DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecog-01312.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ecog-01312.Pdf Ecography ECOG-01312 Riibak, K., Reitalu, T., Tamme, R., Helm, A., Gerhold, P., Znamenskiy, S., Bengtsson, K., Rosén, E., Prentice, H. C. and Pärtel, M. 2014. Dark diversity in dry calcareous grasslands is determined by dispersal ability and stress-tolerance. – Ecography doi: 10.1111/ ecog.01312 Supplementary material Appendix 1. Figure A1. Study area. Dry calcareous grasslands in the Baltic Sea region divided into nine subregions. Modified from Agriculture, Ecosystems and Evironment , Vol. 182, Reitalu, T., Helm, A., Pärtel, M., Bengtsson, K., Gerhold, P., Rosén, E., Takkis, K., Znamenskiy, S., Prentice, H. C. Determinants of fine-scale plant diversity in dry calcareous grasslands within the Baltic Sea region, pp. 59-68, Copyright (2014), with permission from Elsevier. 1 Table A1. List of recorded species (taxa) and their trait values. Species maximum dispersal distance (m) was calculated by applying dispersal function (Tamme, R. et al. 2014. Predicting species’ maximum dispersal distances from simple plant traits. – Ecology 95: 505–513). C, S, R, CR, CS, RS, CRS strategies were fuzzy coded into one quantitative category – S-type with scores being either 0 (C, R, CR), 0.33 (CRS), 0.5 (CS, RS) or 1 (S). Nomenclature follows The Plant List (2010). Version 1. Published on the Internet; <http://www.theplantlist.org> (December 2012). max. dispersal seed weight average plant S-strategy Species strategy type distance (m) (mg) height (cm) score Achillea millefolium 1.4 0.135 45 C 0 Aegopodium podagraria 0.4 2.21 75 C 0 Agrimonia eupatoria 112.3 23.08 65 C 0 Agrostis capillaris 2450.8 0.06 35 CSR 0.33 Agrostis gigantea 304.4 0.07 65 C 0 Agrostis stolonifera 12.6 0.1 32.5 CSR 0.33 Agrostis vinealis 1492.8 0.06 40 CSR 0.33 Alchemilla sp. 46.8 0.7 NA CSR 0.33 Allium oleraceum 0.3 7.04 47 CSR 0.33 Allium schoenoprasum 0.5 0.9 19 CSR 0.33 Allium vineale 0.4 19 42 C 0 Alopecurus sp. 188.0 0.8 65 C 0 Anacamptis morio 29.3 0.004 19 CSR 0.33 Anagallis arvensis 0.2 0.415 14 R 0 Androsace 0.6 0.17 17 SR 0.5 septentrionalis Anemone pratensis 1362.1 2.8 20 CSR 0.33 Anemone pulsatilla 170.2 3 15 CSR 0.33 Anemone sylvestris 25.7 0.6 30 CS 0.5 Angelica sylvestris 3.2 1.48 100 C 0 Antennaria dioica 108.3 0.06 14 CSR 0.33 Anthemis tinctoria 13.9 0.4 45 CS 0.5 Anthericum ramosum 22.0 5.11 27.5 CSR 0.33 Anthoxanthum odoratum 3.4 0.6 25 CSR 0.33 Anthriscus sylvestris 230.4 3.94 70 C 0 Anthyllis vulneraria 216.7 2.43 22 CSR 0.33 Apera interrupta 1057.8 0.15 15 CR 0 Arabis hirsuta 1.2 0.1 42 CSR 0.33 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi 59.7 18.2 95 CS 0.5 Arenaria gothica 0.5 NA 9 NA NA Arenaria serpyllifolia 0.8 0.1 18 R 0 Arrhenatherum elatius 200.0 3.3 85 C 0 Artemisia absinthium 3273.4 0.1 75 CS 0.5 Artemisia campestris 78.4 0.12 75 CS 0.5 Artemisia oelandica 58.3 NA 40 NA NA Artemisia rupestris 377.1 0.0418 19 CS 0.5 Asperula tinctoria 26.0 2.8 35 CSR 0.33 2 max. dispersal seed weight average plant S-strategy Species strategy type distance (m) (mg) height (cm) score Astragalus danicus 21.9 1.355 25 CSR 0.33 Bellis perennis 1.3 0.11 10 CSR 0.33 Botrychium dusenii 9.8 NA 22 S 1 Brachypodium pinnatum 56.4 3.8 90 CS 0.5 Briza media 119.2 0.6 75 CSR 0.33 Bromus hordeaceus 629.9 3.5 40 CR 0 Bunias orientalis 26.7 27.81 65 C 0 Bupleurum tenuissimum 271.4 0.6 40 S 1 Calestania palustris 1.8 2.68 85 CS 0.5 Calluna vulgaris 24.5 0.04 35 CS 0.5 Campanula cervicaria 29.9 0.1 60 CSR 0.33 Campanula glomerata 11.2 0.2 45 CSR 0.33 Campanula persicifolia 27.2 0.06 60 CSR 0.33 Campanula 1.6 0.19 55 CSR 0.33 rapunculoides Campanula rotundifolia 1.1 0.06 30 CSR 0.33 Carex caryophyllea/ 14.3 1.15 15 CSR 0.33 ericetorum Carex digitata 8.3 1.09 20 CSR 0.33 Carex filiformis 4.1 1.0952 25 CSR 0.33 Carex flacca/panicea 26.1 1.65 30 CSR 0.33 Carex hirta 7.9 2.74 36 C 0 Carex hostiana 233.9 1.66 35 CS 0.5 Carex montana 5.4 0.99 20 CSR 0.33 Carex nigra 5.7 0.7 37.5 S 1 Carex ornithopoda 10.0 0.7 12 CSR 0.33 Carex ovalis 1.0 0.58 35 CSR 0.33 Carex pallescens 11.5 1.4 37 CSR 0.33 Carex pulicaris 28.0 1.5 17.5 CSR 0.33 Carex spicata 533.2 2.5 35 CS 0.5 Carlina vulgaris 16.2 1.14 35 CSR 0.33 Carum carvi 129.6 2.6 45 C 0 Centaurea jacea 0.9 2 52 C 0 Centaurea scabiosa 0.9 6.89 80 C 0 Centaurium sp. 2.3 0.025 10.5 NA NA Cerastium fontanum 0.8 0.11 20 CSR 0.33 Cerastium pumilum 146.2 0.1 7 SR 0.5 Cerastium pumilum/ 221.2 0.1 7.5 SR 0.5 glutinosum Cerastium 1.5 0.04 10 R 0 semidecandrum Chaenorhinum minus 1.7 0.1 15 R 0 Cichorium intybus 0.4 1 80 C 0 Cirsium acaule 623.0 3.9 2 CSR 0.33 Cirsium arvense 54.7 1.24 75 C 0 Cirsium vulgare 43.5 2.4 65 CR 0 3 max. dispersal seed weight average plant S-strategy Species strategy type distance (m) (mg) height (cm) score Clinopodium acinos 85.0 0.3 20 CSR 0.33 Clinopodium vulgare 209.4 0.5 57 CS 0.5 Convallaria majalis 32.1 18 25 CS 0.5 Convolvulus arvensis 26.9 10.3 60 CR 0 Crepis biennis 11.7 1 63 CR 0 Crepis praemorsa 143.9 0.093 45 CSR 0.33 Crepis tectorum 37.8 NA 22 CSR 0.33 Cynosurus cristatus 300.4 0.6 40 CSR 0.33 Dactylis glomerata 318.9 1 77.5 C 0 Dactylorhiza fuchsii 16.6 NA 45 CSR 0.33 Dactylorhiza sambucina 57.4 NA 20 CSR 0.33 Danthonia decumbens 285.0 0.8 35 CS 0.5 Daucus carota 22.6 1.09 50 CR 0 Deschampsia cespitosa 879.4 0.29 65 C 0 Dianthus arenarius 0.3 0.5 20 CSR 0.33 Dianthus deltoides 0.7 0.2 20 CSR 0.33 Dianthus superbus 0.5 0.916 45 CSR 0.33 Draba incana 66.4 0.12 14.5 NA NA Echium vulgare 22.8 2.91 65 CR 0 Elytrigia repens 322.7 NA 75 C 0 Equisetum arvense 12.3 NA 30 CR 0 Erigeron acer 47.2 0.13 25 NA NA Erodium cicutarium 4.1 2.1 20 R 0 Erophila verna 2.2 0.02 11 SR 0.5 Euphrasia sp. 59.2 0.1 23.5 R 0 Festuca arundinacea 234.3 2.3 70 C 0 Festuca oelandica 0.5 NA 15 NA NA Festuca ovina 357.3 0.5 40 CSR 0.33 Festuca pratensis 39.3 2.1 65 C 0 Festuca rubra 311.7 1.3 50 C 0 Filipendula vulgaris 332.7 0.8 55 CSR 0.33 Fragaria vesca/viridis 93.1 0.4 13 CSR 0.33 Fumana procumbens 56.4 3.5 15 CSR 0.33 Galeopsis ladanum 383.4 1.2 25 CR 0 Galium album 259.2 0.53 60 C 0 Galium boreale 267.4 0.61 35 CSR 0.33 Galium pumilum 123.7 0.358 22.5 CSR 0.33 Galium uliginosum 308.2 0.35 22 CSR 0.33 Galium verum 145.6 0.44 40 CS 0.5 Gentiana cruciata 115.8 0.15 27 CSR 0.33 Gentianella amarella 252.1 0.14 20 CSR 0.33 Gentianella uliginosa 1.5 0.13 17 CSR 0.33 Geranium columbinum 3.7 4 30 CR 0 Geranium dissectum 5.2 2.6 27.5 CR 0 Geranium molle 2.1 1.2 16 R 0 Geranium pratense 4.3 7.41 55 C 0 4 max. dispersal seed weight average plant S-strategy Species strategy type distance (m) (mg) height (cm) score Geranium pusillum 73.2 0.71 20 C 0 Geranium sanguineum 3.8 8 27 CSR 0.33 Geranium sylvaticum 4.1 6.3 45 C 0 Geum rivale 543.4 1.4 50 CSR 0.33 Geum urbanum 197.9 2.4 50 CSR 0.33 Glechoma hederacea 2.8 0.7 40 CSR 0.33 Globularia vulgaris 5.5 0.8 15 CSR 0.33 Gymnadenia conopsea 47.5 0.008 40 CSR 0.33 Gypsophila fastigiata 1.7 0.44 40 S 1 Helianthemum 126.2 1.12 20 CS 0.5 nummularium Helianthemum 184.8 1 15 CS 0.5 oelandicum Helictotrichon pratense 51.5 2.4 55 CS 0.5 Helictotrichon 116.1 1.89 65 C 0 pubescens Hepatica nobilis 1.5 3 10 CSR 0.33 Heracleum sibiricum 53.7 5.9 80 NA NA Herniaria glabra 134.0 0.07 12 R 0 Hieracium praealtum 21.2 0.1 NA NA NA Hieracium sp.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Thin Layer Chromatography and Chemometric Studies of Selected Potentilla Species
    American Journal of Analytical Chemistry, 2014, 5, 1109-1120 Published Online November 2014 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ajac http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ajac.2014.516118 Thin Layer Chromatography and Chemometric Studies of Selected Potentilla Species Ryszard Świeboda, Agnieszka Jóźwiak, Grzegorz Jóźwiak, Monika Waksmundzka-Hajnos Department of Inorganic Chemistry, Medical University, Lublin, Poland Email: [email protected] Received 13 September 2014; revised 28 October 2014; accepted 13 November 2014 Copyright © 2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Abstract Herbal medicinal products have a long-standing therapeutic record. To ensure the quality of her- bal products specific identification tests which allow experts to discriminate related species and/or potential adulterants/substitutes are required. The purpose of the research was to rec- ommend an original and simple method for the separation of closely related five triterpenic acids (ursolic, oleanolic, tormentic, euscaphic, pomolic acid) and its application to chemotaxonomy stu- dies. 17 standard samples of Potentilla species and 3 test samples were chromatographed (with or without prechromatographic derivatization) on silica gel plates using the mobile phase: chloro- form-diethyl ether-methanol-formic acid (30:10:1:0.2 v/v/v/v); they were subsequently deriva- tized, and visualized in UV 366 nm light. After images received pre-treatment (montaging stack, removal of noise, background subtract, horizontal equalization, two types of warping) exploratory analysis of the investigated Potentilla species fingerprints was processed. The method without prechromatographic derivatization was used to create differential fingerprints.
    [Show full text]
  • Veronica Plants—Drifting from Farm to Traditional Healing, Food Application, and Phytopharmacology
    molecules Review Veronica Plants—Drifting from Farm to Traditional Healing, Food Application, and Phytopharmacology Bahare Salehi 1 , Mangalpady Shivaprasad Shetty 2, Nanjangud V. Anil Kumar 3 , Jelena Živkovi´c 4, Daniela Calina 5 , Anca Oana Docea 6, Simin Emamzadeh-Yazdi 7, Ceyda Sibel Kılıç 8, Tamar Goloshvili 9, Silvana Nicola 10 , Giuseppe Pignata 10, Farukh Sharopov 11,* , María del Mar Contreras 12,* , William C. Cho 13,* , Natália Martins 14,15,* and Javad Sharifi-Rad 16,* 1 Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Bam University of Medical Sciences, Bam 44340847, Iran 2 Department of Chemistry, NMAM Institute of Technology, Karkala 574110, India 3 Department of Chemistry, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal 576104, India 4 Institute for Medicinal Plants Research “Dr. Josif Panˇci´c”,Tadeuša Koš´cuška1, Belgrade 11000, Serbia 5 Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, Craiova 200349, Romania 6 Department of Toxicology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, Craiova 200349, Romania 7 Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Pretoria, Gauteng 0002, South Africa 8 Department of Pharmaceutical Botany, Faculty of Pharmacy, Ankara University, Ankara 06100, Turkey 9 Department of Plant Physiology and Genetic Resources, Institute of Botany, Ilia State University, Tbilisi 0162, Georgia 10 Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, I-10095 Grugliasco, Italy 11 Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Avicenna Tajik State Medical University, Rudaki 139, Dushanbe 734003, Tajikistan 12 Department of Chemical, Environmental and Materials Engineering, University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain 13 Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong SAR 999077, China 14 Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Alameda Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • County Wildlife Site Species Form
    1 Handout 7 – County Wildlife Site Species Form SECTION 2 PLANT LIST for County Wildlife Site Only include one record per species See handout 9 for information on DAFOR Steve: 3/5, 10/5, 17/5, 31/5, 7/6, 9\6, 14/6, 21/6, 5/7, 12/7, 19/7, 26/7, 2/8, 4/8, 9/8,16/8 Name of site: Dates of surveys: Mary, Sara, Samantha: 29/5, 10/6, 27/6,31/7,22/9 Litcham Common………………………………………………… County Wildlife Site No: 2052 Name of surveyor/s: Mary Flook, Sarah Butler, Samantha Hewkin, Steve Short Common name Scientific name DAFOR Comments / Please tick relevant box GPS or Grid Reference location D A F O R creeping buttercup Ranuculus repens X germander speedwell Veronica chamadrys X white clover Trifolium repens X common ragwort Senecio jacobaea X hoary ragwort Senecio erucifolius X apple mint Mentha x villosa X creeping cinquefoil Potentilla reptans red campion Silene dioica X white dead nettle Lamium album X bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. X common vetch Vicia sativa X cow parsley Anthricus sylestris X 2 Handout 7 – County Wildlife Site Species Form common mouse ear Cerastium fontanum X hedgerow cranesbill Geranium pyrenaicum stinging nettle Urtica dioca X broad leaf dock Rumex obtusifolius X lesser burdock Arctium lappa X scented mayweed Matricaria chamomilla X mayweed scentless Tripleurospermum inodorum X dandelion (sp) Taraxacum agg. X hedge woundwort Stachys sylvatica X wood avens Geum urbanum X herb robert Geranium robertianum X broad buckler fern Dryopteris dilata X rosebay willow herb Chamerion angustifolium X ivy-leaved speedwell Veronica filiformis
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Coverage of the National Vegetation Classification
    JNCC Report No. 302 Review of coverage of the National Vegetation Classification JS Rodwell, JC Dring, ABG Averis, MCF Proctor, AJC Malloch, JHJ Schaminée, & TCD Dargie July 2000 This report should be cited as: Rodwell, JS, Dring, JC, Averis, ABG, Proctor, MCF, Malloch, AJC, Schaminée, JNJ, & Dargie TCD, 2000 Review of coverage of the National Vegetation Classification JNCC Report, No. 302 © JNCC, Peterborough 2000 For further information please contact: Habitats Advice Joint Nature Conservation Committee Monkstone House, City Road, Peterborough PE1 1JY UK ISSN 0963-8091 1 2 Contents Preface .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................................... 4 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................. 5 1.1 Coverage of the original NVC project......................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Generation of NVC-related data by the community of users ...................................................................... 5 2 Methodology............................................................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Reviewing the wider European scene.........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (2009) Red Data List of Derbyshire's Vascular Plants
    Red Data List of Derbyshire’s Vascular Plants Moyes, N.J. & Willmot, A. Derby Museum & Art Gallery 2009 Contents 1. Introduction Page 2 2. Red Data List Categories – What’s Included? Page 3 3. What’s Not Included? Page 4 4. Conclusion & Recommendations Page 4 5. Table 1 List of Category 1 Plants Page 5 6. Table 2 List of Category 2 Plants Page 5 7. Table 3 List of Category 3 Plants Page 7 8. Table 4 List of Category 4 Plants Page 8 9. Table 5 List of Category 5 Plants Page 9 10. Table 6 List of Category 6 Plants Page 11 11. References Page 12 Appendix 1 History of Derbyshire Red Data Lists Page 13 Appendix 2 Assessing Local Decline Page 15 Appendix 3 Full List of Derbyshire Red Data Plants Page 18 CITATION: Moyes, N.J. & Willmot, A. (2009) Red Data List of Derbyshire’s Vascular Plants. Derby Museum. 1 1) Introduction County Rare Plant Lists – or Red Data Lists – are a valuable tool to identify species of conservation concern at the local level. These are the plants we should be most concerned about protecting when they are still present, or looking out for if they seem to have declined or become extinct in the locality. All the species named in this Red Data List are native vascular plants in the area, and they either: have a national conservation status in the UK, or are rare in Derbyshire, or have exhibited a significant local decline in recent times, or have become locally extinct. The geographic area in the definition of Derbyshire used here includes: the modern administrative county of Derbyshire, the City of Derby the historic botanical recording area known as the “vice-county” of Derbyshire (VC57).
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity of Sexual Systems Within Different Lineages of the Genus Silene
    Research Article Diversity of sexual systems within different lineages of the genus Silene Ine´s Casimiro-Soriguer1,2*, Maria L. Buide1 and Eduardo Narbona1 1 A´ rea de Bota´nica, Departamento de Biologı´a Molecular e Ingenierı´a Bioquı´mica, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Ctra. de Utrera, km 1, 41013 Sevilla, Spain 2 A´ rea de Bota´nica, Departamento de Biologı´a Vegetal y Ecologı´a, Universidad de Sevilla, Avenida Reina Mercedes s/n, 41012 Sevilla, Spain Received: 16 December 2014; Accepted: 26 March 2015; Published: 10 April 2015 Associate Editor: Diana Wolf Citation: Casimiro-Soriguer I, Buide ML, Narbona E. 2015. Diversity of sexual systems within different lineages of the genus Silene. AoB PLANTS 7: plv037; doi:10.1093/aobpla/plv037 Abstract. Species and populations can be categorized by their sexual systems, depending on the spatial distribu- tion of female and male reproductive structures within and among plants. Although a high diversity of sexual systems exists in Silene, their relative frequency at the genus and infrageneric level is unknown. Here, we carried out an exten- sive literature search for direct or indirect descriptions of sexual systems in Silene species. We found descriptions of sexual systems for 98 Silene species, where 63 and 35 correspond to the phylogenetically supported subgenera Silene and Behenantha, respectively. Hermaphroditism was the commonest sexual system (58.2 %), followed by dioecy (14.3 %), gynodioecy (13.3 %) and gynodioecy–gynomonoecy (i.e. hermaphroditic, female and gynomonoecious plants coexisting in the same population; 12.2 %). The presence of these sexual systems in both subgenera suggests their multiple origins.
    [Show full text]
  • PLANT LIST for POLLINATORS Part 1 – a Concise List of Suggested Garden Plants That Are Attractive to Pollinating Insects
    THE ACTION PLAN FOR POLLINATORS SUGGESTED PLANT LIST FOR POLLINATORS Part 1 – A concise list of suggested garden plants that are attractive to pollinating insects This is a list of suggested garden plants. We have only selected flowers which are garden- worthy, easily obtainable, well-known, and widely acknowledged as being attractive to pollinating insects. In some case we have given extra comments about garden- worthiness. This is intended as a clear and concise short list to help gardeners; it is not intended to be comprehensive and we have avoided suggesting plants which are difficult to grow or obtain, or whose benefit to pollinators is still a matter for debate. We have omitted several plants that are considered to have invasive potential, and have qualified some others on the list with comments advising readers how to avoid invasive forms. PLANT ANGELICA (Angelica species). Attractive to a range of insects, especially hoverflies and solitary bees. AUBRETIA (Aubrieta deltoides hybrids). An important early nectar for insects coming out of hibernation. BELLFLOWER (Campanula species and cultivars). Forage for bumblebees and some solitary bees. BETONY (Stachys officinalis). Attractive to bumblebees. Butterfly Conversation’s Awarded the Royal Horticultural Top Butterflys Society’s ‘Award of Garden Nectar Plants. Merit’. PLANT BIRD’S FOOT TREFOIL (Lotus corniculatus). Larval food plant for Common Blue, Dingy Skipper and several moths. Also an important pollen source for bumblebees. Can be grown in gravel or planted in a lawn that is mowed with blades set high during the flowering period. BOWLES’ WALLFLOWER (Erysimum Bowles Mauve). Mauve perennial wallflower, long season nectar for butterflies, moths and many bee species.
    [Show full text]
  • Number English Name Welsh Name Latin Name Availability Llysiau'r Dryw Agrimonia Eupatoria 32 Alder Gwernen Alnus Glutinosa 409 A
    Number English name Welsh name Latin name Availability Sponsor 9 Agrimony Llysiau'r Dryw Agrimonia eupatoria 32 Alder Gwernen Alnus glutinosa 409 Alder Buckthorn Breuwydd Frangula alnus 967 Alexanders Dulys Smyrnium olusatrum Kindly sponsored by Alexandra Rees 808 Allseed Gorhilig Radiola linoides 898 Almond Willow Helygen Drigwryw Salix triandra 718 Alpine Bistort Persicaria vivipara 782 Alpine Cinquefoil Potentilla crantzii 248 Alpine Enchanter's-nightshade Llysiau-Steffan y Mynydd Circaea alpina 742 Alpine Meadow-grass Poa alpina 1032 Alpine Meadow-rue Thalictrum alpinum 217 Alpine Mouse-ear Clust-y-llygoden Alpaidd Cerastium alpinum 1037 Alpine Penny-cress Codywasg y Mwynfeydd Thlaspi caerulescens 911 Alpine Saw-wort Saussurea alpina Not Yet Available 915 Alpine Saxifrage Saxifraga nivalis 660 Alternate Water-milfoil Myrdd-ddail Cylchynol Myriophyllum alterniflorum 243 Alternate-leaved Golden-saxifrageEglyn Cylchddail Chrysosplenium alternifolium 711 Amphibious Bistort Canwraidd y Dŵr Persicaria amphibia 755 Angular Solomon's-seal Polygonatum odoratum 928 Annual Knawel Dinodd Flynyddol Scleranthus annuus 744 Annual Meadow-grass Gweunwellt Unflwydd Poa annua 635 Annual Mercury Bresychen-y-cŵn Flynyddol Mercurialis annua 877 Annual Pearlwort Cornwlyddyn Anaf-flodeuog Sagina apetala 1018 Annual Sea-blite Helys Unflwydd Suaeda maritima 379 Arctic Eyebright Effros yr Arctig Euphrasia arctica 218 Arctic Mouse-ear Cerastium arcticum 882 Arrowhead Saethlys Sagittaria sagittifolia 411 Ash Onnen Fraxinus excelsior 761 Aspen Aethnen Populus tremula
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Iowa Plant Species List
    !PLANTCO FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUE: IOWA DATABASE This list has been modified from it's origional version which can be found on the following website: http://www.public.iastate.edu/~herbarium/Cofcons.xls IA CofC SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME PHYSIOGNOMY W Wet 9 Abies balsamea Balsam fir TREE FACW * ABUTILON THEOPHRASTI Buttonweed A-FORB 4 FACU- 4 Acalypha gracilens Slender three-seeded mercury A-FORB 5 UPL 3 Acalypha ostryifolia Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 5 UPL 6 Acalypha rhomboidea Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 3 FACU 0 Acalypha virginica Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 3 FACU * ACER GINNALA Amur maple TREE 5 UPL 0 Acer negundo Box elder TREE -2 FACW- 5 Acer nigrum Black maple TREE 5 UPL * Acer rubrum Red maple TREE 0 FAC 1 Acer saccharinum Silver maple TREE -3 FACW 5 Acer saccharum Sugar maple TREE 3 FACU 10 Acer spicatum Mountain maple TREE FACU* 0 Achillea millefolium lanulosa Western yarrow P-FORB 3 FACU 10 Aconitum noveboracense Northern wild monkshood P-FORB 8 Acorus calamus Sweetflag P-FORB -5 OBL 7 Actaea pachypoda White baneberry P-FORB 5 UPL 7 Actaea rubra Red baneberry P-FORB 5 UPL 7 Adiantum pedatum Northern maidenhair fern FERN 1 FAC- * ADLUMIA FUNGOSA Allegheny vine B-FORB 5 UPL 10 Adoxa moschatellina Moschatel P-FORB 0 FAC * AEGILOPS CYLINDRICA Goat grass A-GRASS 5 UPL 4 Aesculus glabra Ohio buckeye TREE -1 FAC+ * AESCULUS HIPPOCASTANUM Horse chestnut TREE 5 UPL 10 Agalinis aspera Rough false foxglove A-FORB 5 UPL 10 Agalinis gattingeri Round-stemmed false foxglove A-FORB 5 UPL 8 Agalinis paupercula False foxglove
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental & Socio-Economic Studies
    Environmental & Socio-economic Studies DOI: 10.1515/environ-2015-0004 Environ. Socio.-econ. Stud., 2013, 1, 1: 22-30 © 2013 Copyright by University of Silesia ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Extinct and endangered species in the vascular plant flora of Strzelce Opolskie (Southern Poland) Łukasz Folcik1, Andrzej Urbisz1 1Department of Plant Systematics, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Silesia, Jagiellońska Str. 28, 40-032 Katowice, Poland E–mail address (corresponding author): [email protected] ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT Symptoms of anthropogenic changes in the vascular plant flora include the spread of some species groups and the extinction of others. Also habitat condition changes (eutrophication, pollution etc.) and biodiversity loss (at a regional, national and even continental scale) should be mentioned. Numerous papers with rare plant species localities and endangered habitats have been published but the extinction processes and scale of this phenomenon in urban areas where environmental conservation is crucial, are not often analysed. The aim of the present study is to estimate species loss in the vascular plant flora of the town Strzelce Opolskie (Chełm, Silesian Upland) on the basis of the floristic literature and botanical surveys carried out from 2011 to 2013. A comparison has been made between the list of species reported up to 1945 and those species currently occurring in the study area. As a result, a list of 99 species included in the red list of plants of Opole and Silesian voivodeships is presented. Among this group, 45 species are not confirmed after 1945. Numerous extinct and endangered species are from families: Orchidaceae (8 species), Cyperaceae (7 species), Ranunculaceae (7 species) and Lamiaceae (6 species).
    [Show full text]
  • Bryophyte Diversity and Vascular Plants
    DISSERTATIONES BIOLOGICAE UNIVERSITATIS TARTUENSIS 75 BRYOPHYTE DIVERSITY AND VASCULAR PLANTS NELE INGERPUU TARTU 2002 DISSERTATIONES BIOLOGICAE UNIVERSITATIS TARTUENSIS 75 DISSERTATIONES BIOLOGICAE UNIVERSITATIS TARTUENSIS 75 BRYOPHYTE DIVERSITY AND VASCULAR PLANTS NELE INGERPUU TARTU UNIVERSITY PRESS Chair of Plant Ecology, Department of Botany and Ecology, University of Tartu, Estonia The dissertation is accepted for the commencement of the degree of Doctor philosophiae in plant ecology at the University of Tartu on June 3, 2002 by the Council of the Faculty of Biology and Geography of the University of Tartu Opponent: Ph.D. H. J. During, Department of Plant Ecology, the University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands Commencement: Room No 218, Lai 40, Tartu on August 26, 2002 © Nele Ingerpuu, 2002 Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastuse trükikoda Tiigi 78, Tartu 50410 Tellimus nr. 495 CONTENTS LIST OF PAPERS 6 INTRODUCTION 7 MATERIAL AND METHODS 9 Study areas and field data 9 Analyses 10 RESULTS 13 Correlation between bryophyte and vascular plant species richness and cover in different plant communities (I, II, V) 13 Environmental factors influencing the moss and field layer (II, III) 15 Effect of vascular plant cover on the growth of bryophytes in a pot experiment (IV) 17 The distribution of grassland bryophytes and vascular plants into different rarity forms (V) 19 Results connected with nature conservation (I, II, V) 20 DISCUSSION 21 CONCLUSIONS 24 SUMMARY IN ESTONIAN. Sammaltaimede mitmekesisus ja seosed soontaimedega. Kokkuvõte 25 < TÄNUSÕNAD. Acknowledgements 28 REFERENCES 29 PAPERS 33 2 5 LIST OF PAPERS The present thesis is based on the following papers which are referred to in the text by the Roman numerals.
    [Show full text]
  • British Wild Plants in Natural Associations
    BRITISH WILD PLANTS IN NATURAL ASSOCIATIONS A database source for landscaping, habitat creation and local planning DATABASE CONTENTS, INTRODUCTION, CLASSIFICATIONS and INDEX NB. The individual community tables and text (see Contents of Main Database below) are available as separate files. Compiled by C J Betts © Christopher Betts ISBN 1 900023 04 0 First published 1998 by Christopher Betts Environmental Biology Monkwood Green Worcester UK Second Edition 2003; further updates 2018,2019 (only available digitally). 1 Dr Christopher Betts, is a Chartered Biologist specialising in environmental biology and ecology. He holds a first class Bachelor of Science Degree with Honours and his PhD was awarded for work in plant community dynamics. He is a Fellow of the British Naturalists’ Association, a Chartered Biologist, and Member of the Royal Society of Biology, the Institution of Environmental Sciences, the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, and the European Federation of Environmental Professionals. Chris Betts has worked for over fifty years in the environmental field, latterly as Chairman and Director of Science of a Professional Practice involved in a range of activities relating to habitat management, biodiversity promotion, environmental biology and land use. He has been responsible for many schemes of habitat creation, enhancement, management and planting on many sites in different areas in the UK and elsewhere and is a keen plantsman himself. 2 CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT ONLY CONTENTS OF THE MAIN DATABASE ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]