THE EPIPHYTIC BRYOPHYTE VEGETATION OF RIPARIAN OAK FORESTS OF TRANSCARPATHIAN LOWLAND: ANTHROPOGENIC TRANSFORMATION AND INDICATOR VALUATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/1998-6475.2024.57.7-14Keywords:
Bryobionta, syntaxonomic diversity, rare species, relic species, old-growth forestAbstract
The epiphytic bryophytes overgrowths of three massifs of riparian forests in the Atak, Ostrosh and Chomoninsky Forest tracts, which differ in the type of anthropogenic transformation, were investigated. The moss cover of the studied forests is represented by 53 bryobiontes species belonging to 36 genera, 20 families and 2 divisions of Marchantiophyta and Bryophyta, bryocoenotically distributed among 15 associations of 5 unions of 2 classes: Neckeretea complanatae and Frullanio dilatatae-Leucodontetea sciuroidis. The natural forest in the nature-protected area of Atak is characterized by the greatest diversity, where 43 bryophytes species, which are distributed among 8 epiphytic associations, have been noted; 17 species are signal, i.e. rare or relict for ancient forests. In the Ostrosh tract, 34 species of bryophytes (including 13 signal ones) and 7 associations were noted; in the Chomoninsky forest tract – 26 species (including 5 signal ones) and 6 associations were found. It was observed that the increase in the degree of anthropogenic load (drainage and forestry exploitation) leads to a decrease in the number of indicator species, which correlates with a reduction in species richness and a decrease in the overall syntaxonomic diversity. Anthropogenic disturbance in the natural regime of the forest leads to xerophytization of zonal microclimatic conditions, which causes the loss of sensitive mesophilic species, primarily relict ones, and decrease in the species diversity of the moss cover. The bryocoenotic transformation takes place according to the following scheme Neckerion complanatae → Ulotenion сrispae → Syntrichion laevipilae, in which the defined associations are indicators of the stages of the ecological series in the transformation from natural to anthropogenic forests.
References
BARDAT, J., HAUGUEL, J.-C. (2002) Synopsis bryosociologique pour la France. Cryptogamie Bryologie, 23, 279–343.
BOYKO, M. (2010) Chervonyy spysok mokhopodibnykh Ukrayiny. Ridkisni ta znykayuchi vydy mokhopodibnykh Ukrayiny [Red List of Bryobionta of Ukraine. Rare and endangered species of the Bryobionta of Ukraine]. Kherson, Ailant, 93 р. (in Ukrainian).
BUCZKOWSKA, K. (2010) Re-appearance of Porella arboris-vitae in the Bieszczady National Park. Roczniki Akademii Rolniczei w Poznaniu, CCCLXXXIX, 14, 33–37.
CZEREPKO, J., GAWRIŚ, R., SZYMCZUK, R., PISAREK, W., JANEK, M., HAIDT, A., KOWALEWSKA, A., PIEGDOŃ, A., STEBEL, A., KUKWA, M., CACCIATORI, C. (2021) How sensitive are epiphytic and epixylic criptogames as indicators of forest naturalness? Testing bryophyte and lichen predictive power in stands under different management regimes in the Białowieża forest. Ecological indicators, 125, 107532. DОІ: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107532.
DIDUKH, Ya. (2019) Epifitni briotsenozy u biotopakh nemoral’nykh lisiv [Epiphytic bryocoenoses in the nemoral forest biotopes]. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 76 (2), 132–143 (in Ukrainian). DОІ: 10.15407/ukrbotj76.02.132.
EK, T., SUŠKO, U., AUZIŅŠ, R. (2001) Inventory of Woodland Key Habitats EMERALD project 2001. Instruction for Inspection of Specially Protected Territories. EMERALD/NATURA 2000 project, Latvian Fund of Nature, Latvian Ornithological Society, Latvian Environment Agency. Rīga.
ELLIS, C., EATON, S., THEODOROPOULOS, M., ELLIOTT, K. (2015) Epiphyte Communities and Indicator Species. An Ecological Guide for Scotland’s Woodlands. Edinburgh, Royal Botanic Garden.
GAPON, S., GAPON, Y., KRYVTSOVA, M., HASYNETS, Ya. (2023) Synantropni epifitni briotsenozy m. Uzhhoroda (Zakarpatska oblast, Ukraiina) ta yoho okolyts [Sinanthropic epiphytic bryocoenoses of Uzhhorod (Carpathian region, Ukraine) and its environs]. Notes in current biology, 6 (2), 16–19 (in Ukrainian). DОІ: 10.29038/2023-2-1-87.
HODGETTS, N., SÖDERSTRÖM, L., BLOCKEEL, T., CASPARI, S., IGNATOV, M.S., KONSTANTINOVA, N.A., LOCKHART, N., PAPP, B., SCHRÖCK, C., SIM-SIM, M., BELL, D., BELL, N.E., BLOM, H.H., BRUGGEMAN-NANNENGA, M.A., BRUGUÉS, M., ENROTH, J., FLATBERG, K.I., GARILLETI, R., HEDENÄS, L., HOLYOAK, D.T., HUGONNOT, V., KARIYAWASAM, I., KÖCKINGER, H., KUČERA, J., LARA, F., PORLEY, R.D. (2020) An annotated checklist of bryophytes of Europe, Macaronesia and Cyprus. Journal of Bryology, 42 (1), 1–116. DОІ: 10.1080/03736687.2019.1694329.
Ingerpuu, N., Vellak, K., Möls, T. (2007) Growth of Neckera pennata, an epiphytic moss of old-growth forest. The Bryologist, 110 (2), 309–318. DОІ: 10.1639/0007-2745(2007)110[309:GONPAE]2.0.CO;2.
KISH, R., ANDRYK, Ye., MIRUTENKO, V. (2006) Biotopy Natura 2000 na Zakarpatskiy nyzovyni. Uzhhorod, Mystetska Liniya (in Ukrainian).
KUIJPER, W. (2000) The Former Occurrence of Neckera crispa Hedw. in the Netherlands. Lindbergia, 25 (1), 28–32. DОІ: 10.2307/20150030.
MEŽAKA, A., ZNOTINA, V. (2006) Epiphytic bryophytes in old-growth forest of slopes, screes and ravines in north-west Latvia. Acta Universitatis Latviensis. Biology, 7, 103–116.
NORDEN, B., PALTOO, H., GÖTMARK, F., WALLIN, K. (2007) Indicators of biodiversity, what do they indicate? – Lessons for observation of cryptogams in oak-rich forest. Biological conservation, 135, 369–379. DОІ: 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.10.007.
ÖRJAN, F., NIKLASSON, M., CHURSKI, M. (2008) Tree age is a key factor for the conservation of epiphytic lichens and bryophytes in beech forests. Applied Vegetation Science, 12, 93–106. DОІ: 10.1111/j.1654-109X.2009.01007.x.
РАРР, B., ERZBERGER, P., ODOR, P. (2010) Updated checklist and red list of Hungarian bryophytes. Studia botanica Hungarica, 41, 31–59.
PRYRODNO-ZAPOVIDNYY FOND. Urochyshche Atak (2024). Available from: https://ecozakarpat.net.ua/parks/botanichna-pam-iatka-prirodi-zaghalnodierzhavnoghoznachiennia-urochishchie-atak (accessed 12.10.2024).
RAGULINA, M.Y., ISIKOV, V.P. (2012) Epifitni briouhrupovannya starovynnykh parkiv Pivdennoho bereha Krymu. Biuleten Derzhavnoho Nikitskoho botanichnoho sadu, 105, 21–24 (in Ukrainian).
STAROVYNNI KARTY (2024) Available from: https://freemap.com.ua/ (accessed 12.10.2024).
STEBEL, А., ŻARNOWIEC, J. (2014) Gatunki puszanskie we florze mchow Bieszczkiego parku narodowego (Karpaty Wschodnie). Roczniki Bieszczadzkie, 22, 259–277.
STOYKO, S.M. (2009) Dubovi lisy Ukrayinskykh Karpat: ekolohichni osoblyvosti, vidtvorennia, okhorona. Lviv, Merkator (in Ukrainian).
UTINEK, D. (2014) Střední a nízký les – proč a jak? (I část). 4 /2014 Ochrana přírody. 12–15.
VIRCHENKO, V. (2021) Brioflora mista Berehove (Zakarpatska obl., Ukraiina) [The bryophyte flora of Berehove town (Transcarphathia, Ukraine)]. Biology & Ecology, 7 (1), 31–37 (in Ukrainian). DОІ: 10.33989/2021.7.1.243424.
WESTHOFF, V., MAAREL, E. (1973) The Braun-Blanquett approach. Handbook of vegetation science. Ordination and classification of vegetation. Hague, 5, 619–726.
ZEROV, D.K., PARTYKA, L.Ya. (1975) Mokhopodibni ukrayinskykh Karpat, Kyiv, Naukova dumka (in Ukrainian).
