Abstract:The diurnal movement patterns of Triturus vulgaris, T. cristatus, Pelobates fuscus, Bufo bufo, Rana temporaria, and R. arvalis were investigated during five breeding seasons (1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998). Two main questions were addressed: 1) What is the probability of an individual amphibian getting killed when crossing the road? and 2) What fraction of the amphibian populations gets killed by traffic? The rate of movement of 203 adult amphibians was recorded. Information on traffic loads was provided, and mortality risk was calculated depending on traffic loads and movement rate. The probability of getting killed ranged from 0.34 to 0.61 when crossing a road with a traffic load of 3,207 vehicles/day, and from 0.89 to 0.98 when crossing a motorway. The number of amphibians killed on the road was estimated by systematic counts. Population sizes were estimated for all ponds within 250m of the relevant highway stretch. Results indicate that about 10% of the adult population of P. fuscus and brown frogs (R. temporaria and R. arvalis) were killed annually by traffic at this site.

Aim Primary forests have high conservation value but are rare in Europe due to historic land use. Yet many primary forest patches remain unmapped, and it is unclear to what extent they are effectively protected. Our aim was to (1) compile the most comprehensive European‐scale map of currently known primary forests, (2) analyse the spatial determinants characterizing their location and (3) locate areas where so far unmapped primary forests likely occur. Location Europe. Methods We aggregated data from a literature review, online questionnaires and 32 datasets of primary forests. We used boosted regression trees to explore which biophysical, socio‐economic and forest‐related variables explain the current distribution of primary forests. Finally, we predicted and mapped the relative likelihood of primary forest occurrence at a 1‐km resolution across Europe. Results Data on primary forests were frequently incomplete or inconsistent among countries. Known primary forests covered 1.4 Mha in 32 countries (0.7% of Europe’s forest area). Most of these forests were protected (89%), but only 46% of them strictly. Primary forests mostly occurred in mountain and boreal areas and were unevenly distributed across countries, biogeographical regions and forest types. Unmapped primary forests likely occur in the least accessible and populated areas, where forests cover a greater share of land, but wood demand historically has been low. Main conclusions Despite their outstanding conservation value, primary forests are rare and their current distribution is the result of centuries of land use and forest management. The conservation outlook for primary forests is uncertain as many are not strictly protected and most are small and fragmented, making them prone to extinction debt and human disturbance. Predicting where unmapped primary forests likely occur could guide conservation efforts, especially in Eastern Europe where large areas of primary forest still exist but are being lost at an alarming pace.

Primary forests, defined here as forests where the signs of human impacts, if any, are strongly blurred due to decades without forest management, are scarce in Europe and continue to disappear. Despite these losses, we know little about where these forests occur. Here, we present a comprehensive geodatabase and map of Europe’s known primary forests. Our geodatabase harmonizes 48 different, mostly field-based datasets of primary forests, and contains 18,411 individual patches (41.1 Mha) spread across 33 countries. When available, we provide information on each patch (name, location, naturalness, extent and dominant tree species) and the surrounding landscape (biogeographical regions, protection status, potential natural vegetation, current forest extent). Using Landsat satellite-image time series (1985–2018) we checked each patch for possible disturbance events since primary forests were identified, resulting in 94% of patches free of significant disturbances in the last 30 years. Although knowledge gaps remain, ours is the most comprehensive dataset on primary forests in Europe, and will be useful for ecological studies, and conservation planning to safeguard these unique forests.

No abstract

Abstract. This paper describes the use of supervised methods for the classification of vegetation. The difference between supervised classification and clustering is outlined, with reference to their current use in vegetation science. In the paper we describe the classification of Danish grasslands according to the Habitats Directive of the European Union, and demonstrate how a supervised classification can be used to achieve a standardized and statistical interpretation within a local flora. We thereby offer a statistical solution to the legal problem of protection of certain selected habitat types. The Habitats Directive protects three types of Danish grassland habitats, whereas two remaining types fall outside protection. A classification model is developed, using available Danish grassland data, for the discrimination of these five types based on their species composition. This new Habitats Directive classification is compared to a previously published unsupervised classification of Danish grassland vegetation. An indicator species analysis is used to find significant indicator species for the three protected habitat types in Denmark, and these are compared to the characteristic species mentioned in the interpretation manual of the Habitats Directive. Eventually, we discuss the pros and cons of supervised and unsupervised classification and conclude that supervised methods deserve more attention in vegetation science.