Flora of Bavaria: floristic status

From Bayernflora
Jump to: navigation, search
Deutsch

You are here: ProjekteFlora of Bavaria: floristic status


General information

Floristic status systems have been an important instrument for the structured description of a flora in space and time since the beginning of the coordinated measures for floristic mapping and the compilation of area-related species checklists. The floristic status (also called occurence status) always refers to a specific area defined within a floristic mapping or checklist project (Ruff et al. 2019).

In projects for the creation and dynamic updating of standard lists or checklists of larger territorial units such as Germany and Bavaria, the so-called primary distribution status or "status of occurrence" of a taxon is determined "ex situ" on the basis of sources and input from florists. Examples are the project for Germany and its federal states (Hand et al. 2020) and the Flora of Bavaria initiative (Lippert & Meierott 2014, Lippert & Meierott 2018, Diewald & Ahlmer 2016 onwards). Primary floristic status information on a taxon, if related to a politically defined area, e.g. Germany, the state of Bavaria or its administrative districts, can supplement information on the Red List category of a taxon in this area, and are categories relevant for official nature conservation.

The floristic status describes the degree of establishment, the time of immigration and the mode of settlement of a taxon in this area (Bergmeier 1991). The floristic status is assigned on taxon level.

The use of a commonly defined and simplified system of terms for the "floristic status" has proven to be particularly useful in large species monitoring projects of vascular plants in order to describe as comprehensibly as possible to what extent a plant occurrence can be attributed to human influence. In species monitoring and mapping projects, this is usually done in the field "in situ" at the time of the individual observation, whereby the observation can refer to a precise location or to a recording area (plot, TK25/Q etc.) at the time of observation. The "in situ" status of a taxon depends on the primary or “ex situ” status in the defined area. In the simplified status system with four categories, two main criteria of classification are considered, namely the time of immigration and the degree of establishment, and a distinction is made between "native" - "established" - "casual" - "cultivated" (see e.g. Floristischer Status, Kartierung Saarland, Anonym; NetPhyD & BfN (Hrsg.) 2014).

  • In connection with the development of the BIB data portal for the flora of Bavaria from 2003 onwards, two sections were established under which information on floristic status categories currently appears:
    • The section "Checklist of Vascular Plants of Bavaria" lists the so-called primary or "ex situ" status (“Bayernstatus, “Bavaria status”) of a taxon as published in the “Kommentierte Artenliste der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen Bayerns” (“Annotated List of Species of Fern and Flowering Plants of Bavaria”) (Lippert & Meierott 2014, Lippert & Meierott 2018). Furthermore, the data management system Diversity Workbench (DWB-DiversityTaxonNames) internally manages changes of the “Bavaria status”, as they result from the continuous processing of the Taxonomischen Referenzliste der Gefäßpflanzen Bayerns (TaxRefListe), currently curated by Wolfgang Diewald. The TaxRefList is independent of the BIB Data Portal and is available for download in static versions as well as dynamically via a web service (see DTN REST Webservice with example). The categories displayed in the BIB Data Portal and in the DTN REST web service are defined in Tab. 1.
    • The section "Profiles of Vascular Plants of Bavaria" with dynamically generated distribution maps refers to the "in situ" status categories, as they are often assigned directly in the field by the individual florists using check lists. The managed categories have changed somewhat in their meaning over time (on the history see Ruff et al. 2019). The system currently in use is based mainly on categories as defined by FlorEin 5.0 and earlier versions of this system. Since 2013, with the migration of central Bayernflora databases from an MS-Access database managed by Wolfgang Ahlmer to the data management system Diversity Workbench (DWB-DiversityCollection), this optimized status system also forms the conceptual schematic basis of the status management of the Bayernflora (BFL) databases. Currently 28 BFL status categories are managed there. (Tab. 2)
  • When providing BFL distribution data to national and international data portals such as GBIF, GFBio and PLADIAS (technically via an installation of the BioCASe Provider Software at the SNSB IT Center), all "in situ" status categories are made available for each individual observation released for publication. It is irrelevant whether this observation is the result of a literature search, or comes from a herbarium label or - as is usually the case - from direct observation of the terrain. The categories appear in the BFL term scheme with corresponding abbreviations, or - in the case of PLADIAS - are assigned secondarily to the terms listed in Tab. 2.
    • The floristic status is usually assigned by the observer, if possible during or immediately after the observation, often as free text ("original note"), e.g. "E? or K" and then appears as "analysis 1". When external data sources are integrated into the BFL database, original information from these external projects may have been processed previously, so that BFL information under "analysis 1" does not always reflect the observation of the floristic status in the field. If necessary, a further floristic status, e.g. "E", will be assigned by the DWB data manager during the first internal quality control and if necessary, further floristic status assignments will be made later by florists, e.g. "U". The numbering visible during data publication indicates which status was assigned first ("analysis 1"), and which status will follow. As a rule, the status with the highest number under "analysis" refers to quality-controlled entries that can be used for data evaluation. There are suitable BFL editing tools for internal DWB editing of the floristic status information.


Tab. 1: List of abbreviations and definitions used in DWB-DTN for the categories of “Bayernstatus” (= "Bavaria status", "ex situ" floristic status categories)

(see also representation in Ruff et al. 2019, p. 229, Tab. 2)

status category: abbreviation status category: name status category: definition (according to BIB Checklist of Vascular Plants of Bavaria with legend for abbreviations, extended) type of status
H native indigenous and archaeophytes (established before ca. 1500) floristic status, "Bavaria status”
H? presumably native presumably indigenous or archaeophytes (established before ca. 1500) floristic status, "Bavaria status”
E established early neophyte (established ca. 1500-1800) or late neophyte (established after ca. 1800); a neophyte is considered established only if it can survive and multiply without human assistance for a certain period of time floristic status, "Bavaria status”
E? presumably established presumably early neophyte (established ca. 1500-1800) or late neophyte (established after ca. 1800); a neophyte is only considered established if it can survive and multiply without human assistance for a certain period of time floristic status, "Bavaria status”
T tendency towards establishment establishment criteria not yet completely fulfilled, but probably in future floristic status, "Bavaria status”
T? presumably tendency towards establishment presumably establishment criteria not yet completely fulfilled, but probably in future floristic status, "Bavaria status”
U casual casual in a broader sense, including cultivated and synanthropic taxa floristic status, "Bavaria status”
F doubtful if present record for Bavaria is considered questionable floristic status, "Bavaria status”
- contrary to earlier opinion not present record for Bavaria is considered wrong floristic status, "Bavaria status”
n status unknown status not yet determined (used for hybrids) floristic status, "Bavaria status”
P potentially invasive neophyte species which have been declared as invasive species by the BfN or the EU (Union list), but which have not yet been recorded in Bavaria status for data processing

In Ruff et al. (2019: 229), counts are given for the allocation of the individual status categories. According to these numbers - as of August 2019 - 3655 taxa were categorized as native to Bavaria, 325 as established, and 1554 as casual.

Tab. 2: List of abbreviations and definitions used in DWB-DC for the "in situ" floristic status categories or the status for data processing

(see also representation in Ruff et al. 2019, p. 227, Tab. 1)

status category: abbreviation status category: name status category: definition (according to BIB Profiles of Vascular Plants of Bavaria with legend for map signatures; FlorEin 5.0 hand book p. 22, extended) type of status assignment to the 4 categories in PLADIAS true/false-category in PLADIAS
I indigenous Natives, idiochorophytes; including archaeophytes (adventive taxa that probably immigrated to the floristic region before 1492) [an exact separation between natives (I) and archaeophytes is usually not possible]. floristic status spontaneous correct
* "normal status" Native in the broad sense, originally the status commonly used throughout Bavaria, later used for natives (incl. archaeophytes) floristic status spontaneous correct
E established Established neophytes. A taxon is classified as established if a) it reproduces spontaneously, either generatively or vegetatively, in the area, b) it has been present in the area for at least 25 years, c) it has colonized an area. [according to BUTTLER & HAND 2008 und BUTTLER, MAY & METZING 2019 two exceptions to these criteria may be permitted: a) if it has been present in the area for less than 25 years, but has spread over climatically and geologically different areas (natural areas) in a shorter period of time [replacement of time by space], b) if it has been present at the place of establishment for at least 100 years if it has only spread locally [replacement of space by time]. floristic status spontaneous secondary correct
D permanently established Establishment criteria fulfilled, but unclear whether I or E floristic status spontaneous secondary correct
U casual Taxa that appear spontaneously without active human intervention, probably cannot survive at the locality and do not yet meet the criteria of E floristic status spontaneous secondary correct
T tendency towards establishment Taxa that will probably soon meet the criteria of establishment floristic status spontaneous secondary correct
W re-introduced / naturally casual Differently defined, therefore no longer to be used floristic status spontaneous correct
K cultivated All taxa whose occurrence is due to deliberate sowing or planting floristic status planted correct
S synanthropic Neochores spread directly or indirectly by humans and/or settling on artificial substrate. May be status A, E, K, U or R floristic status spontaneous secondary correct
A deliberately introduced Mostly rare or decorative taxa which have been deliberately introduced to enrich the regional flora. “A” does not differentiate between artificially propagated generation and their descendants, and then between the first unstable and possibly finally established populations. floristic status planted correct
R culture relic Culture relic, formerly planted at the place of growth, but persisting after abandonment at the place of planting (but not spreading as in E) floristic status planted correct
 ? status completely unclear Status completely unclear floristic status not set correct
Z dubious if native Dubious whether native, can be (almost) any of the other status categories, but cannot be further determined floristic status not set correct
- incorrect record Does not occur here contrary to other published information status for data processing not set wrong
2 incorrect at location Published record incorrect at location (published = Bayernatlas 1990 or newer literature) status for data processing not set wrong
3 incorrect in grid field Published record incorrect in grid field (published = Bayernatlas 1990 or newer literature) status for data processing not set wrong
4 doubtful at location Published record doubtful at location (published = Bayernatlas 1990 or newer literature) status for data processing not set unsure
5 doubtful in grid field Published record doubtful in grid field (published = Bayernatlas 1990 or newer literature) status for data processing not set unsure
F doubtful if present Published information doubtful if present (published = Bayernatlas 1990 or newer literature) status for data processing not set unsure
+ extinct or missing Extinct or missing status for data processing not set correct
6 extinct in location Extinct in location status for data processing not set correct
7 missing in location Missing in location status for data processing not set correct
8 extinct in grid field Extinct in grid field status for data processing not set correct
9 missing in grid field Lost in grid field status for data processing not set correct
V missing Lost (uncertain if really already extinct here) status for data processing not set correct
X extinct Extinct status for data processing not set correct
99 data not to be used Data incorrect, not to be used (but also not to be deleted) status for data processing not set wrong
0 no status given No status given (indication that “normal status” is not meant) status for data processing not set correct
1 new find New find, confirmation status for data processing not set correct
00 new find/ BK, no status given New find from biotope mapping without status indication (internal for data control) status for data processing not set correct
no entry in DC Data without status information, can also be meant as "normal status" or indigenous. Must be clarified for each individual case. status for data processing not set unsure

The last two columns of the table describe the processing of the status information to display the categories used in PLADIAS.

In Ruff et al. (2019: 227), counts are given for the allocation of the individual status categories. According to these numbers - as of August 2019 - 5.4 million observations were categorized as indigenous or native, 255,000 observations were classified as established, and almost as many, namely 219,000 observations, were reported as casual, including cultived and synanthropic taxa.

Further information

Detailed information on the floristic status with reference to the Flora of Bavaria initiative and the project Flora Silvae Gabretae – Flora des Böhmerwaldes – Květena Šumavy on the one hand, and in the national and international context on the other hand, can be found, with a detailed list of literature, on the corresponding pages in the internal area of the wiki. A presentation of historical aspects and first data evaluations can be found in Ruff et al. (2019), where p. 227 also refers to this Wiki page.


Literature

Anonym; NetPhyD & BfN (Hrsg.) 2014: Verbreitungsatlas der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen Deutschlands. 1. Auflage. Landwirtschaftsverlag, Münster, ISBN 978-3-7843-5319-7, S. [1]–912 ("2013").
Bergmeier, E. 1991: Ein Vorschlag zur Verwendung neu abgegrenzter Statuskategorien bei floristischen Kartierungen in Deutschland. In: Floristische Rundbriefe (Bochum). Nr. 25, S. 126–137.
Diewald, W. & Ahlmer, W. 2016: Taxon list of vascular plants from Bavaria, Germany compiled in the context of the BFL project. Staatliche Naturwissenschaftliche Sammlungen Bayerns, doi:10.15468/nbilcw (https:/​/​doi.​org/​10.​15468/​nbilcw).
Hand, R., Thieme, M. & Mitarbeiter 2020: Florenliste von Deutschland (Gefäßpflanzen), begründet von Karl Peter Buttler, Version 11. Berlin (http:/​/​www.​kp-buttler.​de).
Lippert, W. & Meierott, L. 2014: Kommentierte Artenliste der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen Bayerns. Selbstverlag der Bayerischen Botanischen Gesellschaft, München, S. 1–408 (Infos auch unter https://wiki.bayernflora.de/web/Kommentierte_Artenliste_der_Farn-_und_Blütenpflanzen_Bayerns).
Lippert, W. & Meierott, L. 2018: Kommentierte Artenliste der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen Bayerns. Vorarbeiten zu einer neuen Flora von Bayern. Online-Version Dezember 2018. Selbstverlag der Bayerischen Botanischen Gesellschaft, München, S. 1–215 (https:/​/​species-id.​net/​o/​media/​f/​f1/​Lippert_​Meierott_​Bayernliste-2018.​pdf).
Ruff, M., Diewald, W., Weiss, M. & Triebel, D. 2019: Floristischer Status und Florenwandel über 60 Jahre – Eine erste Analyse des Datenbestandes zum Projekt „Flora von Bayern“. In: Berichte der Bayerischen Botanischen Gesellschaft. Bd. 89, München, S. 223–244 (https:/​/​species-id.​net/​o/​media/​a/​ab/​BBBG_​89_​Floristischer_​Status_​und_​Florenwandel_​über_​60_​Jahre.​pdf).