`Americana` Hort., and with S. v - Annales UMCS

Transkrypt

25
THE PHYTOSOCIOLOGICAL STRUCTURE OF MONOCULTURES OF SHRUB WILLOWS...
10.2478/v10067-008-0002-5
ANNALES
UNIVERSITATIS MARIAE CURIE-SKŁODOWSKA
LUBLIN — POLONIA
VOL. LXIII/1/2
SECTIO C
2008
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
Department of Geobotany, Institute of Biology, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University,
ul. Akademicka 19, 20-033 Lublin, Poland
The phytosociological structure of monocultures of shrub willows
with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ Hort., and with S. viminalis L. in
the vicinity of Rudnik and Sarzyna (The Lower San River valley)
Struktura fitosocjologiczna monokultur krzewiastych wierzb z Salix cordata ‘Americana’ Hort.,
i z S. viminalis L. w okolicach Rudnika i Sarzyny (Dolina Dolnego Sanu)
SUMMARY
Few data have been published on the developing phytocenoses in the monocultures of shrub
energy willows. It is possible that this study has described for the first time and in greater detail the
floristic-phytosociological and ecological structure of the type of communities in question with an
example of monocultures with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ Hort. and with S. viminalis L. The
studies were conducted in the left-bank valley of the Lower San river, in the vicinity of Rudnik and
Sarzyna (Fig. 1). These plantations were established on very similar alluvial soils, on arable fields,
meadows, and pastures (Tables 1–6). In general, monocultures with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ are
established on a somewhat wetter substratum than plantations with Salix viminalis. Moreover,
plantations of the former yield a volume of biomass more often than plantations of the latter.
Probably because of the foregoing reasons, the farms with S. cordata ‘Americana’ are characterized
on average, inter alia, by a more varied floral composition than plantations with S. viminalis.
Mainly for those reasons, the phytocenoses of monocultures of the two willow species were classified
as belonging to separate, main groups of communities: with S. cordata, Americana’ and with
S. viminalis.
Floristic-phytosociological similarities and differences between the identified community groups
are highly complex. Above all, they are floristically very heterogeneous phytocenoses (Table 7). In
both the main groups of these phytocenoses, worth noting are three similar subgroups of communities
termed as segetal and meadow, ruderal, and underdeveloped (non-typical). The first two represent
26
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
succession forms. The third one, on account of its highly simplified, quantitative composition of its
species and also because of their exceptionally heterogeneous floristic composition, is a community
developed in a very fragmentary way for various reasons. In the subgroups of segetal-meadow and
ruderal communities, secondary forms of communities are observable with similar or different
dominant species. Most of these community forms exhibit a greater or lesser resemblance to known
phytocenoses, e.g. segetal (with Echinochloa crus-galli and Setaria glauca), meadow (with Agropyron
repens, with Deschampsia caespitosa), ruderal (with Solidago gigantea, with Tanacetum vulgare)
or wet sites (with Juncus bufonius). Only two of these communities, like those with Geranium
palustre and with Equisetum arvense, constitute a certain phytosociological singularity, perhaps
most characteristic of the willow monocultures investigated. The phytocenoses examined are
characterized by a special combination of the quantitative percentage of the group value coefficients
of plants belonging to specific syntaxonomic groups. (Table 8). The characterized phytocenoses
with S. cordata, ‘Americana’ and with S. viminalis were provisionally included into the broadly
interpreted class of Agropyretea intermedio-repentis. We can also accept the proposal that the
subgroups of so-called segetal-grassy and underdeveloped (non-typical) communities should be
classified into the class of Agropyretea intermedio-repentis, and so-called ruderal subgroups – into
the class Artemisietea vulgaris.
STRESZCZENIE
Niewiele jest publikowanych danych odnośnie do kształtujących się fitocenoz w monokulturach krzewiastych wierzb energetycznych. Być może, że po raz pierwszy dokładniej scharakteryzowano tu strukturę florystyczno-fitosocjologiczną i ekologiczną wymienionego typu zbiorowisk
na przykładzie monokultur: z Salix cordata ‘Americana’ Hort. i z S. viminalis L. Badania te
prowadzono w lewobrzeżnej części regionu zwanego Doliną Dolnego Sanu, w okolicach Rudnika
i Sarzyny (ryc. 1). Plantacje te założono na nieznacznie zróżnicowanych glebach aluwialnych,
w miejscach pól uprawnych, łąk i pastwisk (tab. 1–6). Monokultury z Salix cordata ‘Americana’
założone są na podłożu nieco wilgotniejszym niż plantacje z Salix viminalis. Ponadto plantacje tej
pierwszej wikliny są częściej pozyskiwane z biomasy niż plantacje tej drugiej. Prawdopodobnie
z powyższych powodów uprawy z S. cordata ‘Americana’ cechują się przeciętnie między innymi
bardziej urozmaiconym składem roślin niż plantacje z S. viminalis. Głównie z powyższych powodów fitocenozy monokultur tych dwu gatunków wierzb zaliczyć należy do odrębnych dwóch głównych grup zbiorowisk z S. cordata ‘Americana’ i z S. viminalis.
Podobieństwa i różnice florystyczno-fitosocjologiczne między tymi dwoma wymienionymi
grupami zbiorowisk są bardzo złożone. Przede wszystkim są to fitocenozy bardzo niejednorodne
florystycznie (tab. 7). W obydwu głównych grupach tych fitocenoz zwracają uwagę trzy podobne
podgrupy zbiorowisk, określone jako: polno-łąkowe, ruderalne i kadłubowe. Dwie pierwsze reprezentują postacie sukcesyjne. Trzecia z nich, z uwagi na bardzo uproszczony i niejednorodny w niej
skład gatunków, przedstawia grupę zbiorowisk z nader fragmentarycznie rozwiniętych. W podgrupach zbiorowisk polno-łąkowych i ruderalnych zwracają uwagę postacie zbiorowisk o podobnych
lub różnych dominujących gatunkach. Większość z tych zbiorowisk wykazuje mniejsze lub większe podobieństwo do znanych fitocenoz, jak np. segetalnych (z Echinochloa crus-galli i Setaria
glauca), łąkowych (z Agropyron repens, z Deschampsia caespitosa), ruderalnych (z Solidago gigantea, z Tanacetum vulgare) lub miejsc podmokłych (z Juncus bufonius). Jedynie dwa te zbiorowiska, jak z Geranium palustre i z Equisetum arvense, stanowią pewną osobliwość fitosocjologiczną, być może najbardziej charakterystyczną dla rozpatrywanych monokultur wierzb. Rozpatrywane fitocenozy krzewiastych wierzb cechują się specyficzną kombinacją ilościowego w nich udziału
współczynników tzw. wartości grupowej roślin z określonych grup syntaksonomicznych (tab. 8).
27
Dlatego też scharakteryzowane fitocenozy z S. cordata ‘Americana’ i z S. viminalis prowizorycznie zaliczono do szeroko ujętej klasy Agropyretea intermedio-repentis. Alternatywna jest i taka
propozycja, aby podgrupy zbiorowisk tzw. polno-trawiastych i kadłubowych zakwalifikować do
klasy Agropyretea intermedio-repentis, a podgrupy tzw. ruderalne ująć w obrębie klasy Artemisietea vulgaris.
Keywords: Phytocenoses of monocultures with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ Hort. and with
S. viminalis L., the vicinity of Rudnik and Sarzyna, Lower San River Valley, Poland.
INTRODUCTION
The great ecological plasticity of willows, especially shrub ones, makes it possible for them
to be farmed in different habitats, from natural to anthropogenic. These plants serve various practical
purposes, e.g. to reinforce and stabilize the banks of water network, to establish protection zones
against noise, gas and dust emissions, to manage derelict land or sandy sites, to reclaim degraded
land or biological sewage treatment plants, to produce biofuels, cellulose, fiber board, and
pharmaceuticals (1, 2, 7, 8, 20, 21). For decades these willows have been the basic material for
wickerwork craft. In recent years there has been a great interest in using them not only in wickerwork
production but also as energy material (2, 7, 18). A Salix viminalis plantation yields 17 tons of dry
wood mass from 1 ha, which can be a significant alternative to deficit fuel raw material obtained in
the woods (22). The European Union recommends an admixture of 10–12% of biomass contained
in the total organic matter for burning in the form of coal, oil, etc. (18). The energy material is
obtained mainly from two species of shrub willows: sporadically – American willow (Salix cordata
‘Americana’), and most often – common osier or basket willow (Salix viminalis L.). In the Polish
flora, the former is an introduced plant, the latter – a common, native one. The two willow species
form numerous varieties, selectively preferred for specific practical purposes. (20). The American
willow, with its synonymous name S. Americana Hoed., is a hybrid, probably of Salix cordata x
S. gracilis. Its name as Salix cordata ‘Americana’ Hort. was adopted by Szczukowski et al. (20).
In Poland, the area of plantations with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ (75%) are by far larger than
Salix viminalis (20%) plantations (20, 24). Both species belong to perennial shrubs with a considerable
regrowth power and a high crop yield potential, these properties holding for over a dozen years
with repeated exploitation of the plants. Their annual height growth ranges from 100 to 150 cm.
Seedlings for further farming are obtained from parent plantations. The harvesting of willow rods
every year or every several years causes the propagation of these willows On their plantations,
similar measures are applied as in orchards and gardens in order to obtain a greater volume of
willow biomass. These mainly include mechanical soil loosening and mineral fertilization as well
as manual or chemical (herbicides) weed control. In the monocultures of these willows, the diasporas
accumulated in the soil, deriving from the initial and succession ecosystems and from the nearby
ones, determine the annual renewal of the appropriate cover of herbaceous plants.
THE SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY OF INVESTIGATION
The study and description of the developing phytocenoses in monocultures of dwarf willows
is a very important goal, not only for scientific but also practical reasons. The objective is mainly
the phytosociological forms of developing communities and their position in the phytosociological
system. An excessive amount of weeds decreases willow productivity and quality, while labor
expenditure correspondingly increases production costs. We should bear in mind the high sensitivity
28
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
of willows to all chemical substances during the period of bud and leaf development. Especially
dangerous weeds overrun newly established plantations and the older, derelict and thinned ones.
Under such circumstances, reliable identification of community forms and their direction of succession
in the monocultures of the willows in question will facilitate the application of appropriate methods
of weed control and the right choice of herbicides and their use in the right time.
The present paper describes the floristic-phytosociological and habitat properties as well as
the main succession directions in the developing phytocenoses in two forms of monocultures of
shrub willows; with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ and with S. viminalis. They come from the leftbank part of the San river in the vicinity of Rudnik and Sarzyna (Fig. 1). This is a region with an
exceptionally long and famous tradition of wickerwork craft. For more than a decade there has
been increasingly intense farming of the aforementioned dwarf willow species used mainly for
wickerwork production. On the turn of June and July, over two 200 phytosociological records
were made in the area of ca. 100 m2 in the monocultures of these willows. The most representative
ones were listed in Tables 1–6: of which, 70 – from monocultures with Salix cordata ‘Americana’
(Tables 1–3) and 50 – from monocultures with Salix viminalis (Tables 4–6). The stations of these
phytosociological records were located on the appended map of the investigation area against the
additionally marked ATPOL grid squares, compiled by Zając (27)j for the whole territory of
Poland (Fig. 1). These are highly dense plantations, with varied height of willow shoots, ranging
from 50–320 cm – for Salix cordata ‘Americana’ and 60–650 cm – for Salix viminalis (Tables 1–6).
By knowing the height of the willows and their annual height growth ranging from 1–1.5 m, one
can roughly determine the years of their life and the time of establishment. The data concerning the
soils were chosen on the basis of soil and plant maps (Tables 1–6). Comparative figures about the
identified main subgroups of willow plantation phytocenoses were specified in Tables 7 and 8 in
respect of the distribution of species stability classes and the group value of the main, syntaxonomic
groups of species. Phytosociological records and the floristic-phytosociological analysis of
phytocenoses were carried out according to the assumptions of the Braun-Blanquet method, commonly
adopted in Poland (16). The nomenclature of plants was given after Mirek et al. (12) and Ochyra et
al. (14), and their membership of particular syntaxonomic groups was presented after Matuszkiewicz
(11). The preliminary and pioneering but generalized information on the phytosociological structure
of the monocultures of shrub willows is contained in several studies (10, 18, 23, 26).
THE AREA OF INVESTIGATIONS
Phytosociological studies in the monocultures of two species of dwarf willows (Salix cordata
‘Americana’, S. viminalis) were conducted in the left-bank part of the mesoregion of the Lower San
River Valley (Fig. 1), situated in the eastern part of the macroregion of the Sandomierz Basin
[Kotlina Sandomierska] (9, 19). Administratively, this area is located in the Podkarpackie province
[voievodship] in the borderland between the poviats [districts] of Nisko and Leżajsk, in the vicinity
of Rudnik on the San and of Nowa Sarzyna. It occupies a stretch 19 km long and 500 m to 3 km
wide, at 159 to 173 m above sea level. In the east the territory borders on the San riverbed, and in
the west – on the edges of the Tarnobrzeg Plain [Równina Tarnobrzeska] and Kolbuszów Plateau
[Płaskowyż Kolbuszowski]. Climatically, the area described is located in the so-called Sandomierz
climatic region in the 47th Sandomierz country (15). Worth noting are several significant climatic
features of the region in question (12, 15). Its mean annual climatic parameters range from 6.5–
7.5°C for air temperature, and from ca. 600–650 mm for precipitation. We should also note
comparatively short winters (on average: 92 days) and long summer periods (95 days). The level of
ground water ranges from 3–5 m deep on average (3, 4). The basic kind of the substratum is made
up of Holocene alluvial soils with insular banks of Eolian sands of the late Pleistocene. These
29
deposits are intermingled into the several-level system of terraces, most often Holocene, and
infrequently Pleistocene ones (3, 4, 9). Cover deposits, up to over a dozen-odd-meter thick lie on
the substratum of Holocene river sands sometimes interspersed at the bottom with Pleistocene
sandy-gravelly lens. Under such conditions, alluvial soils absolutely dominate spatially over brown
and podzolic, and other soils. Almost all major kinds of soils that occur here are abundant to
a different degree in dusty or sandy sediments (Tables 1–6). Generally, they are mesophilic, fertile
and humus soils (5, 6, 29).
The investigated area is highly agriculturally developed. In the east side, on the edges of the
Kolbuszów Plateau and Tarnobrzeg Plain, it borders on large pine-oak forest complexes. In the
west, along the San river channel, the belt of intermittent shrubbery and of thinned riverside forests
stretches out. Apart from that, a mosaic of farmland, meadows, pastures and willow monocultures
predominates spatially (Fig. 2). Willow plantations are established on different kinds of land:
farmland, meadows and pastures, on fallow and derelict land. These are usually small plantations
with an area of up to one ha. The number of their stations and general area increases every year.
RESULTS OF STUDIES
The specification of the identified phytocenoses in monocultures of shrub
willows with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ and with Salix viminalis and their proposed
position in the phytosociological system is as follows:
Class: Agropyretea intermedio-repentis (Oberd. et all. 1967), Müller et Görs 1926
1. Group of communities of monoculture with Salix cordata ‘Americana’
1.1. subgroup: segetal-meadow
1.1.1. Community: with Geranium palustre
1.1.2. Community: with Juncus effusus
1.1.3. Community with Deschampsia caespitosa
1.1.4. Community: with Elymus repens
1.1.5. Community: with Equisetum arvense
1.2. subgroup: ruderal
1.2.6. Community: with Rubus caesius
1.2.7. Community: with Solidago gigantea
1.2.8. Community: with Tanacetum vulgare
1.3. subgroup: underdeveloped (non-typical)
1.3.9. Community: typical
2. Group of communities of monoculture with Salix viminalis.
2.1. subgroup: segetal-meadow
2.1.1. Community: with Echinochloa crus-gali and Setaria glauca
2.1.2. Community with Deschampsia caespitosa
2.1.3. Community: with Elymus repens
2.1.4. Community: with Equisetum arvense
2.2. subgroup: ruderal
2.2.5: Community: with Rubus caesius
2.2.6. Community: with Solidago gigantea
2.3. subgroup: underdeveloped (non-typical)
2.3.7. Community: typical
30
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
Monocultures with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ are established on a somewhat
wetter substratum than monocultures with Salix viminalis. Moreover, the former
plantation yields a volume of shoot biomass on average several times more often
than the latter. It appears that for those reasons monocultures with Salix cordata
‘Americana’ are more varied as regards the qualitative and quantitative percentage
of herbaceous plants than plantations with Salix viminalis. That is why, for the
aforementioned reasons, the identified phytocenoses in the two forms were
categorized as belonging to distinct main groups of plant communities. On the
other hand, the two separate plantations of willows, apart from differences in the
wetness of their substratum, occur on very similar soils regarding their origin,
mechanical composition, chemical properties etc. Usually, they are mediumheavy or heavy alluvial soils, less often light ones. These plantations are seldom
established on other soils, e.g. brown or podzolic soils. In almost all cases these
are fertile soils, more or less moist and rich in humus, with different quantitative
combinations of dusty, sandy or gravel deposits. It appears that for that reason,
analogous secondary subgroups of phytocenoses are forming in the two types of
plantations of dwarf willows.
The phytocenoses identified in both forms (with S. cordata ‘Americana’ and
with S. viminalis) of willow monocultures are first of all characterized by a highly
heterogeneous floristic composition (Table 7). This shows that we are dealing
with unstable phytocenoses that do not deserve to be phytosociologically classified
as typical plant communities. In all forms of the identified phytocenoses, the
most common plants, apart from the willows under cultivation, include: Elymus
repens, Equisetum arvense, Achillea millefolium, Taraxacum officinale, Phleum
pratense, and Cirsium arvense. Within the main community groups formed in
the monocultures with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ and with Salix viminalis, on the
basis of their general floristic-phytosociological properties, three analogous
secondary subgroups of phytocenoses in each were distinguished, which were
provisionally termed as segetal-meadow, ruderal, and underdeveloped (nontypical). The first two subgroups of communities probably represent the succession
stages of development: from their initial, least stable original forms to more
stable ones of ruderal type. The third subgroup of the investigated phytocenoses
with a highly simplified quantitative percentage of species and with exceptional
floristic heterogeneity represents a classical underdeveloped (non-typical)
community. In the last case it is difficult to conclusively determine the causes of
formation of this specific phytocenosis. They may be of natural origin (e.g. too
great and too frequent shading of the substratum) or anthropogenic (e.g. use of
herbicides, intensive weedings). Worth noting is the fact that in the first two
analogous community subgroups, both analogous and separate of communities.
The analogous ones include: with Agropyron repens, with Deschampsia caespitosa,
3.
4.
1.1.
5.
A, B
C
+
+
+
+
+
+
16
29
33
20
28
23
40
20
22
21
21
20
15
24
25
23
21
22
15
26
12
25
11
22
25
27
22
16
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.c
A.p
M.s
M.c
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.s
A.p
M.s
M.c
M.s
A.p
M.s
M.s
M.c
M.l
M.c
M.c
M.c
M.l
M.s
M.s
D
.
. . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . .
. .
.
Liczba gatunków w zdjęciu
Number of species in record
x Gleba
x Soil
A, B: Drzewa i krzewy (Trees and shrubs)
I. a – sadzone (cultivated). II. Ch: b – Salicion albae (x) . III. Ch: c – Rhamno-Prunetea. IV. d – inne (others) (x)
a Salix cordata ‘Americana' B
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
c Cornus sanguinea B
. . . + . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . + . . . + .
C: Rośliny zielne (Herbaceous plants)
VI. Ch: a - Magnocaricion (x). VII. Ch: b - Bedentetea tripartiti. VIII. Ch: c - Isőeto-Nanojuncetea (x). IX. Ch: d - Calluno-Arctostaphylion
b Polygonum hydropiper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . . . + . .
X. Ch:a - Molinio-Arrhenatheretea , b - Arrhenatheretalia elatioris , c - Arrhenatherion elations , d - Cynosurion , e - Molinetalia , f - Molinion caerulea
(x), g - Filipendulion , h - Calthion , i - Plantaginetalia majoris , Polygonion aviecularis, j - Trifolio fragiferae-Agrostietalia stoloniferae
a Festuca pratensis
. + . . + . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a Rumex acetosa
. . + . . . . . . . + . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
a Prunella vulgaris
. . . + . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + . + .
. + . . .
a Vicia cracca
. . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + .
a Phleum pratense
. . . . . + 2 1 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 . . . + . . . . + . . . .
a Poa pratensis
. . . . . + . . + + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a Poa trivialis
. . . . . . + . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . . . . . . .
a Lathyrus pratensis
. . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . + . . + . . . . . . . .
a Festuca rubra
. . . . . . . . + . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Pokrycie warstwy w %
Cover of layer in %
A, B
1. 2.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
70
220
240
240
250
170
80
270
260
250
270
70
320
80
190
60
70
80
90
170
240
70
250
220
90
190
200
60
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
90
60
40
30
70
40
70
60
60
40
40
30
50
60
60
70
50
60
80
60
60
90
60
30
30
70
40
30
Numer zbiorowiska
Number of community
Numer zdjęcia
Number of record
Maks. wysokość warstwy w cm
Max. height of layer in cm
Table. 1. Phytosociological structure of monocultures of shrub willows in phytocenoses: 1 – groups with Salix cordata ‘Americana’, in
subgroup 1.1. – segetal-meadow, in communities: 1.1.1. – with Geranium palustre, 1.1.2. – with Juncus effusus, 1.1.3. – with
Deschampsia caespitosa, 1.1.4. – with Elymus repens, 1.1.5. – with Equisetum arvense.
31
a Alopecus pratensis
b Daucus carota
b Taraxacum officinale
b Heracleum sphondylium
b Achillea millefolium
c Gallium mollugo
c Arrhenatherum elatius
d Trifolium repens
e Angelica silvestris
e Equisetum palustre
e Deschampsia caespitosa
e Dactylis glomerata
g Geranium palustre
g Hypericum tetrapterum
g Stachys palustris
g Valeriana officinalis
g Lysimachia vulgaris
h Juncus effusus
h Myosotis scorpioides
i Poa annua
i Plantago major
j Agrostis stolonifera
j Carex hirta
j Potentilla anserina
j Lysimachia nummularia
j Rorippa silvestris
j Mentha arvensis
j Ranunculus repens
j Potentilla reptans
XI. Ch: Agropyro intermedio-repentis
Elymus repens
Equisetum arvense
Fallopia convolvulus
Poa angustifolia
Convolvulus arvensis
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
1
.
.
.
+
+
+
.
.
2
.
.
.
+
+
.
+
+
+
.
.
+
1
.
+
+
+ 2 2 1
1 + + +
+ . . .
. . . .
+ . . 1
3
+
.
+
2
+ . . . . . . . + . . . .
. + . . . . . + . . . . .
. . + . . . . + . . . . .
. . + . + . . + . . . . +
+ . . . . . . + . + . + +
. . + . + . + + . . + + .
+ . . . . + . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . + . .
. . . . + . . . . + . . .
+ . . . . . . . . + . . .
. . . + . . . + . . . . .
. . + . . . . + . . . . .
. . . + . . . . . . . . .
. + + + . + . + . . + + +
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . + . . . . . + .
. . . . . . . . . + . . .
+ . . . . . . . + . + . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . + . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 1 . . . . . .
. . . . . + . . . . + + .
+ + + . . . . + . + + + .
. . . . . . + . . . . . .
. . + + . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1 2 1 1 + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2
. . . + . . . . + . + + . . + . +
+ . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
3 2 + + 4 2 2 2 . . . . . + . . .
. . . . . + . . + . + +
+ . . + . . . . . + . .
. . + + . . . + . . + +
+ . + . . . . . . + . +
+ . . . . . + + + . . .
. . . . . + . . . + . .
. . + . . . . + . . . .
. . . . . . . + . . . +
. . . . + . . . . . . +
+ . . + . . . . . . . .
2 2 2 2 2 . . . + + + +
. . . . . + . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . + . +
. . . . + . . . . . . .
. + . . + . + + . . . .
. . + . + . . . . . . .
. . . + + . + . . . . .
+ . . . + . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
+ . . . + . . . . . . .
+ . . . . . . . . . . .
+ + . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . + . . . . . .
. . . . + . . . . . . .
. . + + + . . . . . . +
. . . . + . . + . . . .
. . . . + + . + . . . .
. . 1 . + . . . . . + 2
. . . . . . . . . . . +
1 1 . . +
2 2 1 2 1
. . + + .
. . . . .
. . . . +
.
.
.
+
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
32
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
XII. Ch: a - Stellarietea mediae , b - Centauretalia cyani , c - Aphanenion arvensis, d - Caucalidion lappulae , e - Polygono-Chenopodietalia , f - Polygono-Chenopodion, g - Panico-Setarion, h - Sisymbrietalia , Sisymbrion officinalis (x)
a Matricaria perfoliata
. . + + . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . + . . . + + . . +
a Polygonum aviculare
. . . . . . . . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . +
a Lapsana communis
. . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . + . . . . . . . .
a Galeopsis tetrahit
. . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . + . + . . . . . . . .
a Anagalis arvensis
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + + . . . . . . . + .
a Sinapis arvensis
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + + . . . . . .
b Centaurea cyanus
. . + . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . .
b Vicia sativa
. . . . . . . + . . + . . . . + . . . . . + . . . . . .
b Vicia villosa
. . . . . + . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . + . . . + + .
d Lathyrus tuberosus
. . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . + .
e Atriplex patula
. . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . .
e Chenopodium album
. . + . . + + . . + . . . . r . . . . + . . . . + . + .
e Echinochloa crus-galli
. . + . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . + . . + .
f Euphorbia helioscopia
. . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . + . + . . . . . . . .
f Oxalis stricta
. . + . + . + . + + . + + + . . + + 2 + . . . . + + . .
f Chenopodium polyspermum
. . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . + . .
f Galinsoga parviflora
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . + . . . . . . . .
f Sonchus oleraceus
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + . . + . + .
g Setaria glauca
. + + . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + .
XIII. Ch: a - Artemisietea vulgaris , b - Artemisienea vulgaris , c - Onopordetalia acanthii , d - Onopordion acanthii (x) , e - Dauco-Melilotenion ,
f - Artemisietalia vulgaris, g - Galio-Urticinea, h - Glechometalia hederaceae, i - Alliarion , j - Convolvuletalia sepium , k - Senecion fluviatilis
a Cirsium arvense
+ . . . . . . + + + . . . . + + . . . + + + + + + + . .
a Urtica dioica
. . . . + . . . + . + . . + . . . . . . . . . . + + . .
a Artemisia vulgaris
. . . . + + . . + . + . . . . . . . . + . . . r . + . .
b Linaria vulgaris
. + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + + .
b Silene latifolia subsp. alba
. . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . + + + . . . . . . . . .
b Melandrium album
. . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . + + + . . . . . + . . .
c Picris hieracioides
. . . . . . . . + . + . . . . . . . . + . . . . . + + +
e Tanacetum vulgare
. + + . + 1 + + . + . . . . + . . . . . . . . + + . 1 +
f Arctium lappa
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . + . .
g Galium aparine
. + . + + . + + + . . + + + . + + + . . . + . . + . . .
g Rubus caesius
+ + . + + . . . . . . + . . . . + + + . . . . . . . . +
h Glechoma hederacea
+ . . . . . . . . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
h Geum urbanum
. + . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . + . . .
33
Explanations. x – types, genera and species of soils: M – alluvial soils (l – light, s – medium-heavy, c – heavy). A.p. – podzolic soils of weakly clayey sands, B.p. – brown leached soils
of weakly clayey sands, (x) – syntaxonomic plant group only with sporadic species, listed at the Table bottoms.
Gatunki sporadyczne (Sporadic species): II. b – Populus alba B 24/+. III. c – Ulmus glabra B 23/+, Crataegus monogyna B 28/+. IV. d – Acer negundo B 4/+. VI. a – Poa palustris 7/+. VII. b – Bidens tripartita 26/+. VIII. c – Juncus bufonius
2/+. IX. d – Peucedanum oreoselinum 4/+. X. a – Holcus lanatus 14/+, Ranunculus acer 20/+. X. b – Pimpinella major 22/+. X. c – Pastinaca sativa 7/+, Knautia arvensis 27/+. X. f – Selinum carvifolia 3/+. X. g – Filipendula ulmaria 14/+.
X. h – Scripus silvaticus 2/+. X. j – Rumex crispus 26/+. XII. a – Crepis tectorum 3/+, Thlaspi arvense 18/+. XII. b – Rhinanthus serotinus 7/+, Consolida regalis 15/+, Valerianella dentata 16/+. XII. c – Vicia tetrasperma 16/+. XII. e –
Pylogonum lapathifolium 7/+. XII. f – Veronica persica 16/1. XII. h – Sisymbrium loeselii 22/+. XIII. c – Oenothera biennis 12/+, Melilotus alba 17/+. XIII. d – Verbascum phlomoides 11/+. XIII. f – Rumex obtusifolius 12/+. XIII. g – Impatiens
glandulifera 12/+. XIII. i – Epilobium montanum 26/+. XIII. k – Saponaria officinalis 28/+. XVII. f – Trifolium medium 8/+. XVIII. Capsella bursa-pastoris 3/+, Parthenocissus quinquefolia 3/+, Eryngium planum 6/+, Sedum maximum 8/+,
Veronica chamaedrys 13/+, Lavatera thuringiaca 18/+, Sicyos angulata 21/+, Allium scorodoprassum 22/+. XIX. a. – Pohlia nutans 2/+. XX. b – Ceratodon purpureus 2/+. XXII. d – Polytrichum juniperinum 3/+.
i Torilis japonica
. . . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
j Calystegia sepium
. . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
k Cucubalus bacifer
. . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
k Solidago gigantea
. . + . . + . . + . + . . . . . . . . . . + + + . + . +
XIV. Ch: a - Alnetea glutinosae . XV. Ch: b - Querco-Fagetea, c- Fagetalia silvaticae . XVI. Ch: d - Epilobietea angustifolii . XVII. Ch: e - Trifolio Geranietea sanguinei , f - Trifolion medi (x).
a Lycopus europaeus
. . . . . . + . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . +
b Epipactis helleborine
. . . + . + + . . . . . . + . . . . . . + . . . . . . .
c Scrophularia nodosa
+ . . . + + + . . . . + . . . . . + . . . . . . + . . .
d Calamagrostis epigejos
. . + . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
e Vicia tenuifolia
. . . . + . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . .
e Galium verum
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . + . . . .
XVIII. Inne (others)
Humulus lupulus
+ . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Symphytum officinale
+ . . . + . . . . + + . . + . + . + . . + + . . + . . .
Euphorbia esula
+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . + . . + + . .
Hypericum perforatum
. + . . . . + . + . . . . . . . + + . . . . . . . . + +
Epilobium odoratum
. . + . . . + . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . .
Conyza canadensis
. . + . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . + .
Erigeron annuus
. . . . + . + . 2 . . + . . + . . . . . . . + + . + 2 +
Odontites rubra
. . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +
Helianthus tuberosus
. . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . .
D: Mszaki (Mosses)
XIX. Ch: a - Pohlio-Callunion (x). XX. Ch: b - Koelerio glaucae-Corynephoretalia canescens , Corynophoretalia canescentis (x) . XXI. Ch: c - Fagetalia silvaticae . XXII. d - inne (others).
c Atrichum undulatum
. + . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
d Oxyrrhynchium hians
. . + . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
d Amblystegia serpens
. . . + . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
d Bryum caespiticium
. + + . + . + . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . .
d Brachytheciastrum velutinum
. + + + . . + . . + . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . + . .
34
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
7.
8.
C
D
A, B
1.2.
+
+
.
+
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
x Gleba
x Soil
I. a – sadzone (cultivated). II. Ch: b – Salicion albae (x). III. Ch: c – Querco-Fagetea ,
d – Tilio platyphyli-Acerion pseudoplatani. IV. Ch: e - Rhamno-Prunetea , V. f - inne (others)
a Salix 'Cordata' 'Americana' B
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
c Fraxinus excelsior B
. + . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . .
d Cornus sanguinea B
. + + . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . .
e Crataegus monogyna B
. . . . . . . + . . . . . . . .
+ . . . . . .
f Betula pendula B
. . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . + . . + +
VI. Ch:a - Phragmitetea, Phragmitetalia (x), b - Magnocaricion (x). VII. Ch:c - Bidentetea tripartiti . VIII. Ch:d - Nardo-Callunetea
(x). IX Ch: e - Pohlio-Callunion . X. Ch: f - Calluno-Arctostaphylion (x). XI. Ch: g - Vicio lathyroidis - Potentilletum argenteae (x)
c Polygonum hydropiper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . + . . . .
e Agrostis capillaris
. . . . + . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
XII. Ch: a - Molinio-Arrhenatheretea , b - Arrhenatheretalia elatioris , c - Arrhenatherion elations , d - Molinietalia ,
e - Molinion caeruleae (x), f - Filipendulion. g - Calthion (x) , h - Plantaginetalia majoris , Polygonion avicularis (x),
i - Trifolio fragiferae-Agrostietalia stoloniferae
a Ranunculus acer
. . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a Prunella vulgaris
. . + . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
+
.
.
.
.
Cover of layer in %
A, B
6.
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
200
220
50
70
50
100
320
280
280
80
80
280
170
240
250
240
250
240
250
170
90
190
180
80
40
100
100
100
90
100
90
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
40
60
90
90
100
100
60
100
100
100
100
80
80
60
80
60
30
70
70
40
40
40
50
60
+
+
Numer zbiorowiska
Number of community
Numer zdjęcia
Number of record
Table 2. Phytosociological structure of monocultures of shrub willows in phytocenoses: 1 – groups with Salix cordata ’Americana’, in
subgroup: 1.2. – ruderal, in the communities: 1.2.6. – with Rubus caesius, 1.2.7. – with Solidago gigantea, 1.2.8. – with Tanacetum
vulgare. Explanations as in Table.1.
35
17
11
20
15
16
18
17
13
11
18
18
25
18
16
15
23
10
19
13
29
20
24
19
23
M.c
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.l
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.c
B.p
A.p
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.s
A.p
M.c
B.p
M.s
B.p
. . + . + . + + + + + . + . . . . . . + . . . .
a Vicia cracca
. . . . . + . . . . + . . . . . . . . . + . . .
a Phleum pratense
. . . . . + . . . . . . + + + . . . + . . . . +
a Festuca rubra
. . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . + . . . .
a Poa trivialis
. . . . . . . . + . . . 1 . . . . . . + . . . .
a Rumex acetosa
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + +
. . + . . . + . . + . . . . . + . . + . . . . .
. . . + . . . . . . . . + . . + + + . . . + . .
. . . . . + + . . + . + . . . + + + . . . . + .
b Daucus carota
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + + . +
c Gallium mollugo
. . + . . + . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
d Deschampsia caespitosa
+ . . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . . . + . . . .
d Angelica silvestris
. . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . + . . . + . . .
f Stachys palustris
+ + . . . . . . . . . . + + + + . . . + . . . +
f Geranium palustre
. . . + . + . . . + + . . . . . . . + . . . . .
f Valeriana officinalis
. . . . . + . . . . . . + . + . . + . . . . . .
i Ranunculus repens
+ + . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
i Potentilla reptans
. . . + . . . . . . . . + . . + . . . . . . . .
i Mentha arvensis
+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + .
i Carex hirta
. . . . . . . . . . + . . + . . . . . . . . . .
i Lysimachia nummularia
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . +
XIII. Ch: Agropyro intermedio-repentis
. + . . + . . + . . . . . . . + . . . + . + . .
Elymus repens
1 . + . . + . + 1 + . + 2 1 1 + . 1 1 + + + + +
Equisetum arvense
+ + + 2 + + + + 2 1 + + + + + 2 1 1 . + + 2 + 1
. . . 1 1 . . 1 1 . . . . . . . . . . + . + + .
Poa angustifolia
. . . . . . . . . . + + 1 + . . . . . . + . . .
XIV. Ch: a - Stellarietea mediae, b - Centauretalia cyani, c - Aphanenion arvensis (x), d - Caucalidion lappulae, e - Polygono-Chenopodietalia, f - Polygono-Chenopodion, g - Panico-Setarion
b Vicia villosa
. . + . + . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
a Anagalis arvensis
. . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + .
b Vicia sativa
. . + . + + . . . . . + . . . . . + . + . + . .
. . . . + + . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
e Euphorbia helioscopia
. . . + . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
e Chenopodium album
. . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . + . + . .
e Polygonum lapathifolium
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + . .
36
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
f Sonchus oleraceum
+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . .
f Oxalis stricta
+ . . + . . . . . . . + . . . . . . + . + + . .
f Chenopodium polyspermum
. . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . .
g Setaria glauca
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + + + . +
XV. Ch: a - Artemisietea vulgaris, b - Artemisienea vulgaris, c - Onopordetalia acanthii, d - Onopordion acanthii (x), e - Dauco-Melilotenion, f - Galio-Urticinea, g - Glechometalia hederaceae, h - Alliarion, i - Convolvuletalia sepium (x), j - Senecion fluviatilis (x)
. . . . + + + . . . . + . . . . + + 2 + + + + +
a Cirsium arvense
. . . . . . . . . + . . + + . + . . . + + . . .
a Urtica dioica
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + + . + . . . . .
b Linaria vulgaris
+ . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . .
b Picris hieracioides
. . . . . . . . . . . + . . . + . + . . . . + .
c Tanacetum vulgare
+ . + . . . + + . . . + . . + + . . . 1 1 2 3 4
c Oenothera biennis
. . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . + 1 . +
e Berteroa incana
. . . + . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . +
f Rubus caesius
2 2 5 4 5 4 1 1 . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . .
f Galium aparine
+ . . . . . . + . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . +
g Geum urbanum
. . . . . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . . . . . .
h Torilis japonica
+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . .
i Solidago gigantea
. . . . 2 3 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 4 2 2 3 1 2 2 1 + +
XVI. Ch: a - Querco-Fagetea (x), b - Fagetalia silvaticae . XVII. Ch: c - Epilobietea angustifolii . XVIII. Ch: d - Trifolio-Geranietea
sanguinei (x), e - Trifolion medi (x).
b Scrophularia nodosa
. . . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
c Calamagrostis epigejos
. . . . + . . . . + + + . . 2 . . . . . . + . +
c Gnaphalium silvaticum
. . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . + + .
XIX. Inne (others)
+ . + . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . .
Humulus lupulus
. + . + . + . . . + . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
Helianthus tuberosus
. . + . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Euphorbia esula
. . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . .
Erigeron annuus
. + . . . . + . + + + 2 . . . . + + . . + + + +
. . + . + . . . . . + . . . . + . . + . + + + +
. . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . +
Eryngium planum
Epilobium odoratum
. . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . + . . . . . .
Conyza canadensis
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + + + . +
37
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
+ +
+ .
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
+ +
+ .
. .
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+ . .
+ + .
. . +
. + .
Gatunki sporadyczne (Sporadic species): II. b – Populus alba B. 38/+. III. d – Ulmus glabra B 35/+. V. f – Acer negundo B 47/+. V. f – Quercus robur B 52/+. VI. a – Phragmites australis 41/+. VI. b – Carex gracilis 39/+. VIII. d – Hieracium
pilosella 52/+. X. e – Peucedanum oreoselinum 49/+. XI. g – Dianthus deltoids 39/+. XII. a – Festuca pratensis 41/+, Holcus lanatus 42/+, Alopecurus pratensis 46/+, Trifolium pretense 49/+. XII. b – Arrhenatherum elatius 41/+, Lotus
corniculatus 51/+. XII. c – Pastinaca sativa 32/+, Campanula patula 37/+. XII. d – Equisetum palustre 44/+. XII. e – Selinum carvifolia 39/f. XII. f – Hypericum tetrapterum 31/+, Lisymachia vulgaris 40/+. XII. g – Myosotis scorpioides 44/+.
XII. h – Poa annua 42/+. XIV. a – Galeopsis tetrahit 48/+, Matricaria perfoliata 48/+, Lapsana communis 48/+. XIV. b – Rhinanthus serotina 31/+, Centaurea cyanus 50/+, Avena fatua 48/+. XIV. c –Vicia tetrasperma 31/+. XIV. e – Sonchus
asper 35/+, Atriplex patula 42/+, Echinochloa crus-galli 48/+. XIV. f –– Fumaria officinalis 29/+, Veronica parsica 36/+. XIV. g – Setaria viridis 29/+. XV. b – Silene latifolia ssp. alba 32/+. XV. d – Verbascum phlomides 39/+. XV. g – Glechoma
hederacea 30/+, Anthriscus silvestris 33/+, Chaerophyllum aromaticum 37/+. XV. i – Calystegia sepium 44/+. XV. j – Cucubalus ba ccifer 44/+. XVI. a – Epipactis helleborine 43/+. XVIII. d – Vicia tenuifolia 43/+, Rubus idaeus 43/+. XVIII.
e – Vicia sepium 35/+. XIX. Fragaria ananassa 43/+. XXI. b – Bryum caespiticium 46/+.
D: Mszaki (Mosses)
XX. Ch: a - Fagetalia silvaticae . XXI. b - inne (others)
a Atrichum undulatum
.
b Brachytheciastrum velutinum
.
b Amblystegia serpens
.
b Oxyrrhynchium hians
.
38
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
39
Table 3. Phytosociological structure of monocultures of shrub willows in phytocenoses: 1 – groups
with Salix cordata ‘Americana’, in subgroup: 1.3 – underdeveloped (non typical), in communities
1.3.9 – typical. Explanations as in Table1.
+
+
.
.
C
D
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
A, B
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
A, B
170
220
180
70
185
220
200
250
60
260
80
70
90
180
210
60
200
200
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
9.
30
40
20
30
50
20
30
40
30
30
20
30
30
20
40
20
20
10
Cover of layer in %
1.3.
+
+
+
+
+
.
+
Numer zbiorowiska
Number of community
Numer zdjęcia
Number of record
M.c
M.l
M.s
M.c
A.p
M.s
M.c
M.l
M.s
M.s
A.p
M.c
M.c
M.c
M.c
M.s
M.s
M.c
28
18
23
17
27
19
29
27
23
16
16
18
25
14
14
14
15
8
x Gleba
x Soil
I. a – sadzone (cultivated). II. Ch: b – Tilio platyphyli-Acerion pseudoplatani (x). III. Ch: c – Rham
Prunetea (x). IV. d – inne (others)
a Salix cordata ,Americana' B
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
d Betula pendula B
+ . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . .
V. Ch: a - Bidentetea tripartiti. VI. Ch: b - Nardo-Callunetea (x).
a Polygonum hydropiper
. . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . + .
VII. Ch: a - Molinio-Arrhenatheretea ,
b - Arrhenatheretalia elatioris ,
c - Arrhenatherion elatioris .
d - Cynosurion (x), e - Molinietalia, f - Filipendulion,
g - Calthion, h - Plantaginetalia majoris,
Polygonion avicularis, i - Trifolio fragiferae-Agrostietalia stoloniferae.
a Vicia cracca
+ . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a Poa trivialis
+ . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . .
a Rumex acetosa
. + . . . + . + . . + + . . . . . .
. . . . + . + . . . . + . . . . . .
a Phleum pratense
. . . + . . + . . + . . . . + . . .
a Holcus lanatus
. . . . . . . . . + + . . + + + . .
. . 2 . + . + . + + . + . + . . . +
. . + . . + . . . . . + + . . . . +
. . . + + + . + . + . . + . .
+ .
c Pastinaca sativa
. . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . . .
c Gallium mollugo
. . . . . . . + . . . . . + . + . .
e Deschampsia caespitosa
+ . + . . . + . + + . . . . . + . .
f Lysimachia vulgaris
2 . + . . . + + + . . . . + + + . .
f Stachys palustris
. . + + + . + + . + . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . + . . . . . . + . . . .
g Juncus effusus
. + . . . . . + . . + . . . . . . .
h Plantago major
. . + + + . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i Mentha arvensis
+ . . . . . + + + + . . . . . . . .
i Carex hirta
+ . . . . . + . . . . . . . + . . .
i Rorippa silvestris
. . + . 1 + . + . . + + . . . . . .
i Potentilla reptans
. . 1 . . . . + . . . + . . . + . .
i Ranunculus repens
. 2 + . + . . + . . . + . . . . . +
. . . . + . . + . . . . . . . . . .
VIII. Ch: Agropyro intermedio-repentis
+ + . . . + . + . . . . . + . . . .
. . + + . . + . + . . . . . . . . .
Elymus repens
+ + . + + . + . . 1 . + + + + + . .
Equisetum arvense
. + + . + . + + + 1 1 + . + . . + 1
40
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
IX. Ch: a - Stellarietea mediae. b - Centauretalia cyani , c - Aperion spica-venti (x), d - Caucalidion
lappulae. e - Polygono-Chenopodietalia, f - Polygono-Chenopodion , g - Panico-Setarion
a Galeopsis tetrahit
+ . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a Matricaria perfoliata
. . . . + . . . . . . . + + . . . .
b Vicia sativa
+ . . . . . . + . . . . . . + . . .
b Vicia villosa
+ + 2 2 . + + . + . . + + . . + . .
. . . + . . . . . + . . . . . . . .
e Chenopodium album
. . . . + + . . . . . + . . . . + .
f Oxalis stricta
+ . . . . + . + + . + + + . . . + .
f Sonchus oleraceus
. . + . . . . . . . . . + . . . . .
g Setaria glauca
. . . . . . . . . + . . . . + . . +
X. Ch: a - Artemisietea vulgaris, b - Artemisienea vulgaris, c - Onopordetalia acanthii, d - DaucoMelilotenion, e - Galio-Urticinea , f - Glechometalia hederaceae, g - Alliarion, h - Senecion fluviatilis
a Cirsium arvense
. . + . + . + + + + . + . . . . . .
. . . . . . + . + . . . . . . . . .
b Linaria vulgaris
. . + . + . . + . . . . . . . . + .
. . + . + . . . + . . . . . . . . .
c Oenothera biennis
. . . + . . . . . . . . . . + . . .
c Melilotus alba
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + +
d Tanacetum vulgare
+ + . . . + . . . . + . + . + . . .
e Rubus caesius
+ + . . . . . . + . . . . . + . . .
e Galium aparine
. . + + . . . . + . . . . . . . + .
f Geum urbanum
+ . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . .
f Glechoma hederacea
. . . . 2 1 . . . . . + + . . . . .
g Torilis japonica
+ . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
h Solidago gigantea
. . . . . + . . + . . + + + . . . .
XI. Ch: a - Alnetea glutinosae (x). XII. Ch: b - Querco-Fagetea (x), c - Fagetalia silvaticae (x). XIII.
Ch: d - Epilobietea angustifolii. XIV. e - Trifolio-Geranietea sanguinei , f - Trifolion medi
b Epipactis helleborine
+ . . . . . + . + . . . . . . . . +
c Scrophularia nodosa
+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + .
d Calamagrostis epigejos
+ + . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . .
e Vicia tenuifolia
. . . + . . . . . . + . . . . . . .
f Trifolium medium
. . . . . . + + . . . . . . . . . .
f Vicia sepium
. . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . + .
XV. Inne (others)
Betonica officinalis
+
+
Epilobium odoratum
. + . . . + . . + . . . . . . . . .
Erigeron annuus
+ . . + . + . . . . . . + . . . . .
. . + . + . . + . + . . + . . . . .
Eryngium planum
. + . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . .
Euphorbia esula
+ . . . + . + + . . . . + . . + . .
+ + . + + . . . . . + . + . . . + .
Conyza canadensis
. . . . + . + . . . . . . . . . + .
D: Mszaki (Mosses)
XVI. Ch: a - Plantaginetalia majoris , Polygonion avicularis (x). XVII. Ch: b - Koelerio glaucaeCorynephoretalia canescentis, Corynephoretalia canescentis (x). XVIII. Ch: c - Fagetalia silvaticae (x)
XIX. Ch: d - inne (others)
+ . + . . . + + . . . . . . . . . .
. + + . . . . + . . . . + . + . . .
d Bryum caespiticium
+ + + + + . + . . . . . . . . + . .
Gatunki sporadyczne (Sporadic species): II. b – Cornus sanguinea B 64/+. III. c – Crataegus monogyna B 68/+. VI. b – Luzula campestris 63/+. VII. a – Alopecurus
pratensis 59/+, Centaurea jacea 59/+, Plantago lanceolata 60/+, Poa pratensis 61/+, Prunela vulgaris 65/+. VII. b – Daucus carota 59/+, Arrhenatherum elatius 66/
+, Leucanthemum vulgare 68/+. VII. d – Trifolium repens 55/+. VII. e – Dactylis glomerata 54/+. VII. f – Hypericum tetrapterum 64/+. VII. g – Scirpus silvaticus 54/
+, Myosotis scorpioides 61/+. VII. i – PotentiIIa anserina 53/+, Rumex crispus 62/+. VIII. Poa angustifolia 59/+. IX. a – Thlaspi arvense 58/+, Sinapsis arvensis 61/
+, Spergula arvensis 63/+, Stellaria media 63/+, Viola arvensis 63/+, Lapsana communis 66/+, Crepis tectorum 65/+. IX. b – Rhinanthus serotinus 59/+, Bromus
secalinus 65/+. IX. c – Scleranthus annuus 63/+, Sonchus arvensis 66/+. IX. e – Polygonum lapathifolium 57/+, Echinochloa crus-galii 61/+. IX. f – Veronica persica
58/+. X. a – Urtica dioica 58/+. XI. a – Lycopus europaeus 56/+. XIV. f – Agrimonia eupatoria 68/+. XV. Polygonum persicaria 57/+, Listera ovata 58/+, Vicia
grandiflora 58/+, Senecio jacobaea 60/+, Veronica chamaedrys 62/+, Stellaria graminea 65/+, Amaranthus retroflexus 69/+, Helianthus tuberosus 69/+. XVI. a –
Bryum argenteum 65/+. XVII. b – Brachythecium albicans 65/+, Ceratodon purpureus 65/+. XVIII. c – Atrichum undulatum 67/+. XIX. d – Fissidens taxifolius 60/+,
Polytrichum juniperinum 65/+.
N
N
N
N
M
w
M
P
C
L
N
x
S
A
I
C
I
V
V
e
f
41
Table 4. Phytosociological structure of monocultures of shrub willows in phytocenoses: 2 –
groups with Salix viminalis, in subgroup: 2.1 – segetal-meadow, in communities: 2.1.1. – with
Echinochloa crus-gali and Setaria glaca, 2.1.2. – with Deschampsia caespitosa, 2.1.3. – with
Elymus repens, 2.1.4. – with Equisetum arvense. Explanations as in Table 1.
2.1.
93
92
100
100
50
50
250
91
100
90
400
100
100
40
40
400
89
90
88
100
90
350
280
100
100
40
50
350
86
87
85
100
50
400
500
84
100
90
250
100
100
50
60
350
82
83
100
100
50
90
300
360
80
81
79
100
100
280
230
100
100
100
70
60
100
270
76
77
78
75
100
50
350
240
280
100
C
50
450
100
100
100
260
250
450
4.
A, B
.
.
+
.
.
18
19
17
25
26
18
12
15
13
9
M.s
M.s
M.s
M.c
M.s
M.c
M.c
M.s
M.s
M.s
.
29
26
+ +
M.s
M.s
.
20
32
+ +
29
.
A.p
M.c
+ + +
A.p
.
20
23
28
+ +
M.s
M.s
M.c
.
19
x
+
31
.
20
18
22
.
B.p
.
M.s
D
x Gleba
Soil
3.
60
90
90
Cover of layer in %
A, B
M.s
M.c
B.p
Maks. wysokość warstwy
w cm
71
72
73
Numer zdjęcia
Number of record
2.
74
1.
240
Numer zbiorowiska
Number of community
I. a – sadzone (cultivated). II. Ch: b – Tilio platyphyli-Acerion pseudoplatani (x). III. Ch: c – Rhamno-Prunetea
a Salix viminalis B
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
c Cornus sanguinea B
. . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . . . .
c Crataegus monogyna B
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + .
IV. Ch: a – Phragmitetea, Phragmitetalia, b – Magnocaricion. V – Ch: c – Bidentetea tripartiti (x).
VI. Ch: d – Pohlio-Callunetum (x)
a Rumex hydrolapathum
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + . . . . .
b Poa palustris
. + . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
VII. Ch: a – Molinio-Arrhenatheretalia, b – Arrhenatheretalia elatioris, c – Arrhenatherion elatioris, d – Cynosurion,
e – Molinietalia, f – Filipendulion, g – Calthion, h – Plantaginetalia majoris, Polygonion avicularis, i – Trifolio
fragiferae-Agrostietalia stoloniferae, Agropyro-Rumicion crispi
a Poa pratensis
. . . + . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a Festuca rubra
. . . . + . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. + + . . + . . + . . + + . . . . . . . . . .
a Festuca pratensis
. + . . . + . 1 1 + . + . . . . . . + . . . .
a Alopecurus pratensis
. 1 . . 1 + + 2 1 + . + . . + . . . . . . . .
a Holcus lanatus
. . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . .
a Vicia cracca
. . . + . . . . + . . + . + . . . . . . . + .
a Phleum pratense
. . + + + + 1 1 2 1 1 + + + . + . . + . . . +
a Prunella vulgaris
. . . + . . . . . . . + . . + . . . . . . . .
. . + + + . + + + + + + + . + + + + . . + . .
b Pimpinella major
. . . + . . . . . . . . . . + . + . . . . . .
. . . . . + . . . . . . + + . . . + . . . + .
. . . . . . . . . . + + . . . + + . + . . . .
b Armoracia rusticana
. . . . . . . . . . . . + . + + . . . . . . .
c Galium mollugo
. + + + + + . . + + + . . . . . . . . . . . .
c Campanula patula
. . . + . . + + . + . . . . . . + + . . . . .
d Cynosurus cristatus
. . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . + . . .
e Deschampsia cespitosa
+ 5 5 3 2 3 3 + + + . . . . . + + . . . . . .
e Equisetum palustre
. . . + . . + . . . . . . + . . . . . + . . .
e Dactylis glomerata
. . . . . + . + . . . + . . . . . . + . . . .
f Lysimachia vulgaris
. + . . . . + + + . . . . . . . + . . . . . .
f Stachys palustris
+ . + . . . + + . . . . + . . . . + . . . . .
42
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
f Geranium palustre
. . . . . . . . . . + + . . . . . . + . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + + . . . . .
g Myosotis scorpioides
. . . . + . . + + . . . . . . . . + . . . . .
h Plantago major
+ . . . . . . + . . + . . . . . + + . . . . .
i Carex hirta
. + + + . + . . . + . . . . . . . . + . . . .
. . + + . . + . . + . + . + . . 2 + + . . . .
i Rorippa sylvestris
. . . . . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i Ranunculus repens
. . . . . . + . + . . + + . + . + 1 . . + . .
i Mentha arvensis
. . . . . . . . + . . + . . . . . + . . . . .
VIII. Ch: Agropyro intermedio-repentis
+ . . . . . . . . + + . . . + . . + . . + . +
Elymus repens
. 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 + + + + + + 1
Equisetum arvense
. + + + . . + . 1 2 2 2 4 5 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3
Poa angustifolia
. . . + 1 . . . . + . . + . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . + . . . + . . . 1 + . . . . . + . . .
IX. Ch: a – Stellarietea mediae, b – Centauretalia cyani, c – Caucalidion lappulae (x), d – Polygono-Chenopodietalia, e – Polygono-Chenopodion, f – Panico-Setarion, g – Sisymbrietalia, Sisymbrion (x)
a Matricaria perforata
+ . . . . . . + . . + . + . . . . . . . . . .
a Galeopsis
. + + . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
b Vicia sativa
. . . . + . . . . + . + . . + + . . . . . + .
b Vicia villosa
. . . . . . . . . . + . + . . . . . . . . . .
d Echinochloa crus-galli
2 . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . .
d Polygonum lapathifolium
+ . . + . . . . . . + . + . + . . . . . . . .
e Oxalis stricta
+ . + + . . . + + . . . . + . . . + . . . . .
e Chenopodium
+ . . + . . . . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . +
polyspermum
f Setaria glauca
2 . + . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . + . . . .
X. Ch: a – Artemisietea vulgaris, b – Artemisienea vulgaris (x), c – Onopordetalia acanthii, d – Onopordion
acanthii (x), e – Dauco-Melilotenion, f – Artemisietalia vulgaris (x), g – Galio-Urticinea, h – Glechometalia
hederaceae, i – Alliarion, j – Convolvuletalia sepium, k – Senecion fluviatilis
a Cirsium arvense
+ + + + + + + + + . + . + + . . . + . + + . .
a Urtica dioica
+ . . + . . . + . . . . . . . + . . + . . . +
. . . + . . . . + . . + . + + + . . . . . + .
. . . . . . . + . . + + . . . . . + . . . . .
e Tanacetum vulgare
. + . . + . + + + . . + + + . . + + . . + + .
g Rubus caesius
. . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . .
g Galium aparine
. . . . + . . . . + . . + . . . . . + 1 . . .
h Glechoma hederacea
. . . . . . . + . + . 2 . . . . + . + . . . .
i Torilis japonica
. + . . . . . . . . . + . . + . + . . . . . .
j Calystegia sepium
+ . . . . + . . . . + + . . . . . . . . . . .
k Solidago gigantea
+ 1 1 1 1 + + + + + + + + + 1 1 . + . . 1 1 .
k Cucubalus baccifer
. . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . + . .
XI. Ch: a – Querco-Fagetea, b – Fagetalia silvaticae. XII. Ch: c – Epilobietea angustifolii. XIII. Ch: d – Trifolion medi
a Epipactis helleborine
. . . . . . + . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. + . . . + . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
c Calamagrostis epigejos
. + + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . .
d Trifolium medium
. . + . + . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . .
d Vicia sepium
. . . . + . . . . . . + . . + + + . . . . + .
XIV. Inne (others)
Conyza canadensis
+ . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . + . . . . .
Veronica chamaedrys
. . + + . . + . + . . . . . . . + . . . . . .
Erigeron annuus
+ . + + . . . + + . . + . + . . + . . . . + .
Epilobium adnatum
. . + . . + . + . . + . . . + + . + . . + . .
. . . + . . . . . . . . + . . . + . + . . . .
. . + . . . . . . + + . . + . . . + . . . + .
D. Mszaki (Mosses)
XV. Ch: a – Koelerio glaucae-Corynephoretalia canescentis, Corynephoretalia canescentis (x).
XVI. Ch: b – Fagetalia silvaticae. XVII. c – inne (others)
b Atrichum undulatum
. . . . . + . . + . + + + . . + . . + . + . .
c Brachytheciastrum
. . . . . . . . . . . + + . . . . . . . . . .
velutinum
c Oxyrrhynchium hians
. . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . + . .
Gatunki sporadyczne (Sporadic species): II. b – Acer pseudoplatanus B 87/+. IV. b – Scutellaria galericulata 81/+. V. c – Bidens tripartita 81/+, Polygonum
hydropiper 85/+. VI. d – Agrostis capillaris 91/+. VII. a – Plantago lanceolata 71/+, Centaurea jacea 74/+. VII. d – Trifolium repens 81/+. VII. e – Angelica silvestris
76/+, Sanguisorba officinalis 76/+, Lychnis flos-cuculi 77/+. VII. f – Filipendula ulmaria 77/+. VII. g – Scirpus silvaticus 76/+. VII. h – Poa annua 81/+. VII. i – Rumex
crispus 78/+. IX. a – Stellaria media 90/+, Thlaspi arvense 93/+. IX. b – Centaurea cyanus 78/+, Avena fatua 90/+. IX. c – Aethusa cynapium 87/+. IX. d –
Chenopodium album 81/+. IX. e – Sonchus oleraceus 89/+. IX. g – Tussilago farfara 77/+. X. b – Melandrium album 74/+, Silene latifolia ssp. alba 93/+. X. c –
Oenothera biennis 83/+. X. d – Verbascum phlomoides 83/+. X. f – Arctium lappa 74/+. X. h –Anthriscus silvestris 74/+. XI. a – Aegopodium podagraria 71/2. XII. c
– Gnaphalium silvaticum 88/+. XIII. d – Agrimonia eupatoria 81/+. XIV. Amaranthus retroflexus 71/+, Equisetum silvaticum 79/+, PotentiIIa argentea 84/+, Humulus
lupulus 87/+. XV. a – Ceratodon purpureus 88/+. XVII. c – Bryum caespiticium 85/+, Fissidens bryoides 86/+, Tortula truncata 88/+, Barbula unguiculata 90/+.
43
Table 5. Phytosociological structure of monocultures of shrub willows in phytocenoses: 2 –
groups with Salix viminalis, in subgroup: 2.2. – ruderal, in communities: 2.1.5. – with Rubus
caesius, 2.1.6. – with Solidago gigantea. Explanations as in Table 1.
Numer zbiorowiska
Number of community
Numer zdjęcia
Number of record
Maks. wysokość warstwy
w cm
Cover of layer in %
2.2.
5.
94
95
6.
96
97
98
99
100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108
A, B 280 560 360 500 500 300 350 250 300 600 450 260 320 350 260
A, B 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
C
80 90 90 90 100 100 100 100 90 90 60 30 70 40 40
D
+
+
+
+
+
.
+
.
+
+
+
+
.
+
+
25 10 16 13
8
13 15 18 17 17 16 15 24 15 25
x Gleba
M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s M.s
x Soil
I. a – sadzone (cultivated). II. Ch: b – Rhamno-Prunetea
a Salix viminalis B
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
b Cornus sanguinea B
.
+
.
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
+
.
C: Rośliny zielne (Herbaceous plants
III. Ch: Pohlio-Callunetea
Agrostis capillaris
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
IV. Ch: a – Molinio-Arrhenatheretea, b – Arrhenatheretalia majoris, c – Arrhenatherion elatioris, d – Molinietalia (x),
e – Filipendulion, f – Plantaginetalia majoris, Polygonion avicularis (x), g – Trifolio fragiferae-Agrostietalia stoloniferae, Agropyro-Rumicion crispi
a Alopecurus pratensis
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
a Prunella vulgaris
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
+
+
+
+
+
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
b Leucanthemum vulgare
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
+
.
c Galium mollugo
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
+
e Stachys palustris
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
+
e Valeriana officinalis
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
g Ranunculus repens
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
+
.
.
V. Ch: Agropyro intermedio-repentis
Elymus repens
2
.
.
.
.
1
.
.
2
2
+
.
.
.
.
Equisetum arvense
1
1
+
+
+
+
+
2
+
+
+
+
1
+
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
3
2
.
.
.
.
1
+
.
Poa angustifolia
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
VI. Ch: a – Centauretalia cyani, b – Aphanerion arvensis (x), c – Caucalidion lappulae, d – Polygono-Chenopodietalia (x), e – Polygono-Chenopodion, f – Panico-Setarion (x)
a Vicia sativa
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
a Vicia villosa
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
c Lathyrus tuberosus
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
e Oxalis stricta
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
+
.
+
+
+
VII. Ch: a – Artemisietea vulgaris, b – Artemisienea vulgaris, c – Onopordetalia acanthii, d – Dauco-Melilotenion,
e – Galio-Urticinea, f – Glechometalia hederaceae, g – Alliarion, h – Convolvuletalia sepium, i – Senecion fluviatilis
.
+
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
+
.
1
+
.
.
a Urtica dioica
.
.
1
.
+
.
.
.
+
+
2
+
.
+
+
a Cirsium arvense
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
+
+
.
.
b Silene latifolia ssp. alba
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
b Melandrium album
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
d Tanacetum vulgare
+
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
+
+
.
+
.
+
+
e Rubus caesius
4
5
5
4
1
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
e Galium aparine
.
+
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
+
.
44
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
f Geum urbanum
.
+
+
.
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
+
+
.
f Glechoma hederacea
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
.
.
g Torilis japonica
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
h Calystegia sepium
.
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
2
.
.
.
.
i Solidago gigantea
+
2
3
3
5
5
5
4
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
VIII. Ch: a – Querco-Fagetea, b – Fagetalia silvaticae. IX. Ch: c – Epilobietea angustifolii (x). X. Ch: d – Trifolion medii
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
d Vicia sepium
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
XI. Inne (others)
Erigeron annuus
+
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
+
+
+
.
Fragaria ananassa
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
Humulus lupulus
.
.
1
.
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
.
.
.
.
+
D. Mszaki (Mosses)
XII. Ch: a – Molinietalia (x). XIII. Ch: b – Fagetalia silvaticae, c – Alno-Ulmion. XIV. d – inne (others)
b Atrichum undulatum
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
c Plagiomnium undulatum
+
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
d Fissidens taxifolius
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
d Amblystegium serpens
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
+
+
Gatunki sporadyczne (Sporadic species): II. b – Crataegus monogyna B 106/+. IV. a – Festuca pratensis 94/+, F.
rubra 94/+, Vicia cracca 94/+, Holcus lanatus 99/+, Poa pratensis 102/+, Phleum pratense 103/+, Lathyrus pratensis
106/+. IV. b – Armoracia rusticana 102/+, Pimpinella major 108/+. IV. d – Cirsium palustre 105/+, Deschampsia
caespitosa 108/+. IV. f – Plantago major 108/+. IV. g – Mentha arvensis 94/+, PotentiIIa anserina 94/+, P. reptans 104/
+, Agrostis stolonifera 100/+, Lysimachia nummularia 101/1. V. Fallopia convolvulus 104/+. VI. b – Vicia tetrasperma
97/+. VI. d – Polygonum lapathifolium 108/+. VI. f – Setaria glauca 94/+. VII. b – Linaria vulgaris 94/+, VII. c – Melilotus
alba 100/+. VII. i – Saponaria officinalis 106/+. IX. c – Rubus idaeus 94/+, Calamagrostis epigejos 101/1. X. d –
Trifolium medium 94/+. XI. Echinocystis lobata 99/+, PotentiIIa argentea 99/+, Epilobium adnatum 102/+, Listera
ovata 108/+. XII. a – Climacium dendroides 108/+. XIII. b – Eurchynchium striatum 97/+, XIV. d – Weissia brachycarpa
98/+, Barbula unguiculata 102/+, Fissidens bryoides 108/+, Plagiomnium cuspidatum 108/+.
Table 6. Phytosociological structure of monocultures of shrub willows in phytocenoses: 2 – groups
with Salix viminalis, in subgroup: 2.3. – underdeveloped (non-typical) in communities 2.3.7. –
typical. Explanations as in Table 1.
Numer zbiorowiska
Number of community
Numer zdjęcia
Number of record
2.3.
7.
109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120
A, B 240 650 240 250 60 250 320 350 600 350 80 270
Pokrycie warstwy w %:
Cover of layer in %:
A, B 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
C
30 50 50 60 40 20 20 60 30 20 30 10
D
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
.
27 23 26 24
x Gleba
M.l M.s M.c B.p
x Soil
I. a - sadzone (cultivated). II. Ch: b - Tilio platyphyli-Acerion
Prunetea (x)
a Salix viminalis B
5
5
5
5
25
25
15
15
17
12
11
15
M.s M.c M.s M.s M.c M.s M.c A.p
pseudoplatani
5
5
5
(x), III. Ch: c - Rhamno
5
5
5
5
5
45
IV. Ch: a - Magnocaricion . V- Ch: b - Bidentetea tripartiti
a Poa palustris
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
b Polygonum hydropiper
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
VI. Ch: a - Molinio-Arrhenatheretalia , b - Arrhenatheretalia elatioris , c - Arrhenatherion elatioris ,
d - Molinietalia (x), e - Molinion (x), f - Filipendulion , g - Calthion , h - Plantaginetalia majoris
Polygonion avicularis (x), i - Trifolio fragiferae-Agrostietalia stoloniferae , Agropyro-Rumicion crispi
a Prunella vulgaris
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
b Daucus carota
.
+
+
+
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
+
+
.
.
+
+
1
+
.
.
.
.
+
+
+
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
+
.
.
c Galium mollugo
+
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
d Deschampsia cespitosa
.
.
+
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
f Stachys palustris
+
+
+
+
.
+
+
+
+
.
.
+
g Myosotis scorpioides
.
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
i Ranunculus repens
+
+
+
+
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
VII. Ch: Agropyro intermedio-repentis
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
1
+
.
.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Equisetum arvense
.
+
.
.
1
+
.
1
+
+
+
.
Elymus repens
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
.
+
+
.
VIII. Ch: a - Stellarietea mediae , b - Centauretalia cyani , c - Aphaneion arvensis (x), d - Polygon
Chenopodietalia , e - Polygono-Chenopodion , f - Panico-Setarion (x)
a Stellaria media
.
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
b Vicia villosa
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
b Vicia sativa
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
d Polygonum lapathifolium
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
d Echinochloa crus-galli
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
d Chenopodium album
+
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
+
e Chenopodium polyspermum
+
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
e Sonchus oleraceus
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
e Oxalis stricta
+
.
.
1
.
.
+
.
.
+
+
.
f Galinsoga parviflora
+
.
+
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
+
IX. Ch: a - Artemisietea vulgaris , b - Artemisienea vulgaris (x), c - Onopordetalia acanthii , d - Dauco Melilotenion , e - Galio-Urticinea , f - Glechometalia hederaceae , g - Alliarion (x), h - Convolvuletalia
sepium , i - Senecion fluviatilis
a Cirsium arvense
+
+
+
+
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
.
+
+
.
.
.
d Tanacetum vulgare
+
.
.
+
+
.
+
+
.
.
.
+
e Rubus caesius
+
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
+
e Galium aparine
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
f Geum urbanum
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
h Calystegia sepium
+
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
.
.
.
i Solidago gigantea
+
+
+
.
.
.
+
.
+
+
.
.
X. Ch: a - Querco-Fagetea , b - Fagetalia silvaticae . XI. Ch: c - Epilobietea angustifolii (x). XII. Ch: d Trifolion medi
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
+
d Vicia sepium
.
.
.
.
+
.
+
+
+
.
.
+
46
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
p
XIII. Inne (others)
Erigeron annuus
+
+
Epilobium adnatum
.
+
Conyza canadensis
.
.
.
.
D: Mszaki (Mosses)
XIV. Ch: a - Molinietalia (x). XV. Ch: b - Fagetalia
(others)
.
+
+
+
+
.
+
+
+
.
+
+
.
+
.
.
.
.
+
+
.
.
.
+
+
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
silvaticae (x), c - Alno-Ulmion
(x), XVI. d - inne
.
+
.
+
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Gatunki sporadyczne (Sporadic species): II. b – Ulmus glabra B 110/+. III. c – Cornus sanguinea B 119/+. VI. a –
Phleum pratense 111/+, Festuca rubra 113/+, F. pratensis 114/+, Lathyrus pratensis 113/+, Vicia cracca 113/+. VI. b –
Lotus corniculatus 111/+, Pimpinella major 111/+. VI. c – Knautia arvensis 110/+, Trifolium pratense 112/+, Campanula
patula 116/+, Tragopogon pratensis 117/+. VI. d – Equisetum palustre 109/+. VI. e – Selinum carvifolia 116/+. VI. f –
Geranium palustre 110/+, Lisymachia vulgaris 120/+. VI. h – Plantago major 112/+, Poa annua 120/+. VI. i – Carex
hirta 109/+, Mentha arvensis 109/+, PotentiIIa anserina 109/+, Rorippa sylvestris 109/+, PotentiIIa reptans 110/+. VIII.
a – Galeopsis tetrahit 111/+, Lapsana communis 112/+, Matricaria perforata 112/+, Polygonum aviculare 112/+, Crepis
tectorum 117/+. VIII. c – Vicia tetrasperma 113/+. VIII. d – Sonchus arvensis 112/+. VIII. e – Sonchus asper 112/+,
Galinsoga hirta 114/+. VIII. f – Setaria glauca 114/+. IX. b – Melandrium album 113/+, Silene latifolia ssp. alba 113/+,
Linaria vulgaris 112/+. IX. c – Melilotus alba 113/+. IX. d – Erysimum cheiranthoides 112/+. IX. f – Glechoma hederacea
110/+. IX. g – Epilobium montanum 111/+, Torillis japonica 113/+. XI. c – Gnaphalium silvaticum 112/+, Calamagrostis
epigejos 120/+. XIII. Symphytum officinale 109/+, Euphorbia virgultosa 111/+, Lactuca serriola 111/+, Stellaria graminea
111/+, Senecio jacobaea 113/+, Capsella bursa-pastoris 114/+, Humulus lupulus 117/+, Amaranthus retroflexus 118/
+, Helianthus tuberosus 120/+. XIV. a – Climacium dendroides 113/+. XV. b – Eurhynchium striatum 114/+. XV. c –
Plagiomnium undulatum 115/+. XVI. d – Fissidens taxifolius 110/+, Oxyrrhynchium hians 116/+.
with Equisetum arvense, with Rubus caesius and with Solidago gigantea. However,
separate community are characteristic only of monocultures with Salix cordata
‘Americana’. These are: with Echinochloa crus-galli and Setaria glauca, with
Juncus effusus and with Tanacetum vulgare. Most of these communities,
characterized by dominant and co-dominant plants, show a comparatively high
resemblance to the known, common segetal communities (with Echinochloa crusgalli and Setaria glaca), meadow-pasture communities (with Agropyron repens,
with Deschampsia caespitosa), ruderal ones (with Solidago gigantea, with
Tanacetum vulgare), or to wet habitats (with Juncus bufonius). The communities
with Geranium palustre and with Equisetum arvense represent a certain
phytosociological singularity. In the studied area they are the most characteristic
community of the willow monocultures investigated.
The studied phytocenoses consist of plants characteristic of different units of
18 classes and a group of plants with an indeterminate phytosociological status
(Tables 1–6). Taking into consideration the coefficient of the so-called group
value of specific syntaxonomic plant groups, the comparatively greatest percentage
goes to plants of the following classes: Agropyretea intermedio-repentis, MolinioArrhenatheretea, Artemisietea vulgaris, then to those of the species group with
an indeterminate phytosociological status (so-called miscellaneous) and of the
class Stellarietea mediae. Taking into account the highest coefficients of group
value of plants in their specific taxonomic groups, it should be observed that:
47
a) All the phytocenoses investigated represent the developing, heterogeneous
floristic communities of an intermediate character, mainly between phytocenoses
of classes Molinio-Arrhenatheretea and Agropyretea intermedio repentis.
b) The main direction of their natural succession runs from meadow-field
communities to ruderal herbaceous communities.
c) The properties comparatively closest to the intermediate plants between
classes Agropyretea intermedio-repentis and Molinio-Arrhenatheretea are exhibited
by communities in segetal-meadow subgroups.
d) The properties comparatively closest to the intermediate plants between
classes Agropyretea intermedio-repentis and Artemisietea vulgaris are exhibited
by communities in ruderal subgroups.
e) The properties comparatively closest to the intermediate plants and between
classes Molinio-Arrhenetheretea, Agropyretea intermedio-repentis and Artemisietea
vulgaris are exhibited by communities in underdeveloped (non-typical) subgroups.
f) ‘Ruderal’ properties are especially distinctly exhibited by the ruderal
subgroup in monocultures with Salix viminalis.
g) For undefined natural or artificial reasons, in the two main community
groups there occurs a very high simplification of the cover of herbaceous plants.
Table 7. Distribution of classes of species stability in monocultures of shrub willows in phytocenoses:
1. groups with Salix cordata ‘Americana’, in subgroups: 1.1. – segetal-meadow, 1.2. – ruderal,
1.3. – underdeveloped (non-typical); 2 – groups with Salix viminalis, in subgroups: 2.1. – segetalmeadow, 2.2. – ruderal, 2.3. – underdeveloped (non-typical). NB: S = class of sporadic species
Stałość
Constancy
S
I
II
III
IV
V
S–V
1.1
45
69
23
7
–
3
147
Numer zbiorowiska. Number of community
1.2
1.3
2.1
2.2
46
49
41
35
54
33
37
30
14
29
30
11
3
4
2
5
1
2
3
–
3
1
4
3
121
118
117
84
2.3
58
17
13
10
2
2
102
Table 8. Group values of species in selected syntaxonomic units of monocultures of shrub willows
in phytocenoses: 1. – groups with Salix cordata ‘Americana’, in subgroups: 1.1. – segetal-meadow,
1.2. – ruderal, 1.3. – underdeveloped (non-typical); 2 – groups with Salix viminalis, in subgroups:
2.1. – segetal-meadow, 2.2. – ruderal, 2.3. – underdeveloped (non-typical). NB. Group values of
syntaxonomic groups of species were calculated according to the formulae given by Pawłowski (16).
Klasa. Classes
Molinio-Arrhenatheretea
Agropyretea intermedio-repentis
Artemisietea vulgaris
Stellarietea mediae
Inne. Others
Ogółem. Total
1.1.
4,87
7,51
2,88
1,69
0,94
17,89
Numer zbiorowiska. Number of community
1.2.
1.3.
2.1.
2.2.
2,90
5,51
7,18
2,60
6,77
3,45
5,78
5,53
4,03
2,60
4,09
13,93
0,80
1,79
1,10
1,48
1,72
1,80
1,35
1,87
16,22
15,15
19,50
25,41
2.3.
6,23
6,46
6,08
4,08
2,62
25,47
48
FLORIAN ŚWIĘS
This can be seen most clearly in the communities of underdeveloped (non-typical)
subgroups.
h) In all the investigated subgroups of communities, worth noting is a very
small percentage of plants of classes Stellaria media and a fairly high percentage
of plants with an indeterminate sociological status.
In general, taking into account the characteristic combinations of percentages
of plants of particular syntaxonomic groups, the studied phytocenoses should be
included most appropriately in the broadly understood class Agropyretea
intermedio-repentis. It should also be emphasized that the main direction of
succession of the studied phytocenoses in dwarf willow monocultures runs from
their initial segetal-meadow forms (class Molinio-Arrhenatherea) towards ruderal
communities (class Artemisietea vulgaris) and perhaps finally to their form with
an underdeveloped (non-typical) character (different classes of communities). It
is also possible to propose an assumption that subgroups of communities defined
as segetal-grassy and underdeveloped (non-typical) ones be classified as belonging
to class Agropyretea intermedio-repentis, and the so-called ruderal subgroups –
to class Artemisietea vulgaris. It will be possible to thoroughly determine the
phytosociological structure of monocultures of shrub willows after further studies
of them have been made in different stations.
In the communities investigated, worth noting are the recorded stations of
several regionally rare plants such as Colchicum autumnale, Cucubalus baccifer,
Epipactis helleborine and Euphorbia virgultosa. We should also note the
spontaneous propagation of several shrub and tree species in the studied willow
monocultures: Cornus sanguinea, Crataegus monogyna, Acer negundo, Betula
pendula, Populus alba, Quercus robur, and Ulmus glabra. Also interesting here
is the expansion of 11 bryophyte species belonging to different phytosociological
groups. The most frequent of them include: Atrichum undulatum, Brachytheciastrum velutinum, and Bryum caespiticium (Tables 1–6).
REFERENCES
11. BŁAŻEJ J., BŁAŻEJ J. 2005. Przydatność różnych siedlisk na obszarze województwa podkarpackiego pod uprawę szybko rosnącej krzaczastej formy wierzby. Cz. I. W świetle literatury.
[W:] Wybrane aspekty zagospodarowania odpadów organicznych a produkcja biomasy wierzby energetycznej. Wyd. UR Rzeszów: 157–163.
12. BUKIEWICZ H. 1976. Plantacje wikliny konopianki. Biuro Wyd. HWiU „Libra”, Warszawa.
13. BURACZYŃSKI J., WOJTANOWICZ J. 1966. Rozwój doliny Wisły i Sanu w czwartorzędzie w północnej części Niziny Sandomierskiej. Ann. UMCS, sectio B, 21: 143–184+Tab. I–IV.
14. BURACZYŃSKI J., WOJTANOWICZ J. 1967/68. Zagadnienia geomorfologiczne północnej części
Kotliny Sandomierskiej w widłach Wisły i Sanu. Folia Soc. Sc. Lublin. Geogr. Sectio D, 7/8:
33–44.
15. DOBRZAŃSKI B., MALICKI A. 1969. Gleby województwa krakowskiego i rzeszowskiego. Ann.
UMCS, Sec. B, 4: 117–134.
49
16. DOBRZAŃSKI B., POMIAN J. 1957. Zasobność gleb województwa rzeszowskiego w łatwo dostępny dla roślin potas. Ann. UMCS, sectio E, 12: 93–124.
17. DUBAS J. W., TOMCZYK A. 2005. Zakładanie, pielęgnacja i ochrona plantacji wierzb energetycznych. Wyd. SGGW, Warszawa.
18. JEŻEWSKI Z., HODOROWSKI P. 1956. Uprawa wikliny. PWRiL, Warszawa.
19. KONDRACKI J. 1998. Geografia Regionalna Polski. PWN, Warszawa.
10. KORNIAK T. 2007. Zachwaszczenie upraw wierzby w północno-wschodniej części Polski. 145:
141–149.
11. MATUSZKIEWICZ W. 2005. Przewodnik do oznaczania zbiorowisk roślinnych Polski. [W:] Vademecum Geobotanicum. PWN, Warszawa.
12. MICHNA E. 1973. Z badań nad klimatem województwa rzeszowskiego w świetle potrzeb rolnictwa, turystyki i wypoczynku. [W:] Pracownia administracyjna i ekonomiczna, studia wyższe
w Rzeszowie. Filia UMCS, Rzeszów.
13. MIREK Z., PIĘKOŚ-MIREK H., ZAJĄC A., ZAJĄC M. 2002. Flowering plants and pteridophytes of
Poland a checklist. Biodiversity of Poland I. W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of
Science. Cracow.
14. OCHYRA R., ŻARNOWIEC J., BEDNAREK-OCHYRA H. 2003. Cenzus Cataloque of Polish Mosses.
Polish Academy of Scence Institute of Botany. Cracow.
15. OKOŁOWICZ W. 1966. Regiony klimatyczne. [W:] Polska – Atlas geograficzny. Państw. Przeds.
Wyd. Kartogr. Warszawa.
16. PAWŁOWSKI B. 1977. Skład i budowa zbiorowisk roślinnych oraz metod ich badania. [W:] Szata
roślinna Polski; Ed.: W. Szafer, K. Zarzycki, PWN, Warszawa, p. 1: 237–269.
17. ROLA J., SEKUTOWSKI T., ROLA H., BACOWSKI M. 2006. Problem zachwaszczenia plantacji Salix
viminalis. Prog. Plant Protect/Post. Ochr. Rośl., 46(1): 72–76.
18. ROLA J., SEKUTOWSKI T., ROLA H., BACOWSKI M. 2007. Bioróżnorodność zbiorowisk chwastów
na plantacjach wierzby krzewiastej (Salix viminalis L.) na terenie województwa dolnośląskiego
i opolskiego. Pam. Puławski. 145: 165–175.
19. SZAFER W. 1972. Podstawy geobotaniczne podziału Polski. [W:] Szata roślinna Polski. Red.
W. Szafer, K. Zarzycki. 2. PWN, Warszawa, 9–15 + mapa.
20. SZCZUKOWSKI S., TWORKOWSKI J., WIWAT M. 1996. Wiklina – uprawa i uszlachetnianie. Wyd.
ODR. Boguchwała.
21. SZCZUKOWSKI S., TWORKOWSKI J., WIWAT M. 1998. Zastosowanie wikliny Salix sp. w kształtowaniu i ochronie środowiska. Post. Nauk Rol., 4: 19–23.
22. SZCZUKOWSKI S., TWARKOWSKI J., STOLARSKI M., PRZYBOROWSKI J. 2004. Plon biomasy wierzb
krzewiastych pozyskiwany z gruntów rolniczych w cyklach jednorocznych. Fragm. Agron.,
2(82): 5–18.
23. TRĄBA C., MAJDA J., WALOŃSKI P. 2007. Zbiorowiska roślinne towarzyszące plantacjom Salix
cordata ‘Americana’ Hort. i Salix viminalis L. na terenie województwa podkarpackiego. Pam.
Puławski, 145: 221–231.
24. TRĄBA C., WALOŃSKI P., OKLEJEWICZ K. 2004. Zbiorowiska roślinne nieużytków łąk i pól
w dolinie Sanu. Łąkarstwo w Polsce (Grassland Scence in Poland), 7: 207–238.
25. UZIAK S., POMIAN J. 1967. Gleby północno-zachodniej części byłej Puszczy Sandomierskiej.
Ann. UMCS., Sec. E, 22: 69–105.
26. WNUK Z., ZIAJA M. 2007. Zbiorowiska towarzyszące uprawom roślin dla celów energetycznych w Leszczawie Dolnej gmina Bircza. Pam. Puławski. 145: 243–253.
27. ZAJĄC A. 1978. Założenie metodyczne „Atlas rozmieszczenia roślin naczyniowych w Polsce”.
Wiad. Bot., 22 (3): 145–155.
Fig. 1. Situation map of the investigated area with
stations of 120 phytosociological records of plant
communities in monocultures: with Salix cordata
‘Americana’ (nos. 1–70) and with Salix viminalis
(nos. 71–120). NB. ATPOL grid squares with sides 1 x 1 km,
additionally divided into 4 equal secondary parts (a, b, c, d) with
square sides 500 x 500 m, were also marked
Florian Święs, The phytosociological structure...
Fig. 2. Landscape of monocultures with Salix cordata ‘Americana’ and with Salix viminalis. Lower San River
valley, in the vicinity of Rudnik. Photo by F. Święs, June 2006
Fig. 3. Monoculture with Salix cordata ‘Americana’. Lower San River valley, in the vicinity of Stróża. Photo
by F. Święs, June 2006
Fig. 4. Monocultures with Salix cordata’Americana’ (on the left) and with Salix viminalis (at the far end).
Lower San River valley, in the vicinity of Rudnik. Photo by F. Święs, June 2006
Fig. 5. Monocultures with Salix cordata’Americana’ (on the right) and with Salix viminalis (at the far end).
Lower San River valley, in the vicinity of Rudnik. Photo by F. Święs, June 2006

`Americana` Hort., and with S. v - Annales UMCS

Transkrypt

Podobne dokumenty

Słownictwo łacińskie V

2 Steciana 12.indd