Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Biologia




More options …
Volume 62, Issue 4

Issues

Formal definitions of Slovakian mire plant associations and their application in regional research

Daniel Dítě / Michal Hájek
  • Institute of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, CZ-61137, Brno, Czech Republic
  • Department of Ecology, Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Poříčí 3b, CZ-60300, Czech Republic
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Petra Hájková
  • Institute of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, CZ-61137, Brno, Czech Republic
  • Department of Ecology, Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Poříčí 3b, CZ-60300, Czech Republic
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2007-08-01 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-007-0082-8

Abstract

We applied the Cocktail method to a large data set of 4 117 relevés of all Slovak vegetation types with the aim to create formalised definitions of all Slovakian mire plant associations. We defined 21 groups of species with the statistical tendency of joint occurrences in vegetation. These groups differed substantially in their position along the pH/calcium gradient. We further defined 24 plant associations according to presence and/or absence of certain groups and/or strong dominance of some species. Only six traditional plant associations were not possible to be reproduced this way. We applied our formalised definitions to the regional data set of mires from the surrounding of the Vysoké Tatry Mts. Combined with frequency-positive fidelity index this method has led to the classification of the majority of vegetation plots into ten associations. When the vegetation types obtained from Cocktail-based classification and from cluster analysis were compared with respect to measured pH and conductivity in the study region, 82% of pairs differed significantly either in pH or in water conductivity in the former classification and 69% in the latter one.

Keywords: Braun-Blanquet approach; Cocktail; fen; peatland; species group; vegetation survey; Slovakia

  • [1] Botta-Dukát Z., Chytrý M., Hájková P. & Havlová M. 2005. Vegetation of lowland wet meadows along a climatic continentality gradient in Central Europe. Preslia 77: 89–111. Google Scholar

  • [2] Bruelheide H. 1995. Die Grünlandgesellschaften des Harzes und ihre Standortsbedingungen mit einem Beitrag zum Gliederungsprinzip auf der Basis von statistisch ermittelten Artengruppen. Diss. Bot. 244: 1–338. Google Scholar

  • [3] Bruelheide H. 2000. A new measure of fidelity and its application to defining species groups. J. Veg. Sci. 11: 167–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3236796CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [4] Bruelheide H. & Chytrý M. 2000. Towards unification of national vegetation classifications: A comparison of two methods for analysis of large data sets. J. Veg. Sci. 11: 295–306. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3236810CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [5] Chytrý M. & Otýpková Z. 2003. Plot sizes used for phytosociological sampling of European vegetation. J. Veg. Sci. 14: 563–570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1658/1100-9233(2003)014[0563:PSUFPS]2.0.CO;2CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [6] Chytrý M. (ed.) 2007. Vegetace ČR. 1. Travinobylinná a keríčková vegetace. Akademia, Praha (in press) Google Scholar

  • [7] Chytrý M., Tichý L., Holt J. & Botta-Dukát Z. 2002. Determination of diagnostic species with statistical fidelity measures. J. Veg. Sci. 13: 79–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1658/1100-9233(2002)013[0079:DODSWS]2.0.CO;2CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [8] Dítě, D. & Hájek M. 2005. Rastlinné spoločenstvá s druhom Carex lasiocarpa v severnej časti Slovenska. Ochr. Prír., Banská Bystrica, 23: 191–204. Google Scholar

  • [9] Dítě D., Navrátilová J., Hájek M., Valachovič M. & Pukajová D. 2006: Habitat variability and classification of the bladderwort (Utricularia) communities: comparison of peat depressions in Slovakia and in the Třeboň basin. Preslia 78: 331–343. Google Scholar

  • [10] Ejrnæs R., Bruun H.H., Aude E. & Buchwald E. 2004. Developing a classifier for the habitats directive grassland types in Denmark using species lists for prediction. Appl. Veg. Sci. 7: 71–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1658/1402-2001(2004)007[0071:DACFTH]2.0.CO;2CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [11] Hájek M. 2002. The class Scheuchzerio-Caricetea fuscae in the Western Carpathians: indirect gradient analysis, species groups and their relation to phytosociological classification. Biologia 57: 461–469. Google Scholar

  • [12] Hájek M., Horsák M., Hájková P. & Dítě D. 2006. Habitat diversity of central European fens in relation to environmental gradients and an effort to standardise fen terminology in ecological studies. Persp. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 8: 97–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ppees.2006.08.002CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [13] Hájková P. & Hájek M. 2004. Bryophyte and vascular plant responses to base-richness and water level gradients in Western Carpathian Sphagnum-rich mires. Folia Geobot. 39: 335–351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02803207CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [14] Hájková P. & Hájek M. 2005. Diversity of Calthion wet meadows in the western part of flysch Carpathians: regional classification based on national formal definitions. Thaiszia — J. Bot. 15: 85–116. Google Scholar

  • [15] Hájková P., Hájek M. & Apostolova I. 2006. Diversity of wetland vegetation in the Bulgarian high mountains, main gradients and context-dependence of the pH role. Plant Ecology 184: 111–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11258-005-9056-5CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [16] Havlová M. 2006. Syntaxonomical revision of the Molinion meadows in the Czech Republic. Preslia 78: 87–101 Google Scholar

  • [17] Horsák M. 2006. Mollusc community patterns and species response curves along a mineral richness gradient: a case study in fens. J. Biogeogr. 331: 98–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2005.01359.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [18] Huisman J., Olff H. & Fresco L.F.M. 1993. A hierarchical set of models for species response analysis. J. Veg. Sci. 4: 37–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3235732CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [19] Knollová, I., Chytrý, M., Tichý, L. & Hájek, P. 2006. Local ranges of phytosociological associations: are they reflected in numerical classification? Biologia 61: 71–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/s11756-006-0010-3CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [20] Kočí M., Chytrý M. & Tichý L. 2003. Formalized reproduction of an expert-based phytosociological classification: A case study of subalpine tall-forb vegetation. J. Veg. Sci. 14: 601–610. http://dx.doi.org/10.1658/1100-9233(2003)014[0601:FROAEP]2.0.CO;2CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [21] Lososová Z. 2004. Weed vegetation in southern Moravia (Czech Republic): a formalized phytosociological classification. Preslia 76: 65–85. Google Scholar

  • [22] Marhold K. & Hindák F. (eds) 1998. Zoznam nižších a vyšších rastlín Slovenska. Veda, Bratislava, 688 pp. Google Scholar

  • [23] Navrátilová J. & Navrátil J. 2005. Vegetation gradients in fishpond mires in relation to seasonal fluctuations in environmental factors. Preslia 77: 405–418. Google Scholar

  • [24] Oksanen J. & Minchin P.R. 2002. Continuum theory revisited: what shape are species responses along ecological gradients? Ecol. Modelling 157: 119–129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00190-4CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [25] Podani J. 2005. Multivariate exploratory analysis of ordinal data in ecology: Pitfalls, problems and solutions J. Veg. Sci. 16: 497–510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1658/1100-9233(2005)16[497:MEAOOD]2.0.CO;2CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [26] Rodwell J.S, Mucina L., Pignatti S., Schaminée J.H.J. & Chytrý M. 1997. European vegetation survey: The context of the case studies. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 32: 113–115. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [27] Roleček J. 2007. Formalized classification of thermophilous oak forests in the Czech Republic: what brings the Cocktail method? Preslia 79: 1–21. Google Scholar

  • [28] Rybníček K., Balátová-Tuláčková E. & Neuhäusl R. 1984. Přehled rostlinných společenstev rašeliništ’ a mokřadních luk Československá. Studie ČSAV, Praha, 1984/8, 123 pp. Google Scholar

  • [29] Sjörs H. & Gunnarsson U. 2002. Calcium and pH in north and central Swedish mire waters. J. Ecol. 90: 650–657. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2745.2002.00701.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [30] Sjörs H. 1952. On the relation between vegetation and electrolytes in north Swedish mire waters. Oikos 2: 241–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3564795CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [31] Tahvanainen T. 2004. Water chemistry of mires in relation to the poor-rich vegetation gradient and contrasting geochemical zones of the nort-eastern Fennoscandian Shield. Folia Geobot. 39: 353–369. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [32] Tichý L. 2002. JUICE, software for vegetation classification. J. Veg. Sci. 13: 451–453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1658/1100-9233(2002)013[0451:JSFVC]2.0.CO;2CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [33] Tichý L. 2005. New similarity indices for the assignment of relevés to the vegetation units of an existing phytosociological classification. Plant Ecol. 179: 67–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11258-004-5798-8CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [34] Valachovič M. (ed.) 2001. Plant communities of Slovakia. 3. Wetland vegetation. Veda, Bratislava, 434 pp. Google Scholar

  • [35] van der Maarel E. 1979. Transformation of cover-abundance in phytosociology and its effects on community similarity. Vegetatio 39: 97–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00052021CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [36] Vicherek J. 1973. Die Pflanzengesellschaften der Halophyten-und Subhalophytenvegetation der Tschechoslowakei. Academia, Praha. (Vegetace ČSSR A5). Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2007-08-01

Published in Print: 2007-08-01


Citation Information: Biologia, Volume 62, Issue 4, Pages 400–408, ISSN (Online) 1336-9563, ISSN (Print) 0006-3088, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-007-0082-8.

Export Citation

© 2007 Institute of Botany, Slovak Academy of Sciences. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Tomáš Peterka, Michal Hájek, Daniel Dítě, Petra Hájková, Salza Palpurina, Irina Goia, Vít Grulich, Veronika Kalníková, Zuzana Plesková, Anna Šímová, and Táňa Štechová
Folia Geobotanica, 2018
[3]
Ladislav Mucina, Helga Bültmann, Klaus Dierßen, Jean-Paul Theurillat, Thomas Raus, Andraž Čarni, Kateřina Šumberová, Wolfgang Willner, Jürgen Dengler, Rosario Gavilán García, Milan Chytrý, Michal Hájek, Romeo Di Pietro, Dmytro Iakushenko, Jens Pallas, Fred J.A. Daniëls, Erwin Bergmeier, Arnoldo Santos Guerra, Nikolai Ermakov, Milan Valachovič, Joop H.J. Schaminée, Tatiana Lysenko, Yakiv P. Didukh, Sandro Pignatti, John S. Rodwell, Jorge Capelo, Heinrich E. Weber, Ayzik Solomeshch, Panayotis Dimopoulos, Carlos Aguiar, Stephan M. Hennekens, Lubomír Tichý, and Robert Peet
Applied Vegetation Science, 2016, Volume 19, Page 3
[4]
Tomáš Peterka, Michal Hájek, Martin Jiroušek, Borja Jiménez-Alfaro, Liene Aunina, Ariel Bergamini, Daniel Dítě, Ljuba Felbaba-Klushyna, Ulrich Graf, Petra Hájková, Eva Hettenbergerová, Tatiana G. Ivchenko, Florian Jansen, Natalia E. Koroleva, Elena D. Lapshina, Predrag M. Lazarević, Asbjørn Moen, Maxim G. Napreenko, Paweł Pawlikowski, Zuzana Plesková, Lucia Sekulová, Viktor A. Smagin, Teemu Tahvanainen, Annett Thiele, Claudia Biţǎ-Nicolae, Idoia Biurrun, Henry Brisse, Renata Ćušterevska, Els De Bie, Jörg Ewald, Úna FitzPatrick, Xavier Font, Ute Jandt, Zygmunt Kącki, Anna Kuzemko, Flavia Landucci, Jesper E. Moeslund, Aaron Pérez-Haase, Valerijus Rašomavičius, John S. Rodwell, Joop H.J. Schaminée, Urban Šilc, Zvjezdana Stančić, Milan Chytrý, and Angelika Schwabe-Kratochwil
Applied Vegetation Science, 2017, Volume 20, Number 1, Page 124
[6]
Borja Jiménez-Alfaro, Michal Hájek, Rasmus Ejrnaes, John Rodwell, Paweł Pawlikowski, Eddy J. Weeda, Jarmo Laitinen, Absjørn Moen, Ariel Bergamini, Liene Aunina, Lucia Sekulová, Teemu Tahvanainen, François Gillet, Ute Jandt, Daniel Dítě, Petra Hájková, Gilles Corriol, Hanna Kondelin, Tomás E. Díaz, and Jürgen Dengler
Applied Vegetation Science, 2014, Volume 17, Number 2, Page 367
[7]
Eva Jamrichová, Petra Hájková, Michal Horsák, Eliška Rybníčková, Adam Lacina, and Michal Hájek
Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 2014, Volume 23, Number 5, Page 497
[8]
I. Svitková and J. Šibík
Plant Biosystems - An International Journal Dealing with all Aspects of Plant Biology, 2013, Volume 147, Number 2, Page 315
[9]
K. Hegedüšová, H. Ružičková, D. Senko, and P. Zuccarini
Plant Biosystems - An International Journal Dealing with all Aspects of Plant Biology, 2012, Volume 146, Number 1, Page 58
[10]
Richard Hrivnák, Michal Hájek, Drahoš Blanár, Judita Kochjarová, and Petra Hájková
Biologia, 2008, Volume 63, Number 3

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in