Bryophytes and the morphospecies concept: a comparison of novice and expert sorting

Abstract

THE exclusion of bryophytes (mosses, liverworts and hornworts) from the majority of impact assessment and monitoring studies is probably due to key characters being microscopic and difficult to work with given limited resources. Coarse morphological groups have been used in rangeland monitoring where a level of identification accessible to amateurs successfully separated different soil crust groups (Eldridge and Rosentreter 1999). However, there has been only one study of the feasibility of using a morphospecies approach for bryophytes. Oliver and Beattie (1993) included mosses in their study of the comparison of the results of "biodiversity technicians" and expert taxonomists. They found that novices split and lump many moss species. The bryoflora they investigated was species-rich with 86 species found in 220 specimens. In this study, I investigate a different environment with a level of species richness that is more typical of many dry sclerophyll forests (Pharo and Beattie 1997). Novices collected the specimens as well as sorted, which is a realistic replication of the task facing biologists when undertaking biodiversity surveys or establishing monitoring studies. Here I compare the efforts of 65 novices (second-year biogeography students) and myself in sampling an area of sub-alpine Tasmania. I was interested quantifying the abilities of this group rather than a smaller, more experienced group because a range of interests and abilities were represented. The results are informative as to the feasibility of including bryophytes in monitoring projects where the focus of the project may be on other groups and the field officer has little experience with bryophytes.