Lichens in the new Red List of Estonia

The compilation of the current Red List of Estonia took place during 2006–2008; the IUCN system of categories and criteria (vers. 6.1), which is accepted worldwide, was applied. Out of the 1019 lichenized, lichenicolous and closely allied fungal species recorded in Estonia in 2006, 464 species (45.5%) were evaluated while 555 species remained not estimated – in the category Not Evaluated (NE). Of the evaluated species, 213 were assigned to the so-called red-listed categories: Regionally Extinct (RE), Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU), Near Threatened (NT) and Data Deficient (DD). 113 of them were classified as threatened (belonging to the categories CR, EN, VU). 251 species were assigned to the category Least Concerned (LC). The full enumeration of the red-listed lichens of Estonia with appropriate category and criteria is presented.

Epiphytic lichen diversity in Estonian and Fennoscandian old coniferous forests

Lichen species richness and species composition were compared between Estonian and Fennoscandian old coniferous forests, with a special emphasis on woodland key habitat indicator species. Altogether 42 Picea abies and 40 Pinus sylvestris sample plots were studied in Estonia, Finland, Sweden and Norway. In every plot lichens were recorded on five randomly selected trees; in addition, tree age and canopy openness by the sampled trees were measured. The results revealed clear differences in lichen species composition; the occurrence of many species differed between Estonia and Fennoscandia. Several indicator species were recorded only in one or two sample plots; the relatively frequent indicators differed between the two studied areas. The number of lichen species per sample plot was significantly higher in Fennoscandia compared to Estonia. Maximum tree age was positively correlated with species richness in Estonian spruce sample plots, and mean canopy openness with species richness in Estonian pine sample plots.

Samblike mitmekesisus Eesti poollooduslikes kooslustes

Väitekirja elektrooniline versioon ei sisalda publikatsioone.Pika traditsiooniga Eesti poollooduslikud kooslused – puisniidud ja loopealsed (alvarid) – on looduskaitse seisukohalt olulised kui omapärase ja liigirikka samblikuelustiku, sealhulgas haruldaste ja kaitset väärivate samblike elupaigad. Kahjuks on need poollooduslikud kooslused nii Eesti kui kogu Euroopa kultuurmaastikult kadumas, mis on tingitud eelkõige traditsioonilise majandamisviisi lakkamisest. Puisniidud on võsastunud või haritud üles põllumaaks ning looniidud ja -karjamaad on asendunud tihedate kadastikega, kuna loomade karjatamine madala produktiivsusega alvaritel pole eriti tulus. Puisniitude võsastumise ja kinnikasvamise tulemusel on muutunud sealsed klimaatilised tingimused, eelkõige valgustingimused. See omakorda on muutnud ja vaesustanud puisniitudele omaseid epifüütseid samblikukooslusi. Valgusnõudlikud liigirikkad samblikukooslused on asendunud liigivaeste varju taluvate samblike kooslustega. Et säilitada või taastada epifüütide liigirikkust puisniidul, tuleks luua võimalikult heterogeensed tingimused. Säilitada tuleks puisniitude mosaiikset poolavatud struktuuri jättes kasvama erinevaid puude- ja põõsastegruppe. Puid ja järelkasvu tuleks raiuda valikuliselt, jättes kasvama eri vanuses ja erinevat liiki puid. Traditsiooniline puisniitude majandamine hõlmab ka niitmist või karjatamist, mis tagab puisniidu avatud struktuuri. Ka loopealsete maapinnasamblikud on mõjutatud traditsioonilise majandamise (karjatamise, kadakate harvendamise) lakkamisest. Maapinnasamblike liigirikkus väheneb ja liigiline koosseis muutub rohu- ja põõsarinde katvuse suurendes. Muutub ka samblike kasvuvormide proportsioon, koorikja ja soomusja kasvuvormiga liigid asenduvad põõsasja kasvuvormiga liikidega. Rohu- ja põõsarinde pealetungi suhtes on eriti tundlikud haruldased ja kaitset väärivad liigid. Loopealsete samblikele alternatiivsed kasvukohad, nagu vanad lubjakivikarjäärid, endised sõjaväealad või nurjunud metsastamise katsega jäätmaad, on kujunenud loopealsete samblikele omamoodi ajutisteks asendusaladeks või refuugiumiteks. Seetõttu võiks loopealsete taastamisel ja majandamisel rakendada lisaks traditsioonilistele majandamisvõtetele (karjatamine ja kadakate harvendamine) ka drastilisemaid võtteid nagu mullapinna laiguti eemaldamine aluspõhjani välja.Semi-natural habitats with long management history, wooded meadows and alvars in northern Europe, are of great importance for nature conservation according to their high contribution to biodiversity including rare, red-listed, and protected lichens for the studied region. Unfortunately these habitats are disappearing from our cultural landscape, mainly due to the cessation of traditional management; they are replaced by cultivated fields or abandoned to brushwoods. The study demonstrates that abandonment of wooded meadows causes changes in stand structure and in the openness of wooded meadows, which impoverishes and alters epiphytic lichen community. Light-demanding lichen communities, rich in foliose and fruticose lichens, will be replaced with impoverished shade-tolerant crustose lichen dominated communities due to encroachment of wooded meadows with trees and shrubs. To support diverse epiphytic lichen communities trees and undergrowth should be cut selectively, retaining a mosaic of semi-open structure of wooded meadows with trees of various species and age classes, and some clumps of bushes. Annual mowing or grazing is important for preserving this semi-open structure. Similarly, epigeic lichen communities of semi-natural alvar grasslands are strongly affected by cessation of grazing and cutting of junipers. With the increasing herb and shrub cover, the species richness of epigeic lichens diminishes, species composition alteres and the proportions of species growth forms change (crustose and squamulose species are replaced with fruticose species). Lichens with a conservation value, especially rare species, are particularly sensitive to the abandonment-induced encroachment of herbs and shrubs. Old abandoned limestone quarries, former military areas or wastelands of failed afforestation attempts appeared to be alternative or temporary substitution habitats (refugia) for ground layer lichens including lichens with a high conservation value. Therefore, in addition to conventional recommendations for alvar restoration including moderate grazing and removal of shrubs, it is suggested to promote small-scale ground cover disturbances and patchy peeling off of the soil layer to expose base rock

New Estonian records. Mosses. Pezizales (Ascomycetes). Lichens and lichenicolous fungi.

Fifteen species were recorded for the first time in Estonia last year, although the latest addi- tions to Estonian bryoflora were published quite recently (Vellak et al., 2006). All newly recorded species are mosses. Majority of new species were identified from the earlier collected material from the herbariums of the Natural History Museum of Tartu University (TU), Estonian University of Life Sciences (TAA), Estonian Museum of Natu- ral History (TAM) and Tallinn Botanical Garden (TALL). Altogether 22 new species are reported, 14 of them are lichenized, seven are lichenicolous and one is mainly saprobic fungus. Abbreviations of country regions and frequency classes follow Randlane & Saag (1999). Cited specimens are kept in the lichenological herbaria of University of Tartu (TU) and Uppsala University (UPS).

New Estonian records. Mosses. Pezizales (Ascomycetes). Lichenized, lichenicolous and allied fungi

Since 2009 five species new for Estonian bryo- flora have been found. These additions raise the total number of species in the list of Estonian bryophytes up to 583. Seventeen species are reported as new for Estonia, of them ten are lichenized, six are lichenicolous fungi and one is non-lichenized fungus. The presence of Verrucaria submersella, previously known by literature data only, is confirmed, and Lecanora epibryon, previously considered to be extict from the local lichen flora, was rediscovered. Lepraria sylvestris which has earlier been reported in literature as new for Estonia is not confirmed hereby as further chemical analysis is needed, and Cladonia monomorpha is excluded from the list of Estonian lichens as a misidentification.

Lichens, lichenicolous and allied fungi in Asveja Regional Park (Lithuania)

The paper reports the results of lichenological investigations in Asveja Regional Park (eastern Lithuania). A large part of the study was performed during the joint 18th Symposium of Baltic Mycologists and Lichenologists (BMLS) and Nordic Lichen Society meeting (NLF), September 19–23, 2011. A list of 259 species is presented, 30 of them are new to Lithuania. Arthonia helvola, Bacidina sulphurella, Candelariella lutella, Catillaria croatica, Cladonia conista, Gyalecta derivata, Lecanora quercicola, Leptosphaeria ramalinae, Strigula jamesii, Trichonectria rubefaciens, Verrucaria banatica, V. boblensis, V. christiansenii, V. illinoisensis, V. inornata, V. nigrofusca, V. trabicola, Zwackhiomyces diederichii are recorded for the first time in the Baltic countries. New lichens for Lithuania are: Bacidia incompta, Caloplaca crenulatella, C. pyracea, Catinaria atropurpurea, Lecanora populicola, L. semipallida, Mycobilimbia epixanthoides, Ramalina dilacerata, Verrucaria inaspecta, and new lichenicolous fungi are: Cladosporium licheniphilum, Stigmidium microspilum, Xenonectriella leptalea. Eighteen species included in the Lithuanian Red Data Book were recorded which is the highest number known for any studied area in Lithuania