Invasive flora within urban railway areas: a case study from Lublin (Poland) and Lviv (Ukraine)

Warianty tytułu

EN

Flora inwazyjna terenów kolejowych w obrębie miast – Lublina (Polska) i Lwowa (Ukraina)

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Heterogeneous and disturbed habitats within railway areas create an ideal environment for establishment of invasive plant species. In this study, we compared the invasive species composition and abundance within railway areas of two cities, Lublin, SE Poland and Lviv, W Ukraine. In total, 70 invasive species were recorded. The invasive species list was similar for the two cities, with the most invasive species occurring at both (81.4%), 8.5% occurring only in Lublin and 10% only in Lviv. The proportion of invasive species in the total flora was almost 1.5-fold higher at Lviv compared to Lublin. Invasive species have originated mainly from continental America (45.7%), followed by Asia and Eurasia. The participation of invasive plants derived from Asia and Eurasia at Lviv is higher than at Lublin. The invasive flora includes a wide range of taxonomic groups, with a predominance of Asteraceae and Poaceae. The ecological attributes of invasive species on railway areas are: mainly annual therophytes, mostly wind- and insect pollination modes, a predominance of generative reproduction, anthropochorous and anemochorous dispersal and short-term persistent, long-term persistent or transient seed banks.

PL

Zróżnicowane i zaburzone siedliska w obrębie terenów kolejowych tworzą środowisko do zadomowienia obcych gatunków roślin. W pracy porównano skład oraz bogactwo gatunkowe gatunków inwazyjnych notowanych w obrębie terenów kolejowych Lublina (południowo-wschodnia Polska) oraz Lwowa (zachodnia Ukraina). Zanotowano 70 gatunków inwazyjnych. Skład gatunkowy flory inwazyjnej był w obu miastach podobny; 81.4% gatunków inwazyjnych notowano w obu miastach, 8.5% tylko w Lublinie, a 10% tylko we Lwowie. Udział gatunków inwazyjnych we florze Lwowa był wyższy w porównaniu z florą Lublina. Gatunki inwazyjne pochodziły głównie z Ameryki (45.7% gatunków), Azji i Eurazji. Udział gatunków inwazyjnych przybyłych z Azji i Eurazji był wyższy we Lwowie niż w Lublinie. Gatunki należące do rodziny Asteraceae i Poaceae dominowały wśród gatunków inwazyjnych. Analiza cech ekologicznych gatunków inwazyjnych zasiedlających tereny kolejowe wykazała, że są to głównie rośliny jednoroczne, wiatro- lub owadopylne, rozmnażające się generatywnie, o nasionach rozsiewających się antropochorycznie lub anemochorycznie, tworzące krótkotrwały lub długotrwały bank nasion.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Agrobotanica
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: 70
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: Article 1727 [14p.], fig.,ref.

Twórcy

Bibliografia

• 1. Lososová Z, Chytry M, Tichy L, Danihelka J, Fajmon K, Hajek O, et al. Native and alien flora in urban habitats: a comparison among 32 cities across Central Europe. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2012;21:545–555. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00704.x
• 2. Lambdon P, Pyšek P, Basnou C, Hejda M, Arianoutsou M, Essl F, et al. Alien flora of Europe: species diversity, temporal trends, geographical patterns and research needs. Preslia. 2008;80(2):101–149.
• 3. Tokarska-Guzik B, Dajdok Z, Zając M, Zając A, Urbisz A, Danielewicz W, et al. Rośliny obcego pochodzenia w Polsce ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem gatunków inwazyjnych. Warszawa: Generalna Dyrekcja Ochrony Środowiska; 2012.
• 4. Jeschke J, Bacher S, Blackburn T, Dick J, Essl F, Evans T, et al. Defining the impact of nonnative species. Conserv Biol. 2014;28(5):1188–1194. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12299
• 5. Kowarik I. Time lags in biological invasions with regard to the success and failure of alien species. In: Pysek P, Prach K, Rejmánek M, Wade M, editors. Plant invasions: general aspects and special problems. Amsterdam: SPB Academic Publishing; 1995. p. 15–39.
• 6. Pyšek P, Chocholoušková Z, Pyšek A, Jarošık V, Chytry M, Tichy L. Trends in species diversity and composition of urban vegetation over three decades. J Veg Sci. 2004;15:781–788. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2004.tb02321.x
• 7. Zimmermann H, Brandt P, Fischer J, Welk E, von Wehrden H. The human release hypothesis for biological invasions: human activity as a determinant of the abundance of invasive plant species. F1000Res. 2014;3:109. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3740.2
• 8. Chytry M, Pyšek P, Tichy L, Knollova I, Danihelka J. Invasions by alien plants in the Czech Republic: a quantitative assessment across habitats. Preslia. 2005;77:339–354.
• 9. Štajerová K, Šmilauer P, Brůna J, Pyšek P. Distribution of invasive plants in urban environment is strongly spatially structured. Landsc Ecol; 2017;32(3):681–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0480-9
• 10. Elton CS. The ecology of invasion by plants and animals. London: Methuen; 1958. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7214-9
• 11. Pautasso M. Scale-dependence of the correlation between human population presence and vertebrate and plant species richness. Ecol Lett. 2007;10:16–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00993.x
• 12. Alston K, Richardson D. The roles of habitat features, disturbance, and distance fromputative source populations in structuring alien plant invasions at the urban/wildlandinterface on the Cape Peninsula, South Africa. Biol Conserv. 2006;132(2):183–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.03.023
• 13. Ricotta C, Celesti-Grapow L, Kuhn I, Rapson GP, Pyšek P, La Sorte FA, et al. Geographical constraints are stronger than invasion patterns for European urban floras. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e85661. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085661
• 14. Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T. The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol. 2005;20:223–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2005.02.004
• 15. Chytry M, Pysek P, Wild J, Pino J, Maskell LC, Vilà M. European map of alien plant invasions based on the quantitative assessment across habitats. Divers Distrib. 2009;15:98–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00515.x
• 16. Morelli F, Beim M, Jerzak L, Jones D, Tryjanowsk P. Can roads, railways and related structures have positive effects on birds? A review. Transp Res D Transp Environ. 2014;30:21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2014.05.006
• 17. Furman RTT. Urban ecology: science of cities. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2014.
• 18. Spiekermann K, Wegener M, Kveton V, Marada M, Schürmann C, Biosca O, et al. Transport accessibility at regional/local scale and patterns in Europe. TRACC executive summary and final report. Luxembourg: ESPON; 2015.
• 19. Korres NE, Norsworthy JK, Bagavathiannan MV, Mauromoustakos A. Distribution of arable weed populations along eastern Arkansas–Mississippi Delta roadsides: factors affecting weed occurrence. Weed Technol. 2015;29(3):596–604. https://doi.org/10.1614/WT-D-14-00152.1
• 20. Delgado JD, Arroyo N, Arévalo JR, Fernández-Palacios JM. Edge effects of roads on temperature, light, canopy cover, and canopy height in laurel and pine forests (Tenerife, Canary Islands). Landsc Urban Plan. 2007;81:328–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.01.005
• 21. Moroń D, Skórka P, Lenda M, Rożej-Pabijan E, Wantuch M, Kajzer-Bonk J, et al. Railway embankments as new habitat for pollinators in an agricultural landscape. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e101297. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101297
• 22. Wrzesień M, Jachuła J, Denisow B. Railway embankments – refuge areas for food flora, and pollinators in agricultural landscape. Journal of Apicultural Science. 2016;60(1):39–51. https://doi.org/10.1515/JAS-2016-0004
• 23. Fahrig L. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2003;34:487–515. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419
• 24. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM. What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology. 1996;77(6):1655–1661. https://doi.org/10.2307/2265768
• 25. Chytry M, Pysek P, Tichy L, Knollová I, Danihelka J. Invasions by alien plants in the Czech Republic: a quantitative assessment across habitats. Preslia. 2005;77:339–354.
• 26. Pyšek P, Bacher S, Chytry M, Jarosik V, Wild J, Celesti-Grapow L, et al. Contrasting patterns in the invasions of European terrestrial and freshwater habitats by alien plants, insects and vertebrates. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2010;19:317–333. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2009.00514.x
• 27. Stohlgren TJ, Schnase JL. Risk analysis for biological hazards: what we need to know about invasive species. Risk Anal. 2006;26(1):163–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00707.x
• 28. Rasmussen K, Thyrring J, Muscarella R, Borchsenius F. Climate-change-induced range shifts of three allergenic ragweeds (Ambrosia L.) in Europe and their potential impact on human health. Peer J. 2017;5:e3104. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3104
• 29. Wrzesień M, Denisow B, Mamchur Z, Chuba M, Resler I. Composition and structure of the flora in intra-urban railway areas. Acta Agrobot. 2016;69(3):1666. https://doi.org/10.5586/aa.1666
• 30. Мамчур З [Mamchur Z], Чуба М [Chuba M], Драч Ю [Drach Y]. Мохоподібні та судинні рослинина території залізниці міста Львова [Mosses and vascular plants on railway tracks in the Lviv City]. Вісник Львівського Університету. Серія Біологічна [Visnyk of the Lviv University. Series Biology]. 2017;75:54–65.
• 31. Мамчур З [Mamchur Z], Чуба М [Chuba M], Драч Ю [Drach Y]. Екологічні особливості видів рослин на території залізниці міста Львова [The ecological features of plants of railway in the Lviv City]. Біологічні Студії [Studia Biologica]. 2017;11(1):135–146.
• 32. Kondracki J. Geografia regionalna Polski. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN; 2002.
• 33. Shabliĭ O. L’viv: kompleksnyĭ atlas. Kyïv: DNVP “Kartohrafija”; 2012.
• 34. Rysiak A. Atlas of distribution of vascular plants in Lublin. Lublin: Kartpol; 2016.
• 35. Мамчур З [Mamchur Z], Чуба М [Chuba M]. Екологічні особливості синантропної флори території центральної щільної забудови міста Львова [The ecological features of synanthropic flora of central dense housing area of Lviv]. Біологічні Студії [Studia Biologica]. 2016;10(1):143–154.
• 36. Protopopova VV. Synantropic flora of Ukraine and its development. Kiev: Nauk. Dumka Press; 1991.
• 37. Protopopova VV, Mosyakin SV, Shevera MV. Plant invasions in Ukraine as a threat to biodiversity: the present situation and tasks for the future. Kyiv: M. G. Kholodny Institute of Botany, NAS of Ukraine; 2002.
• 38. Klotz S, Kühn I, Durka W. BIOLFLOR – Eine Datenbank zu biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen der Gefäßpflanzen in Deutschland. Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde. Bonn: Bundesamt für Naturschutz; 2002.
• 39. Kleyer M, Bekker RM, Knevel IC, Bakker JP, Thompson K, Sonnenschein M, et al. The LEDA Traitbase: a database of life-history traits of the Northwest European flora. J Ecol. 2008;96:1266–1274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2008.01430.x
• 40. Protopopova VV, Shevera MV, Mosyakin SV. Deliberate and unintentional introduction of invasive weeds: a case study of the alien flora of Ukraine. Euphytica. 2006;148:17–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-006-5938-4
• 41. Protopopova VV, Shevera MV. Ergasiophytes of the Ukrainian flora. Biodiv Res Conserv. 2014;35:31–46. https://doi.org/10.2478/biorc-2014-0018
• 42. Mirek Z, Piękoś-Mirkowa H, Zając A, Zając M, editors. Flowering plants and pteridophytes of Poland. A checklist. Cracow: W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Science; 2002. (Biodiversity of Poland; vol 1).
• 43. Wrzesień M, Święs F. Flora i zbiorowiska roślinne terenów kolejowych zachodniej części Wyżyny Lubelskiej. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS; 2006.
• 44. Warcholińska AU, Suwara-Szmigielska S. The vascular flora of the railway grounds of the Pabianice town. Folia Biologica et Oecologica. 2009;5:21–41. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10107-009-0002-5
• 45. Galera H, Sudnik-Wójcikowska B, Wierzbicka M, Jarzyna I, Wiłkomirski B. Structure of the flora of railway areas under various anthropogenic pressure. Pol Bot J. 2014;59(1):121–130. https://doi.org/10.2478/pbj-2014-0001
• 46. Tret’yakova AS. The role of railroads in the formation of synanthropic flora in the Middle Urals. Russ J Ecol. 2010;41:123–128. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1067413610020037
• 47. Özaslan C. Do railways contribute to plant invasion in Turkey? J Agric For. 2016:62(3):285–298. https://doi.org/10.17707/AgricultForest.62.3.23
• 48. Aronson MFJ, La Sorte FA, Nilon CH, Katti M, Goddard MA, Lepczyk CA, et al. A global analysis of the impacts of urbanization on bird and plant diversity reveals key anthropogenic drivers. Proc R Soc B. 2014;281(1780):20133330
• 49. Myroszniszenko V. Koleje Ukrainy. Problemy Kolejnictwa. 2007;144:51–58.
• 50. Brandes, D. Flora and vegetation von Stadtmauern, Gottingen. Tuexenia. 1992;12:315–319.
• 51. Jehlík J, Dostálek J. Influence of railway transport in the south-east of Slovakia on formation of adventive flora in Central Europe. Biodivers Res Conserv. 2008;11–12:27–32.
• 52. Filibeck G, Cornelini P, Petrella P. Floristic analysis of a high-speed railway embankment in a Mediterranean landscape. Acta Bot Croat. 2012;71(2):229–248. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10184-011-0064-3
• 53. Brandes D. Contributions to the urban flora and vegetation of Strasbourg (France) [Internet]. 2003 [cited 2017 Dec 23]. Available from: http://opus.tu-bs.de/opus/volltexte/2003/517/
• 54. Anačkov GT, Rat MM, Radak BDj, Igić RS, Vukov DM, Rućando MM, et al. Alien invasive neophytes of the southeastern part of the Pannonian Plain. Cent Eur J Biol. 2013;8(10):1032–1047. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11535-013-0225-6
• 55. Vanderhoeven Brown CS, Tepolt CK, Tsutsui ND, Vanparys V, Atkinson S, et al. Linking concepts in the ecology and evolution of invasive plants: network analysis shows what has been most studied and identifies knowledge gaps. Evol Appl. 2010;3(2):193–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4571.2009.00116.x
• 56. Galera H, Sudnik-Wójcikowska B, Wierzbicka M, Wiłkomirski B. Directions of changes in the flora structure in the abandoned railway areas. Ecological Questions. 2012;16:29–39. https://doi.org/10.12775/v10090-012-0003-5
• 57. Altay V, Ozyigit II, Osma E, Bakir Y, Demir G, Severoglu Z, Yarci C. Environmental relationships of the vascular flora alongside the railway tracks between Haydarpaşa and Gebze (Istanbul-Kocaeli/Turkey). J Environ Biol. 2015;36(1):153–162.
• 58. Raven PH. The relationships between Mediterranean floras. In: Davis PH, Harper PC, Hedge TC, editors. Plant life of Southwest Asia. Aberdeen: Edinburgh Botanical Society; 1971. p. 119–134.
• 59. Delivering alien invasive species inventories for Europe (DAISIE) [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Sep 12]. Available from: http://www.europe-aliens.org/speciesSearch.do
• 60. European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO) [Internet]. EPPO lists of invasive alien plants. 2017 [cited 2017 Sep 12]. Available from: https://www.eppo.int/INVASIVE_PLANTS/ias_lists.htm
• 61. NOBANIS (European Network on Invasive Alien Species) [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Sep 12]. Available from: https://www.nobanis.org
• 62. Kowarik I. Novel urban ecosystems, biodiversity, and conservation. Environ Pollut. 2011;159:1974–1983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.02.022
• 63. Saccone P, Girel J, Pages JP, Brun JJ, Michalet R. Ecological resistance to Acer negundo invasion in a European riparian forest: relative importance of environmental and biotic drivers. Appl Veg Sci. 2013;16:184–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-109X.2012.01227.x
• 64. Mullah CJ, Klanderud K, Totland R, Odee D. Community invasibility and invasion by non-native Fraxinus pennsylvanica trees in a degraded tropical forest. Biol Invasions. 2014;16:2747–2755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-014-0701-6
• 65. Drescher A, Prots B. Fraxinus pennsylvanica – an invasive tree species in Middle Europe: case studies from the Danube basin. Contribuţii Botanice. 2016;51:55–69.
• 66. Drescher A, Prots B, Mountford O. The world of old oxbow lakes, ancient riverine forests and drained mires in the Tisza river basin. Fritschiana. 2003;45:43–69.
• 67. Kangur M, Kotta J, Kukk T, Kull T, Lilleleht V, Luig J, et al. Invasiivsed võõrliigid Eestis. Tallinn: Keskkonnaministeerium; 2005.
• 68. Kiełtyk P, Mirek Z. Importance of molehill disturbances for invasion by Bunias orientalis in meadows and pastures. Acta Oecol. 2015;64:29–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actao.2015.02.007
• 69. Denisow B, Masierowska M, Antoń S. Floral nectar production and carbohydrate composition and the structure of receptacular nectaries in the invasive plant Bunias orientalis L. (Brassicaceae). Protoplasma. 2016;253(6):1489–1501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00709-015-0902-6
• 70. Morales CL, Traveset A. A meta-analysis of impacts of alien vs. native plants on pollinator visitation and reproductive success of co-flowering native plants. Ecol Lett. 2009;12(7):716–728. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01319.x
• 71. Skjøth CA, Smith M, Šikoparija B, Stach A, Myszkowska D, Kasprzyk I, et al. A method for producing airborne pollen source inventories: an example of Ambrosia (ragweed) on the Pannonian Plain. Agric For Meteorol. 2010;150:1203–1210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2010.05.002
• 72. Pyšek P, Jarošík V, Hulme PE, Kühn I, Wild J, Arianoutsou M, et al. Disentangling the role of environmental and human pressures on biological invasions across Europe. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107(27):12157–12162. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1002314107
• 73. Weryszko-Chmielewska E, Chwil M, Localization of furanocoumarins in tissues and on the surface of shoots in Heracleum sosnowskyi Manden. Botany. 2017;95(11):1057–1070. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjb-2017-0043

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5586/aa.1727