Bryophyte Species Richness on Retention Aspens Recovers in Time but Community Structure Does Not

Peer reviewe

Co-variation among species specific regression coefficients between the covariates.

<p>a) Site type and stand age, b) time since logging and stand age, and c) site type and time since logging. Negative values of site type refer to retention sites and positive to conservation sites. Mosses are depicted in black and liverworts in grey. Species-specific regression coefficients are based on the presence-absence model. See <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0093786#pone.0093786.s003" target="_blank">File S3</a> for the species specific regression coefficients for each covariate and <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0093786#pone-0093786-t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a> for the numbered species in c).</p

Examples of species in the four reaction groups (disturbance-favouring, lifeboated, re-colonizing, old-growth favouring; the classification is based on the presence-absence model).

<p>The list includes all obligately or primarily epiphytic species with ≥4 observations and three occasionally epiphytic species. No. refers to the numbering of species in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0093786#pone-0093786-g003" target="_blank">Fig. 3c</a>.</p

Relationship between stand age and bryophyte species richness (a), abundance (b) and community structure (c).

<p>The black lines correspond to aspens in uncut conservation sites, the grey lines correspond to retention aspens in forests that are cut at the stand age of 80 years. Continuous lines show median estimates, dashed lines the interquartile range. Community similarity (c) is measured against a modelled reference community (marked with •) of an aspen that has 60 cm diameter and that occurs in an uncut forest with stand age 150 years. Community structure is based on the presence-absence model.</p

The responses (standardised regression coefficient) of bryophytes to the four covariates included in the study.

<p>Black symbols correspond to the presence-absence model and grey symbols to the abundance (conditional on presence) model. The middle points and bars show the average responses of the species to each of the covariates (posterior mean and 95% central credibility interval for the vector <b><i>μ</i></b>). The lower and upper points indicate the range of responses shown by 95% of the species (posterior means for <b><i>μ ±</i></b> 2SD, where the SD are the standard deviations obtained from the diagonal elements of the matrix <b><i>Σ</i></b>). Diameter shows the effect of increasing aspen size and site type separates retention aspens (−1) from conservation aspens (+1). Time since logging is relevant only for retention aspens whereas stand age is relevant only for conservation aspens.</p

Map of study sites in Central Finland.

<p>© National land survey of Finland 2013.</p

New national and regional biological records for Finland 9:contributions to Bryophyta and Marchantiophyta 8

Abstract Five species of mosses (Bryophyta: Oncophorus demetrii, Oncophorus integerrimus, Oxyrrhynchium speciosum, Sphagnum divinum and Sphagnum medium) and one of liverworts (Marchantiophyta: Kurzia trichoclados) are presented as new for Finland. Seligeria calcarea and Seligeria pusilla, previously thought to be regionally extinct from Finland, are reported to being found again. New records in biogeographical provinces for 74 species of mosses and 36 species of liverworts are listed. Finally, 17 occurrences in provinces are removed due to misidentifications or missing specimens

A miniature world in decline: European Red List of Mosses, Liverworts and Hornworts

This publication has been prepared by IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) as a deliverable of the LIFE European Red Lists project (LIFE14 PRE BE 001). A miniature world in decline: The European Red List of Mosses, Liverworts and Hornworts is, therefore, a part of a series of publications released since 2015, when the project began, that also include: • European Red List of Lycopods and Ferns, 2017 • European Red List of Saproxylic Beetles, 2018 • European Red list of Terrestrial Molluscs: slugs, snails, and semi-slugs, 2019 • European Red list of Trees, 2019 • European Red list of Selected Endemic Shrubs, 2019 Based on other European Red List assessments, 59% of freshwater molluscs, 40% of freshwater fishes, 28% of grasshoppers, crickets and bush-crickets, 23% of amphibians, 20% of reptiles, 20% of ferns and lycopods, 17% of mammals, 16% of dragonflies, 13% of birds, 9% of butterflies and bees, 8% of aquatic plants and 2% of medicinal plants are threatened at the European level (Allen et al., 2014; IUCN, 2015; Hochkirch et al., 2016; García Criado et al., 2017). Additional European Red Lists assessing a selection of species showed that 22% of terrestrial molluscs, 16% of crop wild relatives and 18% of saproxylic beetles are also threatened (Cuttelod et al., 2011; Bilz et al., 2011; Cálix et al., 2018). The findings of this work suggest that 23% of bryophytes are threatened species in Europe, representing the fifth most threatened group of plants assessed so far