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.
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.
Grime (1974, 1979) distinguished three basic ecological strategies of plants: competitive strategy (C), advantageous in habitats where resources are abundant, conditions not extreme and disturbance level is low; stress tolerant strategy (S), advantageous where resources are scarce, conditions severe, but disturbance is uncommon; and ruderal strategy (R), advantageous where resources are abundant and conditions not extreme, but disturbance level is high. There are also intermediate strategies in all possible combinations of the three basic types (CR, CS, SR, CSR). Data were taken from the BiolFlor database (Klotz & Kühn 2002).
Klotz S. & Kühn I. (2002) Ökologische Strategietypen. – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & Durka W. (eds), BIOLFLOR: eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 119–126.
Grime J. P. (1974) Vegetation classification by reference to strategies. – Nature 250: 26–31.
Grime J. P. (1979) Plant strategies and vegetation processes. – Wiley, Chichester.
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.
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.
Leaf life span is a functional trait important for plant competitiveness. It depends on the climate in the distribution range of the taxon and microclimate, nutrient and light availability in typical habitats of the taxon. The data were taken from the BiolFlor database (Klotz & Kühn 2002).
Categories
Klotz S. & Kühn I. (2002) Blattmerkmale. – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & Durka W. (eds), BIOLFLOR: eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 119–126.
Leaf anatomy is an important ecological adaptation which helps plants to optimize photosynthesis under various environmental conditions. It reflects especially the availability of water (Klotz & Kühn 2002). Succulent and scleromorphic leaves are adapted to dry conditions. Both of them have thickened epidermis and cuticle, but the former develop a water-storage tissue while the latter have mechanisms to promote water transport in periods of water availability. Mesomorphic leaves are adapted to less dry conditions; hygromorphic leaves to shady conditions that rarely suffer from drought; helomorphic leaves to oxygen deficiency in swampy soils; and hydromorphic leaves to gas exchange in the water. The most common type in the Czech flora is mesomorphic leaves. The data were taken from the BiolFlor database (Klotz & Kühn 2002), which contains an extended and corrected version of the dataset published by Ellenberg (1979).
Klotz S. & Kühn I. (2002) Blattmerkmale. – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & Durka W. (eds), BIOLFLOR: eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 119–126.
Ellenberg H. (1979) Zeigerwerte der Gefäßpflanzen Mitteleuropas. Ed. 2. – Scripta Geobotanica 9: 1–122.
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.
Dicliny characterizes the level of spatial separation of male and female reproductive organs. Monoclinous (synoecious) plants, including most taxa of the central-European flora, have only bisexual (hermaphroditic) flowers. The plants with unisexual flowers are either monoecious (with both male and female flowers growing on the same individual) or dioecious (with male and female flowers growing on different individuals). Gynomonoecious plants have female and bisexual flowers on the same individuals, while andromonoecious plants have male and bisexual flowers on the same individuals. Gynodioecious plants have female and bisexual flowers on different individuals, or some individuals have only female flowers, and other individuals have both male and female flowers. Androdioecious plants have male and bisexual flowers on different individuals, or some individuals have only male flowers, and other individuals have both male and female flowers. Trioecious plants have individuals with male flowers, individuals with female flowers, and individuals with bisexual (or both male and female unisexual) flowers. Trimonoecious plants have a male, female and bisexual flowers on the same individual. Other plants can be male sterile. The data on dicliny were taken from the BiolFlor database (Durka 2002).
Durka W. (2002) Blüten- und Reproduktionsbiologie. – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & Durka W. (eds), BIOLFLOR – Eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 133–175.
Reproduction is the production of offspring that are physically separated from the parental plant. Plants reproduce either by seed (or spores) or vegetatively, while the combination of these two types of reproduction in the same taxon is common. Asexual seed production (apomixis) is not considered as vegetative reproduction. The data were taken from the BiolFlor database (Durka 2002).
Durka W. (2002) Blüten- und Reproduktionsbiologie. – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & Durka W. (eds), BIOLFLOR – Eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 133–175.
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.
Shoot metamorphoses are modifications of the shoot that involve the development of different structures for special tasks such as vegetative spread or storage. Data about shoot metamorphoses are adopted from the BiolFlor database (Krumbiegel 2002).
Categories
Krumbiegel A. (2002) Morphologie der vegetativen Organe (außer Blätter). – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & DurkaW. (eds), BIOLFLOR: eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 93–118.
The occurrence of organs for storage of nutrients or water is usually associated with the ability of vegetative propagation and dispersal. The data on storage organs were taken from the BiolFlor database (Krumbiegel 2002). The following categories are recognized:
Krumbiegel A. (2002) Morphologie der vegetativen Organe (außer Blätter). – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & DurkaW. (eds), BIOLFLOR: eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 93–118.
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.
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.
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 floristic zones of the Earth in which the taxon occurs are defined according to Meusel et al. (1965, 1978) and Meusel & Jäger (1992). Data were taken from the BiolFlor database (Kühn & Klotz 2002).
Categories
Kühn I. & Klotz S. (2002) Angaben zu den Arealen. – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & DurkaW. (eds), BIOLFLOR: eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 227–239.
Meusel H. & Jäger E. (1992) Vergleichende Chorologie der zentraleuropäischen Flora. Band III. – Gustav Fischer, Jena.
Meusel H., Jäger E. & Weinert E. (1965) Vergleichende Chorologie der zentraleuropäischen Flora. Band I. – Gustav Fischer, Jena.
Meusel H., Jäger E., Rauschert S. & Weinert E. (1978) Vergleichende Chorologie der zentraleuropäischen Flora. Band II. – Gustav Fischer, Jena.
The floristic region is reported as the continent or its part in which the taxon occurs according to the taxon range maps (Meusel et al. 1965, 1978, Meusel & Jäger 1992). The categories are not discrete, and some of the regions can be included within broader regions (e.g. Western Siberia – Siberia – Asia). From a set of overlapping categories, the one that best matches the taxon geographic range or its part is reported. Data were taken from the BiolFlor database (Kühn & Klotz 2002).
Kühn I. & Klotz S. (2002) Angaben zu den Arealen. – In: Klotz S., Kühn I. & DurkaW. (eds), BIOLFLOR: eine Datenbank mit biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen zur Flora von Deutschland, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 38: 227–239.
Meusel H. & Jäger E. (1992) Vergleichende Chorologie der zentraleuropäischen Flora. Band III. – Gustav Fischer, Jena.
Meusel H., Jäger E. & Weinert E. (1965) Vergleichende Chorologie der zentraleuropäischen Flora. Band I. – Gustav Fischer, Jena.
Meusel H., Jäger E., Rauschert S. & Weinert E. (1978) Vergleichende Chorologie der zentraleuropäischen Flora. Band II. – Gustav Fischer, Jena.
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.