Plant heights are relevant for the Czech Republic. They are measured in metres and relate to fully developed mature generative plants growing in the wild. Each taxon is characterized by two values: minimum (lower limit of the common range) and maximum (upper limit of the common range). The data were taken from the Key to the Flora of the Czech Republic (Kaplan et al. 2019).
Kaplan Z., Danihelka J., Chrtek J. Jr., Kirschner J., Kubát K., Štěpánek J. & Štech M. (eds) (2019) Klíč ke květeně České republiky [Key to the flora of the Czech Republic]. Ed. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Growth form describes the potential life span of the plant and its parts (ramets), its reproductive strategy and durability of its aboveground parts (Klimešová et al. 2016, Ottaviani et al. 2017). Here the growth form is classified into nine categories, which also consider herbaceous vs woody nature of the stem. Annual herbs live for one season only and reproduce by seed usually in the same season in which they germinated. They may but need not be clonal; their clonality typically does not result in fragmentation. Perennial herbs are divided into three categories: (i) monocarpic perennial non-clonal herbs, which reproduce sexually only once in their life and do not possess woody aboveground parts or organs of clonal growth, (ii) polycarpic perennial non-clonal herbs, which reproduce sexually several times during their life and do not possess organs of clonal growth, and (iii) clonal herbs, which possess organs of clonal growth enabling them to make fragments during their life and to form independent units (ramets) by vegetative reproduction; the whole plant reproduces sexually several times during its life, while individual ramets may reproduce once or several times during their life. The other categories include woody plants, which may but need not possess organs of clonal growth and may be able or not of fragmentation and vegetative reproduction. The woody plants are divided into dwarf shrubs (woody plants lower than 30 cm, also including suffruticose plants with erect, herbaceous shoots growing from woody stems at the base, which die out in autumn except for the lowest part with regenerative buds), shrubs (woody plants higher than 30 cm, branched at the base), trees (woody plants with trunk and crown), woody lianas and parasitic epiphytes, which include only two species of the Czech flora, Loranthus europaeus and Viscum album.
Data were partly taken from the aggregated CLO-PLA 3.4 database (Klimešová et al. 2017). The CLO-PLA categories were further divided into separate categories for herbaceous vs woody plants, and taxa not included in CLO-PLA were added.
Dřevojan P. (2020) Growth form. – www.pladias.cz.
Klimešová J., Nobis M. P. & Herben T. (2016) Links between shoot and plant longevity and plant economics
spectrum: Environmental and demographic implications. – Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and
Systematics 22: 55–62.
Klimešová J., Danihelka J., Chrtek J., de Bello F. & Herben T. (2017) CLO-PLA: a database of clonal and budbank
traits of the Central European flora. – Ecology 98: 1179.
Ottaviani G., Martínková J., Herben T., Pausas J. G. & Klimešová J. (2017) On plant modularity traits: functions
and challenges. – Trends in Plant Science 22: 648–651.
Life form classification follows the system of Raunkiaer (1934), which is based on the position of the buds that survive the unfavourable season. Macrophanerophytes are woody plants that bear the surviving buds at least 2 m above the ground, usually trees; nanophanerophytes are woody plants with surviving buds 0.3–2 m above the ground, usually shrubs; chamaephytes are herbs or low woody plants with surviving buds above the ground, but not more than 30 cm above it; hemicryptophytes are perennial or biennial herbs with surviving buds on aboveground shoots at the level of the ground; geophytes are perennial plants with surviving buds belowground, usually with bulbs, tubers or rhizomes; hydrophytes are plants with surviving buds in water, usually on the bottom of water bodies; therophytes are summer- or winter-annual herbs that survive the unfavourable season only as seeds germinating in autumn, winter or spring.
The data on life forms were taken from the Key to the Flora of the Czech Republic (Kaplan et al. 2019). Newly added alien taxa were assigned to the categories of life forms based on the FloraVeg.EU database (Dřevojan et al. 2022). Some taxa can belong to more than one life form. In such cases, the dominant life form is listed first.
Kaplan Z., Danihelka J., Chrtek J. Jr., Kirschner J., Kubát K., Štěpánek J. & Štech M. (eds) (2019) Klíč ke květeně České republiky [Key to the flora of the Czech Republic]. Ed. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Dřevojan P., Čeplová N., Štěpánková P. & Axmanová I. (2022) Life form. – www.FloraVeg.EU.
Raunkiaer C. (1934) The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. – Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Data on the presence of leaves on the plant, their metamorphoses and reductions are based on the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010) and the Key to the Flora of the Czech Republic (Kubát et al. 2002).
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky
[Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Kubát K., Hrouda L., Chrtek J. Jr., Kaplan Z., Kirschner J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2002) Klíč ke květeně České
republiky [Key to the flora of the Czech Republic]. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Four basic types of leaf arrangement are distinguished: alternate, opposite, verticillate (whorled) and rosulate (in the basal rosette). The character is assessed in well-developed plants, i.e. not in individuals re-sprouting after damage by mowing or grazing or those with teratological modifications. More than one character state may occur (e.g. Hylotelephium jullianum and Salix purpurea) in some taxa: all character states are recorded in such cases.
In some plants, the arrangement of frondose bracts in the inflorescence is assessed separately (e.g. true leaves in Veronica persica and V. polita are opposite, while bracts are alternate). Leaves with interpetiolar stipules found in the Rubiaceae family are considered as whorled. The leaves in Rhamnus cathartica are considered as opposite, although in most cases they are sub-opposite.
The information was extracted mainly from the descriptions in the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010). In cases of uncertainties, mainly for alien taxa, additional sources were consulted, including the Flora of North America (Flora of North America Editorial Committee 1993), the Flora of China (Wu et al. 1994) and the Flora of Pakistan (www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan).
Grulich V., Holubová D., Štěpánková P. & Řezníčková M. (2017) Leaf arrangement. – www.pladias.cz.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds) (1993) Flora of North America North of Mexico. – Oxford
University Press, New York.
Flora of Pakistan. – http://www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Wu Z., Raven P. H. & Huang D. (eds) (1994) Flora of China. – Science Press, Beijing & Missouri Botanical
Garden, St. Louis.
The primary distinction is made between simple and compound leaves. The simple leaves are categorized based on the leaf blade division associated with venation into palmately divided (e.g. Alchemilla), pinnately divided (e.g. Achillea millefolium), forked (e.g. Batrachium, Ceratophyllum and Utricularia) and pedate (e.g. Helleborus). The categorization is based on well-developed leaves. In many taxa, transitions occur between simple leaves with a dentate or serrate margin, and simple divided (pinnately or palmately lobed) leaves. Only the leaves with the lamina divided to at least one-quarter of their width are considered as divided. Many taxa with varying leaf division are assigned to more than one character state.
The compound leaves are divided into palmate and pinnate. The taxa that have both ternate and pinnate leaves, the latter with two pairs of leaflets (e.g. Aegopodium podagraria and some other species of the Apiaceae family), are assigned to both character states. The degree of division in pinnately compound leaves indicated here relates to well-developed leaves, especially to the basal part of the lamina. Taxa with multiple pinnately compound leaves are assigned to two or more character states based on the level of division, but very small leaves, which may correspond to simple leaves, are not considered.
In many cases, there are transitions between simple and compound leaves, especially between pinnatisect and pinnate leaves. Leaves with linear or filiform segments, including the bi-, tri- or even more-pinnatisect or palmatisect leaves (e.g. stem leaves in Batrachium fluitans, Cardamine pratensis and the genus Seseli) are classified as simple (dissected) leaves. In contrast, leaves with broader segments attached to the rachis by a distinct constriction or a petiolule (e.g. stem leaves in Cardamine dentata or ground leaves in Pimpinella saxifraga) are classified as compound.
In heterophyllous taxa, all types of leaves are assessed, and the taxon is assigned to two or more character states. However, less divided leaves found in juvenile plants of some taxa are not considered heterophyllous. The parasitic plants with rudimentary (vestigial) leaves (e.g. Cuscuta) or the plants with phylloclades replacing the vestigial leaves (e.g. Asparagus) are assigned the character state “reduced”.
The information was extracted mainly from the descriptions in the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010). In uncertain cases, mainly for alien taxa, additional sources were consulted, including the Flora of North America (Flora of North America Editorial Committee 1993), the Flora of China (Wu et al. 1994) and the Flora of Pakistan (www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan).
Grulich V., Holubová D., Štěpánková P. & Řezníčková M. (2017) Leaf shape. – www.pladias.cz.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds) (1993) Flora of North America North of Mexico. – Oxford
University Press, New York.
Flora of Pakistan. – http://www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Wu Z., Raven P. H. & Huang D. (eds) (1994) Flora of China. – Science Press, Beijing & Missouri Botanical
Garden, St. Louis.
Stipules, i.e. paired leaflike appendages at the base of the petiole or sessile leaf blade, can be present or absent. Caducous stipules, i.e. those disappearing soon after the leaf blade has developed (e.g. Prunus), are considered as present. The interpetiolar stipules, morphologically indistinguishable from true leaves and together forming whorls (e.g. Rubiaceae), are considered as true stipules. In contrast, stipules modified into glands (e.g. Lotus) or hairs (e.g. Portulacaceae) are not considered as stipules here.
Information about the presence of stipules was extracted from the descriptions in the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010). In cases of uncertainties, mainly concerning alien taxa, descriptions in the Flora of North America (Flora of North America Editorial Committee 1993), the Flora of China (Wu et al. 1994) and the Flora of Pakistan (www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan) were consulted.
Grulich V., Holubová D., Štěpánková P. & Řezníčková M. (2017) Stipules. – www.pladias.cz.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds) (1993) Flora of North America North of Mexico. – Oxford
University Press, New York.
Flora of Pakistan. – http://www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Wu Z., Raven P. H. & Huang D. (eds) (1994) Flora of China. – Science Press, Beijing & Missouri Botanical
Garden, St. Louis.
Leaf petiole can be present or absent. In some plants, it can be present in some leaves but absent in others. The data were extracted from the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010), the Key to the Flora of the Czech Republic (Kubát et al. 2002), the New Hungarian Herbal (Király et al. 2011) and the Excursion Flora of Germany (Jäger & Werner 2000).
Prokešová H. & Grulich V. (2017) Petiole. – www.pladias.cz.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Jäger E. J. & Werner K. (eds) (2000) Rothmaler, Exkursionsflora von Deutschland. Band 3. Gefäßpflanzen: Atlasband. Ed. 10. – Spectrum Akademischer Verlag, Heidelberg & Berlin.
Király G., Virók V. & Molnár V. (eds) (2011) Új Magyar füvészkönyv. Magyarország hajtásos növényei: ábrák [New Hungarian Herbal. The vascular plants of Hungary: Figures]. – Aggteleki Nemzeti Park Igazgatóság, Jósvafő.
Kubát K., Hrouda L., Chrtek J. Jr., Kaplan Z., Kirschner J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2002) Klíč ke květeně České republiky [Key to the flora of the Czech Republic]. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
The months of the beginning and end of flowering in the Czech Republic are given. The data were taken from the Key to the Flora of the Czech Republic (Kaplan et al. 2019).
Kaplan Z., Danihelka J., Chrtek J. Jr., Kirschner J., Kubát K., Štěpánek J. & Štech M. (eds) (2019) Klíč ke květeně České republiky [Key to the flora of the Czech Republic]. Ed. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Flower colour is reported for nearly all angiosperms except duckweeds (Araceae p. p.) and some hybrids for which data on flower colour were not available.
If a species has more than one flower colour, all colours are reported irrespective of their frequency. This approach is used both for species that regularly form populations with different flower colours (e.g. Corydalis cava and Iris pumila) and for species with occasional occurrence of deviating flower colour (e.g. albinism in Salvia pratensis or pink flowers in Ajuga reptans). However, the whole range of variation is not fully reported in cultivated plants, for which some cultivars of different colour may be ignored (e.g. Gladiolus hortulanus and Callistephus chinensis). In plants with flowers of two colours (e.g. Cypripedium calceolus), both colours are reported. In plants with multi-coloured flowers (e.g. the variegated lip in Ophrys apifera) the predominant colour is reported.
If the flower has a well-developed perianth, the reported flower colour relates to the corolla or the tepals of the homochlamydeous perianth. If such a flower has bracts of a contrasting colour (e.g. Melampyrum nemorosum), their colour is not considered. If the corolla or the homochlamydeous perianth is not developed, the flower colour is based on the calyx (e.g. Daphne mezereum), bracts (e.g. Aristolochia clematitis), the system of bracts and bracteoles in the inflorescence (Euphorbia) or the involucre on secondary peduncles (Bupleurum longifolium). In species of Araceae with spadix and spathe of contrasting colours (e.g. Calla palustris) both colours are reported. The colour of the whole inflorescence is reported for some plants with reduced flowers (e.g. Betula, Salix, some Cyperaceae and Typhaceae). Spikelets in Poaceae are reported as green disregarding a possible violet tint; exceptions include the Melica ciliata agg. and Cortaderia that are reported as white. Also in other, rare cases, the inflorescence colour is reported as flower colour (e.g. green in Ficus carica). In Asteraceae, the colours of the disk flowers and ray flowers are reported separately if the ray flowers are developed and have a contrasting colour (e.g. Bellis perennis). The colour of the involucrum is reported for species with tiny flower heads and indistinct flowers (e.g. Artemisia campestris and Xanthium) and for “immortelles” (e.g. Helichrysum and Xeranthemum).
Information on flower colour is partly based on the field knowledge, partly obtained from various photographs and descriptions in the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010). In the taxa that are not reported in the Flora of the Czech Republic, as well as in unclear cases (especially in alien species), other sources were used, especially the Flora of North America (Flora of North America Editorial Committee 1993), the Flora of China (Wu et al. 1994) and the Flora of Pakistan (http://www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan).
Categories
Štěpánková P. & Grulich V. (2019) Flower colour. – www.pladias.cz.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds) (1993) Flora of North America North of Mexico. – Oxford
University Press, New York.
Flora of Pakistan. – http://www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Wu Z., Raven P. H. & Huang D. (eds) (1994) Flora of China. – Science Press, Beijing & Missouri Botanical
Garden, St. Louis.
Perianth (perigon), i.e. the non-reproductive part of the angiosperm flower, can be classified into heterochlamydeous and homochlamydeous. Heterochlamydeous flowers are divided into calyx and corolla. In homochlamydeous flowers, calyx and corolla are indistinguishable. Perianth or some of its parts can be reduced or absent; flowers with no perianth are called achlamydeous.
In Apiaceae, the presence of the calyx teeth is assessed as a reduced calyx; if these teeth are not visible, the calyx is considered as absent. In Asteraceae, the presence of a pappus, scales or a collar-like structure is considered as a reduced calyx; if no such structures are present, the calyx is considered as absent. In Cyperaceae, the presence of perianth bristles is assessed as a reduced perianth. All members of the Poaceae family are considered as plants with a reduced perianth. The perianth in the genus Basella is arbitrarily classified as a reduced calyx though it is also often considered as a reduced homochlamydeous perianth. The character states “homochlamydeous, sometimes absent” and “homochlamydeous, reduced or absent” mean that in one plant some flowers may have a well-developed or reduced perianth, while other flowers may be achlamydeous (e.g. Atriplex).
The information was extracted mainly from the descriptions in the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010). For the taxa not treated in that flora or if uncertainties occurred, mainly concerning some alien taxa, the descriptions in the Flora of North America (Flora of North America Editorial Committee 1993), the Flora of China (Wu et al. 1994) and the Flora of Pakistan (www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan) were consulted.
Grulich V., Prokešová H. & Štěpánková P. (2017) Perianth type. – www.pladias.cz.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds) (1993) Flora of North America North of Mexico. – Oxford
University Press, New York.
Flora of Pakistan. – http://www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Wu Z., Raven P. H. & Huang D. (eds) (1994) Flora of China. – Science Press, Beijing & Missouri Botanical
Garden, St. Louis.
Inflorescence types follow the morphological system used in the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010). As the Czech terminology used for inflorescences does not match the English terminology, we use Latin terms in the English version of the Pladias Database. The exact identification of the inflorescence type is often equivocal because of varying interpretations of the same object. In species with unisexual flowers, male and female flowers can occur in different inflorescence types. In other cases, it is not possible to identify the inflorescence without detailed knowledge of evolutionary morphology, e.g. umbella vs pseudumbella in the genus Butomus. There are also compound inflorescences, in some cases with very different structure of their parts, especially in Asteraceae, which can have even triple inflorescences (e.g. Echinops sphaerocephalus often has an anthella ex capitulis anthodiorum composita).
The information was extracted mainly from the descriptions in the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010). For the taxa not treated in that flora or if some uncertainties occurred, mainly concerning some alien taxa, information was taken from the descriptions in the Flora of North America (Flora of North America Editorial Committee 1993), the Flora of China (Wu et al. 1994) and the Flora of Pakistan (www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan). In critical groups (e.g. Rubus), especially in recently described species, inflorescence type was taken from the original descriptions.
Grulich V. & Štěpánková P. (2019) Inflorescence type. – www.pladias.cz.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds) (1993) Flora of North America North of Mexico. – Oxford
University Press, New York.
Flora of Pakistan. – http://www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Wu Z., Raven P. H. & Huang D. (eds) (1994) Flora of China. – Science Press, Beijing & Missouri Botanical
Garden, St. Louis.
The primary classification of fruit types is into dry and fleshy. Within each of these two groups, fruit types are further classified based on the scheme outlined in the first volume of the Flora of the Czech Republic (Slavíková 1988), which consistently uses the typological method. This means that fruits are classified based purely on their morphology following the formal definitions of the fruit type, regardless of the fruit type found in closely related species or genera.
One-seeded fruits in Brassicaceae (e.g. Crambe) are classified as achenes, not siliculas. Indehiscent two- and more-seeded fruits in the same family, breaking mainly in constrictions (e.g. in Bunias and Raphanus), are consistently classified as a loment, even if the fruit breaks into two distinct parts, of which one is one-seeded and the other, of strikingly different shape, two- or more-seeded and dehiscent, such as in Rapistrum rugosum. A similar approach is used for the classification of fruits in Fabaceae. Dehiscent fruits of most taxa are classified as legumes, while indehiscent two- and more-seeded fruits breaking into single-seeded parts (e.g. in Hippocrepis and Securigera) are classified as loments. One-seeded indehiscent fruits (e.g. in Onobrychis and Trifolium) are classified as achenes. Two- or more-seeded indehiscent fruits (e.g. in Sophora japonica and Vicia faba) are also classified as legumes. The fruits of all Euphorbia species are classified as capsules, although in some cases the seeds are not released. Fleshy false fruits of the genera Basella, Ficus, Maclura, Morus, Nuphar and Nymphaea are merged into a separate category.
The information about fruit type was extracted mainly from the descriptions in the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010). For the taxa not treated in that flora or in case of uncertainties, especially regarding alien taxa, descriptions in the Flora of North America (Flora of North America Editorial Committee 1993), the Flora of China (Wu et al. 1994), the Flora of Pakistan (www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan), and Flora Iberica (Castroviejo et al. 1986; mainly for the Fabaceae family) were consulted.
Grulich V., Holubová D., Štěpánková P. & Řezníčková M. (2017) Fruit type. – www.pladias.cz.
Castroviejo S., Laínz M., López González G., Montserrat P., Muńoz Garmendia F., Paiva J. & Villar L. (eds) (1986) Flora Iberica. Plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares. – Real Jardín Botánico, Madrid.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds) (1993) Flora of North America North of Mexico. – Oxford
University Press, New York.
Flora of Pakistan. – http://www.tropicos.org/Project/Pakistan
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Slavíková Z. (1988) Terminologický slovník [Terminological dictionary]. – In: Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J.,
Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds), Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist
Republic] 1: 130–153, Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Wu Z., Raven P. H. & Huang D. (eds) (1994) Flora of China. – Science Press, Beijing & Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis.
Data on fruit colour according to the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010) and the Key to the Flora of the Czech Republic (Kubát et al. 2002). Fruit colours are standardized into ten colours. A single dominant colour of ripe fruit is reported for each taxon.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky
[Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Kubát K., Hrouda L., Chrtek J. Jr., Kaplan Z., Kirschner J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2002) Klíč ke květeně České
republiky [Key to the flora of the Czech Republic]. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Diaspore, also called dispersule or propagule, is a generative or vegetative part of the plant body that is dispersed from the parental plant and can produce a new individual. Generative diaspores include spores, seeds and fruits or similar dispersal units (e.g. aggregate fruits in Fragaria, multiple fruits in Morus, gymnosperm cones, epimatium-bearing seed in Taxus, spikelets or their various fragments in Poaceae). If the seed is released from dehiscent fruit or decaying ripe fleshy fruit, both seed and fruit can be considered as diaspores. In plants with indehiscent fruits, only the fruit is considered as a diaspore. A specific category of generative diaspore is tumbleweeds, i.e. mature plant parts including stem branches and large inflorescence (e.g. Crambe tataria and Falcaria vulgaris).
Vegetative diaspores are viable and movable parts of plants that originate above ground or in water and disconnect from the parent plant before sprouting. We did not consider as vegetative diaspores clonal organs connected with the maternal plant until the new plant becomes independent (e.g. stolons in Fragaria) and various types of below-ground organs or shoot bases embedded in soil (e.g. tubers of Helianthus tuberosus or grass tillers). Vegetative diaspores include (i) turions (e.g. Myriophyllum and Utricularia) and similar overwintering structures (detachable buds in Elodea and Groenlandia and shortened shoots of some pondweeds produced by rhizome or stolon, e.g. Potamogeton alpinus); (ii) bulbils and tubers of stem origin (e.g. Allium oleraceum and Dentaria bulbifera) or root origin (Ficaria only); (iii) plantlets born by pseudovivipary (e.g. Poa alpina); (iv) plantlets born from buds on leaves (e.g. Cardamine pratensis); (v) plantlets born on free ends of stolons, detachable before establishing (e.g. Hydrocharis and Jovibarba); (vi) unspecialized fragments of the shoot (e.g. Sedum album and many aquatic plants), shoot tips (e.g. Ceratophyllum demersum) or detachable offsprings born from axillary buds (e.g. Agrostis canina, Arabidopsis halleri and Rorippa amphibia); (vii) budding plants (Lemnaceae only); and (viii) gemmae produced by gametophytes (Trichomanes speciosum only).
Sádlo J., Chytrý M., Pergl J. & Pyšek P. (2018) Plant dispersal strategies: a new classification based on themultiple dispersal modes of individual species. – Preslia 90: 1–22.
Plants use different dispersal modes, also called dispersal syndromes, depending on different dispersal vectors. For example, anemochory is the dispersal by wind, hydrochory by water, epizoochory by attachment to an animal body and endozoochory by animals via ingestion. However, single plant species usually use a combination of several dispersal modes rather than a single mode. Distinct combinations of dispersal modes repeatedly occurring in different plant taxa are called dispersal strategies. Sádlo et al. (2018) distinguished nine dispersal strategies named for the genus names of typical representatives. Taxa of the Czech flora are assigned to individual strategies based on this source.
Categories
Sádlo J., Chytrý M., Pergl J. & Pyšek P. (2018) Plant dispersal strategies: a new classification based on themultiple dispersal modes of individual species. – Preslia 90: 1–22.
Plant parasitism is based on either of two mechanisms. The first group of parasitic plants involves those parasitizing directly on another plant. These plants are called haustorial parasites. They take resources from the host’s vascular bundles using a specialized organ, the haustorium. The second group comprises mycoheterotrophic plants, which parasitize fungi via mycorrhizal interaction and gain organic carbon from them.
Plants in both groups display variable dependence on their host organism. The haustorial parasites include two distinct functional groups: green hemiparasites and holoparasites. Green hemiparasites are partial parasites that retain photosynthetic ability but obtain all mineral resources and a part of the organic carbon from the host. Holoparasites are non-green full parasites unable to photosynthesize. Location of the haustorial attachment to the host (root or stem) is another essential functional trait. The distinction between partial and full parasitism in haustorial parasites may not be straightforward. In the Czech flora, it is nevertheless possible to distinguish between stem hemi- and holoparasites, which are difficult to separate on the global scale (Těšitel 2016). Consequently, we use a traditional classification here and classify as holoparasites those plants that are in adulthood mostly without chlorophyll, even though some of them might have some chlorophyll and perform residual photosynthesis (e.g. Cuscuta).
In mycoheterotrophic plants, there is a continuum from initial mycoheterotrophs through partial mycoheterotrophs to full mycoheterotrophs. In the initial mycoheterotrophs, only initial stages, i.e. gametophytes or seedlings, are dependent on the fungus, whereas adult plants are autotrophic, while still depending on mycorrhizal symbiosis as a source of water and mineral nutrients. In the partial mycoheterotrophs, photosynthesizing adults obtain from their mycorrhizal fungi not only water and mineral nutrients but also different amounts of organic carbon. The full mycoheterotrophs lost their chlorophyll and are thus fully parasitic. In some partial mycoheterotrophs (e.g. the genus Cephalanthera), chlorotic individuals can be found, which lack chlorophyll and fully depend on their hosts.
Classification of haustorial parasites follows Těšitel (2016) with a further distinction of stem hemi- and holoparasites, and identification of mycoheterotrophs follows Merckx (2012).
Těšitel J., Těšitelová T., Blažek P. & Lepš J. (2016) Parasitism and mycoheterotrophy. – www.pladias.cz.
Těšitel J. (2016) Functional biology of parasitic plants: a review. – Plant Ecology and Evolution 149: 5–20.
Merckx V. S. F. T. (2012) Mycoheterotrophy: the biology of plants living on fungi. – Springer, Berlin.
Carnivorous plants attract, trap and kill their prey, animals (mainly insects and small crustaceans) and protozoans, and subsequently absorb the nutrients from their dead bodies.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Plants are classified into those without symbiotic nitrogen fixers and those that form a symbiosis with nitrogen-fixing bacteria. The latter are further divided into those forming a symbiosis with rhizobia (e.g. Allorhizobium, Bradyrhizobium, Mesorhizobium, Rhizobium and Sinorhizobium) and those forming the actinorhizal symbiosis with the genus Frankia, the latter called actinorhizal plants (Bond 1983, Pawlowski & Sprent 2007, Sprent 2008, Benson 2016).
In the Czech flora, the rhizobial group is represented by virtually all legumes (family Fabaceae). Exceptions are three non-native cultivated woody species (Cercis siliquastrum, Gleditsia triacanthos, Gymnocladus dioicus) that do not nodulate (Tedersoo et al. 2018), which is generally considered as evidence for the absence of symbiosis. However, some studies suggest that functional nitrogen-fixing symbiosis may exist even without visible nodules (Bryan et al. 1996). Roots of Gleditsia triacanthos were recorded to contain bacterial structures similar to those in nodules with rhizobia, as well as the presence of nitrogenase (Faria et al. 2002). These genera also contain genes probably related to nodule formation, although their exact function is unclear (Graves et al. 1999). Because convincing evidence of nitrogen fixation in these species is missing, we consider them non-nitrogen-fixing for the time being.
Symbiosis with rhizobia was found in several other families (Tedersoo et al. 2018). Of these, the Czech flora includes only casually introduced Tribulus terrestris (Zygophyllaceae), in which a parallel infection with cyanobacteria was described (Sabet 1946, Mahmood & Athar 1998).
The actinorhizal group is represented in the Czech flora mainly by alder species (Alnus spp.) and also by cultivated species in the family Elaeagnaceae – Elaeagnus spp. and Hippophaë rhamnoides (Bond 1983, Benson 2016).
Blažek P. & Lepš J. (2016) Symbiotic nitrogen fixation. – www.pladias.cz.
Benson D. R. (2016) Frankia & actinorhizal plants. – https://frankia.mcb.uconn.edu/ (accessed on 1 Feb 2021).
Bond G. (1983) Taxonomy and distribution of non-legume nitrogen-fixing systems. – In: Gordon J. C. & Wheeler C. T. (eds), Biological nitrogen fixation in forests: foundations and applications, p. 55–87, Martinus Nijhoff/Dr W. Junk Publ., The Hague.
Bryan J. A., Berlyn G. P. & Gordon J. C. (1996) Toward a new concept of the evolution of symbiotic nitrogen fixation in the Leguminosae. – Plant and Soil 186: 151–159.
de Faria S. M., Olivares F. L. & Xavier R. P. (2002) Nodule-structure in the roots of Gleditsia spp. a non-nodulating legume genus. – In: Pedrosa F. O., Hungria M., Yates G. & Newton W. E. (eds), Nitrogen fixation: from molecules to crop productivity. Current plant science and biotechnology in agriculture, vol 38. Springer, Dordrecht, p. 337.
Graves W. R., Foster C. M., Rosin F. M. & Schrader J. A. (1999) Two early nodulation genes are not markers for the capacity of leguminous nursery crops to form root nodules. – Journal of Environmental Horticulture 17: 126–129.
Mahmood A. & Athar M. (1998) Cyanobacterial root nodules in Tribulus terrestris L. (Zygophyllaceae). – In: Malik K. A. & Sajjad Mirza M. & Ladha J. K. (eds), Nitrogen fixation with non-legumes, Springer, Dordrecht, p. 345–350.
Pawlowski K. & Sprent J. I. (2007) Comparison between actinorhizal and legume symbioses. – In: Pawlowski K. & Newton W. E. (eds), Nitrogen-fixing actinorhizal symbioses, Springer, Dordrecht, p. 261–288.
Sabet Y. S. (1946) Bacterial root nodules in the Zygophyllaceae. – Nature 157: 656–657.
Sprent J. I. (2008) Evolution and diversity of legume symbiosis. – In: Dilworth M. J., James E. K., Sprent J. I. & Newton W. E. (eds), Nitrogen-fixing leguminous symbioses, Springer, Dordrecht, p. 1–21.
Tedersoo L., Laanisto L., Rahimlou S., Toussaint A., Hallikma T. & Pärtel M. (2018) Global database of plants with root-symbiotic nitrogen fixation: NodDB. – Journal of Vegetation Science 29: 560–568.
Chromosome number is the somatic number of chromosomes in the zygotic stage, i.e. without possible endopolyploidy of somatic tissues. If different chromosome numbers are known for a taxon, the database contains primarily the number reported from the Czech Republic or the number that is the most common in this country or can be expected to be the most common based on the data from neighbouring countries. Other existing and less common chromosome numbers are reported in brackets. The survey does not take into account odd chromosome numbers of individual, aneuploid, euploid, haploid or autopolyploid plants, which may rarely originate in natural or experimental populations. It also disregards the numbers reported in early studies or from geographically distant areas for which the taxonomic identity with Czech plants is unclear.
The data compilation is based mainly on the Flora of the Czech Republic (vols. 1–8; Hejný et al. 1988–1992, Slavík et al. 1997–2004, Štěpánková et al. 2010) and the Chromosome Count Database (Rice et al. 2015; http://ccdb.tau.ac.il/). If only information about ploidy level is available from flow cytometry measurements, but no chromosome number is known, the number typical of the given ploidy in closely related taxa is indicated.
Šmarda P. (2018) Chromosome number (2n). – www.pladias.cz.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds) (1988) Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic]. Vol. 1. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Hrouda L. & Skalický V. (eds) (1990) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Hejný S., Slavík B., Kirschner J. & Křísa B. (eds) (1992) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 3. – Academia, Praha.
Rice A., Glick L., Abadi S., Einhorn M., Kopelman N. M., Salman-Minkov A., Mayzel J., Chay O. & Mayrose I. (2015) The chromosome counts database (CCDB): a community resource of plant chromosome numbers. – New Phytologist 206: 19–26.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Štěpánková J. (eds) (2000) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 6. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Chrtek J. jun. & Tomšovic P. (eds) (1997) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 5. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Smejkal M., Dvořáková M. & Grulich V. (eds) (1995) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 4. – Academia, Praha.
Slavík B., Štěpánková J. & Štěpánek J. (eds) (2004) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 7. – Academia, Praha.
Štěpánková J., Chrtek J. jun. & Kaplan Z. (eds) (2010) Květena České republiky [Flora of the Czech Republic]. Vol. 8. – Academia, Praha.
Ploidy level is the number of somatic chromosomal sets in the zygotic stage, i.e. without the possible endopolyploidy of somatic tissues. Ploidy level determines the minimum copy number of most genes, influences minimal cell size and other morphological and ecological properties of the taxon (Stebbins 1950, Levin 2002, Tate et al. 2005). The data presented here are based on the traits Chromosome number and 2C genome size, and to a lesser extent also on a literature search of flow cytometry studies related to the area of the Czech Republic. The reported values are especially those reported from the Czech Republic or those ploidy levels that are most frequent in this country or at least are assumed to be the most frequent based on the data from neighbouring countries. The other existing (minor) ploidy levels (cytotypes) that are documented from the Czech Republic or that may be expected to occur here based on the records from neighbouring countries are indicated in brackets. The survey does not take into account the observations of individual haploid or autopolyploid plants which may rarely originate in natural or experimental populations. It also disregards the ploidy levels derived from the numbers of chromosomes reported in early studies or from geographically distant areas, where taxonomic identity with Czech plants is uncertain.
The size of one chromosomal set (x) or the “base chromosome number” for calculating the ploidy level is derived here from the lowest chromosome number known in the given genus or the group of closely related genera (e.g. Raven 1975). This minimum chromosome number is generally considered to correspond to diploids (i.e., two chromosomal sets). A taxon is considered as polyploid whenever its chromosome number and genome size are jointly ± doubled (or otherwise multiplied) compared to the diploid taxa of related genera. It may therefore sometimes happen that no diploid taxa are known in some genera. The absence of diploids in a given genus may result from (i) the lack of karyological data, (ii) the extinction of the diploid relative(s), or (iii) a polyploidy event that predated the origin of the whole genus, with the current genomes still showing little signs of backward “diploidization”. The joint usage of the chromosome number and genome size enables estimation of ploidy levels also for the taxa with holocentric chromosomes (Cyperaceae, Drosera, Juncaceae, Cuscuta sect. Cuscuta and C. sect. Gramica). In these taxa, the chromosome number does not need to be positively correlated with the ploidy level due to possible chromosomal fissions and fusions (agmatoploidy and symploidy, respectively; Bureš et al. 2013). To handle the chromosomal fusions in Luzula, chromosome size categories as defined by Nordeskiöld (1951) were further considered to estimate the actual ploidy level. Ploidy level estimates in highly polyploid genomes of Viola follow Marcussen et al. (2015).
Šmarda P. (2018) Ploidy level (x). – www.pladias.cz.
Bureš P., Zedek F. & Marková M. (2013) Holocentric chromosomes. – In: Leitch I. J., Greilhuber J., Wendel J. & Wendel J. (eds), Plant genome diversity. Vol. 2. Physical structure, behaviour and evolution of plant genomes, p. 187–208, Springer, Wien.
Dar T.-U.-H. & Rehman R.-U. (2017) Polyploidy: recent trends and future perspectives. – Springer, New Delhi.
Levin D. A. (2002) The role of chromosomal change in plant evolution. – Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Nordenskiöld H. (1951) Cytotaxonomical studies in the genus Luzula. – Hereditas 37: 325–355.
Raven P. H. (1975) The bases of angiosperm phylogeny: cytology. – Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden
62: 724–764.
Stebbins G. L. (1950) Variation and evolution in plants. – Columbia University Press, New York.
Tate J. A., Soltis D. E. & Soltis P. S. (2005) Polyploidy in plants. – In: Gregory R. T. (ed.), The evolution of the
genome, p. 371–426, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
2C genome size is the somatic nuclear DNA content in a zygotic cell measured in megabase pairs (Mbp). This measure can vary among taxa due to both polyploidy and the variability in the content of non-coding DNA (Leitch & Greilhuber 2013). Genome size influences minimum cell size, duration of the cell cycle and cell division, and nutrient requirements. Therefore, it may have a considerable influence on ecological strategies of plants (Bennett 1987, Veselý et al. 2012, Greilhuber & Leitch 2013). Most values were measured in plants collected in the Czech Republic (Šmarda et al. 2019). The data always refer to the dominant chromosome number and the dominant ploidy level of the given taxon.
Šmarda P., Knápek O., Březinová A., Horová L., Grulich V., Danihelka J., Veselý P., Šmerda J., Rotreklová O. & Bureš P. (2019) Genome sizes and genomic guanine+cytosine (GC) contents of the Czech vascular flora with new estimates for 1700 species. – Preslia 91: 117–142.
Bennett M. D. (1987) Variation in genomic form in plants and its ecological implications. – New Phytologist 106 (Suppl.): 177–200.
Greilhuber J. & Leitch I. J. (2013) Genome size and the phenotype. – In: Leitch I. J., Greilhuber J., Doležel J. & Wendel J. (eds), Plant genome diversity. Vol. 2. Physical structure, behaviour and evolution of plant genomes, p. 323–344, Springer, Wien.
Leitch I. J. & Greilhuber J. (2013) Genome size diversity and evolution in land plants. – In: Leitch I. J., Greilhuber J., Doležel J. & Wendel J. (eds), Plant genome diversity. Vol. 2. Physical structure, behaviour and evolution of plant genomes, p. 307–322, Springer, Wien.
Veselý P., Bureš P., Šmarda P. & Pavlíček T. (2012) Genome size and DNA base composition of geophytes: the mirror of phenology and ecology? – Annals of Botany 109: 65–75.
1Cx monoploid genome size is the amount of DNA contained in one set of chromosomes measured in megabase pairs (Mbp). The values were obtained for each taxon by dividing its 2C genome size by the respective ploidy level (Greilhuber et al. 2005). Differences in 1Cx values among taxa are therefore virtually free of the polyploidy effect (i.e. only due to amplification of non-coding DNA). However, the 1Cx values in polyploids are usually slightly smaller due to the increased tendency to eliminate the duplicated, redundant DNA (Leitch & Bennett 2004). Because the 1Cx values tend to be similar in related taxa, they can be used to roughly estimate the 2C genome size in related taxa for which only the ploidy level is known so far. Conversely, they can be used to estimate the ploidy levels based on the known 2C genome size. The data were taken from Šmarda et al. (2019).
Šmarda P., Knápek O., Březinová A., Horová L., Grulich V., Danihelka J., Veselý P., Šmerda J., Rotreklová O. & Bureš P. (2019) Genome sizes and genomic guanine+cytosine (GC) contents of the Czech vascular flora with new estimates for 1700 species. – Preslia 91: 117–142.
Greilhuber J., Doležel J., Lysák M. A. & Bennett M. D. (2005) The origin, evolution and proposed stabilization of the terms ‘genome size’ and ‘C-value’ to describe nuclear DNA content. – Annals of Botany 95: 255–260.
Leitch I. J. & Bennett M. D. (2004) Genome downsizing in polyploid plants. – Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 82: 651–663.
Genomic GC content is the percentage of guanine and cytosine bases in nuclear DNA. It influences the thermal stability of DNA, packing of condensed DNA within the nucleus, the energetic cost of DNA synthesis or cell sensitivity to desiccation (Šmarda & Bureš 2012, Šmarda et al. 2014). For the vast majority of taxa, these data were measured in plants collected in the Czech Republic (Šmarda et al. 2019). The data always refer to the dominant chromosome number and dominant ploidy of the given taxon. Differences up to 1% in closely related taxa or up to 2% in unrelated taxa may be considered insignificant because of possible method errors (Šmarda et al. 2012).
Šmarda P., Knápek O., Březinová A., Horová L., Grulich V., Danihelka J., Veselý P., Šmerda J., Rotreklová O. & Bureš P. (2019) Genome sizes and genomic guanine+cytosine (GC) contents of the Czech vascular flora with new estimates for 1700 species. – Preslia 91: 117–142.
Šmarda P. & Bureš P. (2012) The variation of base composition in plant genomes. – In: Wendel J., Greilhuber J., Doležel J. & Leitch I. J. (eds), Plant genome diversity. Vol. 1. Plant genomes, their residents, and their evolutionary dynamics, p. 209–235, Springer, Heidelberg.
Šmarda P., Bureš P., Šmerda J. & Horová L. (2012) Measurements of genomic GC content in plant genomes with flow cytometry: a test for reliability. – New Phytologist 193: 513–521.
Šmarda P., Bureš P., Horová L., Leitch I. J., Mucina L., Pacini E., Tichý L., Grulich V. & Rotreklová O. (2014) Ecological and evolutionary significance of genomic GC content diversity in monocots. – Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 111: E4096–E4102.
Taxa are classified according to whether they are native or alien to the Czech Republic. Following the definitions used in invasion ecology, native taxa are those that have evolved in the area of the Czech Republic or immigrated there without human assistance from the area where they had evolved. Alien taxa are those whose presence is a result of intentional or unintentional introduction by human activity and can be divided based on their residence time. The alien taxa are divided based on their residence time into archaeophytes and neophytes. Archaeophytes are taxa occurring in the wild that were introduced between the beginning of Neolithic agriculture and the year 1500, i.e. the beginning of intercontinental overseas trade after the discovery of the Americas. Neophytes are taxa occurring in the wild that were introduced after 1500 (see Richardson et al. 2000 for detailed definitions). Some taxa introduced in the Late Middle Ages or Early Modern Period, but with no exact information on the introduction date, were assigned to a joint category of Archaeophyte/neophyte. Additionally, some frequently cultivated taxa that are not known to have escaped from cultivation are listed as a separate category Cultivated. Category Lack of evidence of occurrence in the wild includes taxa for which spontaneous occurrence in the wild is doubtful. Taxa assigned to the category Absent in Czechia are not sufficiently supported by reliable records or occurred just once and disappeared.
The data included in the database follow the third edition of the Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic (Pyšek et al. 2022 and references related to individual taxa therein).
Pyšek P., Sádlo J., Chrtek J. Jr., Chytrý M., Kaplan Z., Pergl J., Pokorná A., Axmanová I., Čuda J., Doležal J., Dřevojan P., Hejda M., Kočár P., Kortz A., Lososová Z., Lustyk P., Skálová H., Štajerová K., Večeřa M., Vítková M., Wild J. & Danihelka J. (2022) Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic (3rd edition): species richness, status, distributions, habitats, regional invasion levels, introduction pathways and impacts. – Preslia 94: 447–577.
Richardson D. M., Pyšek P., Rejmánek M., Barbour M. G., Panetta F. D. & West C. J. (2000) Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. – Diversity and Distributions 6: 93–107.
Indicator value for light is expressed on an ordinal scale from 1 to 9 defined by Ellenberg et al. (1991). The values for individual taxa have been modified and extended for the Czech flora by Chytrý et al. (2018). Values with “x” indicate generalists, i.e. taxa with broad ecological range with respect to light. Indicator values for trees relate to juvenile individuals in herb and shrub layer.
Chytrý M., Tichý L., Dřevojan P., Sádlo J. & Zelený D. (2018) Ellenberg-type indicator values for the Czech flora. – Preslia 90: 83–103.
Ellenberg H., Weber H. E., Düll R., Wirth V., Werner W. & Paulißen D. (1991) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. – Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–248.
Indicator value for temperature is expressed on an ordinal scale from 1 to 9 defined by Ellenberg et al. (1991). The values for individual taxa have been modified and extended for the Czech flora by Chytrý et al. (2018). Values with “x” indicate generalists, i.e. taxa with broad ecological range with respect to temperature.
Chytrý M., Tichý L., Dřevojan P., Sádlo J. & Zelený D. (2018) Ellenberg-type indicator values for the Czech flora. – Preslia 90: 83–103.
Ellenberg H., Weber H. E., Düll R., Wirth V., Werner W. & Paulißen D. (1991) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. – Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–248.
Indicator value for moisture is expressed on an ordinal scale from 1 to 12 defined by Ellenberg et al. (1991). The values for individual taxa have been modified and extended for the Czech flora by Chytrý et al. (2018). Values with “x” indicate generalists, i.e. taxa with broad ecological range with respect to moisture.
Chytrý M., Tichý L., Dřevojan P., Sádlo J. & Zelený D. (2018) Ellenberg-type indicator values for the Czech flora. – Preslia 90: 83–103.
Ellenberg H., Weber H. E., Düll R., Wirth V., Werner W. & Paulißen D. (1991) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. – Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–248.
Indicator value for soil or water reaction is expressed on an ordinal scale from 1 to 9 defined by Ellenberg et al. (1991). The values for individual taxa have been modified and extended for the Czech flora by Chytrý et al. (2018). Values with “x” indicate generalists, i.e. taxa with broad ecological range with respect to the reaction. In acidic environments, the value can be considered as a proxy for pH, while in near-neutral or alkaline environments it is more a proxy for calcium concentration.
Chytrý M., Tichý L., Dřevojan P., Sádlo J. & Zelený D. (2018) Ellenberg-type indicator values for the Czech flora. – Preslia 90: 83–103.
Ellenberg H., Weber H. E., Düll R., Wirth V., Werner W. & Paulißen D. (1991) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. – Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–248.
Indicator value for nutrients is expressed on an ordinal scale from 1 to 9 defined by Ellenberg et al. (1991). The values for individual taxa have been modified and extended for the Czech flora by Chytrý et al. (2018). Values with “x” indicate generalists, i.e. taxa with broad ecological range with respect to nutrient availability. The value is a proxy for availability of nitrogen or phosphorus and to some extent also a proxy for site primary productivity.
Chytrý M., Tichý L., Dřevojan P., Sádlo J. & Zelený D. (2018) Ellenberg-type indicator values for the Czech flora. – Preslia 90: 83–103.
Ellenberg H., Weber H. E., Düll R., Wirth V., Werner W. & Paulißen D. (1991) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. – Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–248.
Indicator value for salinity is expressed on an ordinal scale from 0 to 9 defined by Ellenberg et al. (1991). The values for individual taxa have been modified and extended for the Czech flora by Chytrý et al. (2018). It is a proxy for concentration in the environment of soluble salts, including sulphates, chlorides and carbonates of sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium.
Chytrý M., Tichý L., Dřevojan P., Sádlo J. & Zelený D. (2018) Ellenberg-type indicator values for the Czech flora. – Preslia 90: 83–103.
Ellenberg H., Weber H. E., Düll R., Wirth V., Werner W. & Paulißen D. (1991) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. – Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–248.
The affinity of taxa to the forest environment is assessed using the categories of the German national list of forest taxa (Schmidt et al. 2011). Each taxon is assessed separately for the region of Thermophyticum (lowlands with thermophilous and drought-adapted flora) and merged regions of Mesophyticum and Oreophyticum (mid-elevations and mountains with mesophilous and mountain flora; Skalický 1988). The compilation was based on the list of regional species pools of Czech habitats (Sádlo et al. 2007), expert knowledge and various literature sources. It has been integrated into the European forest plant species list (Heinken et al. 2019).
Categories
Dřevojan P., Chytrý M., Sádlo J. & Pyšek P. (2016) Affinity to the forest environment. – www.pladias.cz.
Heinken T., Diekmann M., Liira J., Orczewska A., Brunet J., Chytrý M., Chabrerie O., de Frenne P., Decoq G.,
Dřevojan P., Dzwonko Z., Ewald J., Feilberg J., Graae B. J., Grytnes J. A., Hermy M., Kriebitzsch W.-U.,
Laivins M., Lindmo S., Marage D., Marozas V., Meirland A., Niemeyer T., Paal J., Pyšek P., Roosaluste E.,
Sádlo J., Schaminée J., Schmidt M., Tyler T., Verheyen K. & Wulf M. (2019) European forest plant species
list. – Fighshare, https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.8095217.v1.
Sádlo J., Chytrý M. & Pyšek P. (2007) Regional species pools of vascular plants in habitats of the Czech Republic. – Preslia 79: 303–321.
Schmidt M., KriebitzschW.-U. & Ewald J. (eds) (2011) Waldartenlisten der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen, Moose und Flechten Deutschlands. – BfN-Skripten 299: 1–111.
Skalický V. (1988) Regionálně fytogeografické členění [Regional phytogeographic division]. – In: Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds), Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic] 1: 103–121, Academia, Praha.
The lowest and the highest elevational vegetation belt in which the taxon commonly occurs in the Czech Republic. For some taxa, also extremes are shown, i.e. elevational belts in which the taxon rarely occurs outside its main elevational range. The submontane belt comprises merged supracolline and submontane belts, and the montane belt comprises merged montane and supramontane belts according to the classification of elevational vegetation belts used in the Flora of the Czech Republic (Skalický 1988). The data were taken from the Key to the Flora of the Czech Republic (Kaplan et al. 2019).
Kaplan Z., Danihelka J., Chrtek J. Jr., Kirschner J., Kubát K., Štěpánek J. & Štech M. (eds) (2019) Klíč ke květeně České republiky [Key to the flora of the Czech Republic]. Ed. 2. – Academia, Praha.
Skalický V. (1988) Regionálně fytogeografické členění [Regional phytogeographic division]. – In: Hejný S., Slavík B., Chrtek J., Tomšovic P. & Kovanda M. (eds), Květena České socialistické republiky [Flora of the Czech Socialist Republic] 1: 103–121, Academia, Praha.
The number of basic grid mapping cells (Central European Basic Area, CEBA) and the number of quadrants of the Central European flora mapping in that the taxon has been recorded within the territory of the Czech Republic are generated dynamically from the current occurrence records in the species distribution module of the Pladias Database. The basic grid cells measure 10 minutes in the west–east direction and 6 minutes in the south–north direction, which corresponds to approximately 12.0 × 11.1 km (133.2 km²) on the 50th parallel. The Czech Republic comprises 679 basic cells, including incomplete cells on the state borders. The quadrants are the basic grid cells divided into four. They measure 5 minutes in the west–east direction and 3 minutes in the south–north direction, which corresponds to approximately 6.0 × 5.55 km (33.3 km²) on the 50th parallel. Revised occurrence records marked as erroneous or uncertain are not counted.
Pladias. Database of the Czech flora and vegetation. – www.pladias.cz.
National Red List categories were taken from the 2017 edition of the Red List of Vascular Plants of the Czech Republic (Grulich 2017). These categories, introduced in the previous editions of the Czech Red List, are different from the IUCN Red List categories. The main category “A” includes extinct or missing taxa, while the main category “C” includes endangered, near threatened and data deficient taxa.
Grulich V. (2017) Červený seznam cévnatých rostlin ČR [The Red List of vascular plants of the Czech Republic]. – Příroda 35: 75–132.
International Red List categories defined by the IUCN were taken from the 2017 edition of the Red List of Vascular Plants of the Czech Republic (Grulich 2017). Taxon assignments to these categories follow the internationally accepted rules (IUCN 2012, 2014). To some extent, the definitions of these categories differ from the national categories used in the previous Czech Red Lists. The national Red List included only threatened or possibly threatened taxa, implying that the non-included taxa are not threatened. Therefore, the non-included taxa are classified here as LC(NA) – least concern (taxon is not on the Red List).
Grulich V. (2017) Červený seznam cévnatých rostlin ČR [The Red List of vascular plants of the Czech Republic]. – Příroda 35: 75–132.
IUCN (2012) Guidelines for application of IUCN Red List criteria at regional and national levels. Version 4.0. – IUCN, Gland.
IUCN (2014) Guidelines for using the IUCN Red List categories and criteria. Version 11. – IUCN, Gland.
Legal protection in the Czech Republic concerns the specifically protected species, i.e. rare taxa, threatened taxa and taxa significant from a cultural or scientific point of view that are listed in Annex II of the Decree of the Ministry of the Environment no. 395/1992. They comprise 487 taxa of vascular plants divided into three categories according to their vulnerability: critically threatened, endangered and vulnerable.
Decree no. 395/1992 of the Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic.