DOCSLIB.ORG

WETLAND PLANTS – Full Species List (English) RECORDING FORM

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
WETLAND PLANTS – Full Species List (English) RECORDING FORM WETLAND PLANTS – full species list (English) RECORDING FORM Surveyor Name(s) Pond name Date e.g. John Smith (if known) Square: 4 fig grid reference Pond: 8 fig grid ref e.g. SP1243 (see your map) e.g. SP 1235 4325 (see your map) METHOD: wetland plants (full species list) survey Survey a single Focal Pond in each 1km square Aim: To assess pond quality and conservation value using plants, by recording all wetland plant species present within the pond’s outer boundary. How: Identify the outer boundary of the pond. This is the ‘line’ marking the pond’s highest yearly water levels (usually in early spring). It will probably not be the current water level of the pond, but should be evident from the extent of wetland vegetation (for example a ring of rushes growing at the pond’s outer edge), or other clues such as water-line marks on tree trunks or stones. Within the outer boundary, search all the dry and shallow areas of the pond that are accessible. Survey deeper areas with a net or grapnel hook. Record wetland plants found by crossing through the names on this sheet. You don’t need to record terrestrial species. For each species record its approximate abundance as a percentage of the pond’s surface area. Where few plants are present, record as ‘<1%’. If you are not completely confident in your species identification put’?’ by the species name. If you are really unsure put ‘??’. After your survey please enter the results online: www.freshwaterhabitats.org.uk/projects/waternet/ Aquatic plants (submerged-leaved species) Stonewort, Bristly (Chara hispida) Bistort, Amphibious (Persicaria amphibia) Arrowhead (Sagittaria sagittifolia) Stonewort, Clustered (Tolypella glomerata) Crystalwort, Channelled (Riccia canaliculata) Arrowhead, Canadian (Sagittaria rigida) Stonewort, Common (Chara vulgaris) Crystalwort, Lizard (Riccia bifurca) Arrowhead, Narrow-leaved (Sagittaria subulata) Stonewort, Convergent (Chara connivens) Duckweed , non-native sp. (Lemna aequinoctialis) Awlwort (Subularia aquatica) Stonewort, Coral (Chara tormentosa) Duckweed, a non-native sp. (Spirodela oligorrhiza) Bladderwort (Utricularia australis) Stonewort, Dark (Nitella opaca) Duckweed, Common (Lemna minor) Bladderwort grp, Greater (Utricularia vulgaris (s.l.)) Stonewort, Delicate (Chara virgata) Duckweed, Fat (Lemna gibba) Bladderwort grp, Intermed (U. intermedia (s.l.)) Stonewort, Dwarf (Nitella tenuissima) Duckweed, Greater (Spirodela polyrhiza) Bladderwort, Greater (Utricularia vulgaris (s.s)) Stonewort, Few-branched (Nitella spanioclema) Duckweed, Ivy-leaved (Lemna trisulca) Bladderwort, Intermed. (U. intermedia (s.s.)) Stonewort, Foxtail (Lamprothamnium papulosum) Duckweed, Least (Lemna minuta) Bladderwort, Lesser (Utricularia minor) Stonewort, Fragile (Chara globularis) Duckweed, non-native sp. (Lemna valdiviana) Bladderwort, Nordic (Utricularia stygia) Stonewort, Hedgehog (Chara pedunculata) Duckweed, Red (Lemna turionifera) Bladderwort, Pale (Utricularia ochroleuca) Stonewort, Intermediate (Chara intermedia) Duckweed, Rootless (Wolffia arrhiza) Bur-reed, Floating (Sparganium angustifolium) Stonewort, Least (Nitella confervacea) Frogbit (Hydrocharis morsus-ranae) Bur-reed, Least (Sparganium natans) Stonewort, Lesser Bearded (Chara curta) Liverwort, floating sp. (Riccia fluitans) Bur-reed, Unbranched (Sparganium emersum) Stonewort, Many-branched (Nitella hyalina) Liverwort, floating sp. (Ricciocarpos natans) Cape-pondweed (Aponogeton distachyos) Stonewort, Mossy (Chara muscosa) Pennywort, Floating (Hydrocotyle ranunculoides) Club-rush, Floating (Eleogiton fluitans) Stonewort, Naked (Chara denudata) Pondweed, Bog(Potamogeton polygonifolius) Fanwort (Cabomba caroliniana) Stonewort, Opposite Stonewort (Chara contraria) Pondweed, Broad-leaved (Potamogeton natans) Hampshire-purslane (Ludwigia palustris) Stonewort, Pointed (Nitella mucronata) Spatter-dock (Nuphar advena) Hornwort, Rigid (Ceratophyllum demersum) Stonewort, Rough (Chara aspera) Water Fern (Azolla filiculoides) Hornwort, Soft (Ceratophyllum submersum) Stonewort, Rugged (Chara rudis) Water-lily, Fringed (Nymphoides peltata) Lobelia, Water (Lobelia dortmanna) Stonewort, Slender (Nitalla gracilis) Water-lily, Least (Nuphar pumila) Mare’s-tail (Hippuris vulgaris) Stonewort, Slimy-fruited (Nitella capillaris) Water-lily, non native sp. (Nymphacae sp.) Marshwort, Lesser (Apium inundatum) Stonewort, Smooth (Nitella flexilis) Water-lily, White (Nymphaea alba) Moss, Bog (list species if possible) (Sphagnum sp.) Stonewort, Starry (Nitellopsis obtusa) Water-lily, Yellow (Nuphar lutea) Moss, Willow (Fontinalis antipyretica) Stonewort, Strawberry (Chara fragifera) Water-plantain, Floating (Luronium natans) Naiad, Holly-leaved (Najas marina) Stonewort, Translucent (Nitella translucens) Emergent plant species Naiad, Slender (Najas flexilis) Tapegrass (Vallisneria spiralis) Parrot’s-feather (Myriophyllum aquaticum) Water-crowfoot species undt. (Ranunculus sp.) Angelica, Garden (Angelica archangelica) Angelica, Wild (Angelica sylvestris) Pipewort (Eriocaulon aquaticum) Water-crowfoot, Brackish (Ranunculus baudotii) Arrowgrass, Marsh (Triglochin palustre) Pondweed species undt. (Potamogeton sp.) Water-crowfoot, Common (Ranunculus aquatilis) Pondweed, American (Potamogeton epihydrus) Water-crowfoot, Fan-leaved (Ranunculus circinatus) Arum, Bog (Calla palustris) Asphodel, Bog (Narthecium ossifragum) Pondweed, Blunt-leaved (Potamogeton obtusifolius) Water-crowfoot, Pond (Ranunculus peltatus) Asphodel, Scottish (Tofieldia pusilla) Pondweed, Curled (Potamogeton crispus) Water-crowfoot, River (Ranunculus fluitans) Pondweed, Fen (Potamogeton coloratus) Water-crowfoot, Stream (Ranunculus penicillatus) Avens, Water (Geum rivale) Balsam, Indian (Impatiens glandulifera) Pondweed, Fennel (Potamogeton pectinatus) Water-crowfoot (R. penicillatus spp. penicillatus) Balsam, Orange (Impatiens capensis) Pondweed, Flat-stalked (Potamogeton friesii) Water-crowfoot, Thread-lvd. (R. trichophyllus) Pondweed, Grass-wrack (P. compressus) Water-crowfoot, Three-lobed (R. tripartitus) Balsam, Touch-me-not (Impatiens noli-tangere) Beak-sedge, Brown (Rhynchospora fusca) Pondweed, Hairlike (Potamogeton trichoides) Water-dropwort, River (Oenanthe fluviatilis) Beak-sedge, White (Rhynchospora alba) Pondweed, Horned (Zannichellia palustris) Water-milfoil, Alternate (Myriophyllum alterniflorum) Pondweed, Lesser (Potamogeton pusillus) Water-milfoil, Spiked (Myriophyllum spicatum) Bedstraw, Common Marsh (Galium palustre) Bedstraw, Fen (Galium uliginosum) Pondweed, Loddon (Potamogeton nodosus) Water-milfoil, Whorled (Myriophyllum verticillatum) Bedstraw, Northern (Galium boreale) Pondweed, Long-stalked (Potamogeton praelongus) Water-soldier (Stratiotes aloides) Pondweed, Opp-leaved (Groenlandia densa) Water-starwort species undt. (Callitriche sp.) Bedstraw, Slender Marsh (Galium constrictum) Beggarticks (Bidens frondosa) Pondweed, Perfoliate (Potamogeton perfoliatus) Water-starwort, Autumnal (C. hermaphroditica) Bent, Creeping (Agrostis stolonifera) Pondweed, Red (Potamogeton alpinus) Water-starwort, Blunt-fruited (C. obtusangula) Pondweed, Sharp-leaved (Potamogeton acutifolius) Water-starwort, Common (Callitriche stagnalis) Bent, Velvet (Agrostis canina) Bird’s-foot-trefoil, Greater (Lotus pedunculatus) Pondweed, Shetland (Potamogeton rutilus) Water-starwort, Intermediate (Callitriche hamulata) Bitter-cress, Large (Cardamine amara) Pondweed, Shining (Potamogeton lucens) Water-starwort, no English name (C. palustris) Bittersweet (Solanum dulcamara) Pondweed, Slender-leaved (Potamogeton filiformis) Water-starwort, Short-leaved (Callitriche truncata) Bladder-moss, Norfolk (Physcomitrium eurystomum) Pondweed, Small (Potamogeton berchtoldii) Water-starwort, Various-lvd. (Callitriche platycarpa) Blinks (Montia fontana) Pondweed, Various-lvd. (Potamogeton gramineus) Water-violet (Hottonia palustris) Blood-drop-emlets (Mimulus luteus) Quillwort (Isoetes lacustris) Waterweed, Canadian (Elodea canadensis) Bogbean (Menyanthes trifoliata) Quillwort, Spring (Isoetes echinospora) Waterweed, Curly (Lagarosiphon major) Bog-rosemary (Andromeda polifolia) Shoreweed (Littorella uniflora) Waterweed, Esthwaite (Hydrilla verticillata) Bog-rush, Black (Schoenus nigricans) Stonewort, Bird's-nest (Tolypella nidifica) Waterweed, Large-flowered (Egeria densa) Bog-rush, Brown (Schoenus ferrugineus) Stonewort, Great Tassel (Tolypella prolifera) Waterweed, Nuttall’s (Elodea nuttallii) Bog-Sedge, Tall (Carex magellanica) Stonewort, Tassel (Tolypella intricata) Waterweed, South American (Elodea callitrichoides) Brooklime (Veronica beccabunga) Stonewort species undt. (Chara sp.) Waterwort, Eight-stamened (Elatine hydropiper) Brookweed (Samolus valerandi) Stonewort, Baltic (Chara baltica) Waterwort, Six-stamened (Elatine hexandra) Bryum, Matted (Bryum calophyllum) Stonewort, Bearded (Chara canescens) Floating-leaved species Bryum, Sea (Bryum warneum) Buckler-fern, Crested (Dryopteris cristata) Loosestrife, Yellow (Lysimachia vulgaris) Spearwort, Adder's-tongue (R. ophioglossifolius) Buckthorn, Alder (Frangula alnus) Lousewort, Marsh (Pedicularis palustris) Spearwort, Creeping (Ranunculus reptans) Bulrush (Typha latifolia) Marsh-marigold (Caltha palustris) Spearwort, Greater (Ranunculus lingua) Bulrush, Lesser (Typha angustifolia) Marshwort, Creeping (Apium repens) Spearwort, Lesser (Ranunculus flammula) Bur-marigold, London (Bidens connata) Meadow-rue, Common (Thalictrum flavum) Speedwell, Marsh (Veronica scutellata) Bur-marigold, Nodding (Bidens cernua) Meadowsweet (Filipendula ulmaria)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Checklist of the Orchids of the Crimea (Orchidaceae)
    J. Eur. Orch. 46 (2): 407 - 436. 2014. Alexander V. Fateryga and Karel C.A.J. Kreutz Checklist of the orchids of the Crimea (Orchidaceae) Keywords Orchidaceae, checklist of species, new nomenclature combinations, hybrids, flora of the Crimea. Summary Fateryga, A.V. & C.A.J. Kreutz (2014): Checklist of the orchids of the Crimea (Orchidaceae).- J. Eur. Orch. 46 (2): 407-436. A new nomenclature checklist of the Crimean orchids with 49 taxa and 16 hybrids is proposed. Six new taxa are added and ten taxa are excluded from the latest checklist of the Crimean vascular flora published by YENA (2012). In addition, five nomenclature changes are proposed: Epipactis persica (Soó) Nannf. subsp. taurica (Fateryga & Kreutz) Fateryga & Kreutz comb. et stat. nov., Orchis mascula (L.) L. var. wanjkovii (E. Wulff) Fateryga & Kreutz stat. nov., Anacamptis ×simorrensis (E.G. Camus) H. Kretzschmar, Eccarius & H. Dietr. nothosubsp. ticinensis (Gsell) Fateryga & Kreutz stat. nov., ×Dactylocamptis uechtritziana (Hausskn.) B. Bock ex M. Peregrym & Kuzemko nothosubsp. magyarii (Soó) Fateryga & Kreutz comb. et stat. nov., and Orchis ×beyrichii Kern. nothosubsp. mackaensis (Kreutz) Fateryga & Kreutz comb. et stat. nov. Moreover, a new variety, Limodorum abortivum (L.) Sw. var. viridis Fateryga & Kreutz var. nov. is described. Zusammenfassung Fateryga, A.V. & C.A.J. Kreutz (2014): Eine Übersicht der Orchideen der Krim (Orchidaceae).- J. Eur. Orch. 46 (2): 407-436. Eine neue nomenklatorische Liste der Orchideen der Krim mit 49 Taxa und 16 Hybriden wird vorgestellt. Sechs Arten sind neu für die Krim. Zehn Taxa, die noch bei YENA (2012) in seiner Checklist aufgelistet wurden, kommen auf der Krim nicht vor und wurden gestrichen.
    [Show full text]
  • "Ecology of Water Relations in Plants". In: Encyclopedia of Life
    Ecology of Water Relations Advanced article in Plants Article Contents . Introduction Yoseph Negusse Araya, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK . Water Uptake and Movement through Plants . Water Stress and Plants Water is an important resource for plant growth. Availability of water in the soil determines . Plant Sensing and Adaptation to Water Stress the niche, distribution and competitive interaction of plants in the environment. Distribution of Plants in Response to Water Regime Introduction doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0003201 Importance of water for plants Moisture Water typically constitutes 80–95% of the mass of growing 8 plant tissues and plays a crucial role for plant growth (Taiz 7 and Zeiger, 1998). Plants require water for a number of 6 physiological processes (e.g. synthesis of carbohydrates) 5 and for associated physical functions (e.g. keeping plants turgid). 4 Water accomplishes its many functions because of its 3 Moisture index 2 unique characteristics: the polarity of the molecule H2O (which makes it an excellent solvent), viscosity (which 1 makes it capable of moving through plant tissues by 0 capillary action) and thermal properties (which makes it Forest Woodland Grassland Desert capable of cooling plant tissues). Total net productivity 1 Plants require water, soil nutrients, carbon dioxide, ox- − 1000 year ygen and solar radiation for growth. Of these, water is most 2 − often the most limiting: influencing productivity (Taiz and m 1 800 Zeiger, 1998) as well as the diversity of species (Rodriguez- − Iturbe and Porporato, 2004) in both natural and agricul- 600 tural ecosystems. This is illustrated graphically in Figure 1. 400 How does water affect ecology of plants? 200 In order to understand the ecology of plant–water rela- 0 Total net productivity g Total tions it is important to understand from where and how Forest Woodland Grassland Desert plants acquire water in their environment (the latter is dis- cussed in the section on water uptake and movement Plant species diversity through plants).
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of Taraxacum Microspecies Along Soil Property Gradients in Salt and Brackish Meadows on the Polish Baltic Coast
    Acta Bot. Croat. 78 (1), 35–45, 2019 CODEN: ABCRA 25 DOI: 10.2478/botcro-2019-0001 ISSN 0365-0588 eISSN 1847-8476 Distribution of Taraxacum microspecies along soil property gradients in salt and brackish meadows on the Polish Baltic coast Beata Bosiacka1*, Helena Więcław1, Paweł Marciniuk2, Marek Podlasiński3 1 Department of Plant Taxonomy and Phytogeography, Faculty of Biology, University of Szczecin, Wąska 13, 71-415 Szczecin, Poland 2 Department of Botany, University of Podlasie, Prusa 12, 08-110 Siedlce, Poland 3 Department of Land Recultivation and Environmental Chemistry, West Pomeranian University of Technology, Słowackiego 14, 71-434 Szczecin, Poland Abstract – The vegetation of protected salt meadows along the Baltic coast is fairly well known; however, dandeli- ons have been so far treated as a collective species. The aim of our study was to examine the microspecies diversity of the genus Taraxacum in Polish salt and brackish coastal meadows and to analyse soil property preferences of the dandelion microspecies identified. In addition, we analysed the relations between soil properties and vegetation patterns in dandelion-supporting coastal meadows (by canonical correspondence analysis). The salt and brackish meadows along the Polish Baltic coast we visited were found to support a total of 27 dandelion microspecies repre- senting 5 sections. Analysis of vegetation patterns showed all the soil parameters (C:N ratio, organic matter con- tent, pH, concentration of Mg, P, K, electrolytic conductivity of the saturated soil extract ECe) to explain 32.07% of the total variance in the species data. The maximum abundance of most dandelion microspecies was associated with the highest soil fertility, moderate pH values and organic matter content, and with the lowest magnesium con- tent and soil salinity.
    [Show full text]
  • Bulletin / New York State Museum
    Juncaceae (Rush Family) of New York State Steven E. Clemants New York Natural Heritage Program LIBRARY JUL 2 3 1990 NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN Contributions to a Flora of New York State VII Richard S. Mitchell, Editor Bulletin No. 475 New York State Museum The University of the State of New York THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT Albany, New York 12230 NEW YORK THE STATE OF LEARNING Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2017 with funding from IMLS LG-70-15-0138-15 https://archive.org/details/bulletinnewyorks4751 newy Juncaceae (Rush Family) of New York State Steven E. Clemants New York Natural Heritage Program Contributions to a Flora of New York State VII Richard S. Mitchell, Editor 1990 Bulletin No. 475 New York State Museum The University of the State of New York THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT Albany, New York 12230 THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Regents of The University Martin C. Barell, Chancellor, B.A., I. A., LL.B Muttontown R. Carlos Carballada, Vice Chancellor , B.S Rochester Willard A. Genrich, LL.B Buffalo Emlyn 1. Griffith, A. B., J.D Rome Jorge L. Batista, B. A., J.D Bronx Laura Bradley Chodos, B.A., M.A Vischer Ferry Louise P. Matteoni, B.A., M.A., Ph.D Bayside J. Edward Meyer, B.A., LL.B Chappaqua Floyd S. Linton, A.B., M.A., M.P.A Miller Place Mimi Levin Lieber, B.A., M.A Manhattan Shirley C. Brown, B.A., M.A., Ph.D Albany Norma Gluck, B.A., M.S.W Manhattan James W.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf of JHOS January 2012
    JJoouurrnnaall of the HHAARRDDYY OORRCCHHIIDD SSOOCCIIEETTYY Vol. 9 No. 1 (63) January 2012 JOURNAL of the HARDY ORCHID SOCIETY Vol. 9 No. 1 (63) January 2012 The Hardy Orchid Society Our aim is to promote interest in the study of Native European Orchids and those from similar temperate climates throughout the world. We cover such varied aspects as field study, cultivation and propagation, photography, taxonomy and systematics, and practical conservation. We welcome articles relating to any of these subjects, which will be considered for publication by the editorial committee. Please send your submissions to the Editor, and please structure your text according to the “Advice to Authors” (see website www.hardyorchidsociety.org.uk , January 2004 Journal, Members’ Handbook or contact the Editor). Views expressed in journal arti - cles are those of their author(s) and may not reflect those of HOS. The Hardy Orchid Society Committee President: Prof. Richard Bateman, Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3DS Chairman: Celia Wright, The Windmill, Vennington, Westbury, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, SY5 9RG [email protected] Vice-Chairman: David Hughes, Linmoor Cottage, Highwood, Ringwood, Hants., BH24 3LE [email protected] Secretary: Alan Leck, 61 Fraser Close, Deeping St. James, Peterborough, PE6 8QL [email protected] Treasurer: John Wallington, 17, Springbank, Eversley Park Road, London, N21 1JH [email protected] Membership Secretary: Moira Tarrant, Bumbys, Fox Road, Mashbury,
    [Show full text]
  • Radial Growth and Ring Formation Process in Clonal Plant Eriophorum Angustifolium on Post-Mined Peatland in the Šumava Mts., Czech Republic
    Ann. Bot. Fennici 45: 44–54 ISSN 0003-3847 (print) ISSN 1797-2442 (online) Helsinki 29 February 2008 © Finnish Zoological and Botanical Publishing Board 2008 Radial growth and ring formation process in clonal plant Eriophorum angustifolium on post-mined peatland in the Šumava Mts., Czech Republic Vojtěch Lanta1,2,*, Štěpán Janeček1 & Jiří Doležal1,2 1) Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Section of Plant Ecology, Dukelská 135, CZ-379 82 Třeboň, Czech Republic (*e-mail: [email protected]) 2) Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 31, CZ-370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic Received 9 Feb. 2007, revised version received 14 Aug. 2007, accepted 24 Sep. 2007 Lanta, V., Janeček, Š & Doležal, J. 2008: Radial growth and ring formation process in clonal plant Eriophorum angustifolium on post-mined peatland in the Šumava Mts., Czech Republic. — Ann. Bot. Fennici 45: 44–54. Eriophorum angustifolium (Cyperaceae) is a pioneer clonal sedge colonizing bare peat surface of harvested peatlands in central Europe. It forms circular patches of densely aggregated ramets, followed by central die-back and ring formation as circles develop. This study experimentally tested the importance of inter-ramet competition, interfer- ence with litter, soil nutrient depletion, and architectural constraints for radial clonal spread and ring formation process. Effects of fertilization, litter addition and competi- tion of neighbor ramets on growth and survival of tillers transplanted into four distinct zones within individual circle were detected only in the first zone (green band) with high ramet density. This suggested that both above-ground competition for light and below-ground competition for soil nutrients can play an important role in population dynamics of E.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article Conservation Status of the Family Orchidaceae in Spain Based on European, National, and Regional Catalogues of Protected Species
    Hind ile Scientific Volume 2018, Article ID 7958689, 18 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7958689 Hindawi Review Article Conservation Status of the Family Orchidaceae in Spain Based on European, National, and Regional Catalogues of Protected Species Daniel de la Torre Llorente© Biotechnology-Plant Biology Department, Higher Technical School of Agronomic, Food and Biosystems Engineering, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, 28140 Madrid, Spain Correspondence should be addressed to Daniel de la Torre Llorente; [email protected] Received 22 June 2017; Accepted 28 December 2017; Published 30 January 2018 Academic Editor: Antonio Amorim Copyright © 2018 Daniel de la Torre Llorente. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Tis report reviews the European, National, and Regional catalogues of protected species, focusing specifcally on the Orchidaceae family to determine which species seem to be well-protected and where they are protected. Moreover, this examination highlights which species appear to be underprotected and therefore need to be included in some catalogues of protection or be catalogued under some category of protection. Te national and regional catalogues that should be implemented are shown, as well as what species should be included within them. Tis report should be a helpful guideline for environmental policies about orchids conservation in Spain, at least at the regional and national level. Around 76% of the Spanish orchid fora are listed with any fgure of protection or included in any red list, either nationally (about 12-17%) or regionally (72%).
    [Show full text]
  • (Orchidaceae- Orchideae) in Two Permanent Plots of a Mire in Slovakia
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Phyton, Annales Rei Botanicae, Horn Jahr/Year: 2006 Band/Volume: 46_1 Autor(en)/Author(s): Hrivnak Richard, Gomory Dusan Artikel/Article: Inter-annual Variability of the Abundance and Morphology of Dactylorhiza majalis (Orchidaceae-Orchideae) in two Permanent Plots of a Mire in Slovakia. 27-44 ©Verlag Ferdinand Berger & Söhne Ges.m.b.H., Horn, Austria, download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Phyton (Horn, Austria) Vol. 46 Fasc. 1 27-44 18. 12. 2006 Inter-annual Variability of the Abundance and Morphology of Dactylorhiza majalis (Orchidaceae- Orchideae) in two Permanent Plots of a Mire in Slovakia By Richard HRIVNÄK*), Dusan GÖMÖRY**) and Alzbeta CVACHOVÄ***) With 4 Figures Received October 13, 2005 Key words: Dactylorhiza majalis, Orchidaceae-Orchideae. - Morphology, modification, variability. - Population growth. - Vegetation of an acidic poor fen. - Slovakia. Summary HRIVNÄK R., GÖMÖRY D. & CVACHOVÄ A. 2006. Inter-annual variability of the abundance and morphology of Dactylorhiza majalis (Orchidaceae-Orchideae) in two permanent plots of a mire in Slovakia. - Phyton (Horn, Austria) 46 (1): 27-44, 4 fig- ures. - English with German summary. Inter-annual variability of the abundance and morphology of Dactylorhiza ma- jalis (RCHB.) HUNT & SUMMERH. was studied in two monitoring plots (MPs) in a nu- trient poor acidic fen in the Veporske Mts, Central Slovakia, during 1997-2004. Stands were regularly mowed in the past. In the late 1980s and during the 1990s, mowing ceased and the area was gradually overgrown by shrubs and trees. Both MPs have been regularly mowed every year since 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridgeshire and Peterborough County Wildlife Sites
    Cambridgeshire and Peterborough County Wildlife Sites Selection Guidelines VERSION 6.2 April 2014 CAMBRIDGESHIRE & PETERBOROUGH COUNTY WILDLIFE SITES PANEL CAMBRIDGESHIRE & PETERBOROUGH COUNTY WILDLIFE SITES PANEL operates under the umbrella of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Biodiversity Partnership. The panel includes suitably qualified and experienced representatives from The Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Northamptonshire; Natural England; The Environment Agency; Cambridgeshire County Council; Peterborough City Council; South Cambridgeshire District Council; Huntingdonshire District Council; East Cambridgeshire District Council; Fenland District Council; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Environmental Records Centre and many amateur recorders and recording groups. Its aim is to agree the basis for site selection, reviewing and amending them as necessary based on the best available biological information concerning the county. © THE WILDLIFE TRUST FOR BEDFORDSHIRE, CAMBRIDGESHIRE AND NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 2014 © Appendices remain the copyright of their respective originators. All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in any type of retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, photocopying, mechanical, recording or otherwise) without the permission of the copyright owner. INTRODUCTION The Selection Criteria are substantially based on Guidelines for selection of biological SSSIs published by the Nature Conservancy Council (succeeded by English Nature) in 1989. Appropriate modifications have been made to accommodate the aim of selecting a lower tier of sites, i.e. those sites of county and regional rather than national importance. The initial draft has been altered to reflect the views of the numerous authorities consulted during the preparation of the Criteria and to incorporate the increased knowledge of the County's habitat resource gained by the Phase 1 Habitat Survey (1992-97) and other survey work in the past decade.
    [Show full text]
  • The Red Data List of Irish Plants
    The Red Data List of Irish Plants The risks that species face are each very different, however, as a guide to the susceptibility of a given species, an agreed set of categories has been established internationally, and these are used to determine the potential risk that a species could become extinct. These categories are:- CRITICALLY ENDANGERED or CR - Species that are declining at a fast rate, and face imminent risk of extinction. ENDANGERED or E - Species that are declining, or grow in habitats likely to be disturbed, 'developed' or facing an ongoing degradation. VULNERABLE or V - Species that are currently not endangered, but would be extremely vulnerable if their habitats are disturbed in the future. There are seven species of plant that require immediate intervention (CR) if we are to save them from joining the fate of 11 other species that are now known to be extinct in Ireland. A number of these are already extinct in the Republic, and are not therefore legally protected under the 1999 Flora Protection Act. In the list below, 188 species of plant are listed, of which 64 are flowering plants, 4 ferns, 14 mosses, 4 liverworts, 1 lichen and 2 algae. Protected=1999 Flora Protection Order; (protected)= formerly protected by 1987 Order; {protected}= formerly protected by 1980 Order; (NI)= protected in Northern Ireland only. EXTINCT (9) Pheasant's-eye Adonis annua -- Corncockle Agrostemma githago Cogal Corn Chamomile Anthemis arvensis Fíogadán goirt Purple Spurge Euphorbia peplis Spuirse dhearg Sea Stock Matthiola sinuata Tonóg chladaigh
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook a “Improving the Availability of Data and Information
    Improving the availability of data and information on species, habitats and sites Focus Area A Handbook on the application of existing scientific approaches, methods, tools and knowledge for a better implementation of the Birds and Habitat Directives Environment FOCUS AREA A IMPROVING THE AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND i INFORMATION ON SPECIES, HABITATS AND SITES Imprint Disclaimer This document has been prepared for the European Commis- sion. The information and views set out in the handbook are Citation those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect the Schmidt, A.M. & Van der Sluis, T. (2021). E-BIND Handbook (Part A): Improving the availability of data and official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not information on species, habitats and sites. Wageningen Environmental Research/ Ecologic Institute /Milieu Ltd. guarantee the accuracy of the data included. The Commission Wageningen, The Netherlands. or any person acting on the Commission’s behalf cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information Authors contained therein. Lead authors: This handbook has been prepared under a contract with the Anne Schmidt, Chris van Swaay (Monitoring of species and habitats within and beyond Natura 2000 sites) European Commission, in cooperation with relevant stakehold- Sander Mücher, Gerard Hazeu (Remote sensing techniques for the monitoring of Natura 2000 sites) ers. (EU Service contract Nr. 07.027740/2018/783031/ENV.D.3 Anne Schmidt, Chris van Swaay, Rene Henkens, Peter Verweij (Access to data and information) for evidence-based improvements in the Birds and Habitat Kris Decleer, Rienk-Jan Bijlsma (Approaches and tools for effective restoration measures for species and habitats) directives (BHD) implementation: systematic review and meta- Theo van der Sluis, Rob Jongman (Green Infrastructure and network coherence) analysis).
    [Show full text]
  • Este Trabalho Não Teria Sido Possível Sem O Contributo De Algumas Pessoas Para As Quais Uma Palavra De Agradecimento É Insufi
    AGRADECIMENTOS Este trabalho não teria sido possível sem o contributo de algumas pessoas para as quais uma palavra de agradecimento é insuficiente para aquilo que representaram nesta tão importante etapa. O meu mais sincero obrigado, Ao Nuno e à minha filha Constança, pelo apoio, compreensão e estímulo que sempre me deram. Aos meus pais, Gaspar e Fátima, por toda a força e apoio. Aos meus orientadores da Dissertação de Mestrado, Professor Doutor António Xavier Pereira Coutinho e Doutora Catarina Schreck Reis, a quem eu agradeço todo o empenho, paciência, disponibilidade, compreensão e dedicação que por mim revelaram ao longo destes meses. À Doutora Palmira Carvalho, do Museu Nacional de História Natural/Jardim Botânico da Universidade de Lisboa por todo o apoio prestado na identificação e reconhecimento dos líquenes recolhidos na mata. Ao Senhor Arménio de Matos, funcionário do Jardim Botânico da Universidade de Coimbra, por todas as vezes que me ajudou na identificação de alguns espécimes vegetais. Aos meus colegas e amigos, pela troca de ideias, pelas explicações, pela força, apoio logístico, etc. I ÍNDICE RESUMO V ABSTRACT VI I. INTRODUÇÃO 1.1. Enquadramento 1 1.2. O clima mediterrânico e a vegetação 1 1.3. Origens da vegetação portuguesa 3 1.4. Objetivos da tese 6 1.5. Estrutura da tese 7 II. A SANTA CASA DA MISERICÓRDIA DE ARGANIL E A MATA DO HOSPITAL 2.1. Breve perspetiva histórica 8 2.2. A Mata do Hospital 8 2.2.1. Localização, limites e vias de acesso 8 2.2.2. Fatores Edafo-Climáticos-Hidrológicos 9 2.2.3.
    [Show full text]