Tolerance of Shrubs at the Krasnoyarsk’s Landscaping Facilities in Terms of Their Vitality Index. P. 163–174

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 0.4MB )

UDС

712.41

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2026-3-163-174

Abstract

The present study is aimed at determining the adaptability of shrubs in the landscaping conditions of Krasnoyarsk: squares, parks, streets, and nurseries in the urban and suburban areas of the city. An analysis of the combination of anthropogenic, recreational, and microclimatic conditions that negatively affect plant growth and development revealed that the municipal enterprise’s nursery is in satisfactory conditions, 2 objects are in stressful conditions, 15 are in adverse conditions, and 4 are in critical conditions. Plantings growing in satisfactory conditions are located in the suburban area. Critical conditions are typical for areas along highways and near industrial enterprises with high levels of harmful emissions. Landscaping facilities with stressful environmental conditions are located near streets with moderate traffic volume and moderate air pollution; facilities with adverse conditions are located near roads with heavy traffic, violations of urban planning regulations regarding plant spacing, and the presence of harmful industrial enterprises. The vitality status of plants in Krasnoyarsk ranges from healthy to dying. The vitality index (VI) varies from 99 to 15 and can serve as an indicator of the extent to which environmental factors affect shrubs. The shrubs are ranked in order of sensitivity (from the most tolerant to the least tolerant) to anthropogenic stresses in the urban environment: Syringa josikaea Jacq. → Ribes diacanthum Pall. → Cotoneaster lucidus Schltdl. → Caragana arborescens Lam. → Lonicera tatarica L. Recommendations have been developed for the use of shrubs in various types of landscaping facilities based on data regarding their tolerance. Syringa josikaea Jacq. and Ribes diacanthum Pall. are recommended for planting in parks as well as along highways with heavy traffic; Cotoneaster lucidus Schltdl. and Caragana arborescens Lam. are recommended for planting in parks and squares; Lonicera tatarica L. is recommended for planting in parks and at sites with low anthropogenic loads.

Authors

Elena V. Avdeeva*, Doctor of Agriculture, Prof.; ResearcherID: GLR-2803-2022, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3425-7157
Natalia V. Tsygankova, Postgraduate Student; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9284-9679

Affiliation

Reshetnev Siberian State University of Science and Technology, prosp. im. gazety “Krasnoyarskiy rabochiy”, 31, Krasnoyarsk, Russia, 660037; e.v.avdeeva@gmail.com*, irw@mail.ru

Keywords

landscaping facilities, urban landscaping, shrubs in urban landscaping, anthropogenic stress to plants, plant tolerance, plant sensitivity to anthropogenic stress, vitality status, Krasnoyarsk

For citation

Avdeeva E.V., Tsygankova N.V. Tolerance of Shrubs at the Krasnoyarsk’s Landscaping Facilities in Terms of Their Vitality Index. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2026, no. 3, pp. 163–174. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2026-3-163-174

References

1. Avdeeva E.V. Growth and Indicator Role of Woody Plants in Urban Environments: A Monograph. Krasnoyarsk, SibSTU Publ., 2007. 361 p. (In Russ.).

2. Avdeeva E.V., Ivanov D.V., Shpagin D.E. Inventory Assessment of Plantings of Greening Objects and City Nursery (Based on the Example of Krasnoyarsk). Conifers of the boreal area, 2024, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 53–62. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.53374/1993-0135-2024-2-53-62

3. Avdeeva E.V., Kukhar I.V., Ivanov D.V. Inventory Assessment of Landscaping Objects in the City of Krasnoyarsk. Conifers of the boreal area, 2022, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 242–249. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.53374/1993-0135-2022-6-242-249

4. Avdeeva E.V., Panov A.I. Bioindication of Urban Ecosystems According to the Morphological Characteristics of Conifers. Conifers of the boreal area, 2017, vol. 35, no. 1-2, pp. 7–14. (In Russ.).

5. Alekseev V.A. Forest Ecosystems and Air Pollution. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1990. 200 p. (In Russ.).

6. Larionov M.V., Lyubimov V.B., Logacheva E.A., Sergadeeva M.Y. The Influence of Sulfur Dioxide on Ornamental Shrubs (For Example, Urbanized Areas and Rural Areas Balashov Municipal District). Fundamental research, 2015, no. 7-1, pp. 35–38. (In Russ.).

7. Mozolevskaya E.G. Causes of the Weakening and Death of Young Trees in Moscow and Measures to Enhance Their Stability and Viability. Ecology of Big City, 2001, no. 5, pp. 40–46. (In Russ.).

8. Mozolevskaya E.G., Zherebtsova G.P., Sokolova E.S., et al. Assessment of Tree Viability and Guidelines for Their Selection and Designation for Felling and Replanting. Moscow, MGUL Publ., 2004. 40 p. (In Russ.).

9. Neverova O.A. The Main Pathways of Change in the Vital Activity of Woody Plants in the Industrial City of Kemerovo. Èkologiâ promyšlennogo proizvodstva = Industrial ecology, 2001, no. 4, pp. 10–14. (In Russ.).

10. Neverova O.A. Bioecological Assessment of Atmospheric Air Based on the Health Status of Woody Plants. Novosibirsk, Nauka Publ., 2001. 119 p. (In Russ.).

11. Neverova O.A., Kolmogorova E.Yu. Woody Plants and the Urbanized Environment: Ecological and Biotechnological Aspects. Novosibirsk, Nauka Publ., 2003. 222 p. (In Russ.).

12. Nikolaevskiy V.S. Biological Foundations of Plants’ Gas Tolerance. Novosibirsk, Nauka Publ., 1979. 278 p. (In Russ.).

13. Primakov N.V. Prospects for Woody and Shrubby Plants in the Landscaping of Krasnodar. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2022, no. 1, pp. 98–109. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2022-1-98-109

14. Selenina E.A., Avdeeva E.V., Selenin N.A., Vagner E.A. Recommendations for Greening Rules and Improvements of a Modern Municipal District. Technologies and Equipment for Garden, Park and Landscape Construction: Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference. Krasnoyarsk, 2020, pp. 10–14. (In Russ.).

15. Yakubov Kh.G. Environmental Monitoring of Green Spaces in Moscow. Moscow, Stagirit-N Publ., 2005. 264 p. (In Russ.).

16. Chen D., Wang X., Thatcher M., Barnett G., Kachenko A., Prince R. Urban Vegetation for Reducing Heat Related Mortality. Environmental Pollution, 2014, vol. 192, pp. 275–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.05.002

17. Chen Y., Zhong Q., Li B. Positive or Negative Viewpoint Determines the Overall Scenic Beauty of a Scene: A Landscape Perception Evaluation Based on a Panoramic View. Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, iss. 14, art. 11458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411458

18. Li J., Huang Z., Zhu Z., Ding G. Coexistence Perspectives: Exploring the Impact of Landscape Features on Aesthetic and Recreational Values in Urban Parks. Ecological Indicators, 2024, vol. 162, art. 112043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112043

19. Li X., Huang C. Environment Impact of Heavy Metals on Urban Soil in the Vicinity of Industrial Area of Baoji City, P.R. China. Environmental Geology, 2007, vol. 52, iss. 8, pp. 1631–1637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-006-0608-3

20. Lisotova E., Suntsova L., Insakov E. State of Woody Vegetation in an Urbanized Environment (The Example of Krasnoyarsk). IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2021, vol. 875, art. 012080. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/875/1/012080

21. Ozkan U.Y., Ozdemir I. Assessment of Landscape Silhouette Value in Urban Forests Based on Structural Diversity Indices. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 2015, vol. 12, pp. 3971–3980. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-015-0826-x

22. Tiwary A., Reff A., Colls J.J. Collection of Ambient Particulate Matter by Porous Vegetation Barriers: Sampling and Characterization Methods. Journal of Aerosol Science, 2008, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2007.09.011

23. Weber F., Kowarik I., Säumel I. Herbaceous Plants as Filters: Immobilization of Particulates Along Urban Street Corridors. Environmental pollution, 2014, vol. 186, pp. 234–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.12.011