Range Expansion of Cotoneaster lucidus Schlecht. in Forest Parks of Yekaterinburg. P.73-84

Complete text of the article:

Download article (pdf, 0.7MB )

UDС

581.524.2-271.171(470.54-25)

DOI:

10.37482/0536-1036-2022-5-73-84

Abstract

Shiny cotoneaster (Cotoneaster lucidus Schlecht.) is one of the oldest plants. It originated in Southeast Asia and has many primitive traits. Its survival strategy is fascinating. Its introduction range extends throughout Eurasia. The cotoneaster has been actively introduced to all forest parks and city forests around Yekaterinburg. Its spread was facilitated by the presence of edible, long-preserved fruits on the shoots, which were the food supply for many bird species. The research aims at analyzing the distribution patterns and features of ecological occurrence of Cotoneaster lucidus in the forest parks of Yekaterinburg. There were 15 forest parks surveyed, and in 11 of them it is found in the undergrowth. The studies were carried out on the basis of forest inventory materials. Local habitats were monitored in four forest parks most visited by the population of the city: Sanatorny Forest Park, Uktusskiy Forest Park, Park named after Foresters of Russia, Shartashskaya Forest Park. Optimal environment for cotoneaster growth are mixed herbs pine forests with stand density of 0.7–0.8. Mature stands of the 1st resistance class are also appropriate. The highest occurrence of cotoneaster in the Central Forest Park is 7 % of the total area of the forest park. The density of cotoneaster increases with increasing stand density from 320 to 1,140 individuals. At a density of 0.3–0.5 the number of individuals per unit area decreases, and at 0.1–0.2 cotoneaster disappears completely as a result of increased anthropogenic load and the inflow of light in excessive amounts. High shade tolerance is a bioecological feature of Cotoneaster lucidus. Morphometric parameters of plants in the studied forest parks depend on the density of the tree canopy; the maximum values were found for specimens in the Sanatorny Forest Park, where the distribution of shrubs is rare with a density of the stand of 0.7. A positive correlation of plant height with projection area and crown volume was found. The spatial distribution of individuals varies depending on the forest park and its attendance by people. For instance, in the Shartashsky Forest Park 60.4 % of cotoneasters are located in dense undergrowth, and in the Uktusskiy Forest Park 66.7 % are found in sparse undergrowth. Immature individuals are present in all of the Forest Parks, which indicates successful naturalization and high potential of the species.

Authors

Elena A. Tishkina^1,2*, Candidate of Agriculture, Research Scientist, Assoc. Prof.; ResearcherID: AAC-4442-2020, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6315-2878 Lidia A. Semkina1,2, Doctor of Biology, Leading Research Scientist; ResearcherID: AAC-4433-2020, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2351-3258
Irina V. Shevelina², Candidate of Agriculture, Assoc. Prof.; ResearcherID: ABH-5277-2020, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8352-558X

Affiliation

¹Botanical Garden of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, ul. 8 Marta, 202 a, Yekaterinburg, 620014, Russian Federation; Elena.MLOB1@yandex.ru*, lidia.semkina@botgard.uran.ru
²Ural State Forest Engineering University, ul. Sibirskiy trakt, 37, Yekaterinburg, 620100; Elena.MLOB1@yandex.ru, lidia.semkina@botgard.uran.ru, shevelinaiv@m.usfeu.ru

Keywords

Cotoneaster lucidus, cotoneaster, invasion, forest parks, cotoneaster ecological features, cotoneaster biological features, cotoneaster habitat, Yekaterinburg

For citation

Tishkina E.A., Semkina L.A., Shevelina I.V. Range Expansion of Cotoneaster lucidus Schlecht. in Forest Parks of Yekaterinburg. Lesnoy Zhurnal = Russian Forestry Journal, 2022, no. 5, pp. 73–84. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2022-5-73-84

References

1.Andreeva E.N., Bakkal I.Yu., Gorshkov V.V., Lyanguzova I.V., Maznaya E.A., Nesha taev V.Yu., Neshataeva V.Yu., Stavrova N.I., Yarmishko V.T., Yarmishko M.A. Methods of Studying Forest Communities. Saint Petersburg, SPbU Publ., 2002. 240 р.
2.Antropov K.M., Varaksin A.N. Assessing Nitrogen Dioxide Air Pollution in Ekaterin burg Land Use Regression Model. Ecological Systems and Devices, 2011, no. 8, pp. 47–54.
3.Veselkin D.V., Korzhinevskaya A.A., Podgayevskaya E.N. The Species Com position and Abundance of Alien and Invasive Understory Shrubs and Trees in Urban Forests of Yekaterinburg. Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Biologi ya = Tomsk State University Journal of Biology, 2018, no. 42, pp. 102–118.Antropov K.M., Varaksin A.N. Assessing Nitrogen Dioxide Air Pollution in Ekaterin burg Land Use Regression Model. Ecological Systems and Devices, 2011, no. 8, pp. 47–54.https://doi.org/10.17223/19988591/42/5
4.Vstovskaya T.N. Woody Plants – Introduced Species of Siberia: Abelia-Ligustrum.
Novosibirsk, Nauka Publ., 1985. 278 p.
5.Golovatin M.G., Lyakhov A.G. Ornithocomplexes of Forest Parks in Yekaterinburg.
Тhe Russian Journal of Ornithology, 2013, vol. 22, iss. 858, pp. 709–716.
6.Gusev N.N., Sinitsyn S.G., Sukhikh V.I., Bukin N.I. Forest Management in the USSR.
Moscow, Lesnaya promyshlennost’ Publ., 1981. 328 p.
7.Angiosperms. Trochodendraceae – Rosaceae Families. Vol. 3. Trees and Shrubs of the USSR: Wild, Cultivated and Promising for Introduction. Ed. by S.Ya. Sokolov, B.K. Shishkin. Moscow, AN SSSR Publ., 1954. 872 p.
8.Knyazev M.S. The Genus Cotoneaster (Rosaceae) in the Urals. Botanicheskii Zhurnal, 2007, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 420–428.
9.Koropachinskiy I.Yu., Vstovskaya T.N. Woody Plants of Asian Russia. Novosibirsk, Geo Publ., 2012. 707 p.
10.Krishtafovich A.N. Palaeobotanica. Leningrad, Gostoptehizdat Publ., 1957. 650 p.
11.Kulikov P.V., Zolotareva N.V., Podgaevskaya E.N. Endemic Plants of the Urals in the Flora of the Sverdlovsk Region. Yekaterinburg, Goshchitskiy Publ., 2013. 610 p.
12.Ladeyshchikova G.V., Petrov A.P. Introduced Species in the Forest Park Area of Yekaterinburg. Al’manakh sovremennoy nauki i obrazovaniya, 2008, no. 11, pp. 83–86
13.Forest Management Instruction: Approved by the Order No. 122 of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation Dated March 29, 2018: Reg istered with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on April 20, 2018, Registration No. 50859.Access mode:http://docs.cntd.ru/document/542621790 
14.Mamaev S.A. Identification Guide of Trees and Shrubs of the Urals. Native and Intro duced Species. Yekaterinburg, UB RAS Publ., 2000. 260 p.
15.Petrov A.P., Ladeyshchikova G.V., Zoteeva E.A. Digression of Phytocenoses and Nat uralization of Woody Plants in the Forest Park Zone of Yekaterinburg. Botanical Studies in the Urals. Perm, PSU Publ., 2009, pp. 279–281.
16.Sturman V.I. Natural and Technogenic Factors of Air Pollution in Russian Cities. Bul letin of Udmurt University. Series Biology. Earth Sciences, 2008, iss. 2, pp. 15–29.
17.Tahtadzhyan A.L. The Origin of Angiosperms. Moscow, Vysshaya shkola Publ., 1961.
132 p
18.Tretyakova A.S. Regularities of Distribution of Alien Plants in Anthropogenous Habi tats of Sverdlovsk Oblast. Russian Journal of Biological Invasions, 2015, no. 4, pp. 118–128.
19.Shevelina I.V., Nagimov Z.Ya., Metelev D.V. Characteristic of the Forest Fund of the Urban Forest Zone of Municipal Unit “City of Yekaterinburg”. Modern problems of science and education, 2015, no. 1-1.
20.Carpenter K.J. Stomatal Architecture and Evolution in Basal Angiosperms. American Journal of Botany, 2005, vol. 92, iss. 10, pp. 1595–1615. https://doi.org/10.3732/ ajb.92.10.159521.Díaz Velez M.C., Sérsic A.N., Traveset A., Paiaro V. The Role of Frugivorous Birds in Fruit Removal and Seed Germination of the Invasive Alien Cotoneaster franchetii in Cen tral Argentina. Austral Ecology, 2018, vol. 43, iss. 5, pp. 558–566. https://doi.org/10.1111/ aec.12592
22.Dickoré W.B., Kasperek G. Species of Cotoneaster (Rosaceae, Maloideae) In digenous to, Naturalising or Commonly Cultivated in Central Europe. Willdenowia, 2010, vol. 40(1), pp. 13–45. https://doi.org/10.3372/wi.40.40102
23.Hylmö B., Fryer J. Cotoneasters in Europe. Acta Botanica Fennica, 1999, vol. 162,pp. 179–184.
24.Markgraf Fr. Forsythia europaea und die Forsythien Asiens. Mitteilungen der Deutschen dendrologischen gesellschaft, 1930, Nr. 42, Ss. 1–12. (In Ger.).
25.Potter D., Eriksson T., Evans R.C., Oh S., Smedmark J.E.E., Morgan D.R., Kerr M., Robertson K.R., Arsenault M., Dickinson T.A., Campbell C.S. Phylogeny and Classification of Rosaceae. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 2007, vol. 266, pp. 5–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-007-0539-9
26.Sennikov A. Fryer J. & Hylmö B. Cotoneasters: A Comprehensive Guide to Shrubs for Flowers, Fruit, and Foliage. Nordic Journal of Botany, 2010, vol. 28, iss. 4, pp. 509–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-1051.2009.00639.x
27.Sennikov A. Proposal to Conserve the Name Mespilus tomentosa (Cotoneas ter tomentosus) against Mespilus orientalis (Rosaceae). Taxon, 2011 vol. 60, iss. 2, p. 606. https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.602045
28.Sennikov A.N., Somlyay L. Atlas Florae Europaeae Notes 17: Typification of Co toneaster tomentosus (Rosaceae) and Its Synonyms. Taxon, 2011, vol. 60, iss. 2, pp. 579–584. https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.602026