Pan-European Approaches to the Classification of Habitats, Vegetation and Forest Types. P. 9–24

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 0.7MB )

UDС

630*187

DOI:

10.37482/0536-1036-2022-4-9-24

Abstract

The article describes the approaches and features of classification of forests, habitats and vegetation at the Pan-European level on the example of the classification of European forest types (EFT), the EUNIS habitat classification and the Europe vegetation classification created by the phytosociologists of the European Vegetation Survey (EVS). The forest type in the EFT classification is a large forest vegetation unit distinguished within biogeographic regions by the similarity of forest site conditions, structure and productivity of the plantation, and the degree of anthropogenic transformation of forests. Accounting for the successional dynamics of forest biogeocoenosis is worked out at the theoretical level, in practice, the accounting is possible due to the information obtained from the EUNIS habitat classification, which is linked to the EVS classification by cross-references. The EUNIS classification is a Pan-European reference set of habitat units. It was created using the results of previous large-scale studies in Europe, which resulted in the creation of a number of classifications of biotopes, soil cover and marine habitats. The EVS classification is a comprehensive hierarchical syntaxonomic system of unions, orders and classes of Brown-Blanquet syntaxonomy for vascular plants, mosses, lichens and algae native to Europe. The great advantage of the EFT classification is the inclusion of anthropogenic impacts among the key diagnostic features of a forest type, which are defined by assessing the degree of naturalness of forests, the number of forest species, the type and intensity of anthropogenic impacts. The strength of the EFT classification is to establish cross-links with other forest type classification systems used both within national forest inventory systems and at the EU level. The use of the Braun-Blanquet ecological and floristic approach implemented in the classification of phytosociological alliances makes it possible to conduct a detailed ecological analysis and taking into account not only the stand productivity, but also the level of stand biodiversity, which makes the classification more useful for scientific research and nature preservation.

Authors

Valery V. Fomin^1*, Doctor of Biology, Assoc. Prof.; ResearcherID: J-3404-2017, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9211-5627
Natalya S. Ivanova^1,2, Doctor of Biology; ResearcherID: O-8367-2019, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0845-9433
Sergey V. Zalesov¹, Doctor of Agriculture, Prof.; ResearcherID: H-2605-2019, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3779-410X
Anna P. Mikhailovich³, Senior Lecturer; ResearcherID: AAN-5903-2020, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8282-9431

Affiliation

¹Ural State Forest Engineering University, Sibirskiy trakt, 37, Yekaterinburg, 620100, Russian Federation; fomval2011@yandex.ru*, zalesovsv@m.usfeu.ru
²Botanical Garden of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, ul. 8 Marta, 202 а, Yekaterinburg, 620144, Russian Federation; i.n.s@bk.ru
³Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, ul. Mira, 19, Yekaterinburg, 620002, Russian Federation; anna.mikhailovich@gmail.com

Keywords

forest typological studies, vegetation classification, European forest type classification, EUNIS habitat classification, phytosociological alliance classification, EVS classification

Funding

The research was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR grant No. 20-14-50422) and the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (projects FEUG-2020-0013 and FEUZ 2021-0014).

For citation

Fomin V.V., Ivanova N.S., Zalesov S.V., Mikhailovich A.P. Pan-European Approaches to the Classification of Habitats, Vegetation and Forest Types. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2022, no. 4, pp. 9–24. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2022-4-9-24

References

1. Ivanova N.S. Forest Typological Features of Biodiversity and Restoration-Age Dynamics of Mountain Forest Vegetation of the Southern and Middle Urals: Dr. Biol. Sci. Diss. Yekaterinburg, 2019. 304 p. (In Russ.).

2. Barbati A., Corona P., Marchetti M. European Forest Types. EEA Technical Report No. 9/2006. Сopenhagen, European Environment Agency, 2007. 98 p. Available at: https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/technical_report_2006_9 (accessed 05.11.20).

3. Barbati A., Marchetti M., Chirici G., Corona P. European Forest Types and Forest Europe SFM Indicators: Tools for Monitoring Progress on Forest Biodiversity Conservation. Forest Ecology and Management, 2014, vol. 321, pp. 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.004

4. Biondi E. Phytosociology Today: Methodological and Conceptual Evolution. Plant Biosystems, 2011, vol. 145, iss. sup1, pp. 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2011.602748

5. Blasi C., Frondoni R. Modern Perspectives for Plant Sociology: The Case of Ecological Land Classification and the Ecoregions of Italy. Plant Biosystems, 2011, vol. 145, iss. sup1, pp. 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2011.602747

6. Braun-Blanquet J. Pflanzensoziologie. Wien, Springer, 1964. 866 p. (In Ger.). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-8110-2

7. Caudullo G., Pasta S., Giannetti F., Barbati A., Chirici G. European Forest Classifications. European Atlas of Forest Tree Species. Ed. by J. San-Miguel-Ayanz, D.de Rigo, G. Caudullo, T. Houston Durrant, A. Mauri. Luxembourg, Publication Office of the European Union, 2016, pp. 32–33. https://doi.org/10.2760/233115

8. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. Official Journal of the European Communities, 1992, vol. 206, pp. 7–50.

9. D’Annunzio R., Sandker M., Finegold Y., Min Z. Projecting Global Forest Area Towards 2030. Forest Ecology and Management, 2015, vol. 352, pp. 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.03.014

10. Davies C.E., Moss D., Hill M.O. EUNIS Habitat Classification Revised 2004. European Environment Agency, 2004. 307 p. 11. Fomin V., Ivanova N., Mikhailovich A. Genetic Forest Typology as a Scientific and Methodological Basis for Environmental Studies and Forest Management. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2020, vol. 609, art. 012044. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/609/1/012044

11. Fomin V., Mikhailovich A., Zalesov S., Popov A., Terekhov G. Development of Ideas Within the Framework of the Genetic Approach to the Classification of Forest Types. Baltic Forestry, 2021, vol. 27, iss. 1, art. 466. https://doi.org/10.46490/BF466

12. Ivanova N.S., Zolotova E.S. Development of Forest Typology in Russia. International Journal of Bio-Resource and Stress Management, 2014, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 298–303. https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-4038.2014.00572.7

13. Maiti R., Rodriguez H.G., Ivanova, N.S. Autoecology and Ecophysiology of Woody Shrubs and Trees: Concepts and Applications. UK, Wiley Blackwell, 2016. 352 p. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119104452

14. Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe. Forest Europe. 2021. Available at: https://foresteurope.org/ (assessed 06.03.21).

15. Mucina L. Classification of Vegetation: Past Present and Future. Journal of Vegetation Science, 1997, vol. 8, iss. 6, pp. 751–760. https://doi.org/10.2307/3237019

16. Mucina L., Bültmann H., Dierßen K., Theurillat J., Raus T., Čarni A. et al. Vegetation of Europe: Hierarchical Floristic Classification System of Vascular Plant, Bryophyte, Lichen, and Algal Communities. Applied Vegetation Science, 2016, vol. 19, iss. S1, pp. 3–264. https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12257

17. Parrotta J.A. Present Challenges to Global Forests and the Role of IUFRO. iForest, 2019, vol. 12, iss. 6, pp. 488–490. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor0066-012

18. Pinus Taiga Woodland. European Environment Agency. 2021. Available at: https://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats/1758#legal (assessed 06.05.21).

19. Rodwell J.S., Schaminée J.H.J., Mucina L., Pignatti S., Dring J., Moss D. The Diversity of European Vegetation. Wageningen, National Reference Centre for Agriculture, Nature and Fisheries, 2002. 115 p.

20. Russo G., Pedrotti F., Gafta D. Typology and Synecology of Aspen Woodlands in the Central-Southern Apennines (Italy): New Findings and Synthesis. iForest, 2020, vol. 13, pp. 202–208. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor3315-013

21. Schaminée J.H.J., Janssen J.A.M., Hennekens S.M., Ozinga W.A. Large Vegetation Databases and Information Systems: New Instruments for Ecological Research, Nature Conservation, and Policy Making. Plant Biosystems, 2011, vol. 145, iss. sup1, pp. 85–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2011.602744

22. Theurillat J.-P., Willner W., Fernández‐González F., Bültmann H., Čarni A., Gigante D., Mucina L., Weber H. International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature. 4th Edition. Applied Vegetation Science, 2021, vol. 24, iss. 1, art. e12491. https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12491

23. Weber H.E., Moravec J., Theurillat J.-P. International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature. 3rd Edition. Journal of Vegetation Science, 2000, vol. 11, iss. 5, pp. 739–768. https://doi.org/10.2307/3236580

24. Welcome to EUNIS, the European Nature Information System. European Environment Agency. 2021. Available at: https://eunis.eea.europa.eu (assessed 06.05.21).

25. Vegetation of Europe. Hierarchical Floristic Classification System of Vascular Plant, Bryophyte, Lichen, and Algal Communities. European Vegetation Survey. Available at: https://www.synbiosys.alterra.nl/evc/ (accessed 05.11.20).