Advertisement

Biologia

, Volume 74, Issue 4, pp 405–418 | Cite as

Epiphytic and epixylic lichens in forests of the Šumava mountains in the Czech Republic; abundance and frequency assessments

  • Jan VondrákEmail author
  • Jiří Kubásek
Original Article
  • 34 Downloads

Abstract

Extensive sampling of lichen diversity in forest habitats in the Šumava mountains consisted of 128 plots with 824 sampled objects (single trees, snags, logs, etc.). The survey enabled assessment of regional abundance and frequency of epiphytic and epixylic lichen species. 240 species were recorded with frequencies (i.e. number of plots in which each species was recorded) ranging from 1 to 123 and with total abundance scores (i.e. sum of abundances from all objects) ranging from 1 to 1304. Using the total abundance scores, each species was classified as either: rare (129 species), common (68) or abundant (43). We recognised six types of forest, one formed by human activity and five natural ones. Species richness in the natural forests were in decreasing order: beech forests (167 species), bog and waterlogged forests (147), montane spruce forests (124), ash-alder alluvial forests (92) and ravine forests (68). The relative order of the first four kinds is probably real, but the low number of species in ravine forests is a result of insufficient sampling. All species were characterized by their fidelity and specificity to each forest type. Each natural forest category has a group of species with high fidelity. Many species were recorded in only a single category of forest, which demonstrates that a rich regional lichen biota requires variability in forest types. Forest habitats formed by human impact, mostly plantations of coniferous trees, have fewer species, and distinctly fewer species with high fidelity, than any natural forest category. Throughout the region, mature spruce trees in montane spruce forests have been dying at a rapid rate for over 20 years. This has probably resulted in a decline in those lichens that require high humidity, and an increase of some epixylic lichens, especially nitrophilous species. We did not encounter all species previously recorded in forests in the region, but most of the species missing from our list are either rare or have specialised habitat requirements. In the Red List of the Czech Republic, we suggested changes in categories for 32 species.

Keywords

Fidelity Habitats Lichen diversity monitoring Montane spruce forests Regional rarity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Linda in Arcadia kindly revised the English. Zdeněk Palice and Jiří Malíček kindly helped with identification of some lichen specimens. Zdeňka Křenová generously proposed that we participate in the project Silva Gabreta monitoring. Data on areas of forest habitats were kindly provided by Pavla Trachtová and by the Nature Conservation Agency of the Czech Republic. Field work was financed by the bilateral Czech-Bavarian project 26, EÚS 2014-2020 - Silva Gabreta monitoring. Our research received support by a long-term research development grant RVO 67985939.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11756_2019_207_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (26 kb)
Appendix 1 Recorded species with their frequencies and abundance scores. Species are alphabetically ordered within three categories of regional frequency/abundance in the Šumava mountains. (XLSX 26 kb)
11756_2019_207_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (116 kb)
Appendix 2 Primary floristic data. Abundances of species are shown for 128 investigated plots. (XLSX 115 kb)

References

  1. AOPK ČR (2017) Vrstva mapování biotopů. Elektronická georeferencovaná databáze. Verze 2017. [Layer of habitat mapping. Electronic georeference database. Version 2017]. Agentura ochrany přírody a krajiny ČR. Praha. Accessed 5 Jan 2018Google Scholar
  2. Bässler C, Seifert L, Müller J (2015) The BIOKLIM project in the National Park Bavarian Forest: lessons from a biodiversity survey. Silva Gabreta Vimperk 21:81–93Google Scholar
  3. Bässler C, Cadotte MW, Beudert B, Heibl C, Blaschke M, Bradtka JH, Langbehn T, Werth S, Müller J (2016) Contrasting patterns of lichen functional diversity and species richness across an elevation gradient. Ecography 39:689–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cervenka J, Bace R, Zenahlikova J, Svoboda M (2016) Changes in stand structure, dead wood quantity and quality in mountain spruce forest after severe disturbance. Rep For Res 61:254–261Google Scholar
  5. Chao A (1987) Estimating the population size for capture-recapture data with unequal catchability. Biometrics 43:783–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chytrý M, Kučera T, Kočí M, Grulich V, Lustyk P (2010) Katalog biotopů Česke republiky. (ed) 2 Habitat Catalogue of the Czech Republic. 2nd edn. Agentura ochrany přirody a krajiny ČR, Praha (in Czech)Google Scholar
  7. Colwell RK, Mao CX, Chang J (2004) Interpolating, extrapolating, and comparing incidence-based species accumulation curves. Ecology 85:2717–2727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dufrêne M, Legendre P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol Monogr 67:345–366Google Scholar
  9. Ellis CJ, Eaton S, Theodoropoulos M et al (2014) Response of epiphytic lichens to 21st century climate change and tree disease scenarios. Biol Conserv 180:153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guttová A, Palice Z, Czarnota P, Halda JP, Luká M, Malíček J, Blanár D (2012) Lišajníky Národného parku Muránska planina IV – Fabova hoľa [lichens of the national park Muránská Planina 4 – Fabova hola]. Acta Rerum Naturalium Musei Nationalis Slovaci 58:51–75Google Scholar
  11. Hardman A, Stone D, Selva SB (2017) Calicioid lichens and fungi of the Gifford Pinchot and Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forests in Washington, U.S.A. Opuscula Philolichenum 16:1–14Google Scholar
  12. Hofmeister J, Hošek J, Malíček J, Palice Z et al (2016) Large beech (Fagus sylvatica) trees as `lifeboats' for lichen diversity in central European forests. Biodivers Conserv 25:1073–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holien H (1997) The lichen flora on Picea abies in a suboceanic spruce forest area in Central Norway with emphasis on the relationship to site and stand parameters. Nord J Bot 17:55–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hultengren S, Gralén H, Plije H (2004) Recovery of the epiphytic lichen Flora following air quality improvement in south-West Sweden. Water Air Soil Pollut 154:203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jönsson MT, Thor G, Johansson P (2011) Environmental and historical effects on lichen diversity in managed and unmanaged wooded meadows. Appl Veg Sci 14:120–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kindlmann P, Matějka K, Doležal P (2012) Lesy Šumavy, lýkožrout a ochrana přírody [forests of the Šumava mountains, bark beetle and nature conservation]. Karolinum, PrahaGoogle Scholar
  17. Király I, Nascimbene J, Tinya F, Ódor P (2013) Factors influencing epiphytic bryophyte and lichen species richness at different spatial scales in managed temperate forests. Biodivers Conserv 22:209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kuusinen M, Siitonen J (1998) Epiphytic lichen diversity in old-growth and managed Picea abies stands in southern Finland. J Veg Sci 9:283–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liška J (2012) Lichen flora of the Czech Republic. Preslia 84:851–862Google Scholar
  20. Liška J, Palice Z (2010) Červený seznam lišejníků České republiky (verze 1.1). [Red list of lichens of the Czech Republic (version 1.1).] Příroda, Praha, 29:3–66Google Scholar
  21. Liška J, Palice Z, Dětinský R (1998) Změny v rozšíření vzácných a ohrožených lišejníků v České republice 1 [Changes in distribution of rare and threatened lichens in the Czech Republic 1]. Příroda 12:131–144Google Scholar
  22. Liška J, Palice Z, Dětinský R, Vondrák J (2006) Changes in distribution of rare and threatened lichens in the Czech Republic 2. In: Lackovičová A, Guttová A, Lisická E, Lizoň P (eds) Central European lichens: diversity and threat. Mycotaxon, Ithaca, pp 241–258Google Scholar
  23. Lõhmus P (2003) Composition and substrata of forest lichens in Estonia: a meta-analysis. Folia Cryptog. Estonica, Fasc 40:19–38Google Scholar
  24. Lõhmus A, Lõhmus P (2011) Old-forest species: the importance of specific substrata vs. stand continuity in the case of calicioid fungi. Silva Fennica 45: no. 5, article id 84Google Scholar
  25. Malíček J, Palice Z (2015) Epifytické lišejníky Jilmové skály na Šumavě. Bryonora 56:56–71Google Scholar
  26. Malíček J, Palice Z, Vondrák J (2014) New lichen records and rediscoveries from the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Herzogia 27:257–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moning C, Werth S, Dziock F et al (2009) Lichen diversity in temperate montane forests is influenced by forest structure more than climate. For Ecol Manag 258:745–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nascimbene J, Marini L, Nimis PL (2010) Epiphytic lichen diversity in old-growth and managed Picea abies stands in alpine spruce forests. For Ecol Manag 260:603–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nascimbene J, Nimis PL, Ravera S (2013) Evaluating the conservation status of epiphytic lichens of Italy: a red list. Plant Biosyst 147:898–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Palice Z (1999) New and noteworthy records of lichens in the Czech Republic. Preslia 71:289–336Google Scholar
  31. R Core Team (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  32. Skye E, Hallberg I (1969) Changes in the lichen Flora following air pollution. Oikos 20:547–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sørensen T (1948) A method of establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species and its application to analyses of the vegetation on Danish commons. Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab 5:1–34Google Scholar
  34. ÚHÚL (2007) Národní inventarizace lesů v České republice 2001–2004, úvod, metody, výsledky [Forest inventory in the Czech Republic 2001–2004, introduction, methods, results]. Ústav pro hospodářskou úpravu lesů / The Forest Management Institute, Brandýs nad Labem 224 pp (in Czech)Google Scholar
  35. Vězda A, Liška J (1999) Katalog lišejniků Česke republiky. Institute of Botany, Průhonice, 283 ppGoogle Scholar
  36. Vondrák J, Liška J (2010) Changes in distribution and substrate preferences of selected threatened lichens in the Czech Republic. Biologia 65:595–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wolseley P, Sanderson N, Thüs H, Carpenter D, Eggleton P (2017) Patterns and drivers of lichen species composition in a NW-European lowland deciduous woodland complex. Biodivers Conserv 26:401–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zenáhlíková J, Červenka J, Čížková P et al (2015) The biomonitoring project – monitoring of forest ecosystems in non-intervention areas of the Šumava National Park. Silva Gabreta Vimperk 21:95–104Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plant Science and Biodiversity Centre, Slovak Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Botany of the Czech Academy of SciencesPrůhoniceCzech Republic
  2. 2.Faculty of ScienceUniversity of South BohemiaČeské BudějoviceCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations