Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Indicators for plant species richness in pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forests of Germany

  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Forestry is obliged to record as well as maintain and/or enhance biological diversity in forests due to national and international agreements. Accordingly, it is necessary to work out methodological approaches for the assessment of biodiversity in forests. In the study presented here, we focus on the total plant species pool (563 vascular plant and bryophyte species) of pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forests in NE Germany to identify indicators for plant species richness. We distinguished several groups like “herb”, “grass-like”, “woody”, “endangered”, and “exotic species”, for which we detected indicators for low (class #1), intermediate (class #2), and high (class #3) species numbers. From a total of 84 species, which were identified by a three-step procedure, most indicators were found for class #3. Only few indicators have been revealed for intermediate species numbers, i.e. class #2. With help of Ellenberg’s ecological indicator values and information on the main occurrence in Central European vegetation types and plant communities, respectively, we characterized the indicator species ecologically. The ecological site preferences of the indicator species in general reflect the fact that species richness is highest in base-rich, light, and anthropogenically disturbed pine forests. On the contrary, species-poor forests were revealed by indicators, which mainly occur on acidic sites. It is concluded that a considerable set of indicators for species richness can help facilitate biodiversity assessments in forestry and ecosystem restoration practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arrhenius O (1921) Species and area. J Ecol 9:95–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barthlott W, Mutke J, Braun G, Kier G (2000) Die ungleiche globale Verteilung pflanzlicher Artenvielfalt – Ursachen und Konsequenzen. Berichte Reinhold-Tüxen-Gesellschaft 12:67–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun-Blanquet J (1964) Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde, 3rd ed. Springer, Wien

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckland ST, Magurran AE, Green RE, Fewster RM (2005) Monitoring change in biodiversity through composite indices. Phil Trans Roy Soc 360:243–254

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carignan V, Villard MA (2002) Selecting indicator species to monitor ecological integrity: a review. Environ Monitoring Assessment 78:45–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CBD (2004) Convention on biological diversity. United Nations Environment Programme. http://www.biodiv.org/convention

  • Connell JH (1978) Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science 199:1302–1310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Desrochers RE, Anand M (2004) From traditional diversity indices to taxonomic diversity indices. Int J Ecol Environ Sci 30:85–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutschewitz K, Lausch A, Kühn I, Klotz S (2003) Native and alien plant species richness in relation to spatial heterogeneity on a regional scale in Germany. Global Ecol Biogeogr 12:299–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupré C, Diekmann M (1998) Prediction of occurrence of vascular plants in deciduous forests of South Sweden by means of Ellenberg indicator values. Appl Veget Sci 1:139–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellenberg H (1996) Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen, 5th ed. Ulmer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellenberg H, Weber HE, Düll R, Wirth V, Werner W (2001) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa, 3rd ed. Scripta Geobotanica 18:1–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferris R, Humphrey JW (1999) A review of potential biodiversity indicators for application in British forests. Forestry 72:313–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forest Stewardship Council (2003) Policy & standards, FSC principles & criteria of forest stewardship. http://www.fsc.org/fsc/how_fsc_works/policy_standards/ princ_criteria

  • Frahm J-P, Frey W (2004) Moosflora. Ulmer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ (2000) Global patterns in biodiversity. Nature 405:220–227

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gleason HA (1922) On the relation between species and area. Ecology 3:156–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeupler H (2000) Biodiversität in Zeit und Raum – Dynamik oder Konstanz? Berichte Reinhold-Tüxen-Gesellschaft 12:113–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeupler H, Schönfelder P (eds) (1988) Atlas der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Ulmer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinken T (1995) Naturnahe Laub- und Nadelwälder grundwasserferner Standorte im niedersächsischen Tiefland: Gliederung, Standortsbedingungen, Dynamik. Dissertationes Botanicae 239:1–311

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendel M (2002) Klima. In: Liedke H, Marcinek J (eds) Physische Geographie Deutschlands, 3rd edn. H Haack Verlagsges., Gotha, pp. 14–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Heywood VH, Watson RT, Baste I, Gardner KA (1995) Introduction. In: Heywood VH, Watson RT, Baste I (eds) Global biodiversity assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs RJ, Huenneke LF (1992) Disturbance, diversity, and invasions: Implications for conservation. Conserv Biol 6:324–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann G (1995) Wald, Klima, Fremdstoffeintrag. Ökologischer Wandel mit Konsequenzen für Waldbau und Naturschutz dargestellt am Gebiet der neuen Bundesländer Deutschlands. Angewandte Landschaftsökologie 4:165–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Kessler M (2001) Maximum plant-community endemism at intermediate intensities of anthropogenic disturbance in Bolivian montane forests. Conserv Biol 15:634–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klimo E, Hager H, Kulhavý J (eds) (2000) Spruce monocultures in Central Europe – problems and prospects. European Forest Institute Proceedings 33:1–208

  • Knoerzer D (1999) Zur Naturverjüngung der Douglasie im Schwarzwald. Dissertationes Botanicae 306:1–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Korn H, Stadler J and Friedrich S (eds) (2001) Report on the expert meeting in preparation of SBSTTA-7, Sept. 27–29. Bundesamt f. Naturschutz, Skripten 55:1–53

  • Kowarik I (2003) Biologische Invasionen: Neophyten und Neozoen in Mitteleuropa. Ulmer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowarik I, Seidling W (1989) Zeigerwert-Berechnungen nach Ellenberg. Zu Problemen und Einschränkungen einer sinnvollen Methode. Landschaft und Stadt 21:132–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreyer D, Zerbe S (2006) Short-lived tree species and their role as indicators for plant diversity in pine forests. Restor Ecol 14:137–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambeck RJ (1997) Focal species: A multi-species umbrella for nature conservation. Conserv Biol 11:849–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawesson JE, Fosaa AM, Olsen E (2003) Calibration of Ellenberg indicator values for the Faroe Islands. Appl Veget Sci 6:53–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuschner C (1999) Zur Abhängigkeit der Baum- und Krautschicht mitteleuropäischer Waldgesellschaften von der Nährstoffversorgung des Bodens. Berichte Reinhold-Tüxen-Gesellschaft 11:109–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA (1997) Biodiversity: interfacing populations and ecosystems. In: Abe T, Levin SA, Higashi M (eds) Biodiversity: an ecological perspective. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 277–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Lohmeyer W, Sukopp H (1992) Agriophyten in der Vegetation Mitteleuropas. Schriftenreihe Vegetationskunde 25:1–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig G, Schnittler M (eds) (1996) Rote Liste gefährdeter Pflanzen Deutschlands. Schriftenreihe Vegetationskunde 28:1–744

  • Magurran AE (2004) Measuring biological diversity. Oxford, Carleton

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer P, Abs C, Fischer A (2002) Biodiversität als Kriterium für Bewertungen im Naturschutz - eine Diskussionsanregung. Natur und Landschaft 77:461–463

    Google Scholar 

  • MCPFE (Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe) (2003) Improved Pan-European indicators for sustainable forest management. http://www.mcpfe.org/publications/pdf/improved_indicators.pdf

  • Mitchell PL, Kirby KJ (1989) Ecological effects of forestry practices in long-established woodland and their implications for nature conservation. Oxford Forestry Institute Occasional Papers 39:1–172

    Google Scholar 

  • MTK (Central Union of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners, ed) (1995) Biodiversity in Finnish private forests. MTK’s biodiversity strategy and action plan. Helsinki

  • Mühr B (2002) Klimadiagramme, Retrieved from http://www.imk.physik.uni. karlsruhe.de/∼muehr/climate/Frame/diagramme.html

  • Noss RF (1999) Assessing and monitoring forest biodiversity: A suggested framework and indicators. Forest Ecol Manage 115:135–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oberdorfer E (1992) Süddeutsche Pflanzengesellschaften. Part IV. Wälder und Gebüsche. 2nd ed., Fischer, Jena, Stuttgart, New York

  • Oberdorfer E (2001) Pflanzensoziologische Exkursionsflora für Deutschland und angrenzende Gebiete, 8th ed. Ulmer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Oheimb Gv (2003) Einfluss forstlicher Nutzung auf die Artenvielfalt und Artenzusammensetzung der Gefäßpflanzen in norddeutschen Laubwäldern. Schriftenreihe Naturwissenschaftliche Forschungsergebnisse 70:1–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsthoorn AFM, Bartelink HH, Gardiner JJ, Pretzsch H, Hekhuis HJ, Franc A (1999) Management of mixed-species forest: silviculture and economics. IBN Scientific Contributions 15:1–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlóci L, Anand M, Pillar VD (2002) Biodiversity analysis: issues, concepts, techniques. Commun Ecol 3:217–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passarge H (1964) Pflanzengesellschaften des nordostdeutschen Flachlandes, I. Pflanzensoziologie 13:1–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyšek P (1989) On the richness of Central European urban flora. Preslia 61:329–334

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyšek P (1993) Factors affecting the diversity of flora and vegetation in central European settlements. Vegetatio 106:89–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt R (2002) Böden. In: Liedke H, Marcinek J (eds) Physische Geographie Deutschlands, 3rd edn. H. Haack Verlagsge, Gotha, pp 198–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt I, Zerbe S, Betzin J, Weckesser M (2006) An approach to the identification of indicators for forest biodiversity – the Solling mountains (NW Germany) as an example. Restor Ecol 14:123–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt M, Ewald J, Fischer A, Oheimb Gv., Kriebitzsch W-U, Schmidt W and Ellenberg H (2003) Liste der in Deutschland typischen Waldgefäßpflanzen. Mitteilungen Bundesforschungsanstalt Forst- und Holzwirtschaft 212: 1–34 + appendix

  • Schmidt W, Weckesser M (2001) Struktur und Diversität der Waldvegetation als Indikatoren für eine nachhaltige Waldnutzung. Forst und Holz 56:493–498

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiecker H (2003) Silvicultural management in maintaining biodiversity and resistance of forests in Europe – temperate zone. J Environ Manage 67:55–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Starfinger U (1997) Introduction and naturalization of Prunus serotina in Central Europe. In: Brock JH, Wade M, Pyšek P, Green D (eds) Plant invasions: studies from North America and Europe. Backhuys Publ., Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 161–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Sukopp H (1998) Urban ecology – scientific and practical aspects. In: Breuste J, Feldmann H, Uhlmann O (eds) Urban ecology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 3–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Urbanska KM (1992) Populationsbiologie der Pflanzen. Ulmer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Westphal C (2001) Theoretische Gedanken und beispielhafte Untersuchungen zur Naturnähe von Wäldern im Staatlichen Forstamt Sellhorn (Naturschutzgebiet Lüneburger Heide). Berichte Forschungszentrum Waldökosysteme, Reihe A 174:1–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiegleb G (2003) Was sollten wir über Biodiversität wissen?. In: Weimann J, Hoffmann A, Hoffmann S (eds) Messung und ökonomische Bewertung von Biodiversität: Mission impossible? Metropolis, Marburg, pp 151–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildi O, Keller W, Kuhn N, Krüsi BO, Schütz M, Wohlgemuth T (1996) Revision der Waldgesellschaften der Schweiz: Die Analyse einer nicht-systematischen Datenbasis, In: Zerbe S (ed) Vegetationsökologie mitteleuropäischer Wälder. Landschaftsentwicklung und Umweltforschung 104:37–48

  • Wisskirchen R, Haeupler H (1998) Standardliste der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen Deutschlands – mit Chromosomenatlas von Focke Albers. Ulmer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Zerbe S (2002) Restoration of natural broad-leaved woodland in Central Europe on sites with coniferous forest plantations. Forest Ecol Manage 167:27–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerbe S, Brande A, Gladitz F (2000) Kiefer, Eiche und Buche in der Menzer Heide (N-Brandenburg). Veränderungen der Waldvegetation unter dem Einfluß des Menschen. Verhandlungen Botanischer Verein Berlin Brandenburg 133:45–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Zerbe S, Kreyer D (2006) Introduction to the special section: Biodiversity assessment within restoration projects. Restor Ecol 14:103–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerbe S, Maurer U, Schmitz S, Sukopp H (2003) Biodiversity in Berlin and its potential for nature conservation. Landscape Urban Planning 62:139–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerbe S, Wirth P (2006) Non-indigenous plant species and their ecological range in Central European pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forests. Annals Forest Sci 63:189–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study has been financially supported by the German Federal Ministry for Research and Education (BMBF) within the Bioteam Research Program (Fkz. 01 LM 0207).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Geobotany and Landscape Ecology, University Greifswald, Grimmer Str. 88, D-17487, Greifswald, Germany

    Stefan Zerbe

  2. Albrecht-von-Haller-Institute for Plant Sciences, University of Göttingen, Grisebachstr. 1, D-37077, Göttingen, Germany

    Inga Schmidt

  3. Statistics and Mathematical Economics Group, Technical University of Berlin, Franklinstraße 28/29, D-10587, Berlin, Germany

    Jörg Betzin

Authors
  1. Stefan Zerbe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Inga Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jörg Betzin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Zerbe.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zerbe, S., Schmidt, I. & Betzin, J. Indicators for plant species richness in pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forests of Germany. Biodivers Conserv 16, 3301–3316 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-006-9111-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-006-9111-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation