* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Assessment of sparsely vegetated land ecosystems and their
Unified neutral theory of biodiversity wikipedia , lookup
Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project wikipedia , lookup
Biodiversity wikipedia , lookup
Latitudinal gradients in species diversity wikipedia , lookup
Molecular ecology wikipedia , lookup
Island restoration wikipedia , lookup
Biogeography wikipedia , lookup
Introduced species wikipedia , lookup
Occupancy–abundance relationship wikipedia , lookup
Sacred natural site wikipedia , lookup
Restoration ecology wikipedia , lookup
Habitat conservation wikipedia , lookup
Ecosystem services wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical ecology wikipedia , lookup
Assessment of sparsely vegetated land ecosystems and their services in East Rhodope Mts (Bulgaria) Svetlana Bancheva1, Vladimir Vladimirov1, Petar Dimov2, Malina Delcheva1, Toshko Lyubomirov1 1Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Acad. G. Bonchev, bl. 23, 1113-Sofia, Bulgaria, [email protected] 2Forest Research Institute, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 132, St. Kliment Ohridski Blvd., Sofia, Bulgaria General description • Project: “Mapping and assessment of Sparsely vegetated land ecosystem services in Bulgaria (SPA-EcoServices)”, co-funded by the Financial Mechanism of the European Economic Area 2009-2014 and the Bulgarian State Budget • Methodology for assessment and mapping of SPARSELY VEGETATED LAND ecosystems condition and their services in Bulgaria, Part B6 (Sopotlieva et al., 2016). The proposed typology of sparsely vegetated land ecosystems corresponds with the ecosystem classification of MAES (2013) combined with the European Nature Information System (EUNIS) habitat classification types • Activity period: 11.2015 – 03.2017 • Sparsely vegetated area assessment is made on a national level, outside NATURA 2000 network sites Stages of the mapping and assessment process • Creating a GIS vector model of sparsely vegetated lands based on all spatial data available • In-situ verification and field data collection (establishing plots on random selected areas) and ex-situ verification (100% of the GIS model features) • In-situ verification on selected areas of special interest • Ecosystem state and ecosystem services assessment based on collected plot data Region of East Rhodopes • Located in Southern Bulgaria and Northern Greece • 12200 square km in Bulgarian territory • Average height 350 m above sea level (varies between 50 and 1500 m) • Climate type is Transitional continental and Mediterranean continental • Different types of intrusive, sedimentary, volcanic (Paleogene), and metamorphic bedrock types • Great biodiversity rate with many rare and endangered species • Variety of historical and cultural monuments, directly related to sparsely vegetated lands Sparsely vegetated ecosystems in Eastern Rhodopes • EUNIS H2 – Screes: Accumulations of boulders, stones, rock fragments, pebbles, gravels or finer material, of non-aeolian depositional origin, unvegetated, occupied by lichens or mosses, or colonized by sparse herbs or shrubs (HD 92/42/EEC – 8110, 8120) • EUNIS H3 – Inland cliffs, rock pavements and outcrops: Unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, and bryophyte- or lichen-vegetated cliffs, rock faces and rock pavements in inland areas (HD 92/42/EEC – 8210, 8220, 8230) Sparsely vegetated ecosystems in Eastern Rhodopes • Dense rock formations of many bedrock types • Rock screes • Volcanic ash and rhyolite formations • Geology, erosion and weathering processes can often cause weird and unique rock formations, especially in volcanic and volcanicsedimentary rocks Sparsely vegetated land sites • In Eastern Rhodopes, most of the sites are located in the western half of the region (Kurdjali area), as in the eastern part there are several NATURA 2000 sites, mainly BG0001032 (Rhodopes - Eastern) • Around 1000 sparcely vegetated land sites, covering area of appr. 3000 ha Ecosystem type distribution GIS model as the first step Polygon check and re-digitalization to improve model quality Field work at mechanically selected or intentionally chosen sites • Field data collection on several parameters: Biodiversity within the site (flora and fauna) – number of species in and near the plot, endangered species (red list), invasive species, overall vegetation coverage Landscape aesthetic value assessment (picturesque landscapes and formations) Land use and human impact assessment of the site area (in-situ and ex-situ): neighboring agricultural lands; livestock breeding (incl. grazing), erosion, household waste pollution, fire damage Protected areas, tourism, historical and cultural sites and events, visitor centers, scientific research in the area Intentionally chosen sites • Intended on field (sites near the previously selected) • Sites missing in the input spatial data for the ecosystem distribution model, or specific formations • Sites near fortifications and sanctuary complexes, natural phenomena – often tourist attractions with permanent human presence Using a UAV to help site verification and spatial precising in GIS Importing field data to the temporary GIS model Importing field data to the temporary GIS model • 91 of total 553 plots are in Eastern Rhodopes • Plots have been established in 63 sites • All parameter data from the plot forms is imported in GIS tables Basic parameter statistics • Mean vegetation cover is 26% (greater rates generally come from lichens and mosses, can reach up to 100%) • Mean in-plot flora species count is 6 (varies from 0 to 23 per plot) • Mean near-plot flora species count is 26 (not including in-plot species) • Mean fauna species count is 18 • 82 of 91 plots have at least one wildlife animal species from the red list • 61 of 91 plots have at least one flora species from the red list • Only 5 sites have an invasive species of the flora and none has one of the fauna • At least 40 of the visited sites are near a historical site, landscape with high aesthetic value or in a tourist area • 29 sites have grazing or other livestock breeding use (much higher percent than average for the country) • 13 sites have household waste pollution issues Thank you for your attention!