Towards a more transparent use of the potential natural vegetation concept – an answer to Chiarucci et al.

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

AbstractIn this paper, the concerns of Chiarucci et al. () regarding use of the potential natural vegetation (PNV) concept are addressed, as voiced in the forum section of theJournal of Vegetation Science. First, we rectify some unfounded expectations concerningPNV, including a relationship with prehuman vegetation and phytosociology. Second, we point out issues that pose considerable challenges inPNVand require common agreement. Here, we address the issue of time and disturbance. We propose to use the staticPNVconcept as a baseline, a null model for landscape assessment and in comparisons. Instead of changing thePNVconcept itself, we introduce a new term, potential future natural vegetation (PFV) to cover estimations of potential successional outcomes. Finally, we offer a new view ofPNVwith which we intend to make the use ofPNVestimates more transparent. We formalize thePNVtheory into a partial cause‐effect model of vegetation that clearly states which effects on vegetation are factored out during its estimation. Further, we also propose to assessPNVin a probabilistic setting, rather than providing a single estimate for one location. This multiplePNVwould reflect our uncertainty about the vegetation entity that could persist at the locality concerned. Such uncertainty arises from the overlap of environmental preferences of different mature vegetation types. Thus reformulated, we argue that thePNVconcept has much to offer as a null model, especially in landscape ecology and in site comparisons in space and time.