2020
DOI: 10.23855/preslia.2020.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Oak-hornbeam forests of central Europe

Abstract: Csiky J., Onyshchenko V. & Chytrý M. (2020) Oak-hornbeam forests in central Europe: a formalized classification and syntaxonomic revision. -Preslia 92: 1-34Oak-hornbeam forests (order Carpinetalia) are a widespread vegetation type in central Europe. As vegetation ecologists focused on them since the pioneering times of vegetation research, many syntaxonomic units are described. However, classification systems used in various central-European countries suffer from inconsistencies and overlaps of the concepts of… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At its southern and south-eastern distribution limits, European beech most likely is limited by summer droughts and heat (Czúcz et al, 2011;Fang and Lechowicz, 2006), and its occurrence is restricted to the humid montane belt of the mountains (Coldea et al, 2015;Horvat et al 1974), avoiding the drier and hotter lowland regions. Here, beech forests are replaced by oak-rich sub-Mediterranean forest communities of the Quercetalia pubescenti-petraeae (thermophilic mixed oak forests) and Carpinetalia betuli (oak-hornbeam forests) orders (Czúcz et al, 2011;Novák et al, 2020). With the recent increase in summer temperatures, VPD and the frequency of heat waves (Barriopedro et al, 2011;Schär et al, 2004), and regionally decreasing summer precipitation (Caloiero et al, 2018;Schönwiese and Janoschitz, 2008) , it is predicted that the climate will become less favourable for beech not only in southern and south-eastern Europe but also in parts of its Central European distribution range (Dolos et al, 2016;Garamszegi et al, 2020;Mette et al, 2013;Walthert et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At its southern and south-eastern distribution limits, European beech most likely is limited by summer droughts and heat (Czúcz et al, 2011;Fang and Lechowicz, 2006), and its occurrence is restricted to the humid montane belt of the mountains (Coldea et al, 2015;Horvat et al 1974), avoiding the drier and hotter lowland regions. Here, beech forests are replaced by oak-rich sub-Mediterranean forest communities of the Quercetalia pubescenti-petraeae (thermophilic mixed oak forests) and Carpinetalia betuli (oak-hornbeam forests) orders (Czúcz et al, 2011;Novák et al, 2020). With the recent increase in summer temperatures, VPD and the frequency of heat waves (Barriopedro et al, 2011;Schär et al, 2004), and regionally decreasing summer precipitation (Caloiero et al, 2018;Schönwiese and Janoschitz, 2008) , it is predicted that the climate will become less favourable for beech not only in southern and south-eastern Europe but also in parts of its Central European distribution range (Dolos et al, 2016;Garamszegi et al, 2020;Mette et al, 2013;Walthert et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…OHFs are of key importance for biodiversity conservation because they serve as refugia for nemoral biota, especially in largely deforested lowlands (Vera, 2000; Kolb & Diekmann, 2004; Stefańska‐Krzaczek et al, 2016; Chytrý et al, 2019). They harbour numerous narrow‐range (limited to <20% of the study region, typically <10%) and relict forest plant species (Coldea, 2015; Novák et al, 2019, Novák, Willner et al, 2020; Gholizadeh et al, 2020) as well as rare semi‐shade species (Garbarino & Bergmeier, 2014; Miklín & Čížek, 2016; Kiedrzyński et al, 2017). They are classified as near threatened (NT) for EU28 and EU28+ countries, as their abiotic and biotic quality has decreased significantly over the last 50 years (Janssen et al, 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recent studies have focused on relatively understudied regions in Euxinia, the Caucasus and northern Iran (Çoban & Willner, 2018; Novák et al, 2019, Novák, Zukal et al, 2020; Gholizadeh et al, 2020). Modern overviews of OHF diversity across large parts of Europe appeared in the last two decades (Onyshchenko, 2009; Košir et al, 2013; Novák, Willner et al, 2020). In EVC (Mucina et al, 2016), OHFs comprise 10 primarily biogeographically defined alliances.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The situation may have changed with both the emergence of new analytical tools based on numerical methods and the access to international databases allowing direct comparisons of communities from different geographical regions [17,18]. Consequently, traditional classification systems of forest communities in Central Europe have started to modify quickly, and many of the syntaxonomic units described from individual countries have been downgraded or renamed to synonyms, e.g., [19][20][21][22]. The final framework for the division into higher units (up to the level of alliance) is provided by the study of Mucina et al [23], to which the national classification systems should be gradually adapted.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%