Plant Ecology

, Volume 141, Issue 1–2, pp 9–19 | Cite as

CLO-PLA2 – a database of clonal plants in central Europe

  • Leoš Klimeš
  • Jitka Klimešová
Article

Abstract

’CLO-PLA2' (CLOnal PLAnts, version 2) is a database on architectural aspects of clonal growth in vascular plants of central Europe. The database includes 2749 species, characterised by 25 variables, either directly or indirectly related to clonal growth. The total number of items in the database is over 12 750. The structure of the database is described and the variables used to characterise clonal growth of individual species are listed. Two examples of database utilisation are given. The first concerns the relationship between habitat niche width and the mode of clonal growth. Turf graminoids, species with long-lived rhizomes either short to long and formed below-ground, or short and formed above-ground, and short-lived rhizomes formed above-ground, are over-represented among the species with very broad niches and under-represented among the species with narrow niches. In contrast, species multiplying by plant fragments are missing among the species with the broadest niches. The second example explores how individual clonal growth modes are combined in individual species. About 21% of species of clonal plants have more than one mode of clonal growth. Some combinations are over-represented in certain families and environments. The application of phylogenetic independent contrasts (PIC) showed that both phylogenetic constraints and adaptations to particular environmental conditions play important roles in determining the observed pattern.

Central European flora Clonal growth Combinations of clonal growth modes Database Niche width Vascular plants 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bazzaz, F. A. 1987. Experimental studies on the evolution of niche in successional plant populations. Pp. 245–271. In: Gray, A. J., Crawley, M. J. & Edwards, P. J. (eds), Colonization, succession and stability. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, M. D. & Leitch, I. J. 1995. Nuclear DNA amounts in angiosperms. Ann. Bot. 76: 113–176.Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, M. D. & Leitch, I. J. 1997. Nuclear DNA amounts in angiosperms – 583 new estimates. Ann. Bot. 80: 169–196.Google Scholar
  4. Borhidi, A. 1995. Social behaviour types, the naturalness and relative ecological indicators of the higher plants in the Hungarian flora. Acta Bot. Hung. 39: 97–181.Google Scholar
  5. Cavers, P. B. & Mulligan, G. A. 1972. A new series – The biology of Canadian weeds. Can. J. Pl. Sci. 52: 651–654.Google Scholar
  6. Chase, M. W., Soltis, D. E., Olmstead, R. G., Morgan, D., Les, D. H., Mishler, B. D., Duvall, M. R., Price, R. A., Hills, H. G., Qiu, Y.-L., Kron, K. A., Rettig, J. H., Conti, E., Palmer, J. D., Manhart, J. R., Sytsma, K. J., Michaels, H. J., Kress, W. J., Karol, K. G., Clark, W. D., Hedrén, M., Gaut, B. S., Jansen, R. K., Kim, K.-J., Wimpee, C. F., Smith, J. F., Rurnier, G. R., Strauss, S. H., Xiang, Q.-Y., Plunkett, G. M., Soltis, P. S., Swensen, S. M., Williams, S. E., Gadek, P. A., Quinn, C. J., Eguiarte, L. E., Golenberg, E., Learn, G. H., Jr., Graham, S. W., Barrett, S. C. H., Dayanandan, S. & Albert, V. A. 1993. Phylogenetics of seed plants, an analysis of nucleotide sequences from the plastid gene rbcL. Ann. Miss. Bot. Gard. 80: 528–580.Google Scholar
  7. Crawley, M. J., 1997(ed.) Plant ecology. Blackwell Science, Oxford.Google Scholar
  8. Cyganov, D. N. 1983. Fitoindikacija ekologičceskich re~imov v podzoněechvojno-širokolistvennych lesov. Nauka, Moscou.Google Scholar
  9. de Vries, D. M., Kruine, A. A. & Mooi, H. 1957. Veelvuldigheid van graslandplanten en hun aanwijzing van milieu-eigenschappen. Jaarb. Inst. Biol. Scheik. Onderzoek Landbouwgewassen. 27: 183–191.Google Scholar
  10. Donita, N. et al. 1977. Ecologie forestiera. Edit. Stiint. si Enciclopedica. Bucuresti.Google Scholar
  11. Ellenberg, H. 1948. Unkrautgesellschaften als Mass für den Säuregrad, die Verdichtung und andere Eigenschaften des Ackerbodens. Ber. Landtechnik 4: 2–18.Google Scholar
  12. Ellenberg, H. 1950. Landwirtschaftliche Pflanzensoziologie. I: Unkrautgemeinschaften als Zeiger für Klima und Boden. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  13. Ellenberg, H. 1952. Landwirtschaftliche Pflanzensoziologie. II: Wiesen und Weiden und ihre standörtliche Bewertung. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  14. Ellenberg, H. 1953. Physiologisches und ökologisches Verhalten derselben Pflanzenarten. Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges. 65: 351–361.Google Scholar
  15. Ellenberg, H. 1974. Zeigerwerte der Gefässpflanzen Mitteleuropas. Scripta Geobotanica 9: 1–97.Google Scholar
  16. Ellenberg, H., Weber, H. E., Düll, R., Wirth, V., Werner, W. & Paulissen, D. 1992. Zeigerwerte der Gefässpflanzen Mitteleuropas. Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–248.Google Scholar
  17. Elmquist, T. & Cox, P. A. 1996. The evolution of vivipary in flowering plants. Oikos 77: 3–9.Google Scholar
  18. Fitter, A. H. & Peat, H. J. 1994. The ecological flora database. J. Ecol. 82: 415–425.Google Scholar
  19. Frank, D. & Klotz, S. 1988, 1990. Biologisch-ökologische Daten zur Flora der DDR. Wissenschaftliche Beiträge der Martin Luther Universität in Halle-Wittemberg, 32, 1–167. Ed. 1 and 2.Google Scholar
  20. Giller, P. S. 1984. Community structure and the niche. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  21. Grime, J. P. 1979. Plant strategies and vegetation processes. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  22. Grime, J. P., Hodgson, J. G. & Hunt, R. 1988. Comparative plant ecology. Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  23. Grubb, P. J. 1977. The maintenance of species-richness in plant communities: the importance of the regeneration niche. Biol. Rev. 52: 107–145.Google Scholar
  24. Harley, J. L. & Harley, E. L. 1987. A check-list of mycorrhiza in the British flora. New Phytol. 105(Suppl.): 1–102.Google Scholar
  25. Harvey, P. H. & Pagel, M. 1991. The Evolutionary Method in Comparative Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  26. Harvey, P. H., Read, A. F. & Nee, S. 1995. Why ecologists need to be phylogenetically challenged. J. Ecol. 83: 535–536.Google Scholar
  27. Hundt, R. 1966: Ökologisch-geobotanische Untersuchungen an Pflanzen der Mitteleuropäischen Wiesenvegetation. Leipzig.Google Scholar
  28. Hutchinson, G. E. 1957. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 22: 415–427.Google Scholar
  29. Irmisch, T. 1850. Zur Morphologie der monokotylischen Knollenund Zwiebelgewächse. G. Reimer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  30. Jongman, R. H., ter Braak, C. J. F. & van Tongeren, O. F. R. 1987. Data analysis in community and landscape ecology. Pudoc, Wageningen.Google Scholar
  31. Jurko, A. 1990. Ekologicke a socioekologicke hodnotenie vegetacie. Príroda, Bratislava.Google Scholar
  32. Kästner, A. & Karrer, G. 1995: Ñbersicht der Wuchsformtypen als Grundlage für deren Erfassung in der ‘Flora von Österreich’. Fl. Austr. Novit. 3: 1–51.Google Scholar
  33. Kirchner, O., Loew, E. & Schröter, C. 1908–1936. Lebensgeschichte der Blütenpflanzen Mitteleuropas. Ulmer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  34. Klapp, E. 1965. Grünlandvegetation und Standort. Berlin.Google Scholar
  35. Klimeš, L. 1999. Plant mobility in a species-rich grassland.J. Veg. Sci. (in press).Google Scholar
  36. Klimeš, L., Klimešová, J., Hendriks, R. & van Groenendael, J. 1997. Clonal plant architectures: a comparative analysis of form and function. Pp. 1–29. In: de Kroon, H. & van Groenendael, J. (eds), The ecology and evolution of clonal plants. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden.Google Scholar
  37. Knuth, P. 1898–1899. Handbuch der Blütenbiologie. I–II. Wilhelm Engelmann, Leipzig.Google Scholar
  38. Kull, K. 1997. Vegetative mobility as a community parameter. P. 34. In: Marshall, C. & Price, E. A. C. (eds), Clonal plants and environmental heterogeneity – space, time and scale. Abstracts of 5th clonal plant workshop. Bangor, Wales, U.K.Google Scholar
  39. Kutchera, L. & Lichtenegger, E. 1982–1992. Wurzelatlas mitteleuropäischer Ackerkräuter und Kulturpflanzen. Vols. 1–2. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  40. Lambers, H. & Porter, H. 1992. Inherent variation in growth rate between higher plants: a search for physiological causes and ecological consequences. Adv. Ecol. Res. 23: 188–261.Google Scholar
  41. Landolt, E. 1977. Ökologische Zeigerwerte zur Schweizer Flora. Veröff. Geobot. Inst. Eidg. Techn. Hochsch. Stift. Rübel Zürich 64: 1–208.Google Scholar
  42. Leibold, M. A. 1995. The niche concept revisited: Mechanistic models and community contex. Ecology 76: 1371–1382.Google Scholar
  43. Lichtenegger, E., Kutschera, L., Sobotik, M. & Haas, D. 1997. Spezieller Teil. In: Bewurzelung von Pflanzen in den verschedenen Lebensraumen. 5. Band der Wurzelatlas-Reihe. Stapfia 49, 331 pp.Google Scholar
  44. Lindacher, R. 1995. PHANART. Datenbank der Gefässpflanzen Mitteleuropas. Erklärung der Kennzahlen, Aufbau und Inhalt. Veröff. Geobot. Inst. ETH, Stiftung Rübel, Zürich 125: 1–436.Google Scholar
  45. Lukasiewicz, A. 1962. Morphological-developmental types of herbs. Prace Komisii biologicznej. PTPN 27/1, 1–398.Google Scholar
  46. MacNally, R., 1995. Ecological versatility and community ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  47. Malanson, G. P. 1982. The assembly of hanging gardens: effects of age, area, and location. Am. Nat. 119: 145–150.Google Scholar
  48. Manly, B. F. J. 1991. Randomization and Monte Carlo methods in biology. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
  49. Manly, B. F. J. 1997. Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
  50. Meusel, H. & Jäger, E. C. 1965–1992. Vergleichende Chorologie. Vols. I–III. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena.Google Scholar
  51. Mráz, K. & Samek, V. 1966. Lesní rostliny. Praha.Google Scholar
  52. Oberdorfer, E. 1994. Pflanzensoziologische Exkursionsflora. Ed. 7. Eugen Ulmer, GmbH & Co., Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  53. Oberdorfer, E., Korneck D. & Müller, T. 1977–1992. Pflanzengesellschaften Süddeutschlands. Vols. 1–4. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena.Google Scholar
  54. Odum, E. P. 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 262–270.Google Scholar
  55. Peat, H. J. & Fitter, A. H. 1994. Comparative analyses of ecological characteristics of British angiosperms. Biol. Rev. 69: 95–115.Google Scholar
  56. Petersen, A. 1953. Die Gräser als Kulturpflanzen und Unkräuter auf Wiese, Weide und Acker.Google Scholar
  57. Poschlod, P., Matthies, D., Jordan, S. & Mengel, Ch. 1996. The biological flora of Central Europe – an ecological bibliography. Bull. Geobot. Inst. ETH 62: 89–108.Google Scholar
  58. Purvis, A. & Rambaut, A. 1995. Comparative analysis by independent contrasts (CAIC), an Apple Macintosh application for analysing comparative data. Comp. Appl. Biosci. 11: 247–251.Google Scholar
  59. Pyšek, P. 1997. Clonality and plant invasions: can a trait make a difference? Pp. 405–427. In: de Kroon, H. & van Groenendael, J. (eds), The ecology and evolution of clonal plants. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  60. Rabotnov, T. A. 1974, ed. Biologi?ceskaja flora Moskovskoj oblasti. Izdatelstvo Moskovskogo Universiteta, Moscou.Google Scholar
  61. Ramenskij, L. G. et al. 1956. Ekologi?ceskaja ocenka kormovych ugodij po rastit?elnomu pokrovu. Moscou.Google Scholar
  62. Rauh, W. 1937. Die Bildung von Hypokotyl-und Wurzelsprossen und ihre Bedeutung für die Wuchsformen der Pflanzen. Nova Acta Leopoldina, NF 4/24: 395–552.Google Scholar
  63. Ricklefs, R. E. 1996. Applications of phylogenetically independent contrasts: a mixed progress report. Oikos 77: 167–172.Google Scholar
  64. Rothmaler, W. 1987. Excursion flora for the DDR and BRD. Vol. 3, Volk und Wissen Volkseigener Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  65. Rysin, L. P. & Rysina, G. P. 1987.Morfologija i struktura podzemnych organov lenych rastenij. Nauka, Moscou.Google Scholar
  66. Sanda, V. et al. 1983. Caracterizarea ecologica si fitocenologica a speciilor spontane din flora Romaniei. Stud. si Comunic. Muz. Brukenthal Sibiu 25. Suppl., pp. 1–126.Google Scholar
  67. Schmid, B. 1984. Niche width and variation within and between populations in colonizing species (Carex flava group). Oecologia 63: 1–5.Google Scholar
  68. Sculthorpe, C. D. 1985. The biology of aquatic vascular plants. Ed. 2, Koeltz Scientific Books, Koenigstein.Google Scholar
  69. Silvertown, J., Franco, M. & Harper, J. L. 1997, eds., Plant life histories. Ecology, phylogeny and evolution. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Smirnova, O. V. 1987. Struktura travenistogo pokrova širokolistvennych lesov. Nauka, Moscou.Google Scholar
  71. Ter Braak, C. J. F. & Barendregt, L. G. 1986. Weighted averaging of species indicator values: its efficiency in environmental calibration. Math. Biosci. 78: 57–72.Google Scholar
  72. Troll, W. 1937–1942. Vergleichende Morphologie der höheren Pflanzen., Vols. 1–4, Verlag Gebrüder Borntraeger, Berlin.Google Scholar
  73. van der Pijl, L. 1969. Principles of dispersal in higher plants. Springer Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  74. van Groenendael, J. M., Klimeš, L., Klimešová, J. & Hendriks, R. J. J. 1996. Comparative ecology of clonal plants. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 351: 1331–1339.Google Scholar
  75. Velenovský, J. 1905–1913. Vergleichende Morphologie der Pflanzen, Vols. 1–3 and Suppl. Verlagsbuchhandlung von Fr. ? Rivná?c, Prag.Google Scholar
  76. Wagner, H. 1955. Die Bewertung der Wasserstufen in der Bodenschätzung des Grünlandes. Bodenkultur, Wien.Google Scholar
  77. Weeda, E. J., Westra, R., Westra, C. & Westra, T. 1985–1993. Nederlandse oecologische flora: Wilde planten en hun relaties. Vols. 1–5. IVN, Hilversum.Google Scholar
  78. Weither, E. & Keddy, P. A. 1995. Assembly rules, null models, and trait dispersion: new questions from old patterns. Oikos 74: 159–164.Google Scholar
  79. Whittaker, R. H. 1973(ed.) Ordination and classification of communities. Junk, The Hague.Google Scholar
  80. Wilson, J. B. & Roxburgh, S. H. 1994. A demonstration of guildbased assembly rules for a plant community, and determination of intrinsic guilds. Oikos 69: 267–276.Google Scholar
  81. Wilson, J. B. & Watkins, A. J. 1994. Guilds and assembly rules in lawn communities. J. Veg. Sci. 5: 591–600.Google Scholar
  82. Wittrock, V. B. 1884. About root-shoots in herbs, with special reference to their biological significance. Bot. Not. 1884: 21–37.Google Scholar
  83. Zlatník, A. et al. 1970. Lesnická botanika speciální. Praha.Google Scholar
  84. Zólyomi, B. et al. 1966. Einreihung von 1400 Arten der ungarischen Flora in ökologische Gruppen nach TWR-Zahlen. Fragm. Bot. Mus. Hist.-Natur. Hung. 4: 101–142.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leoš Klimeš
    • 1
  • Jitka Klimešová
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Botany, Section of Plant EcologyTrebonCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations