Latvian Biodiversity Clearing-House Mehanism

Forest typology

2006-08-30T00:00:00Z

To characterise the diversity of forest types the best option is using forest typological division. Nowadays, in forest typology the system developed K. Buss 20 years ago is applied and includes 23 forest types (Buss 1976; 1981).

According to moisture conditions forest types are classified into 5 orders:

Forests on dry mineral soils (Cladinoso-callunosa, Vacciniosa, Myrtillosa, Hylocomiosa, Oxalidosa, Aegopodiosa;
Forests on wet mineral soils (the depth of the peat layer does not reach 30 cm) (Calluno-sphagnosa), Vaccinio-sphagnosa, Myrtilloso- sphagnosa, Myrtilloso-polytrichosa, Dryopteriosa;
Forests on wet peat soils (the depth of the peat layer exceeds 30 cm) (Sphagnosa, Caricoso-phragmitosa, Dryopterioso-caricosa, Filipeniidulosa);
Forests on drained mineral soils (Callunosa mel., Vaccioniosa - mel., Myrtillosa-mel., Mercurialiosa-mel.);
Forests on drained peaty soils (Callunosa turf.mel., Vacciniosa turf.mel., Myrtillosa turf.mel., Oxalidosa turf.mel.).

According to soil or substrate fertility forests are classified into three forest fertility types or trophic groups:

Forests on nutrient poor soils or oligotrophic forests - cover 10.2% from the total forest area (Cladinoso-callunosa, Vacciniosa, Calluno-sphagnosa, Vaccinio-sphagnosa, Sphagnosa, Callunosa mel., Callunosa turf.mel.);
Forests on medium rich soils or mezotrophic forests - cover 56.1% from the total forest area (Myrtillosa, Hylocomiosa, Myrtilloso- sphagnosa, Caricoso-phragmitosa, Dryopterioso-caricosa, Vaccioniosa - mel., Myrtillosa-mel., Vacciniosa turf.mel., Myrtillosa turf, mel.);
Forests on nutrient rich soils or eutrophic forests - cover 33,7% from the total forest area (Oxalidosa, Aegopodiosa, Myrtilloso-polytrichosa, Dryopteriosa, Filipeniidulosa, Mercurialiosa-mel., Oxalidosa turf.mel.).

According to the main economic activity type (forest drainage) that is human influenced forest productivity, forests are classified into two large groups:

Natural forest types (forests on normal moisture soils, forests on wet mineral soils and forests on wet peat soils);
Antropogenic (human influenced) forest types.

Author: Dr.hab.geogr. Maris Laivins

Tree and shrub species

2006-08-30T00:00:00Z

In Latvian forests, over 50 native tree and shrub species grow but the main role in the formation the tree stands play only 9 species.

Main differences in species of forest type and forest stand in the regions of the country:

Oligotrophic forest type distribution is higher in the Coastal Lowland (28.1%) and near the largest rivers - the Venta and Gauja. Pine forests cover the largest areas. Nutrient poor forests are less distributed in the West Zemgale- 0.8% and Vidzeme Upland - 2.6%.
More eutrophic forests occur in upland areas - the Vidzeme Upland - 50.4%, East Kursa - 46.2%, but especially in the West Zemgale - 73.9%. In uplands, spruce forests Oxalidosa and Aegopodiosa, but in the West Zemgale ash and grey alder forests Aegopodiosa are common.
Dry forests are more associated with uplands where the ground water is in the deepest soil layers. Forests on wet mineral soils are more widespread in the Coastal Lowland, but forests on peaty soils in the East Latvia near the Aiviekste River.

Author: Dr.hab.geogr. Maris Laivins

Lichen, bryophyte and vascular plant species diversity in forests

2006-08-30T00:00:00Z

Data about the richness of flora and fauna of Latvian forests is very heterogeneous, and the level of research of different organism groups greatly differ both in Latvia as a whole and in forest habitats.
Studies of species diversity in Latvian forests are not published up to now. Only fragmentary data is available and concerns separate plant and animal groups. Quite large information is available on vascular plant flora. Analysis of parcial flora (ecologically uniform areas - ecotope) was carried out in many protected nature areas (Gavrilova, Laiviņs, 1992; Bambe, 2001 etc.), occurrence of vascular plant species in the forest types was studied by K. Buss (1964). There are several studies about bryophyte occurrence in different habitat types (Āboliņa, 2001; Bambe, Lārmanis, 2001; A. Āboliņa, (not published.) etc.).

Lichens

In Latvian forests, over 304 lichen species occur that is about 60.3 % of the total lichen flora of Latvia. Among them, 160 species belong to crustose lichens, 55 to leaf lichens and 89 species to fruticose lichens. The largest lichen species number concentrates in 10 families. These must be considered as more polymorphic - dominating lichen species in Latvian forest flora. These families include 223 species that comprises 73.4 % of the total lichen species number found in the forests. Only 81 species belong to the other families that is 26.6 % of the total species number.
In Latvian forests, 47 lichen species occur that are included in the List of Protected Plant Species according to the Regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers. It is an important part of all protected lichen species (84.0 %). Among them, 25 species are included in the Red Data Book of Latvia.

Bryophytes

In Latvian forest habitats, 298 bryophyte species occur (58% of the total species number of Latvian bryophyte flora) and include species from 120 genus and 52 families.
In the list of the EU Directives and 6th Resolution of Bern Convention 3 bryophyte species occurring in Latvian forests are included:

Buxbaumia viridis (Moug. ex Lam. et DC) Brid.ex Moug. et Nestl.
Dicranum viride (Sull. et Lesq.) Lindb.
Plagiomnium drummondii (B. et S.) T.Kop.

In Appendix V of the EU Directives (plant and animal species that are of community interest and whose picking and exploitation in nature can be allowed) one species that grows in Latvian forests is included:

Leucobryum glaucum (Hedw.) Ångstr.

Vascular plants

Latvian forests provide a habitat for 656 vascular plant species from 79 families and 305 genus. It comprises 40% of the total vascular plant number in Latvian flora. It must be mentioned that from the total number of species growing in forests foreign species (adventive species and garden escapers) comprise only 5 %, but in Latvian flora their density is much higher - about 30%. Concerning the local (autohtone) species, forest significance is even higher - it is the habitat for 51% of autohtone species.

In forests, the richest is Rosaceae family that in the whole Latvian flora is only on the third place. The species richest family of Latvian flora - Poaceae family and Compositae family in the forest flora is on the third and fourth positions. Several families, like Aspidiaceae syn. Dryopteridaceae, Pyrolaceae occur only in forests, but for 80% species of Violaceae, Ericaceae, Campanulaceae, Lycopodiaceae, Orchidaceae, Caprifoliaceae forests are the most suitable habitat.

Forests are very important for the protection of Latvian rare and protected plant species. In forests, 111 especially protected plant species (51% of all protected species) and 143 Latvian Red Data Book species occur. Only about a half (46%) of all protected species can be maintained outside forests, but the other species can grow only forests, and in rare cases in habitats that are associated with forests.

From species that are included in international documents, 11 species occur in forests (in total in Latvia there are 21 such species). Both in EU Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora and Bern Convention, such species as Cypripedium calceolus, Pulsatilla patens, Thesium ebracteatum un Neottianthe cucullata are included. In the EU Directive and also 6th Resolution of the Bern Convention also Cinna latifolia, Agrimonia pilosa, Sorbus teodorii and Dianthus arenarius subsp. arenarius are included, but in Bern Convention - Botrychium matricariifolium, B.multifidum and Dracocephalum ruyschiana.

Publications in Latvia

2006-08-30T00:00:00Z

Āboliņa A. 2001. Sūnu flora dabas liegumā “Čortoka ezers ar apkārtējo ainavu”. Latvijas Veģetācija, 4: 105-114. Andrusaitis G. (red.) 1998.Latvijas Sarkanā grāmata. Retās un apdraudētās augu un dzīvnieku sugas. 4.sēj. Bezmugurkaulnieki. (Z.Spuris red.). Rīga, LU Bioloģijas institūts: 388 lpp.

Andrusaitis G. (red.) 1998. Latvijas Sarkanā grāmata. Retās un apdraudētās augu un dzīvnieku sugas. 1.sēj. Sēnes un ķērpji. (E.Vimba, A.Piterāns sast.). Rīga, LU Bioloģijas institūts, 201 lpp.

Andrusaitis G. (red.) 2000.Latvijas Sarkanā grāmata. Retās un apdraudētās augu un dzīvnieku sugas. 6.sēj. Putni un zīdītāji. Rīga, LU Bioloģijas institūts.

Anon.1995. Latvijas kukaiņu datu bāze. Latvijas Entomoloģijas biedrība, projekta atskaite, 93 lpp.

Anon. 1997. Ķemeru projekta teritorijas individuālais dabas aizsardzības plāns,. Silva, VMD-WWF: 51+14 pielikumi (projekta atskaite). Anon. 1999. Bioloģiskās daudzveidības nacionālā programma. Stratēģiskā daļa, 1999. Rīga, VARAM: 56 lpp. Anon. 2000. Noteikumi par īpasi aizsargājamo sugu un ierobežoti izmantojamo aizsargājamo sugu sarakstu. Latvijas Vēstnesis, 17.11.2000., Nr. 413/417. Auziņs R. Bērmanis R., Ek T., Thor B. 2000. Inventory of woodland key habitats – report after 2 years of full scale inventory. Riga: State Forest Service, Latvia, County Forestry Board, Östra Götaland, Sweden. 50lpp.

Bambe B. 1999. Sausieņu priežu mežu augu sabiedrības paugurainēs un uz pauguru grēdām. Mežzinātne, 8:3-42.

Bambe B., Lārmanis V. 2001. Dabas lieguma Pirtslīcis-Līkā atteka mežu īpatnības un sūnu flora. Mežzinātne, 10: 73-88 Buss K. 1964. Latvijas PSR meža augsanas apstākļu un purvu tipu noteicējs. Jaunākais Mežsaimniecībā, 6/7: 72-93

Buss K. 1978. Mežkopības teorijas un prakses galvenie attīstības virzieni, Rīga, 23 lpp.

Buss K. 1981. Meža ekoloģija un tipoloģija. Zinātne, Rīga, 165 lpp.

Ehnström B. 1999. Kukaiņu izraisīto dažādu koku sugu mizas un koksnes bojājumu īss noteicējs. Zviedrijas apdraudēto sugu nodaļa, Zviedrijas Lauksaimniecības zinātņu universitāte, Upsala: 23 lpp. (tulkots manuskripts).

Ek T., Susko U., Auziņs R. 2001.Mežaudžu atslēgas biotopu inventarizācija. Metodika. Rīga, Valsts meža dienests, Latvija, Östra Götaland Meža pārvalde, Zviedrija. 76 lpp.

Gavrilova Ģ., Laiviņs M. 1992. Botāniskie liegumi. Lukna, Čužupurvs, Vīdale, Dižkalni, Piesdanga, Gavieze, Vērene. Latvijas aizsargājamo teritoriju flora. Zinātne, Rīga, 215 lpp. Gavrilova Ģ., sulcs V. 1999. Latvijas vaskulāro augu flora. Taksonu saraksts. Latvijas Akadēmiskā bibliotēka, Rīga, 136 lpp.

Jermacāne S., Laiviņs M. 2001. Āronas pilskalna veģetācija. Mežzinātne, 10:55-72

Jermacāne S., Laiviņs M. 2001.Latvijā aprakstīto augu sabiedrību sintaksonu saraksts. Latvijas Veģetācija, 4:115-132.

Kabucis I. (Sast.) 2000. Biotopu rokasgrāmata. ES aizsargājamie biotopi Latvijā. Rīga, 160 lpp.

Kabucis I. (Sast.) 2001. Latvijas Biotopi. Klasifikators. Latvijas Dabas Fonds, Rīga, 96 lpp.

Kirsteins K. 1926. Tipoloģijas mežaudžu klasifikācijas izveidosanās un pielietosana praksē. Mežsaimniecības Rakstu Krājums, 4: 3-16.

Krauklis A. 1999. Virsu bioģeocenozes Britānijas un Latvijas ainavās. Ģeogrāfiski Raksti, 7: 31-57.

Kupffer K. 1911. Baltische Landeskunde. Riga, 557 S.

Laiviņs M. 1994. Latvijas meža tipu bioģeogrāfiskā analīze. Mežzinātne, 4:50-62.

Laiviņs M. 1997. Latvijas mežu reģionālā analīze. Mežzinātne, 7:40-76.

Laiviņs M. 1998. Latvijas boreālo priežu mežu sinantropizācija un eitrofikācija. Latvija Veģetācija, 1, 137 lpp.

Laiviņs M.,Zālītis P., Donis J. 2000. Valsts nozīmes īpasi vērtīgas mežsaimniecības teritorijas. Mežzinātne, 9:4-17. Lārmanis V. 1999. Latvijas – Zviedrijas kopprojekta “Mežaudžu atslēgas biotopu inventarizācija” darbu kontrole. Līgumdarba atskaite. Rīga, Latvijas Dabas fonds. 48 lpp. Mallner F. 1944. Vorgeschichte und Werdegang des lettlandischen Waldtypensystems. Zeitschrift fur das gesamte Forstwesen, Jg.76/70, Heft 7/9: 105-136. Ozols G. 1985. Priedes un egles dendrofāgie kukaiņi Latvijas mežos. Zinātne, Rīga, 208 lpp. Pētersons G. (sast.) 1997. Latvijas Sikspārņi. Rīga, “Gandrs”. Piterāns A. 2001. Latvijas ķērpju konspekts. Latvijas Veģetācija, 3: 5-46 Priedītis N. 1999a. Status of wetland forests and their structural richness in Latvia. Environmental Conservation, 26, 4: 332-346 Priedītis N. 1999b. Latvijas mežs: daba un daudzveidība. WWF, Rīga, 209 lpp.

Priedītis N. 2000. Biotopi. Mežaudžu atslēgas biotopu rokasgrāmata. Rīga, 11-25. lpp.

Priednieks J., Strazds M, Strazds A., Petriņs A. 1989. Latvijas ligzdojoso putnu atlants 1980-1984. (Red. J. Vīksne), Rīga, “Zinātne”. Priednieks J., Petriņs A., Lārmanis V., Vilka I. 1999. Priežu mežu ornitofauna un mežsaimnieciskās darbības ietekme uz to. Mežzinātne 8(41)’98: 84-127.

Riekstiņs I., Laiviņs M. 1984. Ogu īves izplatība Latvijā un tās saistība ar klimatiskajiem un edafiskajiem faktoriem. Jaunākais Mežsaimniecībā, 26:29-32

Rupais A. 1999. Kokaugu kaitēkļi. Sugu noteiksanas tabulas pēc bojājumiem dārzos un parkos (iespiesanā).

Strazds M. 1993. Horstschutzzonen fur den Schwarzstorch in Lettland – eine wichtige Masnahme fur den Biotopschutz. Naturschutzzentrum Wasserschlos Mitwitz 2/93. S. 39-45.

Strazds M., Avotiņs A., Ķuze J., Cīrulis V. 1998. Krustkalnu rezervāta ligzdojoso putnu atlants. Putni Dabā 7,3-4: 7-52.

Strazds M., Račinskis E., Kalvāns A. 2000. Gaujas Nacionālā parka ligzdojosie putni. Putni Dabā 9,3-4: 2-33.

Susko U. 1997. Natural forests of Latvia. Riga, WWF project report, 188 p. (manuscript).

Tauriņs E. 1982. Latvijas zīdītājdzīvnieki. Rīga, “Zvaigzne”.

Аболинь А. 1968. Листостебельные мхи Латвийской ССР . Зинатне, Рига, 193 стр.

Залитис П. 1983. Основы рационального лесоосушения в Латвийской ССР . Зинатне, Рига, 230 стр.

Лайвиня С.Х. 1987. Остров Морицсала. Флора охраняемых территорий Латвии. Зинатне, Рига, 190 стр.

Табака Л., Гаврилова Г., Фатаре И. 1988. Флора сосудистых растений Латвийской ССР . Зинатне, Рига, 193 стр.

Табака Л.В., Клявиня Г.Б. 1981. Долина реки Абава. Флора охраняемых территорий Латвии. Зинатне, Рига, 130 стр.