Fig 1.
Land cover map and illustration of plant species responding to NLC.
a, the distribution of NLC across the Netherlands. b, the distribution of the NLC-F across the Netherlands. c, the distribution of the NLC-O across the Netherlands. d-f, Illustration of three types of hypothetical curves indicating plant species responding to NLC (or NLC-F or NLC-O).
Fig 2.
Response to NLC for 1 122 native plant species with significant null models.
3 species with a neutral (without a relationship, named ‘None’) response were omitted as not preferring any NLC. a-h, Response curves of plant species to NLC. i-l, Summary statistics of preferred NLCs. a, Summary of all 1 122 native plants responding to NLC (with percentages in parentheses). b-d, Response curves of species with decreasing (each magenta line indicates one species) (b), unimodal (each blue line indicates one species) (c) and increasing (each green line indicates one species) (d) relations with NLC. The dark black line is the average response curve of each species group. The yellow line indicates the standardized proportion of grids with different NLC in the Netherlands. Both the occurrence probability and the standardized proportion (percentage) range from 0% to 100% and are indicated by the y axis. e-h, Species with unimodal shapes were split into four groups based on their preferred NLCs (e, species with preferred NLCs ranging from 0–25%; f, species with preferred NLCs ranging from 25–50%; g, species with preferred NLCs ranging from 50–75%; h, species with preferred NLCs ranging from 75–100%). i-j, Statistics of preferred NLCs of all 1 122 native plant species (i, summary of 1 122 plant species’ preferred NLCs; j, percentage of species (in brackets) in different preferred NLC range groups, i.e. 0%, 0–25%, 25–50%, 50–75%, 75–100% and 100%). k-l, Statistics of preferred NLCs of species with unimodal shapes (k, summary of plant species’ preferred NLCs; l, histogram of preferred NLCs of plant species with unimodal relations with NLC). All mean values are means ± SE.
Table 1.
Comparison of permutation importance among variables.
Fig 3.
Percentage of grids with different NLC and species with different preferred NLC in the Netherlands.
a, 1 122 native species. b, 230 threatened species. c, 503 rare species. The brown color means the distribution of grid cells with different NLC and the green color means the distribution of species with different preferred NLC.
Fig 4.
The representativeness, i.e. relative occurrence of a species group in relation to the NLC availability in the Netherlands.
It describes the difference between the proportion of occurrence of grid cells with different NLC in the Netherlands and the relative occurrence of each species group along NLC. Species were classified into decrease, increase, preferred NLCs of 0–25% (unimodal0-25%), 25–50% (unimodal25-50%), 50–75% (unimodal50-75%) and 75–100% (unimodal75-100%), respectively. Lines represent the best-fit regressions and the grey bands represent the regression 95% confidence interval. The black horizontal line indicated 0.
Fig 5.
Preferred NLC-F and preferred NLC-O of native plant species.
Preferred NLC-F and NLC-O were classified into six groups, corresponding to species with decreasing shapes (preferred NLC-F or NLC-O equalling 0%), species with increasing shapes (preferred NLC-F or NLC-O equalling 100%), species with preferred NLC-F or NLC-O between 0% and 25%, species with preferred NLC-F or NLC-O ranging from 25% to 50%, species with preferred NLC-F or NLC-O ranging from 50% to 75%, species with preferred NLC-F or NLC-O ranging from 75% to 100%. The number of species (in each grid) increases with the blue color in each grid getting dark.
Fig 6.
Percentage distribution of species along the preferred NLC, preferred NLC-F and preferred NLC-O within each species category (threatened status, rarity and origin of species).
a-c, Percentage distribution of threatened and not threatened species along preferred NLC (a), NLC-F (b) and NLC-O (c). d-f, Percentage distribution of common and rare species along preferred NLC (d), NLC-F (e) and NLC-O (f). h-i, Percentage distribution of native and exotic species along preferred NLC (g), NLC-F (h) and NLC-O (i). ‘+’ indicates values that are above expectation according to our Contingency Analysis (see supplementary analysis for detailed results).
Fig 7.
The average occurrence probability change (average occurrence probability change from 0% NLC to others, e.g. NLC at 1x1 km resolution increases from 0% to 11%) of different species groups.
a, All native species vs exotic species. b, Threatened species vs not threatened species. c, Rare species vs common species. d, Rare species vs common species, but rare species are classified into three categories (i.e. very rare, rare, rather rare) according to the Red List of Vascular Plants of the Netherlands [26]. Lines represent the best-fit regressions.
Fig 8.
The average occurrence probability change (average occurrence probability change from 0% NLC-O to others, e.g. the NLC-O at 1x1 km resolution increases from 0% to 11%) of different species groups.
a, all native species vs exotic species. b, threatened species vs not threatened species. c, rare species vs common species. d, Rare species vs common species, but rare species are classified into three categories (i.e. very rare, rare, rather rare) according to the Red List of Vascular Plants of the Netherlands [26]. Lines represent the best-fit regressions.
Fig 9.
The average occurrence probability change (average occurrence probability change from 0% NLC-F to others, e.g. the NLC-F increases from 0% to 11%) of different species groups.
a, all native species vs exotic species. b, threatened species vs not threatened species. c, rare species vs common species. d, Rare species vs common species, but rare species are classified into three categories (i.e. very rare, rare, rather rare) according to the Red List of Vascular Plants of the Netherlands [26]. Lines represent the best-fit regressions.