Research Article
Print
Research Article
Contribution to the knowledge of marsh vegetation of montane and submontane areas of Northern Apennines (Italy)
expand article infoLorenzo Lastrucci, Claudia Angiolini§, Gianmaria Bonari|, Alessandro Bottacci, Vincenzo Gonnelli#, Antonio Zoccola¤, Michele Mugnai«», Daniele Viciani«»
‡ Natural History Museum of the University of Florence, Florence, Italy
§ University of Siena, Siena, Italy
| Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
¶ Unaffiliated, Figline Valdarno, Italy
# Unaffiliated, Pieve Santo Stefano, Italy
¤ Reparto Carabinieri Biodiversità di Pratovecchio, Pratovecchio, Italy
« University of Florence, Florence, Italy
» National Biodiversity Future Center, Palermo, Italy
Open Access

Abstract

Freshwater ecosystems are crucial for biodiversity conservation. They are among the most threatened habitats in the world. However, the wetlands of southern European mountains still lack fine-scale plant community studies. Here we studied submontane and montane palustrine communities of the Tuscan-Romagna Apennines. Data from 123 vegetation plots dominated by palustrine species were analysed by means of cluster analysis. We identified 18 vegetation types that we attributed to five classes (Phragmito-Magnocaricetea, Montio-Cardaminetea, Isoëto-Nanojuncetea, Molinio-Arrhenatheretea, and Epilobietea angustifolii), and to two Natura 2000 habitats (3130 - Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea, and 6430 - Hydrophilous tall herb fringe communities of plains and of the montane to alpine levels). According the 4th edition of the International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature we corrected the names Phragmition communis Koch 1926 nom. inept. in P. australis Koch 1926 nom. corr., Phragmitetum communis Savič 1926 nom. inept. in P. australis Savič 1926 nom. corr., Glycerietum plicatae Kulczyński 1928 nom. inept. in G. notatae Kulczyński 1928 nom. corr., Beruletum angustifoliae Roll 1938 nom. inept. in Beruletum erectae Roll 1938 nom. corr., and we mutated the name Scirpetum lacustris Chouard 1924 nom. inept. in Schoenoplectetum lacustris Chouard 1924 nom. mut. nov. Our study highlights the diversity of marsh vegetation of montane and submontane areas of Northern Apennines. Most of the palustrine communities, though important from the point of view of conservation, cannot be attributed at present to any habitat type legally protected at the European level.

Keywords

Conservation, freshwater ecosystem, palustrine habitat, phytosociology, syntaxonomy, vegetation

Introduction

Wetlands are crucial for biodiversity conservation as they provide suitable habitats for numerous threatened plant species and communities (Zhang et al. 2012). Despite that, they are among the most threatened habitats in the world, mainly by human pressures, such as overexploitation, water pollution, flow modification, destruction or degradation of habitat, and alien species invasion (Dudgeon et al. 2006; Hrivnák et al. 2014). This worrying trend is rapidly increasing in the last few years (Reid et al. 2018). In Europe, and in Italy, freshwater ecosystems include many threatened habitats with an unfavorable conservation status (Janssen et al. 2016; Zivkovic et al. 2017; Gigante et al. 2018; Lazzaro et al. 2020; Viciani et al. 2020; Gennai et al. 2021). Nevertheless, several wetland plant communities of conservation relevance are not included in the Habitats Directive, nor in any other protection list, although extremely rare, especially in the Mediterranean Basin (Gigante et al. 2013; Benavént-Gonzales et al. 2014; Lastrucci et al. 2014, 2017a, 2019; Angiolini et al. 2017; Casavecchia et al. 2021). Wetlands in the Apennines are often fragmented and floristically impoverished (Angiolini et al. 2019). Moreover, many Apennine freshwater ecosystems are partially or totally of artificial origin, being related to anthropogenic activities, especially at relatively low elevations (Gerdol and Tomaselli 1993). Despite this, such wetlands, including many artificial ones, can be highly relevant for plant diversity and conservation (Hrivnák et al. 2014; Viciani et al. 2022).

Studies of wetland vegetation at high-elevation areas of the Tuscan Apennines are available (Gerdol and Tomaselli 1993), while relatively few works have investigated low-elevation areas of the Northern Apennines, between Eastern Tuscany and Romagna (see Viciani et al. 2022 for aquatic vegetation). To fill the gap of knowledge for this area, we present our contribution concerning the marsh vegetation.

Material and methods

Study area

The study area is located in the northeastern Apennines between Tuscany and Emilia-Romagna regions (Central Italy, Fig. 1). It encompasses 45 wetlands sites, ranging from 535 m up to 1,470 m a.s.l., partially located in the Foreste Casentinesi National Park and in some Special Areas of Conservation belonging to Natura 2000 network (Appendix I). These wetlands include artificial lakes, small ponds, pools, marshes, and wet meadows. The climate is generally submontane/montane, with mesic temperatures and moderate to heavy rainfall, depending on the elevation. The study area has a temperate oceanic bioclimate at higher elevations and a temperate oceanic-submediterranean bioclimate at lower elevations (Pesaresi et al. 2017). As for geological substrates, there are four main geological formations in the area (Carmignani et al. 2013): three on the Tyrrhenian-facing slopes, with two types of siliceous sandstones, with different percentages of limestone and silty schists (“Macigno del Chianti” and “Macigno del Mugello”), and limestone outcrops (“Alberese”); and one, a sandstone-marly flysch formation (“Marnoso-arenacea”) is widespread in the Adriatic-facing slopes. Other less extensive geological formations are also present (Carmignani et al. 2013).

Figure 1. 

Study area and its position in respect to Italy (inset in the upper right corner). Circles are the investigated sites.

Data set and data analysis

Our dataset is composed of 123 relevés (N = 109 original; N = 14 published; Lastrucci et al. 2005) concerning plant communities dominated by palustrine species. Data have been collected in the years 2005-2019 following the phytosociological method (Braun-Blanquet 1932). Site names, site abbreviations used in the relevé tables, coordinates, elevation, inclusion in protected areas and references concerning published data, are available in Appendix I. We analysed a matrix of 123 relevés × 164 species using a cluster analysis in R environment (R Core Team 2020), using the chord distance of the function vegdist of ´vegan´ package (Oksanen et al. 2020) and median linkage of the function hclust of ´stats´ package (R Core Team 2020). Data was transformed using the Van der Maarel scale. Plant species names mainly follow the Portal to the Flora of Italy (2022), while the syntaxonomic nomenclature of classes, orders, and alliances follows mainly the Vegetation of Europe by Mucina et al. (2016), and the Italian Vegetation Prodrome (Biondi and Blasi 2015). The names of the syntaxa have been corrected and mutated when necessary in agreement with the 4th edition of the ICPN (Theurillat et al. 2021).

Results and discussion

The dendrogram resulting from the cluster analysis (Fig. 2) allowed us to identify 18 different plant communities. From a syntaxonomic viewpoint, they can be classified to five different classes: Phragmito-Magnocaricetea, Montio-Cardaminetea, Isoëto-Nanojuncetea, Molinio-Arrhenatheretea, and Epilobietea angustifolii. In the following sections, the communities are described and commented.

Figure 2. 

Cluster dendrogram of our data encompassing 123 relevés of palustrine vegetation of montane and submontane areas of Northern Apennines (Italy). Relevés groups: 1, Typhetum angustifoliae; 2, Schoenoplectetum lacustris; 3, Peplis portula community; 4, Glycerietum fluitantis; 5, Eleocharitetum palustris; 6, Caricetum vesicariae; 7, Typhetum latifoliae; 8, Glycerio-Sparganietum neglecti; 9, Caltha palustris community; 10, Heracleo ternati-Petasitetum hybridi; 11, Beruletum erectae; 12, Glycerietum notatae; 13, Phragmitetum australis; 14, Equiseto palustris-Juncetum effusi; 15, Caricetum remotae; 16, Cardamine amara community; 17, Carici otrubae-Juncetum inflexi variant with Juncus effusus; 18, Carici otrubae-Juncetum inflexi; 19, Carici otrubae-Juncetum inflexi variant with Equisetum palustre.

Marsh vegetation communities

PHRAGMITETUM AUSTRALIS Savič 1926 nom. corr. (Suppl. Material S1, Table 1, rels 1–8, Group 13 in Fig. 2)(Phragmitetum communis Savič 1926 nom. inept.)

Nomenclatural notes : The name reported by Savič (1926) is Phragmitetum communis according the taxon name Phragmites communis Trin. 1820. In the current floras of most countries worldwide (see Euro+Med 2023; POWO 2023) the accepted name of this taxon is Phragmites australis (Cav.) Steud. 1840, therefore we corrected the name in Phragmitetum australis Savič 1926 nom. corr.

Phragmites australis forms dense species-poor stands, along submerged and emergent shores of lakes, swamps, pools, ponds, riverbanks, and channels (Landucci et al. 2013). The association is rather widespread in Italy (Landucci et al. 2013). In several wetlands of Central Italy, it seems affected by the die-back syndrome (Lastrucci et al. 2017a). In the study area, P. australis is not very common and we found it only at three sites, where it grows in temporarily submerged conditions. Less dense stands can be interpreted as transitional vegetation towards communities belonging to alliance Glycerio-Sparganion.

SCHOENOPLECTETUM LACUSTRIS Chouard 1924 nom. mut. nov. (Suppl. Material S1, Table 1, rels 9–10, Group 2 in Fig. 2)

(Scirpetum lacustris Chouard 1924 nom. inept.)

Nomenclatural notes : The name reported by Chouard (1924: 1136-1137) is “Association à Scirpus lacustris” according to the taxon name Scirpus lacustris L. 1753. Currently Scirpus lacustris is included in the genus Schoenoplectus and its name is Schoenoplectus lacustris (L.) Palla 1888 (Euro+Med 2023; POWO 2023). Therefore, we introduce the new name Schoenoplectetum lacustris Chouard 1924 nom. mut. nov.

This association, with a strong pioneer feature, is reported for several habitat types such as on shores of mesotrophic to eutrophic lakes, ponds, or channels, usually growing in deeper water than other types of reed vegetation (Poldini 1989; Landucci et al. 2013; Lastrucci et al. 2019). In the study area, it grows catenal to the association Typhetum angustifoliae. Rarely, Schoenoplectus lacustris forms large dense stands, sometimes accompanied by Schoenoplectus litoralis, which can also reach high cover locally. S. litoralis usually forms stands in slightly to moderate halophilous habitats (e.g., Curcó i Masip 2001; Brullo and Sciandrello 2006), but the presence of this species in the freshwater wetlands of the Northern Apennines was highlighted by Lastrucci and Raffaelli (2006).

TYPHETUM LATIFOLIAE Eggler 1933 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 1, rels 11–14, Group 7 in Fig. 2)

Nomenclatural notes : The name Typhetum latifoliae Nowiński 1930 is actually invalid, as it was originally published not at the rank of association but as a subassociation of the Scirpo-Phragmitetum (see Nowiński 1930); the first validly published name for these communities resulted to be Typhetum latifoliae Eggler 1933.

This association is very common in Italy and develops in several different habitats, such as ponds, lakeshores, banks of slow-flowing streams, deltas, swamps, and channels (Landucci et al. 2013), and it tolerates the summer drying (Šumberová et al. 2011). In the study area, the association forms more or less dense stands around ponds. The association is often very poor in species or even monospecific (Hrivnák 2004; Fernez and Causse 2015). This feature is also confirmed within our study area.

TYPHETUM ANGUSTIFOLIAE Allorge ex Pignatti 1953 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 1, rels 15–17, Group 1 in Fig. 2)

This association is typical of several wetland types on mesotrophic to eutrophic waters, often monospecific or species-poor (Landucci et al. 2013). Though the association is rather common in Italy (Landucci et al. 2013 and references therein), and in Tuscany (Lastrucci et al. 2010a; Mereu et al. 2012; Lastrucci et al. 2017b), it was found only at two sites of our study area, forming stands on flooded soils. According to the ecological features of this association, the surveyed stands appeared monospecific or species-poor.

CARICETUM VESICARIAE Chouard 1924 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 1, rels 18–21, Group 6 in Fig. 2)

Large sedge vegetation is not widespread in the study area. We found only one patch, corresponding to a community attributable to Caricetum vesicariae, typical of mesotrophic to eutrophic habitats, permanently flooded for most of the year (Landucci et al. 2013). Within the association, variants typical of marshlands and wet meadows can be often identified (Buchwald 1994; Hrivnák 2004; Lastrucci et al. 2008). In the study area, the association is catenal to communities of the alliance Glycerio-Sparganion (associations Glycerietum fluitantis and Glycerio-Sparganietum), but in some relevés, together with typical marsh plants, also a pool of species typical of wet meadows is present (Agrostis stolonifera, Rumex conglomeratus, Ranunculus repens).

GLYCERIO-SPARGANIETUM NEGLECTI Koch 1926 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 2, rels 1–14, Group 8 in Fig. 2; Fig. 3A)

Figure 3. 

Dense stand of the association Glycerio-Sparganietum neglecti Koch 1926 with Sparganium erectum L. s.l. (A) and wet meadows of the association Carici otrubae-Juncetum inflexi Minissale et Spampinato 1985 with Juncus inflexus L. (B). Photo credit: V. Gonnelli, 2012.

According to Landucci et al. (2013), this association includes both Sparganium erectum subsp. erectum and S. erectum subsp. neglectum communities. However, a recent genetic study also highlighted a putative intraspecific hybridization among subspecies (Píšová and Fér 2020) The stands dominated by S. erectum s.l. can be attributed to this association (Šumberová et al. 2011; Landucci et al. 2013). S. erectum communities are usually located in the ecological transition between the Phragmition and Glycerio-Sparganion communities, so their attribution to the alliance level is not always univocal (Buchwald 1994; Landucci et al. 2013; Landucci et al. 2020).

In the study area, the association forms dense belts around ponds, developing in habitats with strong fluctuations of water levels, similar to Glycerietum fluitantis or Glycerietum notatae, and less flooded than those occupied by Phragmition communities, justifying our attribution to the alliance Glycerio-Sparganion. At some sites, the association also occurs in trampled and disturbed habitats, hosting species of wet meadows such as Poa trivialis, Ranunculus repens, and Rumex conglomeratus.

GLYCERIETUM NOTATAE Kulczyński 1928 nom. corr. (Suppl. Material S1, Table 2, rels 15–30, Group 12 in Fig. 2)

(Glycerietum plicatae Kulczyński 1928 nom. inept.)

Nomenclatural notes : The name reported by Kulczyński (1928) is “Glycerietum plicatae” according the taxon name Glyceria plicata Fr. 1839. Currently the accepted name for this taxon is Glyceria notata Chevall. 1827 (Euro+Med 2023; POWO 2023), therefore we corrected the name in Glycerietum notatae Kulczyński 1928 nom. corr.

This association occurs in several habitat types such as riverbanks, channels in arable lands, natural and artificial ponds, and depressions in wet meadows, where it is often in contact with other communities of alliance Glycerio-Sparganion (Landucci et al. 2013).

This association is rather common in Italy (Landucci et al. 2013). Accordingly, in our study area, it represents one of the most widespread vegetation types. It has been generally found around small ponds or watering holes, but it can also develop in less humid and disturbed sites, showing, in this case, a higher floristic richness with species of wet meadows such as Carex hirta, Juncus inflexus, Poa trivialis, and Ranunculus repens.

GLYCERIETUM FLUITANTIS Nowinski 1930 nom. inval. (Suppl. Material S1, Table 2, rels 31–34, Group 4 in Fig. 2)

Nomenclatural notes : The name Glycerietum fluitantis Nowinski 1930 although extensively used in recent times and in the past, must be considered invalid according to the ICPN code (Theurillat et al. 2021) because published as a subassociation and not as association (see Nowińsky 1930). However, this nomenclature issue could not be solved in this study.

According to Landucci et al. (2013), this vegetation type is structurally and ecologically very similar to Glycerietum notatae, but Glyceria fluitans is less tolerant than G. notata to eutrophication and disturbance, leading the association Glycerietum fluitantis to be less common in Italy than Glycerietum notatae. This trend was also found in the study area and we recorded Glycerietum fluitantis at only two sites. Rarely, it forms stands in shallow waters with the presence of Ranunculus trichophyllus, or it is in contact with the association Caricetum vesicariae.

BERULETUM ERECTAE Roll 1938 nom. corr. (Suppl. Material S1, Table 2, rels 35–39, Group 11 in Fig. 2)

(Beruletum angustifoliae Roll 1938 nom. inept.)

Nomenclatural notes : The name reported by Roll (1938) is Beruletum angustifoliae according to the taxon name Berula angustifolia Mert. & W.D.J.Koch 1826. However this name is a nomen illegitimum. Therefore we corrected the name in Beruletum erectae Roll. 1938 nom. corr.

Berula erecta-dominated stands can be attributed to the association Beruletum erectae, though this species also tends to occur in other communities such as Helosciadietum nodiflori Maire 1924 (Lastrucci et al. 2005; Landucci et al. 2013). The association is typical of mesotrophic streams and channels characterized by slow-flowing waters (Landucci et al. 2013). In the study area, the association was found along two wetlands supplied by small streams. According to the cluster analysis, one relevé previously attributed to Phalarido-Petasitetum hybridi (Lastrucci et al. 2005), was attributed to Beruletum, being interpretable as a transition towards tall herb communities, present at the edge of the wetland.

ELEOCHARITETUM PALUSTRIS Savič 1926 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 2, rels 40–48, Group 5 in Fig. 2)

This association is dominated by Eleocharis palustris and shows a typical pioneer behavior, often developing in the wet soils emerging during the dry season (Venanzoni and Gigante 2000). In our relevés, we only found E. palustris subsp. palustris, but in the area, the presence of other subspecies is likely (Lastrucci et al. 2020). This association, typically species-poor, is rather common in Italy (Landucci et al. 2013). Even in our study area, it is one of the most widespread vegetation type, colonizing, often in narrow strips, the muddy areas surrounding the small pools and drinking troughs, often in conditions of disturbance due to the presence of livestock. Our relevés show that the association is catenal to communities of hydrophytes of open waters (Chara vulgaris, Potamogeton nodosus, Ranunculus trichophyllus; see also Viciani et al. 2022) reaching the shallow shores of the pools colonized by Eleocharitetum palustris.

CARICETUM REMOTAE Kästner 1941 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 3, rels 1–9, Group 15 in Fig. 2)

This association is typical of flooded depressions with irregular water regimes and gravely beds such as small streams irrigating the forest roads, and forest springs disturbed by animals (Valachovič and Janovicová 1999). Both shade-tolerant and hygrophilous species are present in the floristic composition of the association, sometimes together with a high cover of bryophytes (Kliment et al. 2008). In the study area, we found the association in humid depressions at the forest margins or in mountain forests, watered by seasonal streams or rainwater. Our relevés show the presence of diagnostic species of the association, such as Carex remota (dominant), Schedonorus giganteus or Brachypodium sylvaticum, as well as several forest species such as Athyrium filix-femina and Ranunculus lanuginosus; hygrophilous species such as Juncus spp. and Galium palustre subsp. palustre; and nitrophilous and shade-tolerant species such as Urtica dioica subsp. dioica.

CARDAMINE AMARA community (Suppl. Material S1, Table 3, rels 10–16, Group 16 in Fig. 2)

Cardamine amara communities have often been attributed to the class Montio-Cardaminetea, sometimes considering it as C. amara community (e.g. Gerdol 1993; Mariotti 1995), attributed to different associations such as Cardaminetum amarae (Rübel 1912) Br.-Bl. 1926 (Braun-Blanquet 1949) or Cardamino-Chrysosplenietum alternifolii Maas 1959. The latter is an association typical of springs surrounded by forests with a partially-closed herb layer, often characterized by a species-rich bryophyte layer (Kliment et al. 2008). However, in the study area, C. amara-dominated stands were rather impoverished in species of Montio-Cardaminetea and they were often found at the edge of ponds and pools, sometimes in contact with aquatic vegetation, especially in some areas where small ditches enter the pools. These stands seem to replace the communities of the alliance Glycerio-Sparganion in semi-shaded habitats. In accordance with Hájková and Hájek (2011), also in our study area, the C. amara communities thrive better in wetter conditions than those belonging to the association Caricetum remotae.

CALTHA PALUSTRIS community (Suppl. Material S1, Table 3, rels 17–19, Group 9 in Fig. 2)

Caltha palustris is a very rare species within the study area. It was found only at two sites, typically along little streams where it forms stands rich in hygrophilous and shade-tolerant species. From a phytosociological and nomenclatural point of view, the syntaxonomic attribution of C. palustris communities is affected by the fact that in the past many infraspecific taxa, currently considered synonyms of C. palustris (e.g., C. laeta Schott, Nyman & Kotschy) were used to define the associations. Our communities show some ecological affinities with those reported by Valachovič and Janovicová (1999) and Kliment et al. (2008) in Central Europe under the name Carici remotae-Calthetum laetae Coldea 1978, typical of muddy alluvia of stream meanders, and small-sized forest springs on the low-elevation mountains of Slovakia. In addition, C. palustris can grow in different habitat types, such as the wet mown meadows of the alliance Calthion palustris (Mucina et al. 2016), including for example the association Chaerophyllo hirsuti-Calthetum palustris Balátová-Tuláčková 1985 (see Balátová-Tuláčková 2000). Nevertheless, the ecological features of C. palustris stands occurring in the study area, which grow in partially shaded habitats along rivulets originating from impluviums and springs, let us classifying our communities to the class Montio-Cardaminetea, where the presence of this species is rather frequent (Hájková and Hájek, 2011). The increasing forest coverage and the disturbance by anthropogenic activities and ungulates are critical factors for the occurrence of this vegetation type.

CARICI OTRUBAE-JUNCETUM INFLEXI Minissale et Spampinato 1985 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 4, rels 1–22, Group 18 in Fig. 2; Fig. 3B)

variant with Juncus effusus (Suppl. Material S1, Table 4, rels 11–16, Group 17 in Fig. 2)

variant with Equisetum palustre (Suppl. Material S1, Table 4, rels 17–22, Group 19 in Fig. 2)

The rushes with Juncus inflexus represent one of the most common types of plant communities in the study area. From a topological point of view, they generally occupy the outer belts of wet areas, frequently disturbed and trampled by livestock, or the humid depressions and lowlands temporarily flooded in winter at the edge of forest vegetation. From a phytosociological point of view, J. inflexus can rarely form communities in marsh environments such as Galio palustris-Juncetum inflexi described for Umbria by Venanzoni and Gigante (2000) or, more usually, wet meadows communities such as Junco inflexi-Menthetum longifoliae Lohmeyer 1953 (e.g., Pedrotti 2008) or Carici otrubae-Juncetum inflexi described from Sicily (Minissale and Spampinato 1985). For their floristic composition, and for the richness of Molinio-Arrhenatheretea species, the high frequency of Carex otrubae, and their ecological characteristics, we attribute our stands to the association Carici otrubae-Juncetum inflexi. This association, as reported by Minissale and Spampinato (1985) for Sicily, is in contact with the communities of the long submerged habitats (Eleocharitetum palustris or Glycerio-Sparganion communities). These communities are also known for southern Tuscany (Lastrucci et al. 2019). The analysis of the rush communities of the study area also shows two different aspects. The first one is represented by rush mixed relevés with the presence of J. effusus, lacking in the original relevés of the Carici otrubae-Juncetum inflexi (see Minissale and Spampinato 1985). The second one is represented by stands developing in depressions with water stagnation or with slight runoff at the edge of the forest. This vegetation type is differentiated by species of shady margins and/or indicators of high water availability, characterizing a more hygrophilous variant of the Carici-Juncetum, with high frequency/cover values of Equisetum palustre, E. telmateja, Mentha aquatica, and the sporadic presence of the rare Epipactis palustris. The two Equisetum species (particularly E. palustre) show sometimes high cover values, becoming the dominant species in this variant.

EQUISETO PALUSTRIS-JUNCETUM EFFUSI Minissale et Spampinato 1990 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 4, rels 23–25, Group 14 in Fig. 2)

This association was described for the higher stretches of an artificial channel in Sicily (Minissale and Spampinato 1990). The association is characterized by the dominance of Juncus effusus and by the presence of a conspicuous pool of wet meadow species of the class Molinio-Arrhenatheretea, but also of species requiring a high water availability such as Equisetum palustre. In the study area, the association was found only at one site on terraces along a stream. The J. effusus community of a recently restored wetland is also provisionally attributed to this association, despite some floristic differences, maybe due to the disturbance caused by restoration works.

HERACLEO TERNATI-PETASITETUM HYBRIDI Pedrotti 2008 (Suppl. Material S1, Table 5, rels 1–6, Group 10 in Fig. 2)

We found Petasites hybridus-dominated communities along the main streams of the study area and at the edge of marshes shaded by forest vegetation. In the plain or submontane wetlands of Italy, the association Phalarido-Petasitetum hybridi Schwick 1933 was often reported (Biondi et al. 2004; Pedrotti et al. 2008; Lastrucci et al. 2010b). According to Pedrotti (2008), in the Apennine mountains, the presence, although rare, of Heracleum sphondylium subsp. ternatum (= H. sibiricum subsp. ternatum) in the P. hybridus communities allows to differentiate a new association, i.e. Heracleo ternati-Petasitetum hybridi. At many sites, the communities appear less floristically defined and they can be interpreted as an impoverished aspect of the association. As far as the alliance classification is concerned, the association was originally attributed to Aegopodion podagrariae of the class Galio-Urticetea (Pedrotti 2008). The name accepted by Mucina et al. (2016) for this class is Epilobietea angustifoliae. In the Italian vegetation prodrome (Biondi and Blasi 2015), the name Aegopodion podagrariae is synonymised with Petasition officinalis, which is attributed to the class Galio-Urticetea. In Mucina et al. (2016), the two alliances are instead both accepted and attributed to two different classes, Epilobietea angustifoliae and Mulgedio-Aconitetea, respectively. Moreover, the concept of Petasition officinalis in Mucina et al. (2016) is restricted to Carpathian and Central European areas. For this reason, we consider it appropriate to maintain the attribution of the association to Aegopodion podagrariae.

PEPLIS PORTULA community (Suppl. Material S1, Table 6, rels 1–2, Group 3 in Fig. 2)

The only surveyed therophytic hygrophilous community is represented by Peplis portula stands, occurring only at two sites. In both cases, this community develops on the edge of pools that are dry up during the summer season. This species acts as a differential or dominant species in various associations of the class Isoëto-Nanjuncetea, in the Mediterranean and in Central European areas (Brullo and Minissale 1998; Šumberová and Hrivnák 2013). The almost monophytic stands of the study area can be considered a “basal phytocoenon” according to Poldini and Sburlino (2005) and do not allow any better phytosociological attribution.

Other communities

We found two additional small communities in the humid soils nearby the tall helophytic vegetation. The first community is a Carex hirta-dominated wet meadow (Suppl. Material S1, Table 4, rel. 26), with presence of hygrophilous species of the class Molinio-Arrhenateretea (Juncus effusus, J. articulatus, Ranunculus repens), and helophytic species (Carex pseudocyperus, Eleocharis palustris, Galium palustre) and forest species (Fragaria vesca, Geranium nodosum, Salix caprea). This small community shows some affinity to the Festuco-Caricetum hirtae O. Bolòs 1962 reported by Carreras et al. (1988), though other authors considered C. hirta a species with a low phytosociological diagnostic value (Tomaselli and Bernardo 2006). In our case, the limited extent of the stand suggests considering this vegetation as a transitional aspect between the more hygrophilous communities of the flooded areas and the nitrophilous and forest communities of the habitats further from the water.

The second community is a stand dominated by Urtica dioica, developing on shaded and deep soil near woody vegetation and reed bed (Suppl. Material S1, Table 5, rel. 7). This species often forms stands on eutrophic and semi-ruderal habitats (Biondi et al. 2004; Lastrucci et al. 2010b, 2010c, sub Urtico dioicae-Sambucetum ebuli (Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1936) Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1952) and it plays a role in differentiating a nitrophilous and emerging variant of Phragmitetum (Lastrucci et al. 2017a). In the study area, this vegetation type marks the boundary between the communities of wetland habitats (e.g. Phragmitetum australis) and the surrounding forests.

Habitat conservation

Marsh communities consisting of helophytes that colonize water bodies and rivers subjected to more or less prolonged submersion, provide many fundamental ecological functions. They provide shelter for fauna, act as a buffer zone between aquatic and terrestrial environments, strengthen the stability of the banks, and host an extremely specialized flora (Ostendorp, 1993; Mishra et al. 2015). In recent times, however, this vegetation has undergone a severe reduction of extent due to anthropogenic factors. Despite this, scientific works pointed out the conservation importance of these environments, especially in southern Europe and the Mediterranean (Angiolini et al. 2017; Landucci et al. 2020; Casavecchia et al. 2021). Nonetheless, some of these habitats are officially considered worthy of conservation at the European level and are listed in the annexes of the Habitats Directive (European Commission 1992; 2013; Biondi et al. 2009, 2012). In particular, among the communities investigated here, only those belonging to classes Isoëto-Nanojuncetea and Epilobetea angustifolii can be clearly attributed to Natura 2000 habitats (codes 3130 and 6430 respectively, i.e. “Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea” and “Hydrophilous tall herb fringe communities of plains and of the montane to alpine levels”). The communities with Caltha palustris have sometimes been considered to be part of the habitat code 7220* “Petrifying springs with tufa formation (Cratoneurion)” through the widening of the habitat definition in Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC, (Bassi 2015; Foggi et al. 2017). The communities of Glycerio-Sparganion were sometimes considered of local importance, as they are listed in Tuscan regional conservation laws (Tuscan Regional Law no. 56/2000 and no. 30/2015). Other communities, such as many communities of the orders Phragmitetalia and Magnocaricetalia, have been proposed to become of national and, possibly, European importance in the future instead (see Casavecchia et al. 2021, treated under the name “Freshwater large sedge and reed beds”). Our study highlights the diversity of montane and submontane marsh habitats of Northern Apennines. Despite the important role of natural freshwater ecosystems, many of these communities are still not protected. We argue that our data can be used for biodiversity conservation purpose by supporting further development and the refinement of the Habitats Directive.

Syntaxonomic scheme

PHRAGMITO-MAGNOCARICETEA Klika in Klika et Novák 1941

PHRAGMITETALIA AUSTRALIS Koch 1926

Phragmition australis Koch 1926 nom. corr.

Phragmitetum australis Savič 1926 nom. corr.

Schoenoplectetum lacustris Chouard 1924 nom. mut. nov.

Typhetum latifoliae Eggler 1933

Typhetum angustifoliae Allorge ex Pignatti 1953

MAGNOCARICETALIA Pignatti 1953

Magnocaricion gracilis Géhu 1961

Caricetum vesicariae Chouard 1924

NASTURTIO-GLYCERIETALIA Pignatti 1953

Glycerio-Sparganion Br.-Bl. et Sissingh in Boer 1942

Glycerio-Sparganietum neglecti Koch 1926

Glycerietum notatae Kulczyński 1928 nom. corr.

Glycerietum fluitantis Nowinski 1930 nom. inval.

Beruletum erectae Roll 1938 nom. corr.

OENANTHETALIA AQUATICAE Hejný ex Balátová-Tuláčková et al. 1993

Eleocharito palustris-Sagittarion sagittifoliae Passarge 1964

Eleocharitetum palustris Savič 1926

MONTIO-CARDAMINETEA Br.-Bl. et Tx. ex Klika et Hadač 1944

CARDAMINO-CHRYSOSPLENIETALIA Hinterlang 1992

Caricion remotae Kästner 1941

Caricetum remotae Kästner 1941

Cardamine amara community

Caltha palustris community

ISOËTO-NANOJUNCETEA Br.-Bl. et Tx. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1952

NANOCYPERETALIA Klika 1935

Peplis portula community

MOLINIO-ARRHENATHERETEA Tx. 1937

POTENTILLO-POLYGONETALIA AVICULARIS Tx. 1947

Potentillion anserinae Tx. 1947

Carici otrubae-Juncetum inflexi Minissale et Spampinato 1985

variant with Juncus effusus

variant with Equisetum palustre

Equiseto palustris-Juncetum effusi Minissale et Spampinato 1990

Carex hirta community

EPILOBIETEA ANGUSTIFOLII Tx. et Preising ex von Rochow 1951

CIRCAEO LUTETIANAE-STACHYETALIA SYLVATICAE Passarge 1967

Urtica dioica community

Aegopodion podagrariae Tx. 1967

Heracleo ternati-Petasitetum hybridi Pedrotti 2008

Funding statement

This work was supported by the Open Access Publishing Fund of the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano. The authors acknowledge the support of NBFC to University of Florence, funded by the Italian Ministry of University and Research, PNRR, Missione 4 Componente 2, “Dalla ricerca all’impresa”, Investimento 1.4, Project CN00000033.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the staff of the National Park of Foreste Casentinesi, M. Falterona, Campigna and of the Ufficio Territoriale Carabinieri per la Biodiversità di Pratovecchio for supporting the investigations in their territories. We thank Lorella Dell’Olmo for preparing the figure of the study area, and Rosaria D'Oria and Giorgio Kioussis who helped in data collection, Mc Conaghy Charlotte for the English proofreading, and Giacomo Calvia for the proofreading. Finally, we thank two anonymous reviewers and Flavia Landucci for their valuable suggestions, which greatly improved the article.

Bibliography

  • Angiolini C, Viciani D, Bonari G, Lastrucci L (2017) Habitat conservation prioritization: A floristic approach applied to a Mediterranean wetland network. Plant Biosystems 151(4): 598–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2016.1187678
  • Angiolini C, Viciani D, Bonari G, Zoccola A, Bottacci A, Ciampelli P et al. (2019) Environmental drivers of plant assemblages: are there differences between palustrine and lacustrine wetlands? A case study from the northern Apennines (Italy). Knowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems 420: 34. https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2019026
  • Balátová-Tuláčková E (2000) Molinietalia-Gesellschaften im Gebirge Moravskoslezske Beskydy (NO-Mähren). Preslia 72(1): 49–72.
  • Benavent-González A, Lumbreras A, Molina JA (2014) Plant communities as a tool for setting priorities in biodiversity conservation: A novel approach to Iberian aquatic vegetation. Biodiversity and Conservation 23: 2135–2154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0709-3
  • Biondi E, Blasi C, Burrascano S, Casavecchia S, Copiz R, Del Vico E et al. (2009) Manuale Italiano di interpretazione degli habitat della Direttiva 92/43/CEE. Società Botanica Italiana. Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, D.P.N. http://vnr.unipg.it/habitat
  • Biondi E, Burrascano S, Casavecchia S, Copiz R, Del Vico E, Galdenzi D et al. (2012) Diagnosis and syntaxonomic interpretation of Annex I Habitats (Dir. 92/43/EEC) in Italy at the alliance level. Plant Sociology 49(1): 5–37. https://doi.org/10.7338/pls2012491/01
  • Biondi E, Vagge I, Baldoni M, Taffetani F (2004) Biodiversità fitocenotica e paesaggistica dei fiumi dell’Italia centro-settentrionale: aspetti fitosociologici e sinfitosociologici. Studi Trent. Sci. Nat., Acta Biol. 80(2003): 13–21.
  • Braun-Blanquet J (1932) Plant sociology: The study of plant communities. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  • Brullo S, Minissale P (1998) Considerazioni syntassonomiche sulla classe Isoëto-Nanojuncetea. Itinera Geobotanica 11: 263–290.
  • Brullo S, Sciandrello S (2006) La vegetazione del bacino lacustre “Biviere di Gela” (Sicilia meridionale). Fitosociologia 43(2): 21–40.
  • Buchwald R (1994) Vegetazione e odonatofauna negli ambienti acquatici dell’Italia Centrale. Braun-Blanquetia 11: 1–77.
  • Carreras J, Ninot JM, Soriano I, Vigo J. (1988) L’alianca Agropyro-Rumicion a la meitat oriental dels Pireneus Ibèrics. Acta Bot. Barc. 37: 59–68.
  • Casavecchia S, Allegrezza M, Angiolini C, Biondi E, Bonini F, Del Vico E et al. (2021) Proposals for improvement of Annex I of Directive 92/43/EEC: Central Italy. Plant Sociology 58(2): 99–118. https://doi.org/10.3897/pls2021582/08
  • Curcó i Masip A (2001) La vegetación del delta del Ebro (V): las comunidades helofíticas e higrófilas (clases Phragmiti-Magnocaricetea y Molinio-Arrhenatheretea). Lazaroa 22: 67–81.
  • Dudgeon D, Arthington AH, Gessner MO, Kawabata Z, Knowler DJ, Lévêque C et al. (2006) Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews 81: 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793105006950
  • European Commission (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Official Journal European Union 206: 7–50.
  • European Commission (2013) Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats - Version EUR 28, April 2013. European Commission DG-ENV, Brussels, 146 pp.
  • Fernez T, Causse G (2015) Synopsis phytosociologique des groupements végétaux d’Île-de-France. Version 1 - avril 2015. Conservatoire botanique national du Bassin parisien - Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, délégation Île-de-France, Direction régionale et interdépartementale de l’environnement et de l’énergie Île-de-France. 89 p.
  • Gennai M, Gabellini A, Viciani D, Venanzoni R, Dell’Olmo L, Giunti M et al. (2021) The floodplain woods of Tuscany: towards a phytosociological synthesis. Plant Sociology 58(1): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3897/pls2021581/01
  • Gerdol R (1993) The vegetation of wetlands in the southern Carnian Alps (Italy). Gortania 15: 67–107.
  • Gigante D, Acosta ATR, Agrillo E, Armiraglio S, Assini S, Attorre F et al. (2018) Habitat conservation in Italy: the state of the art in the light of the first European Red List of Terrestrial and Freshwater Habitats. Rendiconti Lincei. Scienze Fisiche e Naturali 29(2): 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12210-018-0688-5
  • Gigante D, Landucci F, Venanzoni R (2013) The reed die-back syndrome and its implications for floristic and vegetational traits of Phragmitetum australis. Plant Sociology 50: 3–16. https://doi.org/10.7338/pls2013501/01
  • Hájková P, Hájek M (2011) Vegetace pramenišť (Montio-Cardaminetea). Vegetation of springs. In Chytrý M. (ed.), 2011. Vegetace České republiky 3. Vodní a mokřadní vegetace. Vegetation of the Czech Republic 3. Aquatic and wetland vegetation: 581–615. Academia, Praha.
  • Hrivnák R (2004) The plant communities of Phragmitetalia in the catchment area of the Ipel’river (Slovakia and Hungary), 2, Tall-sedge dominated wetlands (Magnocaricion elatae). Biologia 59(4): 457–476.
  • Hrivnák R, Kochjarová J, Oťaheľová H, Paľove-Balang P, Slezák M, Slezák P (2014) Environmental drivers of macrophyte species richness in artificial and natural aquatic water bodies–comparative approach from two central European regions. Annales de Limnologie-International Journal of Limnology 50(4): 269–278. https://doi.org/10.1051/limn/2014020
  • Janssen JAM, Rodwell JS, Criado MG, Gubbay S, Haynes T, Nieto A et al. (2016) European Red List of Habitats. Publications Office of European Union, Luxembourg. ISBN 978-92-79-61588-7. https://doi.org/10.2779/091372
  • Kliment J, Kochjarová J, Hrivnák R, Šoltés R (2008) Spring communities of the Veľká Fatra mts (western Carpathians) and their relationship to central European spring vegetation. Polish Botanical Journal 53(1): 29–55
  • Kulczyński S (1928) Die Pflanzenassoziationen der Pieninen. Bulletin International de l'Academie des Sciences de Cracovie. Classe des Sciences Mathematiques et Naturelles. Serie B. Sciences Naturelles, Suppl. 1927/2: 57–203.
  • Landucci F, Šumberová K, Tichý L, Hennekens S., Aunina L., Biță-Nicolae C et al. (2020) Classification of the European marsh vegetation (Phragmito-Magnocaricetea) to the association level. Applied Vegetation Science 23: 297–316. https//doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12484
  • Lastrucci L, Bonari G, Angiolini C, Casini F, Giallonardo T, Gigante D et al. (2014) Vegetation of Lakes Chiusi and Montepulciano (Siena, central Italy): updated knowledge and new discoveries. Plant Sociology 51(2): 29–55. https://doi.org/10.7338/pls2014512/03
  • Lastrucci L, Cerri M, Coppi A, Dell’Olmo L, Ferranti F, Ferri V et al. (2019) Spatial landscape patterns and trends of declining reed-beds in peninsular Italy. Plant Biosystems 153(3): 427–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2018.1498401
  • Lastrucci L, Cerri M, Coppi A, Ferranti F, Ferri V, Foggi B et al. (2017a) Understanding common reed die-back: a phytocoenotic approach to explore the decline of palustrine ecosystems. Plant Sociology 54(2) Suppl. 1: 15–28. https://doi.org/10.7338/pls2017542S1/02
  • Lastrucci L, Dell'Olmo L, Foggi B, Massi L, Nuccio C, Vicenti C, Viciani D (2017b) Contribution to the knowledge of the vegetation of the Lake Massaciuccoli (northern Tuscany, Italy). Plant Sociology 54(1): 67–87. https://doi.org/10.7338/pls2017541/03
  • Lastrucci L, Ferretti G, Mantarano N, Foggi B (2019) Vegetation and habitat of conservation interest of the lake Acquato (Grosseto – Central Italy). Plant Sociology 56(1): 19–30. https://doi.org/10.7338/pls2019561/03
  • Lastrucci L, Gonnelli V, Foggi B (2005) Flora e vegetazione di alcune aree umide dell’altopiano della “Pianca” nell’alta Val Marecchia (Provincia di Arezzo, Toscana). Informatore Botanico Italiano 36(2)(2004): 429–442.
  • Lastrucci L, Foggi B, Mantarano N, Ferretti G, Calamassi R, Grigioni A (2010a) La vegetazione del laghetto “Lo Stagnone” (Isola di Capraia, Toscana). Atti Soc. Tosc. Sci. Nat., Mem. Ser. B 116(2009): 17–25.
  • Lastrucci L, Lazzaro L, Lunardi L, Fiorini G, Viciani D (2020) Morphometric surveys on Eleocharis palustris (L.) Roem. et Schult. (Cyperaceae). The contribution of herbarium investigations to the delimitation of its subspecies and their distribution in Italy. Annali di Botanica (Roma) 10: 97–105. https://doi.org/10.13133/2239-3129/16502
  • Lastrucci L, Paci F, Raffaelli M (2010b) The wetland vegetation of the Natural Reserves and neighbouring stretches of the Arno river in the Arezzo province (Tuscany, Central Italy). Fitosociologia 47(1): 29–59.
  • Lastrucci L, Raffaelli M (2006) Contributo alla conoscenza della flora delle zone umide planiziarie e collinari della Toscana orientale: la provincia di Arezzo (Italia centrale). Webbia 61(2): 271–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/00837792.2006.10670807
  • Lastrucci L, Viciani D, Nuccio C, Melillo C (2008) Indagine vegetazionale su alcuni laghi di origine artificiale limitrofi al Padule di Fucecchio (Toscana, Italia Centrale). Ann. Mus. Civ. Rovereto 23(2007): 169–203.
  • Lazzaro L, Bolpagni R, Buffa G, Gentili R, Lonati M, Stinca A et al. (2020) Impact of invasive alien plants on native plant communities and Natura 2000 Habitats: state of the art, gap analysis and perspectives in Italy. Journal of Environmental Management 274: 111140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111140
  • Mariotti MG (1995) Osservazioni sulla vegetazione della Liguria. Atti dei Convegni Lincei 115(1993): 189–227.
  • Mereu L, Lastrucci L, Viciani D (2012) Contributo alla conoscenza della vegetazione del fiume Pesa (Toscana, Italia Centrale). Studia Botanica 29: 105–143.
  • Minissale P, Spampinato G (1990) Osservazioni fitosociologiche sul “Pantano Gurna” presso Mascali (Sicilia orientale). Boll. Acc. Gioenia Sci. Nat. 23(336): 317–336.
  • Mishra S, Tripathi A, Tripathi DK, Chauhan DK (2016) Role of sedges (Cyperaceae) in wetlands, environmental cleaning and as food material. In: Azooz M.M., Ahmad P. (Eds.), Plant-Environment Interaction: 327–338. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119081005.ch18
  • Mucina L, Bültmann H, Dierßen K, Theurillat J-P, Raus T, Čarni A et al. (2016) Vegetation of Europe: hierarchical floristic classification system of vascular plant, bryophyte, lichen, and algal communities. Applied Vegetation Science 19(suppl. 1): 3–264. https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12257
  • Nowiński M (1930) Roślinnosć i znaczenie dla rolnictwa torfowisk niskich z okolic ujścia Wisłoka do Sanu, w południowo-wschodniej części dawnej puszczy Sandomierskiej (Zespoły roślinne Puszczy Sandomierskiej). Prace Rolniczo- Leśne 3: 1–90.
  • Ostendorp W (1993) Reed bed characteristics and significance of reeds in landscape ecology. In: Ostendorp W. Krummscheid-Plankert P. (Eds.), Seeuferzerstörung und Seeuferrenaturierung in Mitteleuropa. Limnologie aktuell 5. Stuttgart, Jena (Germany): Gustav-Fischer-Verlag. p. 149–160.
  • Pedrotti F (2008) La vegetazione delle Marcite di Norcia (Italia centrale). Braun-Blanquetia 44: 1–31.
  • Píšová S, Fer T (2020) Intraspecific differentiation of Sparganium erectum in the Czech Republic: molecular, genome size and morphometric analysis. Preslia 92(2): 137–165. https://doi.org/10.23855/preslia.2020.137
  • Poldini L (1989) La vegetazione del Carso isontino e triestino. Ed. Lint, Trieste.
  • Poldini L, Sburlino G (2005) Terminologia fitosociologica essenziale. Fitosociologia 42(1): 57–69.
  • R Core Team (2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
  • Reid AJ, Carlson AK, Creed IF, Eliason EJ, Gell PA, Johnson PT et al. (2019) Emerging threats and persistent conservation challenges for freshwater biodiversity. Biological Reviews 94(3), 849–873. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12480
  • Roll H (1938) Die Pflanzengesellschaften ostholsteinischer Fliesgewasser. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 34: 159–305.
  • Savič NM (1926) Luga Kol’skogo poluostrova. Izvestiya Geograficheskogo Instituta Leningrad 6: 56–72.
  • Šumberová K, Hrivnák R (2013) Formalised classification of the annual herb vegetation of wetlands (Isoëto-Nano-Juncetea class) in the Czech Republic and Slovakia (Central Europe). Phytocoenologia 43(1-2): 13–40. https://doi.org/10.1127/0340-269X/2013/0043-0529
  • Šumberová K, Hrivnák R, Rydlo J, Oťaheľová H (2011) Vegetace parožnatek (Charetea). Vegetation of stoneworts. In Chytrý M. (Ed.), Vegetace České republiky 3. Vodní a mokřadní vegetace [Vegetation of the Czech Republic 3. Aquatic and wetland vegetation], Academia Praha, pp. 248–267.
  • Theurillat JP, Willner W, Fernández-González F, Bültmann H, Čarni A, Gigante D et al. (2021) International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature. 4th edition. Applied Vegetation Science 24: e12491. https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12491
  • Tomaselli M, Bernardo L (2006) La vegetazione degli ambienti umidi nei massicci del Sirino-Papa e del Pollino (Italia meridionale). Arch. Geobot. 9 (1-2) (2003): 1–18.
  • Valachovič M, Janovicová K (1999) Altitudinal differentiation of oligotrophic water-spring vegetation in Slovakia. Thaiszia 9: 49–62
  • Venanzoni R, Gigante D (2000) Contributo alla conoscenza della vegetazione degli ambienti umidi dell’Umbria (Italia). Fitosociologia 37(2): 13–63.
  • Viciani D, Angiolini C, Bonari G, Bottacci A, Dell’Olmo L, Zoccola A et al. (2022) Contribution to the knowledge of aquatic vegetation of montane and submontane areas of Northern Apennines (Italy). Plant Sociology 59(1): 25–35. https://doi.org/10.3897/pls2022591/03
  • Viciani D, Vidali M, Gigante D, Bolpagni R, Villani M, Acosta ATR et al. (2020) A first checklist of the alien-dominated vegetation in Italy. Plant Sociology 57(1): 29–54. https://doi.org/10.3897/pls2020571/04
  • Zhang LL, Yin JX, Jiang YZ, Wang H (2012) Relationship between the hydrological conditions and the distribution of vegetation communities within the Poyang lake national nature reserve, China. Ecological Informatics 11: 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2012.05.006
  • Zivkovic L, Biondi E, Pesaresi S, Lasen C, Spampinato G, Angelini P (2017) The third report on the conservation status of habitats (Directive 92/43/EEC) in Italy: processes, methodologies, results and comments. Plant Sociology 54(2): 51–64. https://doi.org/10.7338/pls2017542/0

Appendix I

Site abbreviation Site name Lat (°) Long (°) Elevation m a.s.l. Inclusion in protected areas (PNFC: National Park of Foreste Casentinesi; SAC: Special Area of Conservation, followed by SAC code) Reference to published data
A Asqua 43.796.280 11.788.290 823 PNFC; SAC IT5180002
Be Beccia 43.708.990 11.916.770 951
Cam Camarelle 43.685.020 12.107.370 954
F Fangacci di Campigna 43.867.267 11.735.892 1,325 PNFC; SAC IT4080001
FC Fonte Sodo dei Conti 43.880.308 11.711.449 1,547 PNFC; SAC IT4080001
Fe Ferraiolo 43.684.557 12.116.995 972
FG Fonte del Ghiaccio 43.687.699 12.099.813 952
G Gorga Nera 43.877.920 11.684.560 1,286 PNFC; SAC IT5180002
IV Il Vinco palude 43.716.132 11.910.581 800
La Lama 43.829.913 11.838.356 710 PNFC; SAC IT4080001
LI Lago degli Idoli 43.864.070 11.691.800 1,374 PNFC; SAC IT5180002
LP Lago Pianacci 43.722.410 11.903.240 628
LT La Trappola 43.664.895 12.076.409 658
LV Lago del Vinco 43.716.100 11.910.390 801
MA La Maiolica 43.721.578 11.914.147 788
MC Monte Cavallo 43.677.850 12.105.150 834
MP Metaleto pantano 43.791.732 11.815.021 903 PNFC; SAC IT5180018
MV Monte Verde 43.673.010 12.126.460 1,028 SAC IT5180010
P Fonte Porcareccio 43.836.055 11.795.912 1,390 PNFC; SAC IT4080001
PB Poggio Bonetto 43.734.896 11.973.090 996 SAC IT5180005
PC Pozza del Cervo 43.830.055 11.816.984 1,176 PNFC; SAC IT4080001
PE Pantano dell’Eremo 43.811.217 11.809.832 1,046 PNFC; SAC IT5180018
PF Prato al Fiume 43.812.819 11.808.751 1,052 PNFC; SAC IT5180018
PG Passo Gualanciole 43.736.775 11.981.465 1,077 SAC IT5180005
Pi La Pianca 43.740.670 12.119.170 1,030 Relevés from Lastrucci et al. (2005)
Poz Pozzolo 43.667.500 12.114.140 910
Pr Pratelle 43.738.880 11.986.410 969 SAC IT5180006
Prt Pratalino 43.720.980 11.928.450 966 PNFC; SAC IT5180005
PS Poggio Sambuco 43.684.190 12.117.610 1,001
PStr Pozza delle Strosce 43.618.460 11.952.540 1,345
PT Pantano Traversari 43.807.340 11.819.490 1,072 PNFC; SAC IT5180018
St Stammerina 43.807.650 11.858.550 1,110 PNFC; SAC IT5180018
T Laghetto Traversari 43.807.340 11.819.490 1,077 PNFC; SAC IT5180018
To Il Toro 43.719.860 11.951.320 1,032 SAC IT5180007

Supplementary material

Supplementary material 1 

Tables S1–S6

Lorenzo Lastrucci, Claudia Angiolini, Gianmaria Bonari, Alessandro Bottacci, Vincenzo Gonnelli, Antonio Zoccola, Michele Mugnai, Daniele Viciani

Data type: tables

Explanation note: Phytosociological tables

This dataset is made available under the Open Database License (http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0). The Open Database License (ODbL) is a license agreement intended to allow users to freely share, modify, and use this Dataset while maintaining this same freedom for others, provided that the original source and author(s) are credited.
Download file (107.50 kb)
login to comment