Peatland (Mire Types): Based on Origin and Behavior of Water, Peat Genesis, Landscape Position, and Climate

Reference work entry


Mires, or peat-forming systems, have traditionally been recognised as falling into two broad peat-forming types – minerotrophic fens fed by groundwater or collected surface water, and ombrotrophic bogs fed exclusively by direct precipitation. Different types of fen can then be distinguished based on sources of water and rates of water supply. In contrast, ombrotrophic bogs can be classified according to their morphology, position within the landscape and consequent developmental history. A few ‘mixed’ or ‘intermediate’ mire types can also be identified.


Aapa Basin Bog Blanket bog Blanket mire Climate Cloud forest Condensation Estuarine Floodplain fen Flush Groundwater Immersion mire Ladder fen Minerotrophic Mire Mixed mire Ombrotrophic Occult Palsa Patterned fen Peatland fen Percolation Polygon mire Raised bog Raised mire Topogenous Saddle Schwingmoor Soligenous Spring Spur Transition Valley mire Valley bog Valley fen Valley side Watershed 


  1. Botch MS, Masing VV. Mire ecosystems in the U.S.S.R. In: Gore AJP, editor. Mires: swamp, bog, fen and moor (Ecosystems of the world 4B). Regional studies. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific; 1983. p. 95–152.Google Scholar
  2. Bruijnzeel LA, Hamilton LS. Decision time for cloud forests. IHP Humid Tropics Programme series no. 13. Paris: UNESCO; 2000. Available to download from Accessed 3 Apr 2015.
  3. Charman DJ. Patterned fens in Scotland: evidence from vegetation and water chemistry. J Veg Sci. 1993;4:543–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davis RB, Anderson DS. The eccentric bogs of Maine: a rare wetland type in the United States. Technical bulletin 146. Orono: Maine Agricultural Experiment Station; 1991. Available from Accessed 11 Mar 2015.
  5. Dommain R, Couwenberg J, Glaser PH, Joosten H, Suryadiptura INN. Carbon storage and release in Indonesian peatlands since the last deglaciation. Quat Sci Rev. 2014;97:1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Du Rietz GE. Die Mineralbodenwasserzeigergrenze als Grundlage einer natürichen Zweigliederung der nord- und mitteleuropäischen Moore [The mineral soil water boundary indicator as the foundation for a natural two-part division of northern and central European peatlands]. Vegetatio. 1954;5-6:571–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. European Commission. Interpretation manual of European Union habitats. Brussels: European Commission DG Environment, Nature and Biodiversity; 2007. Available from Accessed 9 Mar 2015.
  8. Goodwillie R. European peatlands, Nature and environment series, no. 19. Strasbourg: Council of Europe; 1980.Google Scholar
  9. Hulme PD. The classification of Scottish peatlands. Scott Geogr Mag. 1980;96:46–50.Google Scholar
  10. Joosten H, Clarke D. Wise use of mires and peatlands. Totness: NHBS/International Mire Conservation Group and International Peat Society; 2002. Available from: Accessed 9 Mar 2015.
  11. Lindsay RA. Bogs: the ecology, classification and conservation of ombrotrophic mires. Battleby, Perth: Scottish Natural Heritage; 1995. Available from: Accessed 11 Mar 2015.
  12. Lindsay RA, Charman DJ, Everingham F, O’Reilly RM, Palmer MA, Rowell TA, Stroud DA. The flow country: the peatlands of Caithness and Sutherland. Peterborough: Nature Conservancy Council; 1988.Google Scholar
  13. Löfroth M. European mires – an IMCG project studying distribution and conservation. In: Grünig A, editor. Mires and man: mire conservation in a Densely Populated Country – the Swiss experience. Birmensdorf: Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research; 1994. p. 281–3. Available from Accessed 14 Apr 2015.
  14. Moore PD, Bellamy DJ. Peatlands. London: Elek Science; 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mulligan M, Burke S. DFID FRP Project ZF0216 global cloud forests and environmental change in a hydrological context. Final Report. London: UK Department for International Development (DFID); 2005. Available to download from Accessed 2 Mar 2015.
  16. Nature Conservancy Council (NCC). Guidelines for selection of biological SSSIs. Peterborough: Nature Conservancy Council; 1989. Available from: Accessed 11 Mar 2015.
  17. Ruuhijärvi R. The Finnish mire types and their regional distribution. In: Gore AJP, editor. Ecosystems of the world 4b. Mires: swamp, bog, fen and moor. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1983. p. 47–67.Google Scholar
  18. Shimizu Y. Species numbers, area, and habitat diversity on the habitat islands of Mizorogaike pond. Japan Ecol Res. 1986;1:185–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sjörs H. Mires of Sweden. In: Gore AJP, editor. Mires: swamp, bog, fen and moor (Ecosystems of the world 4B). Regional studies. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific; 1983. p. 69–94.Google Scholar
  20. Steiner GM. Österreichischer Moorschutzkatalog. [Austrian Mire Conservation Catalogue]. Grüne Reihe des, Bundesministeriums für Umwelt, Jungend und Familie, Band 1. Graz: Verlag Ulrich Moser; 1992.Google Scholar
  21. Steiner GM. Die Moorverbreitung in Österreich/Distribution of mires in Austria. In: Steiner GM, editor. Moore – von Siberien bis Feuerland/Mires – from Siberia to Tierra del Fuego, Stapfia 85. Linz: Oberösterreichische Landesmuseen; 2005. p. 55–96.Google Scholar
  22. Succow M, Jeschke L. Moore in der Landschaft – Enststehung, Haushalt, Lebewelt, Verbreitung, Nutzung und Erhaltung der Moore [Peatlands in the landscape – formation, ecology, biodiversity, distribution, use and conservation of peatlands]. Leipzig: Urania-Verlag; 1990.Google Scholar
  23. Weber CA. Über die Vegetation und Entstehung des Hochmoors von Augstumal im Memeldelta [Vegetation and development of the raised bog of Augstumal in the Memel delta]. Berlin: Verlagsbuchhandlung Paul Parey. In: Couwenberg J, Joosten H, editors. C.A. Weber and the Raised Bog of Augstumal. Tula: International Mire Conservation Group/PPE “Grif & K”; 1902.Google Scholar
  24. Weber CA. Die grundlegenden Begriffe der Moorkunde [Basic peatland concepts], Zeitschrift für Moorkultur und Torfverwertung, vol. 5. Wien: Jahrgang; 1907.Google Scholar
  25. Wheeler BD, Proctor MCF. Ecological gradients, subdivisions and terminology of north-west European mires. J Ecol. 2000;88:187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zoltai SC, Pollett FC. Wetlands in Canada: their classification, distribution and use. In: Gore AJP, editor. Ecosystems of the world 4B. Mires: swamp, bog, fen and moor. Regional Studies. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific; 1983. p. 245–68.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sustainability Research InstituteUniversity of East LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations