kashmir valley. The native geographical range of the plant species was obtained from every possible source, such as (Khuroo et al. 2007), Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) of the US Department of Agriculture. The alien plant species were characterised at different stages of the invasion process along the introduction-naturalisation-invasion continuum (see Richardson et al. 2000) (Figure 1). In this study, we defined ‘casual’ alien species as those alien species that do not form self-replacing populations (Pyšek et al. 2004). Those alien species that reproduce consistently and sustain self-replacing populations over many life cycles without direct intervention by people (or in spite of human intervention) have been categorised as ‘naturalised’ alien species (sensu Richardson et al. 2000; Pyšek et al. 2004). ‘Casual or naturalised’ alien plant species were those alien plant species about which adequate field information was not available (Wu et al. 2004). We used the term ‘invasive’ for those alien species that cause apparent damage or pose potential threats to species, ecosystems or to the economy (IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) (1999); Wang et al. 2011). In this sense, invasives should be considered as a subset of naturalised species capable of spreading considerably and with harmful effects, a definition which could also be likened with the terms ‘transformers’ and ‘weeds’ as defined by Richardson et al. (2000) and Pyšek et al. (2004).

With regard to habit, the species were classified into trees, shrubs, sub-shrubs, lianas, climbers and herbs. The species were characterised on the basis of lifespan into various categories like annuals, biennials and perennials. The level of invasion was measured as the total numbers of alien plant species or their proportion of the total species richness (Jauni and Hyvönen 2010). Finally, the specimens bearing collection no. 200-351 SM Andrabi dated 2010 have been deposited in KASH (herbarium of the Department of Botany at the Centre for Biodiversity and Taxonomy, University of Kashmir, Srinagar).
Figure 2

Habit and life form of the floras of various habitat types in Srinagar city.

Results

Floristic diversity of specific habitat types

Flora of graveyards

The graveyard flora in urban areas comprised 96 plant species belonging to 77 genera and 32 families (Table 1). Six families namely Asteraceae (23 species), Poaceae (10 species), Brassicaceae (7 species), Fabaceae (6 species), Lamiaceae (5 species) and Apiaceae (4 species) accounted for 57.29% of plant species (Table 2). Sixteen families had one representative each in the urban graveyard flora, five families were represented by two species each and five families were represented by three species each. Out of 77 genera, only Poa and Iris were represented by three species each, 15 genera were represented by two species each and 60 genera were represented by just one species each.
Table 1

Conspectus of plant species in various habitats of Srinagar city

Name of plant species

Family

Group

Species status in the region

Growth form

Invasion status

Graveyard

Grassland

Orchards

Wastelands

Achillea millefolium L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

Aegilops tauschii Cosson

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

Ageratum conyzoides L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

Ailanthus altissima Sw.

Simaroubaceae

Dicot

Alien

T

In

+

+

+

Althaea rosea Cav.

Malvaceae

Dicot

Alien

B

Cs

+

Amaranthus caudatus L.

Amaranthaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

Amaranthus spinosus L.

Amaranthaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

Anagalis arvensis L.

Primulaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

Anchusa ovata Lehm.

Boraginaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

Anthemis cotula L

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

B

In

+

+

+

+

Arctium lappa L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Arenaria serpyllifolia L.

Caryophyllaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

Artemisia absinthium L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

Ss

In

+

+

+

+

Artemisia dubia Wall. ex Besser

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Artemisia tournefortiana Reichb.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

Asparagus filicinus Ham.

Liliaceae

Monocot

Native

P

 

+

+

Avena sativa L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

A

Cs

+

+

Bellis perennis L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

Bidens cernua L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

Bothriochloa ischaemum Keng

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

Brachiaria eruciformis Griseb.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

A

 

+

+

Breea arvensis Less.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

+

Bromus japonicus Thunb.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

+

Cannabis sativa L.

Cannabiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Capsella bursa-pastoris Medic.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Cardamine hirsuta L.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

Carex fedia Nees

Cyperaceae

Monocot

Native

P

 

+

Carex notha Kunth.

Cyperaceae

Monocot

Alien

B

In

+

Carpesium abrotanoides L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

+

Carpesium cernuum L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

Celtis australis L.

Ulmaceae

Dicot

Alien

T

Nt

+

+

Cerastium vulgatum L.

Caryophyllaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

Ceratocephalus falcatus Pers.

Ranunculaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

Chenopodium album L.

Chenopodiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

Chenopodium botrys L.

Chenopodiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

Chenopodium hybridum L.

Chenopodiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

Cichorium intybus L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

Cirsium falconeri Petrak

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

+

Clinopodium umbrosum C. Koch

Lamiaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

Clinopodium vulgare L.

Lamiaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

Convolvulus arvensis L.

Convolvulaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Conyza bonariensis Cronquist

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Cs

+

+

+

Conyza canadensis Cronquist

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

B

In

+

+

+

+

Coronopus didymus Sm.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

+

Cotula anthemoides L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

Crataegus songarica K. Koch

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

T

Cs

+

+

Crepis sancta Babc.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

Cuscuta europaea L.

Cuscutaceae

Dicot

Native

Ph

 

+

+

Cynodon dactylon L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

+

Cynoglossum glochidiatum Wall. ex Benth.

Boraginaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

+

Cyperus iria L.

Cyperaceae

Monocot

Alien

Aq

Nt

+

Cyperus rotundus L.

Cyperaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Dactylis glomerata L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

In

+

Datura stramonium L.

Solanaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

Daucus carota L.

Apiaceae

Dicot

Alien

B

In

+

+

+

Delphinium roylei Munz.

Ranunculaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Descurainia sophia Webb.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

+

Digitaria cruciata A. Camus

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

A

 

+

Echinochloa crus-galli P. Beauv.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

Aq

Nt

+

+

Echinops cornigerus DC.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Equisetum debile Roxb. ex Vaucher

Equisetaceae

Pteridophyte

Native

P

 

+

Equisetum ramosissimum Desf.

Equisetaceae

Pteridophyte

Native

P

 

+

Erodium cicutarium L'Herit. ex Ait.

Geraniaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

+

Eryngium billardieri Del.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

+

Eryngium coeruleum M-Bieb.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

+

Euclidium syriacum R. Br.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Euphorbia helioscopia L.

Euphorbiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Euphorbia wallichii Hook. f.

Euphorbiaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Foeniculum vulgare Mill.

Apiaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Cs

+

+

Fumaria indica H. N.

Fumariaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

Galinsoga parviflora Cav.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

Galium aparine L.

Rubiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Cn

+

+

+

+

Garhadiolus minutissimus Kitamura

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

Geranium nepalense Sweet

Geraniaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

Geranium pusillum Burm. f.

Geraniaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

+

Geum roylei Bolle

Rosaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Herniaria hirsuta L.

Caryophyllaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Hesperis matronalis L.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Alien

B

Cn

+

Hordeum murinum L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

+

Hypericum perforatum L.

Hypericaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

Imperata cylindrica P. Beauv.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

Nt

+

Indigofera heterantha wall. ex Brand.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Native

S

 

+

Ipomoea purpurea Roth.

Convolvulaceae

Dicot

Alien

C

Nt

+

Iris ensata Thunb.

Iridaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

Iris germanica L.

Iridaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

Nt

+

Iris kashmiriana Baker

Iridaceae

Monocot

Native

P

 

+

Kikxia spuria Dum.

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Lactuca serriola L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

B

 

+

+

+

Lamium amplexicaule L.

Lamiaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Lathyrus aphaca L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

Lepidium latifolium L.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Lespedeza cuneata G. Don.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Native

Ss

 

+

+

Leucanthemum vulgare Lam.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

Linaria dalmatica Miller

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Cn

+

Lithospermum arvense L.

Boraginaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

Lolium perenne L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

Lolium persicum Boiss. and Hoh. ex Boiss.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

A

 

+

Lotus corniculatus L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

Malcolmia africana R. Br.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

Malva mauritiana L.

Malvaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Cs

+

Malva neglecta Wall.

Malvaceae

Dicot

Alien

B

Nt

+

+

+

Malva parviflora L.

Malvaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

Marrubium vulgare L.

Lamiaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Mazus pumilus Van Steenis

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Medicago lupulina L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

Medicago minima Grufb.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

Medicago polymorpha L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Medicago sativa L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

B

Nt

+

+

Melia azedarach L.

Meliaceae

Dicot

Alien

T

Cs

+

Melilotus albus Desr.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Melilotus officinalis Pall.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Native

B

 

Mentha longifolia L.

Lamiaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

Morus alba L.

Moraceae

Dicot

Alien

T

Nt

+

+

Muehlenbergia duthieana Hack.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

A

 

+

Myosotis micrantha Pall. ex Lehm.

Boraginaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Myosotis sylvatica Hoffm.

Boraginaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

Narcissus tazetta L.

Amaryllidaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

In

+

Nepeta cataria L.

Lamiaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

Oenothera biennis L.

Onagraceae

Dicot

Alien

B

Nt

+

+

Oenothera rosea Ait.

Onagraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

Onopordum acanthium L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

Ornithogalum umbellatum L.

Hyacinthaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

Cs

+

Oxalis corniculata L.

Oxalidaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

+

Papaver macrostomum Boiss. & Heut ex Boiss.

Papaveraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Cn

+

Paspalum paspaloides Scribner

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

A

Nt

+

Peganum harmala L.

Zygophyllaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

Phleum alpinum L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

Phleum paniculatum Huds.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

A

 

+

+

Phragmites australis Trin.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

In

+

Plantago lanceolata L.

Plantaginaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Plantago major L.

Plantaginaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Poa angustifolia L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

+

Poa annua L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Poa bulbosa L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

+

Poa pratensis L.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

Nt

+

Polygonum heterophyllum Lindman

Polygonaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

+

Polygonum hydropiper L.

Polygonaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

Polygonum plebejum R. Br.

Polygonaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Polypogon fugax Nees ex Steud.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

Populus alba L.

Salicaceae

Dicot

Alien

T

Nt

+

Portulaca oleracea L.

Portulacaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

Potentilla nepalensis Hk.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

Potentilla reptans L.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

+

Potentilla supina L.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

Prunus armeniaca L.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

T

Cs

+

Prunus domestica L.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

T

Cs

+

+

Ranunculus arvensis L.

Ranunculaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

Ranunculus laetus Wall. ex Hk. f. and T.

Ranunculaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

Ranunculus muricatus L.

Ranunculaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

Robinia pseudoacacia L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

T

In

+

+

+

Rorippa islandica Borbas

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Alien

Aq

Nt

+

+

+

Rorippa sylvestris Besser.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

+

Rosa brunonii Lindl.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

S

Nt

+

+

Rubia cordifolia L.

Rubiaceae

Dicot

Alien

C

Nt

+

Rubus niveus Thunb. non Wall.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

S

Nt

+

+

Rubus ulmifolius Schott.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

S

In

+

+

+

Rumex dentatus L.

Polygonaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

+

Rumex nepalensis Spreng.

Polygonaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

+

+

Salvia moorcroftiana Wall. ex Bth.

Lamiaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

+

Sanguisorba minor Scop.

Rosaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

Nt

+

Scandix pecten-veneris L.

Apiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

Scirpus setaceus L.

Cyperaceae

Monocot

Native

P

 

+

Sclerochloa dura P. Beauv.

Poaceae

Monocot

Native

P

 

+

Scorozonera virgata DC.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Scrophularia lucida Hk. f.

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Setaria viridis P. Beauv.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

A

In

+

Siegesbeckia orientalis L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

Sisymbrium loesellii L.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Sisymbrium officinale Scop.

Brassicaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

Solanum nigrum L.

Solanaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

Sonchus asper Hill

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

Sonchus oleraceus L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

Sorghum halepense Pers.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

In

+

+

Stachys floccosa Benth.

Lamiaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

+

Stellaria media Cyr.

Caryophyllaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Taraxacum officinale Weber

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Torilis japonica DC.

Apiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

+

Torilis leptophylla Reichb. f.

Apiaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

+

+

Tragopogon kashmirianus Gurcharan singh

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

B

 

+

+

+

Trifolium pratense L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Trifolium repens L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Trigonella foenum-graecum L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Cs

+

Tulipa clusiana DC.

Liliaceae

Monocot

Native

P

 

+

Tulipa lanata E. Regel

Liliaceae

Monocot

Alien

P

Nt

+

Tussilago farfara L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Urtica dioica L.

Urticaceae

Dicot

Alien

P

In

+

+

+

+

Valerianella eriocarpa Desv.

Valerianaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

Verbascum thapsus L.

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Alien

B

In

+

+

+

Verbena officinalis L.

Verbenaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

+

Veronica agrestis L.

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

+

Veronica anagallis-aquatica L.

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Nt

+

Veronica persica Poir.

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Veronica stewartii Penn.

Scrophulariaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

Vicia angustifolia L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Native

A

 

+

+

+

+

Vicia sativa L.

Fabaceae

Dicot

Alien

A

Cn

+

Viola indica Bkr.

Violaceae

Dicot

Native

P

 

+

Vulpia myuros Gmel.

Poaceae

Monocot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Xanthium spinosum L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

+

Xanthium strumarium L.

Asteraceae

Dicot

Alien

A

In

+

+

+

Growth form: A, annual herb; B, biennial herb; P, perennial herb; Ss, sub-shrub; S, shrub; T, tree; Aq, aquatics; C, climber; L, liana; Ps, parasitic herb. Invasion status: Cs, casual aliens; Cn, casual or naturalised aliens; Nt, naturalised aliens; In, invasive aliens; (+) presence of a species; (−) absence of a species.

Table 2

Taxonomic structure of the floras of different habitat types in Srinagar city

Family

Number of species

Clubbed

Graveyards

Grasslands

Orchards

Wastelands

Asteraceae

35

23

19

29

20

Poaceae

27

10

22

14

16

Fabaceae

16

6

10

12

8

Brassicaceae

12

7

6

10

8

Rosaceae

11

6

8

6

Scrophulariaceae

9

3

6

5

4

Lamiaceae

8

5

2

8

4

Apiaceae

5

4

4

3

3

Boraginaceae

5

2

4

3

Cyperaceae

5

3

3

Polygonaceae

5

3

3

4

4

Ranunculaceae

5

2

2

3

Caryophyllaceae

4

3

3

2

Malvaceae

4

3

3

Chenopodiaceae

3

2

_

2

Geraniaceae

3

2

3

3

2

Iridaceae

3

3

Liliaceae

3

3

Amaranthaceae

2

2

2

Convolvulaceae

2

2

Equisetaceae

2

2

Euphorbiaceae

2

2

Onagraceae

2

2

2

Plantaginaceae

2

2

2

2

2

Rubiaceae

2

2

Solanaceae

2

2

2

Only the families with two or more representatives are shown. (−) absence of a species.

Growth form and life span profile of graveyard flora

Of the 96 species recorded in urban graveyards, 91 (94.79%) were herbs (43 annual, 8 biennial, 39 perennial and 1 aquatic), and only 1 and 4 were sub-shrub and trees, respectively (Figure 2).
Figure 3

Comparison of level of alien plant invasion in various habitats of Srinagar city.

Out of 91 herbs recorded, 61 (67.03%) were alien and 30 (32.97%) were native. The only one sub-shrub species and all four tree species that were recorded were alien in the study area, and no native species from these two groups were recorded.

Proportion of alien and native species

In terms of species status in the region 66 (68.75%), the species were alien (Figure 3) and 30 species (31.25%) were native. Of the 66 aliens, casuals were represented by four species, casuals or naturalised aliens were represented by just one (1.52%) species, 24 (36.36%) and 37 (56.06%) plant species were grouped under naturalised and invasive categories, respectively (Table 3).
Table 3

Comparison of alien plant species at different stages of invasion in various habitats of Srinagar city

Habitat

Aliens

Total species

Casual

Casualised or naturalised

Naturalised

Invasive

Total alien species

Percentage of respective habitat flora

Graveyards

4

1

24

37

66

68.75

96

Grasslands

2

2

33

40

77

68.75

112

Orchards

6

3

35

50

94

66.67

141

Wastelands

5

2

28

39

74

67.27

110

Flora of grasslands

The present study revealed the presence of 112 species belonging to 92 genera and 33 families (Table 1). Seven families namely Poaceae (22 species), Asteraceae (19 species), Fabaceae (10 species), Brassicaceae (6 species), Rosaceae (6 species), Scrophulariaceae (6 species), and Apiaceae (4 species) accounted for 65.18% of species (Table 2). Seventeen (51.51%) families were each represented by one species, five families each by two species and remaining four families each were represented by three species. Out of 92 genera, only Poa and Veronica were represented by four species each and Medicago by three species. Twelve genera were each represented by two species and remaining 77 (83.69%) genera were represented each by just one species.

Growth form and life span profile of grassland flora

The analysis of the urban grassland flora revealed that 105 species belonged to herbaceous habit and accounted for about 93.75% of species. They belonged to various life forms like annuals represented by 56 species, biennials by 6 species, perennials by 40 species, aquatics by 2 species and 1 parasitic species. Two species were sub-shrubs, three were shrubs and two tree species were also recorded (Figure 2).

Out of the 105 herbs, 71 (67.62%) were alien and 34 (32.38%) were native to the Kashmir. Of the two sub-shrubs, one was alien and the other one was native to the region. Of the three shrubs recorded, all were alien to the Kashmir. Similarly, two tree species belonged to alien category and no native tree species was recorded from the study area.

Proportion of alien and native species

Out of 112 species recorded in urban grasslands, 77 (68.75%) were alien (Figure 3) and 35 (31.25%) were native to the Kashmir. Out of 77 alien species, casuals included 2 species, casuals or naturalised category included 2 species, naturalised category included 33 species and 40 (51.95%) species belonged to invasive category (Table 3).

Flora of orchards

The present study revealed the presence of 141 species belonging to 110 genera and 39 families (Table 1). Six families namely Asteraceae (29 species), Poaceae (14 species), Fabaceae (12 species), Brassicaceae (10 species), Lamiaceae and Rosaceae (8 species each) accounted for 57.45% of the species (Table 2). Eighteen (46.15%) families were represented by one species each, seven families were represented by two species each, five families by three species each, two families (Polygonaceae and Boraginaceae) were represented by four species and the other one family (Scrophulariaceae) by five species. Out of the 110 genera only one genus, Medicago was represented by four species. Artemisia, Malva, Poa and Veronica were represented by three species each, 20 genera by two species each and 85 (77.27%) genera were represented by just one species each.

Growth form and life span profile of orchard flora

Out of 141 species, 130 (92.19%) were herbaceous (60 annual, 11 biennial, 57 perennial, 1 aquatic and 1 climber), 2 were sub-shrubs and 4 were shrubs. Five tree species were also recorded in the study area (Figure 2).

Eighty-five (65.38%) of the total 130 herbaceous species were alien and 45 (34.62%) were native to the region. Out of two sub-shrubs, one was alien and other was native to the region. Out of four shrubs, three were alien and one was native. All the five tree species were alien to Kashmir.

Proportion of alien and native species

Out of 141 species, 94 (66.67%) were alien (Figure 3) and 47 (33.33%) were native to Kashmir. Out of 94 alien species, 6 were casuals, 3 were casuals or naturalised; naturalised category included 35 species, and 50 (53.19%) species represented invasive category (Table 3).

Flora of wastelands

Urban wasteland flora comprised 110 species, belonging to 89 genera and 36 families (Table 1). Five families, namely Asteraceae (20 species), Poaceae (16 species), Brassicaceae (8 species), Fabaceae (8 species) and Rosaceae (6 species) accounted for 52.73% of species (Table 2). Nineteen families were represented by single species each, six families by two species each, three families by four species each and three families were represented by three species each. The maximum number of species i.e. three species was of Poa and Potentilla. Seventeen genera were represented by two species each, and the remaining 70 (78.65%) genera were represented by single species each.

Growth form and life span profile of wasteland flora

Out of 110 species, 102 (92.59%) were herbaceous (59 annual, 5 biennial, 34 perennial, 2 aquatic, 1 climber and 1 parasitic), besides 1 sub-shrub, 1 shrub and 6 tree species (Figure 2).

Proportion of alien and native species

Out of 110 species, 74 (67.27%) were alien (Figure 3) and 36 (32.73%) were native to Kashmir. Casuals included 5 species; casuals or naturalised category included 2 species; 28 species were grouped under naturalised category and 39 species were grouped under invasive category (Table 3).

Discussion

This study revealed a preponderance of alien plant species across all habitat types. The proportion of alien species among habitats varied from 67.27% to 68.75%, with a mean value of 67.86% and 64.84% in the clubbed species list. Several studies across the globe have reported a higher proportion of alien species in city floras. Pyšek (1998) in a study, involving 54 central European cities, reported a high proportion of alien plant species which ranged between 20% and 60%. The proportion of alien species found in Ensenada, a fast-growing city located in the north-western peninsula of Baja California (Mexico) was also as high as 61% (Garcillán et al. 2009). Kowarik (1990) also reported that Polish cities have an average of 50% to 70% alien plant species.

Across all habitats, four families such as Asteraceae, Poaceae, Fabaceae and Brassicaceae were having dominant contribution to the respective floras and they contributed 46.09% to 50.89% species to respective habitat floras. The clubbed species list was dominated by large global plant families which have a weedy tendency. The family that included the largest number of species was Asteraceae, followed by Poaceae, Fabaceae, Brassicaceae and Rosaceae. These five families accounted for 50.75% of alien plant species in the clubbed species list in the present study and have been reported to be dominant in other alien floras in Europe (e.g. Weber 1997; Pyšek et al. 2002; Celesti-Grapow et al. 2009) and in Asian countries (China Weber et al. 2008 and India Khuroo et al. 2012). By and large, all genera are represented equally and no genus or few of them dominated the species pool in urban landscapes.

This study revealed that plant species with herbaceous habitat dominated the clubbed species list as well as respective habitat floras and accounted for 92.46% of all species. The annual and perennial herbs were represented by 45.23% and 37.69% of plant species, respectively. This seems to commensurate with the reports that Kashmir Himalayan region has witnessed 25% introductions for landscaping and ornamenting purposes only (Khuroo et al. 2007). The dominance of herbaceous plant species, with annual and perennial lifespan, is in agreement with findings of Khuroo et al. (2007) who also reported preponderance of annual (32% of all alien species) and perennial herbs (27% of all alien species) in alien flora of Kashmir Himalaya. Wang et al. (2011) also reported the preponderance of herbaceous habit in naturalised plant species recorded in Beijing Municipality, China. The dominance of alien plant species with herbaceous habit found in urban landscapes of Kashmir valley is presumably due to high anthropogenic disturbance. In areas frequently disturbed, those species have an advantage that can colonise rapidly and make use of the additional resources created by the disturbance such as herbs or grasses with a low canopy height (Hobbs 1989; Lake and Leishman 2004).

Conclusions

Srinagar city is one of the fastest-growing urban centres where frequent disturbances due to rapid infrastructure development create bare niches and pave way for alien introductions. This is testified by the predominance of alien plant species in the flora of Srinagar city across habitats as found in the present study. The growing preference over time for using alien rather than native species in urban landscaping and ornamenting, despite the Kashmir Himalaya region being quite rich in native ornamentals, has exacerbated the urbanisation-mediated invasions. The role of disturbance, a hallmark of urbanisation, in facilitating plant invasions is also indicated by the dominance of fast-colonising herbaceous plant species as compared to other growth forms in almost all the investigated habitats. The rapid pace of urbanisation and consequent burgeoning invasion in the Srinagar city’s studied habitats call for careful policy planning to devise effective strategies for the management of urban landscapes. In fact, using native plant species in developing the urban landscapes and new green zones should be the rule, not the exception.

Abbreviation

GRIN: 

Germplasm Resources Information Network

Declarations

Acknowledgements

SMA is thankful to university of Kashmir, Srinagar for the fellowship grant. Thanks are due to Dr. AR Naqshi, Ex-Reader Department of Botany, University of Kashmir, for his special help in plant identification. Thanks are due to the two anonymous reviewers for their critical appraisal of the manuscript.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Botany, University of Kashmir
(2)
Department of Geography, Humboldt University of Berlin
(3)
School of Architecture, Birmingham City University

References

  1. Bastin L, Thomas CD (1999) The distribution of plant species in urban vegetation fragments. Landscape Ecol 14:493–507View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Bolger DT, Scott TA, Sauvajot RM, Potenza P, McCalvin C, Tran D, Mazzoni S, Soule ME (1997) Response of rodents to habitat fragmentation in coastal southern California. Ecol Appl 7:522–563View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolund P, Hunhammar S (1999) Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol Econ 29:293–301View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Catling PM, Porebski ZS (1994) The history of invasion and current status of Glossy Buckthorn, Rhamnus frangula, in Southern Ontario. Can Field Nat 108:305–310Google Scholar
  5. Celesti-Grapow L, Alessandrini A, Arrigoni PV, Banfi E, Bernardo L, Bovio M, Brundu G, Cagiotti MR, Camarda I, Carli E, Conti F, Fascetti S, Galasso G, Gubellini L, La Valva V, Lucchese F, Marchiori S, Mazzola P, Peccenini S, Poldini L, Pretto F, Prosser F, Siniscalco C, Villani MC, Viegi L, Wilhalm T, Blasi C (2009) The inventory of the non-native flora of Italy. Plant Biosys 143:386–430View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis MA (2003) Biotic globalization: does competition from introduced species threaten biodiversity? Bioscience 53:481–489View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Garcillán PP, Rebman JP, Casilla F (2009) Analysis of the non-native flora of Ensenada, a fast growing city in north-western Baja California. Urban Ecosyst 12:449–463View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) of the United States Department of Agriculture. http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxgenform.pl. Accessed 20 Mar 2012
  9. Guirado M, Pino J, Roda F (2006) Understory plant species richness and composition in metropolitan forest archipelagos: effects of forest size, adjacent land use and distance to the edge. Global Ecol Biogeogr 15:50–62View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Haase D, Larondelle N, Andersson E, Artmann M, Borgstrom S, Breuste J, Gomez-Baggethun E, Gren A, Hamstead Z, Hansen R, Kabisch N, Kremer P, Langemeyer J, Rall EM, McPhearson T, Pauleit S, Qureshi S, Schwarz N, Voigt A, Wurster D, Elmqvist T (2014) A quantitative review of urban ecosystem service assessments: concepts, models, and implementation. AMBIO 43:413–433View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Hobbs RJ (1989) The nature and effects of disturbance relative to invasions. In: Drake JA, Mooney HA, di Castri F, Groves RH, Kruger FJ, Rejmánek M, Williamson M (eds) Biological invasions: a global perspective. Wiley, Chichester, pp 389–405Google Scholar
  12. Hobbs RJ, Huenneke LF (1992) Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for conservation. Conserv Biol 6:324–337View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Hobbs RJ, Yates CJ (2003) Impacts of ecosystem fragmentation on plant populations: generalising the idiosyncratic. Aust J Bot 51:471–488View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Houlahan JE, Keddy PA, Makkay K, Findlay CS (2006) The effects of adjacent land use on wetland species richness and community composition. Wetlands 26:79–96View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) (1999) IUCN guidelines for the prevention of biodiversity loss due to biological invasion. Species 31–32:28–42Google Scholar
  16. Jauni M, Hyvönen T (2010) Invasion level of alien plants in semi-natural agricultural habitats in boreal region. Agr Ecosyst Environ 138:109–115View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Khuroo AA, Rashid I, Reshi Z, Dar GH, Wafai BA (2007) The alien flora of Kashmir Himalaya. Biol Invasions 9:269–292View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Khuroo AA, Reshi ZA, Malik AH, Weber E, Rashid I, Dar GH (2012) Alien flora of India: taxonomic composition, invasion status and biogeographic affiliations. Biol Invasions 14:99–113View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Kowarik I (1990) Some responses of flora and vegetation to urbanization in central Europe. In: Sukopp H, Hejny S, Kowarik I (eds) Urban ecology: plants and plant communities in urban environments, SPB, Academic Publ. bv, The Hague, The Netherlands pp 45–74Google Scholar
  20. Kühn I, Klotz S (2006) Urbanization and homogenization–comparing the floras of urban and rural areas in Germany. Biol Conser 127:292–300View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Kupfer JA, Malanson GP, Franklin SB (2006) Not seeing the ocean for the islands: the mediating influence of matrix-based processes on forest fragmentation effects. Global Ecol Biogeogr 15:8–20View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Lake JC, Leishman MR (2004) Invasion success of exotic in natural ecosystems: the role of disturbance, plant attributes and freedom from herbivores. Biol Conserv 117:215–226View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Levine MJ, Vilà M, D'Antonio MC, Dukes SJ, Grigulis K, Lavorel S (2003) Mechanisms underlying the impacts of exotic plant invasions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 270:775–781View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Miller JR (2005) Biodiversity conservation and the extinction of experience. Trends Ecol Evol 20:430–434View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Miller JR (2006) Restoration, reconciliation, and reconnecting with nature. Biol Conserv 127:356–361View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Miller JR, Hobbs RJ (2002) Conservation where people live and work. Conserv Biol 16:330–337View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, Grove JM, Nilon CH, Pouyat RV, Zipperer WC, Costanza R (2001) Urban ecological systems: linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:127–157View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Pyšek P (1998) Alien and native species in Central European urban floras: a quantitative comparison. J Biogeogr 25:155–163View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Pyšek P, Hulme PE (2005) Spatio-temporal dynamics of plant invasions: linking pattern to process. Ecoscience 12:302–315View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Pyšek P, Richardson DM, Rejmanek M, Webster GL, Williamson M, Kirschner J (2004) Alien plants in checklists and floras: towards better communication between taxonomists and ecologists. Taxon 53:131–143View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Pyšek P, Sádlo J, Mandák B (2002) Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic Preslia. Praha 74:97–186Google Scholar
  32. Qureshi S (2010) The fast growing megacity Karachi as a frontier of environmental challenges: urbanization and contemporary urbanism issues. J Geogr Reg Plan 3:306–321Google Scholar
  33. Qureshi S, Breuste JH, Jim CY (2013) Differential community and the perception of urban green spaces and their contents in the megacity of Karachi, Pakistan. Urban Ecosyst 16:853–870View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Qureshi S, Haase D, Richard C (2014) The theorized urban gradient (TUG) method—a conceptual framework for socio-ecological sampling in complex urban agglomerations. Ecol Indic 36:100–110View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Richardson DM, Pysek P, Rejmanek M, Barbour MG, Panetta FD, West CJ (2000) Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. Divers Distrib 6:93–107View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Ricotta C, La Sorte FA, Pysek P, Rapson GL, Celesti-Grapow L, Thompson K (2009) Phyloecology of urban alien floras. J Ecol 97:1243–1251View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Saunders DA, Hobbs RJ, Margules CR (1991) Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv Biol 5:18–32View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Shah MA, Callaway RM, Shah T, Houseman GR, Pal RW, Xiao S, Luo W, Rosche C, Reshi ZA, Khasa DP, Chen S (2014) Conyza canadensis suppresses plant diversity in its nonnative ranges but not at home: a transcontinental comparison. New Phytol 202:1286–1296View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Sullivan JJ, Timmins SM, Williams PA (2005) Movement of exotic plants into coastal native forests from gardens in northern New Zealand. New Zeal J Ecol 29:1–10Google Scholar
  40. Thompson K, McCarthy MA (2008) Traits of British alien and native urban plants. J Ecol 96:853–859View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  41. Turner WR, Nakamura T, Dinetti M (2004) Global urbanization and separation of humans from nature. BioScience 54:585–590View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang H, Pujol JL, Meyerson LA, Qui JX, Wang XK, Ouyang ZH (2011) Biological invasions in rapidly urbanizing areas: a case study of Beijing, China. Biodivers Conserv 20:2483–2509View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. Weber E, Sun SG, Li B (2008) Invasive alien plants in China: diversity and ecological insights. Biol Invasions 10:1411–1429View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Weber EF (1997) The alien flora of Europe: a taxonomic and biogeographic review. J Veg Sci 8:565–572View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  45. Wilson EO (1984) Biophilia. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  46. Wu SH, Hsieh CH, Chaw SM, Rejmanek M (2004) Plant invasions in Taiwan: insights from the flora of casual and naturalized alien species. Divers Distrib 10:349–362View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Andrabi et al.; licensee Springer. 2015

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.