ISSN 2415-8860 (Online), ISSN 0372-4123 (Print)
logoUkrainian Botanical Journal
  • 5 of 9
Up
Ukr. Bot. J. 2019, 76(1): 42–51
https://doi.org/10.15407/ukrbotj76.01.042
Vegetation Science, Ecology, Conservation

Phytocenotic characteristics of plant communities with Amorpha fruticosa (Fabaceae) in the Middle Dnipro area (Ukraine)

Shevchyk V.L., Shevchyk T.V.
Abstract

Due to rapid spread and naturalization of Amorpha fruticosa in natural plant communities in the Middle Dnipro region, the phytocoenotic range of this invasive species was studied. This is necessary in order to predict its behavior, to identify the most vulnerable biotopes in relation to possible invasions of this species, and to prevent their negative consequences, in particular, transformation of the regionally important natural biotopes. Analysis of 120 geobotanical relevés of plants associations from the studied region that include Amorpha fruticosa was performed. These cenopopulations belong to 4 classes, 5 orders, 7 unions, 7 associations, and a single community of unidentified syntaxonomical status within Dicrano-Pinion union. Phragmition communis + Magnocaricion elatae + Molinatealia – Rubo caesi-Amorphion fruticosae – Salicion albae form the central part in the vegetation of this area. The outermost zone of the phytocoenotic range for Amorpha fruticosa in the floodplain is a xeromezophilous demutational succession series represented by the following syntaxonomical aggregations: Galietalia veri – Artemisio dniproicae-Salicion acutifoliae – Dicrano-Pinion. In these floodplain phytocenoses, Amorpha fruticosa is capable of regular reproduction of populations due to the presence of individuals of the juvenile age group in the herbaceous layer. Occurrence of Amorpha fruticosa in the communities of the classes Robinietea and Carpino-Fagetea can be regarded mostly as a residual effect of the use of this shrub in forestry. In these populations of Amorpha fruticosa almost no individuals of the juvenile age exist and therefore there is no prospect of an extended recovery in such biotopes.

Keywords: Amorpha fruticosa, Dnipro floodplain, ecological succession, invasive species, Phragmito-Magnocaricetea, Robinietea, Salicetea purpurea, Vaccinio-Piceetea

Full text: PDF (Ukr) 1.15M

References
  1. Blagojević M., Konstantinović B., Kurjakov A., Samardźić N. 2014. Seed bank of Amorpha fruticosa L. on some ruderal sites in Serbia. In: Neobiota 2014. 8th International conference on biological invasions from understanding to action. Antalya, Turkey, p. 74.
  2. Chauge N., Fried G. 2011. Community-level impacts of three invasive alien plants in Mediterranean coastal habitats In: 3th International symposium enviromental weeds and invasive plants. Monteverite, p. 17.
  3. Csiszer A., Korda M., Schmidt D., Sporčić D., Teleki B., Tiborcz V., Zagyvai G., Bartha D. 2013. Allelopathic potential of some invasive woody plant species occurring in Hungary. Allelopathy Journal, 31(2): 309–318.
  4. De Haan L.J., Ehlke N.J., Sheaffer C.C., Wyse D.L., De Haan R.L. 2006. Evaluation of diversity among North American accession of False Indigo (Amorpha fruticosa L.) for forage and biomass. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, (53)7: 1463–1476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-005-6845-6
  5. Egoshyn A.V. 2014. Izvestia Saratovskogo universiteta. Series chimia, biologia, ekologia, 14(4): 36–62.
  6. Evtushenko T.M., Ivan’ko I.A. 2009. In: Bioriznomanittya ta rol tvaryn v ekosystemakh: Materialy V Mizhnarodnoi naukovoi konferentsii. Dnipropetrovsk, pp. 10–11.
  7. Karmyzova L. 2014. Ecological study of invasive Amorpha fruticosa at research biological stations within steppe zone, Ukraine. Kharkiv National University Journal. Series Biology, (22)11: 300–304.
  8. Kelbel P. 2012. Comparison of invasive woody plant species presense in the Botanical garden of P.J. Šafarik University in Košice from the viewpoint of time and management of sanitation measures. Thaiszia – Journal of Botany, (22)2: 163–180.
  9. Kosman E.G., Sirenko I.P., Solomakha V.A., Sheliag-Sosonko J.R. 1991. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 48(2): 98–104.
  10. Kuzemko A.A., Chorna G.A. 2002. Ukrainian Phytosociological Collection. Series A, 1(18): 15–31.
  11. Lyubchenko V.M. 1987. Bulleten Glavnogo Botanicheskogo Sada, 46: 48–50.
  12. Lyubchenko V.M., Bortnyak M.M. 1986. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 43(5): 16–20.
  13. Manuilova G.M. 2005. Fitomelioration of virgin landscapes in the conditions of Lviv Region Cand. Sci. Diss. Abstract. Lviv, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, 19 pp.
  14. Matuszkiewicz Wł. 2001. Przewodnik do oznaczania zborowisk roślinnych Polski. Warszawa: Wyd-wo Naukove PWN, 540 pp.
  15. Mirkin B.M., Naumova L.G. 1998. Prodromus i diagnosticheskie vidy vysshych edinic rastitelnosti territorii byvshego SSSR. Ufa: Gilem, 335–412 pp.
  16. Moravec J. Rostlinná společenstva České republiky a jejich ohrožení. 2 vyd. Litoměřice: Severočeská pobočka České botanické společnosti, 206 s.
  17. Mosyakin S.L., Fedoronchuk M.M. 1999. Vascular plants of Ukraine. A nomenclatural checklist. Kyiv, xxii + 345 pp.
  18. Mucina L., Bültmann H., Dierßen K., Theurillat J.-P., Raus T., Čarni A., Sumberová K., Willner W., Dengler J., García R.G., Chytrý M., Hájek M., Di Pietro R., Iakushenko D., Pallas J., Daniëls F.J.A., Bergmeier E., Guerra A.S., Ermakov N., Valachovič M., Schaminée J.H.J., Lysenko T., Didukh Ya.P., Pignatti S., Rodwell J.S., Capelo J., Weber H.E., Solomeshch A., Dimopoulos P., Aguiar C., Hennekens S.M., Tichý L. 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
  19. Ruzhilenko N.S. 2002. Visnyk Luhanskoho derzhavnoho pedahohichnoho instytutu, 45(1): 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003081-200203000-00013 ?
  20. Seibold S., Fischer A. 2008. Suppression of alien invasive species by traditional land use forms: Amorpha fruticosa L. in the Croatian nature park Lonsjko Polje. Sauteria, 20: 265–276.
  21. Sărăţeanu V., Horablaga M.N., Stroia M.S., Butnarin M., Bostan C. 2008. Approach on the shrub invasive species impact on western Romanian grasslands. Lucrări Ştiinţifice Facultatea de Agricultură. Timişoara, 40(1): 315–318.
  22. Senchilo O.O., Vorobyov Ye.O., Shevchyk V.L., Solomakha I.V. 1999. Ukrainian Phytosociological Collection. Series A. Phytosociology, 3(14): 58–67.
  23. Shevchyk V.L., Borysenko M.M., Shevchyk T.V. 2015. Naukovi osnovy zberezhennia biotychnoji riznomanitnosti, 13(5): 195–202.
  24. Shevchyk V.L, Shevchyk T.V., Tsynda R.V. 2013. In: Naukovi zapysky pryrodnogo zapovidnyka "Mys Martian", vyp.4: Materialy mizhnar. nauk. konf. Yalta, pp. 106–107.
  25. Shevchyk V.L., Solomakha V.A. 1996. Ukranian Phytosociological Collection. Series A. Phytosociology, 1: 12–27.
  26. Sirenko I.P. 1996. Ukrainian Phytosociological Collection. Series A. Phytosociology, 1: 9–11.
  27. Solomakha V.A. 2008. Syntaksonomiya roslynnosti Ukrainy. Tretye nablyzhennya. Kyiv: Fitosotsiotsentr, 296 pp.
  28. Weber H., Moravec J., Theurillat J. 2000. International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature. 3rd edition. Journal of Vegetation Science, 11: 739–768. https://doi.org/10.2307/3236580%0A