Advertisement

Community Ecology

, Volume 9, Supplement 1, pp 115–123 | Cite as

Semi-natural grasslands under impact of changing land use during last 30 years: Trollio-Cirsietum community in the Liptov region (N Slovakia)

  • L. HaladaEmail author
  • H. Ružičková
  • S. David
  • A. Halabuk
Open Access
Article
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

Significant transformation of agriculture took place in Central Europe during the second half of the 20th century. The paper reviews the nature and consequences of this process in terms of grassland management and land use changes in the Liptov region (N Slovakia) and their impacts on plant communities of fen meadows (Caricion davallianae, Caricion fuscae), wet meadows (Calthion) and mesophilous grasslands (Arrhenatherion, Cynosurion). We studied in detail the changes in structure of the rare plant community Trollio-Cirsietum (Kühn 1937) Oberd. 1957 that occurred between the first period (1974–1983) and the second period (2002–2003). We recorded the decrease in abundance of species characteristic for permanently wet and fen meadows (alliances Calthion and Caricion davallianae) and the increase in abundance of characteristic species of seasonally dried, mesophilous and thermophilous meadows and mesophilous fringes (classes Molinio-Arrhenatheretea, Festuco-Brometea and alliances Molinion caeruleae, Bromion erecti and Trifolion medii). In the second studied period, a large group of mesophilous and thermophilous species appeared as new in this wet-meadow community. A cumulative impact of different factors, especially drainage and intensification of surrounding grasslands as well as abandonment of the community can represent reasons responsible for observed changes. Regardless identified changes, the community still maintains its typical character in significant proportion of the studied sites and hosts a high number of threatened plant species.

Keywords

Community structure changes Fens Intensification of agriculture Mesophilous grasslands Rural landscape Trollio-Cirsietum Wet meadow 

Abbreviations

T-C

Trollio-Cirsietum (Kühn 1937) Oberd. 1957.

References

  1. Alard, D., J.F. Bance and P.N. Frileux. 1994. Grassland Vegetation as an Indicator of the Main Agro-Ecological Factors in a Rural Landscape: Consequences for Biodiversity and Wildlife Conservation in Central Normandy (France). J. Env. Manag. 42: 91–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alard, D. and I. Poudevigne. 1999. Factors controlling plant diversity in a rural landscape: a functional approach. Landscape and Urban Planning 46: 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berlin, G.A.I., A.C. Linusson and E.G.A. Olsson. 2000. Vegetation changes in semi-natural meadows with unchanged management in southern Sweden, 1965–1990. Acta Oecol. 21: 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Braun-Blanquet, J. 1951. Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde. 2 Aufl. Biologische Studienbücher, Wien.Google Scholar
  5. Ellenberg, H.. 1974. Zeigewerte des Gefäßpflanzen Mitteleuropas. Scripta Geobot. 9, 97 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Falińska, K. 2003. Alternative pathways of succession: species turnover patterns in meadows abandoned for 30 years. Phytocoenosis 15 (N.S.), Arch. Geobot. 9: 1–112.Google Scholar
  7. Feráková, V., Š. Maglocký and K. Marhold. 2001. Red list of ferns and flowering plants of Slovakia. Ochrana prírody, Banská Bystrica 20, Suppl.: 44–77.Google Scholar
  8. Gustavsson, E., T. Lennartson and M. Emanuelsson. 2007. Land use more than 200 years ago explains current grassland plant diversity in a Swedish agricultural landscape. Biological Conservation 138: 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hennekens, S.M. and J.H.J. Schaminee. 2001. TURBOVEG, a Comprehensive Data Base Management System for Vegetation Data. J. Veg.Sci. 12: 589–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Herben, T. and Z. Münzbergerová. 2003. Phytosociological data processing on examples. I. Species composition data (in Czech). Http://www.natur.cuni.cz/botany/multivar.pdf Google Scholar
  11. Hopkins, A. and B. Holz. 2006. Grassland for agriculture and nature conservation: production, quality and multi-functionality. Agronomy Research 4: 3–20.Google Scholar
  12. Hreško, J. and M. Boltižiar. 2001. The influence of the morphodynamic processes to landscape structure in the high mountains (Tatra Mts.). Ekológia (Bratislava) 20, Supplement 3: 141 – 149.Google Scholar
  13. Jongman, R.H.G. 2002. Homogenisation and fragmentation of the European landscape: ecological consequences and solutions. Landscape Urban Plan. 58: 211–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jurko, A. 1990. Ecological and Socio-Economic Evaluation of Vegetation (in Slovak). Príroda, Bratislava.Google Scholar
  15. Komaś, J. and E. Dubiel. 1991. Land use and vegetation changes in the hay meadows of the Ojcow National Park during the last thirty years. Veröf. Geobot. Inst. Rübel 106: 208–231.Google Scholar
  16. Lepš J. and P. Šmilauer. 2003. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data Using CANOCO. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 282 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Linusson, A.C., G.A.I. Berlin and E.G.A. Olsson. 1998. Reduced community diversity in semi-natural meadows in southern Sweden, 1965–1990. Plant Ecol. 136:77–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. MacDonald, D., J.R Crabtree, D. Wiesinger, T. Dax, N. Stamou, P. Fleury, J. Gutierrez-Lazpita and A. Gibton. 2000. Agricultural abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: environmental consequences and policy response. J Env. Manag. 59: 47–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marhold, K. 1998. Ferns and Flowering Plants. In: K. Marhold and F. Hindák (eds.), Checklist of Non-Vascular and Vascular Plants of Slovakia. Veda, Bratislava. pp. 333–687.Google Scholar
  20. Oberdorfer, E. 1957. Süddeutsche Pflanzengesellschaften. VEB G. Fischer Verlag, Jena.Google Scholar
  21. Pärtel, M., H.H. Bruun and M. Sammul, M. 2005. Biodiversity in temperate European grasslands: origin and conservation. In: Lillak, R., R. Viiralt, A. Linke, V. Geherman (eds.): Integrating Efficient Grassland Farming and Biodiversity. Proceedings of the 13th International Occasional Symposium of the European Grassland Federation. 29–31 August 2005, Tartu, Estonia: 1– 14Google Scholar
  22. Rabingee, R. and CA. van Diepen. 2000. Changes in agriculture and land use in Europe. Eur. J. Agron. 13: 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Robinson, R.A. and W.J. Sutherland. 2002. Post-war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain. J Appl. Ecol. 39: 157–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rosenthal, G. and J. Müller. 1988. Wandel der Grünlandvegetation im mittleren Ostetal – Ein Vergleich 1952–1987. Tuexenia 8: 79–99.Google Scholar
  25. Ružičková, H. 1978. As. Trollio-Cirsietum Kühn 1937 in the Liptovská kotlina basin (in Slovak). Biológía 33: 307–314.Google Scholar
  26. Ružičková, H. 1986. Grasslands of the Liptovská kotlina basin (in Slovak). Biol. Pr. SAV 32: 1–138.Google Scholar
  27. Ružičková, H. 2004. Crepido-mollis-Agrostietum ass. novaand Poo-Trisetetum Knapp ex Oberd. 1957 – grassland associations in NE part of the Nízke Tatry Mts. and their present species composition as the consequence of changes in grassland utilisation. Thaiszia – J. Bot. 14: 75–92.Google Scholar
  28. Ružičková, H, L’. Halada and S. David. 2005. Trollio-Cirsietum (Kühn 1937) Oberd. 1957 – threatened plant community of wet meadows of upper Liptov. Current distribution and species composition (in Slovak). Ochrana prírody 24: 87–100.Google Scholar
  29. ter Braak, C.J.F. and P. Šmilauer. 2002. CANOCO Reference Manual and CanoDraw for Windows User’s Guide: Software for Ca- nonical Community Ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power (Ithaca NY, USA), 500 pp.Google Scholar
  30. Tichý, L. 2002. JUICE, software for vegetation classification. J. Veg. Sci. 13:451–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Válkovcová, Ζ. and Η. Ružičková. 2007. Influence of land use on current composition of meadow species in Upper Liptov region within 50 years time horizon (Case study in the cadastre of Východná village (in Slovak). In: Grassland Ecology VII. Proceedings of the international conference, Banská Bystrica: 220–223Google Scholar
  32. van der Maarel, E. 1979. Transformation of cover-abundance values in phytosociology and its effects on community similarity. Vegetatio 39: 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vos, W. and H. Meekes. 1999. Trends in European cultural landscape development: perspectives for a sustainable future. Landscape and Urban Planning 46: 3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Westhoff, W. and E. van den Maarel. 1978. The Braun-Blanquet approach. In: R.H. Whittaker (ed.), Classification of Plant Communities. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague. pp. 287–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Young, J., C. Richards, A. Fischer, L. Halada, T. Kull, A. Kuzniar, U. Tartes, Y. Uzunov and A. Watt. 2007. Conflicts between biodiversity conservation and human activities in the Central and Eastern European Countries. Ambio 36(7): 545–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2008

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Halada
    • 1
    Email author
  • H. Ružičková
    • 2
  • S. David
    • 1
  • A. Halabuk
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Landscape Ecology SAS, Branch NitraNitraSlovakia
  2. 2.Institute of Landscape Ecology SASBratislavaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations