Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Methodological Aspects of Using Indicator Values in Biodiversity Analysis

  • Published:
Contemporary Problems of Ecology Aims and scope

Abstract

Indicator values are becoming an increasingly popular tool in basic and applied botanical research: more than 55 original phytoindication systems, including about 200 optimal and range scales for various environmental factors, are known. This paper describes seven methods for calculating the phytoindication optimum of a taxonomical list: averaging with weighting by indicators of the taxon’s participation (cover, frequency, and activity) and the degree of ecological tolerance amplitude breadth. Optimum and interval indices of ecological consensus are proposed for a quantitative assessment of the level of ecological homogeneity of plant communities and floras. The distinguishing ability of the described methods of environmental calculation and consensus indices were critically compared and assessed in the environmental analysis module of the IBIS 7.2 botanical information system using data from Bashkiria and the Southern Urals at the level of phytocoenoses assigned to four communities and their coenofloras. The possible fields of further use of the results in phytocoenology and floristics are described.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The term status sensu Korolyuk (2007) means the original indicator value expressed in gradations or fractions of a unit for an indicator taxon on a specific ecological scale. Depending on the type of scale, it is possible to talk about the minimum, optimal, and minimum statuses (all three categories are applicable for amplitude-optimal scales). This term is also used (in the form of “average status”) to denote the ecological optimum of a community or flora equal to the estimated phytoindication value for the list of taxa by the selected factor.

REFERENCES

  1. BIOLFLOR—Eine Datenbank zu Biologisch-Ökologischen Merkmalen der Gefäßpflanzen in Deutschland, Klotz, S., Kühn, I., and Durka, W., Eds., Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde vol. 38, Bonn: Bundesamt Naturschutz, 2002.

  2. Bulokhov, A.D., Fitoindikatsiya i ee prakticheskoe primenenie (Phytoindication and Its Use), Bryansk: Bryansk. Gos. Univ., 2004.

  3. Buzuk, G.N. and Sozinov, O.V., Phytoindication: use of regression analysis, Vestn. Farm., 2007, no. 3, pp. 44–54.

  4. Chepinoga, V.V. and Rosbakh, S.A., Activity of various species of aquatic flora of Irkutsk-Cheremkhovskaya Plain, Geogr. Prirod. Resur., 2008, no. 1, pp. 97–104.

  5. Cherepanov, S.K., Sosudistye rastneiya Rossii i sopredel’nykh gosudarstv (v predelakh byvshego SSSR) (Vascular Plants of Russia and Adjacent Countries within the Former USSR), St. Petersburg: Mir i Sem’ya, 1995.

  6. Chytrý, M., Tichý, L., Dřevojan, P., Sádlo, J., and Zelený, D., Ellenberg-type indicator values for the Czech flora, Preslia, 2018, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 83–103. https://doi.org/10.23855/preslia.2018.083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Didukh, Ya.P., The Ecological Scales for the Species of Ukrainian Flora and Their Use in Synphytoindication, Kyiv: Phytosociocentre, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Didukh, Ya.P. and Plyuta, P.G., Fitoindikatsiya ekologichnykh faktoriv (Phytoindication of Ecological Factors), Kyiv: Naukova Dumka, 1994.

  9. Diekmann, M., Use and improvement of Ellenberg’s indicator values in deciduous forests of the Boreo-nemoral zone in Sweden, Ecography, 1995, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1995.tb00339.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Diekmann, M., Species indicator values as an important tool in applied plant ecology—a review, Basic Appl. Ecol., 2003, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1078/1439-1791-00185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Diekmann, M. and Lawesson, J.E., Shifts in ecological behavior of herbaceous forest species along a transect from northern central to North Europe, Folia Geobot., 1999, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02803080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dierschke, H., Pflanzensoziologie: Grundlagen und Methoden, Stuttgart: Verlag Eugen Ulmer, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ecological Flora of the British Isles, Fitter, A.H. and Peat, H.J., Eds., 2019. http://www.ecoflora.co.uk. Accessed January 5, 2020.

  14. Ellenberg, H., Zeigerwerte der Gefasspflanzen Mitteeleuropas, Scr. Geobot., 1974, vol. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ellenberg, H., Weber, H.E., Düll, R., Wirth, W., Werner, W., and Paulißen, D., Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa, Scr. Geobot., 1991, vol. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ewald, J., Epigeic bryophytes do not improve bioindication by Ellenberg, values in mountain forests, Basic Appl. Ecol., 2009, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 420–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2008.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fitter, A.H. and Peat, H.J., The ecological flora database, J. Ecol., 1994, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 415–425. https://doi.org/10.2307/2261309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. FloraWeb, Bundesamtes für Naturschutz, 2019. http://floraweb.de. Accessed December 28, 2019.

  19. Frank, D. and Klotz, S., Biologisch-Ökologische Daten zur Flora der DDR, Halle: Martin-Luter-Univ. Halle-Wittenberg, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hennekens, S.M. and Schaminée, J.H.J., TURBOVEG, a comprehensive data base management system for vegetation data, J. Veg. Sci., 2001, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 589–591. https://doi.org/10.2307/3237010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hill, M.O., Mountford, J.O., Roy, D.B., and Bunce, R.G.H., Ellenberg’s indicator values for British Plants, Huntingdon: Inst. Terr. Ecol., 1999, vol. 2.

  22. Hill, M.O., Roy, D.B., Mountford, J.O., and Bunce, R.G.H., Extending Ellenberg’s indicator values to a new area: an algorithmic approach, J. Appl. Ecol., 2000, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2000.00466.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hill, M.O., Preston, C.D., Bosanquet, S.D.S., and Roy, D.B., BRYOATT Attributes of British and Irish Mosses, Liverworts and Hornworts with Information on Native Status, Size, Life Form, Life History, Geography and Habitat, Huntingdon: Centre Ecol. Hydrol., 2007.

  24. Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A., et al., Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia, Arctoa, 2006, vol. 15, pp. 1–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jaccard, P., Distribution de la flore alpine dans le Bassin des Dranses et dans quelques regions voisines, Bull. Soc. Vaudoise Sci. Nat., 1901, vol. 37, pp. 241–272.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kattge, J., Bonisch, G., Diaz, S., Lavorel, S., Prentice, I.C., et al., TRY plant trait database—enhanced coverage and open access, Global Change Biol., 2020, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 119–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kleshcheva, E.A., The use of ecological scales for indication of the current state of forest communities, Russ. J. Ecol., 2007, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 94–100. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1067413607020051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kopečky, K. and Hejný, S., A new approach to the classifications of anthropogenic plant communities, Vegetatio, 1974, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 17–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02390892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Korolyuk, A.Yu., Ecological maximums of the plants of the Southern Siberia, in Botanicheskie issledovaniya Sibiri i Kazakhstana (Botanical Studies of Siberia and Kazakhstan), Kupriyanov, A.N., Ed., Barnaul: Irbis, 2006, no. 12, pp. 3–28.

  30. Korolyuk, A.Yu., Use of ecological scales in geobotanical studies, Materialy III Vserossiiskoi shkoly-konferentsii “Aktual’nye problemy geobotaniki” (Proc. III Al-Russ. School-Conf. “Current Problems in Geobotany”), Petrozavodsk: Karel. Nauchn. Tsentr, Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2007, pp. 177–197.

  31. Kupriyanov, A.N., Kaz’mina, S.S., and Zverev, A.A., Shift in the floristic composition of plant communities of the Karakan Ridge near coal mines, Vestn. Tomsk. Gos. Univ., Biol., 2018, no. 43, pp. 66–88. https://doi.org/10.17223/19988591/43/4

  32. Landolt, E., Ökologische Zeigerwerte zur Schweizer Flora, Veroff. Geobot. Inst. Eidg. Tech. Hochsch., Stift.Rubel, Zurich, 1977, vol. 64, pp. 1–208.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Landolt, E., Bäumler, B., Erhardt, A., et al., Flora Indicativa: Ökologische Zeigerwerte und Biologische Kennzeichen zur Flora der Schweiz und der Alpen, Bern: Haupt Verlag, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2011.01168.x

    Book  Google Scholar 

  34. Malyshev, L.I., floristic zonation based on quantitative features, Bot. Zh., 1973, vol. 58, no. 11, pp. 1581–1588.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Martynenko, V.B., Shirokikh, P.S., Mirkin, B.M., Naumova, L.G., Baisheva, E.Z., and Muldashev, A.A., A syntaxonomic analysis of the initial stage effect on secondary autogenous succession of broad-leaved forest, Zh. Obshch. Biol., 2016, vol. 77, no. 4, pp. 303–313.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Metodicheskie ukazaniya po ekologicheskoi otsenke kormovykh ugodii lesostepnoi i stepnoi zon Sibiri po rastitel’nomu pokrovu (Guide for Ecological Assessment of Fodder Resources of Forest-Steppe and Steppe Zones of Siberia by Vegetation Cover), Moscow: Vses. Nauchno-Issled. Inst. Kormov im. V.R. Vil’yams, 1974.

  37. Nikolić, T., Flora Croatica Database, Zagreb: Univ. of Zagreb, 2018. http://hirc.botanic.hr/fcd. Accessed January 5, 2020.

  38. Pignatti, S., Menegoni, P., and Pietrosanti, S., Valori di bioindicazione delle piante vascolari della Flora d’Italia, Braun-Blanquetia, 2005, vol. 39, pp. 1–97.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Pladias: Database of the Czech flora and vegetation. 2019. http://www.pladias.cz. Accessed December 30, 2019.

  40. Ramenskii, L.G., Vvedenie v kompleksnoe pochvenno-geobotanicheskoe issledovanie zemel’ (Introduction into Complex Soil-Geobotanical Study of Lands), Moscow: Sel’khozgiz, 1938.

  41. Ramenskii, L.G., Izbrannye raboty. Problemy i metody izucheniya rastitel’nogo pokrova (Selected Research Works. Analysis of Vegetation Cover), Leningrad: Nauka, 1971.

  42. Ramenskii, L.G., Tsatsenkin, I.I., Chizhikov, O.N., and Antipin, N.A., Ekologicheskaya otsenka kormovykh ugodii po rastitel’nomu pokrovu (Ecological Assessment of Fodder Resources by Vegetation Cover), Moscow: Sel’khozgiz, 1956.

  43. Ramenskii, L.G., Tsatsenkin, I.I., Chizhikov, O.N., and Antipin, N.A., Ecological assessment of fodder conditions by vegetation cover, Bot. Zh., 1957, vol. 42, no. 7, pp. 1110–1114.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Seledets, V.P., Metod ekologicheskikh shkal v botanicheksikh issledovaniyakh na Dal’nem Vostoke Rossii (Use of Ecological Scales in Botanical Studies in Russian Far East), Vladivostok: Dal’nauka, 2000.

  45. Shchegoleva, N.V. and Zverev, A.A., Specific ecological ranges of buttercups (Ranunculus) in Siberia, Materialy Vserossiiskoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii “Itogi i perspektivy geobotanicheskikh issledovanii v Sibiri” (Proc. All-Russ. Sci.-Pract. Conf. “The Results and Prospective Development of Geobotanical Studies in Siberia”), Novosibirsk: Tsentr. Sib. Bot. Sad, Sib. Otd., Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2019, pp. 124–125.

  46. Shirokikh, P.S., Martynenko, V.B., Zverev, A.A., Bikbaev, I.G., Ibragimov, I.I., Bikbaeva, G.G., Karimova, L.D., and Baisheva, E.Z., Vegetation of abandoned agricultural lands of Bashkir Cis-Ural region, Vestn. Tomsk. Gos. Univ., Biol., 2017, no. 37, pp. 66–104. https://doi.org/10.17223/19988591/37/5

  47. Shurupova, M.N., Zverev, A.A., and Gureyeva, I.I., Ecological ranges and types of rarity in the Kuznetsk Alatau of some Saussurea DC species, Contemp. Probl. Ecol., 2017, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1995425517010103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Telyatnikov, M.Yu., Comparative analysis of local florae of the northwest part of Putorana Plateau, Contemp. Probl. Ecol., 2010, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 919–928.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Tichý, L., JUICE, software for vegetation classification, J. Veg. Sci., 2002, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 451–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2002.tb02069.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Troeva, E.I., Zverev, A.A., Korolyuk, A.Yu., and Cherosov, M.M., Ecological scales of flora and micobiota of Yakutia, in Flora Yakutiya: geograficheskie i ekologicheskie aspekty (Flora of Yakutia: Geographical and Ecological Aspects), Egorova, A.A., Ed., Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2010, pp. 114–150.

  51. Tsyganov, D.N., Fitoindikatsiya ekologicheskikh rezhimov v podzone khvoino-shirokolistvennykh lesov (Phytoindication of Ecological Regimes in Subzone of Coniferous-Broad-Leaved Forests), Moscow: Nauka, 1983.

  52. Viktorov, S.V. and Remezova, G.L., Indikatsionnaya geobotanika: uchebnoe posobie (Indicative Geobotany: Manual), Moscow: Mosk. Gos. Univ., 1988.

  53. Viktorov, S.V., Vostokova, E.A., and Vyshivkin, D.D., Vvedenie v indikatsionnuyu geobotaniku (Introduction into Indicative Geobotany), Moscow: Mosk. Gos. Univ., 1962.

  54. Yurtsev, B.A., Flora Suntar-Khayata. Problemy istorii vysokogornykh landshaftov Severo-Vostoka Sibiri (Flora of Suntar Hayat. The History of High-Latitude Landscapes of the Northeastern Sibria), Leningrad: Nauka, 1968.

  55. Zarzycki, K., Trzcińska-Tacik, H., Rożański, W., Szeląg, Z., Wołek, J., and Korzeniak, U., Ecological Indicator Values of Vascular Plants of Poland, Biodiversity of Poland Series vol. 2, Mirek, Z., Ed., Krakow: W. Szafer Inst. Bot., 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Zhukova, L.A., Determination of the environmental valence and stenoeuribiontic plant species, Materialy VII Vserossiiskogo populyatsionnogo seminara “Metody populyatsionnoi biologii” (Proc. VII All-Russ. Population Seminar “Methods of Population Biology”), Syktyvkar, 2004, part 1, pp. 75–76.

  57. Zhukova, L.A., Dorogova, Yu.A., Turmukhametova, N.V., et al., Ekologicheskie shkaly i metody analiza ekologicheskogo raznoobraziya rastenii: monografiya (Ecological Scales and Analysis of Ecological Diversity of the Plants: Monograph), Zhukova, L.A., Ed., Yoshkar-Ola: Mariisk. Gos. Univ., 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Zonneveld, I.S., Principles of bio-indication, Environ. Monit. Assess., 1983, vol. 3, nos. 3–4, pp. 207–217.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Zubkova, E.V., Khanina, L.G., Grokhlina, T.I., and Dorogova, Yu.A., Komp’yuternaya obrabotka geobotanicheskikh opisanii po ekologicheskim shkalam s pomoshch’yu programmy EcoScaleWin: uchebnoe posobie (Computer Processing of Geobotananical Descriptions Using Ecological Scales and EcoScaleWin Software: Manual), Yoshkar-Ola: Mariisk. Gos. Univ., 2008.

  60. Zverev, A.A., The use of environmental compliance coefficients in numerical study methods of vegetation cover, Materialy IV Mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii “Problemy izucheniya rastitel’nogo pokrova Sibiri,” Tezisy dokladov (Proc. IV Int. Sci. Conf. “Study of Vegetation Cover of Siberia,” Abstracts of Papers), Tomsk: Tomsk. Gos. Univ., 1995, pp. 233–235.

  61. Zverev, A.A., Informatsionnye tekhnologii v issledovaniyakh rastitel’nogo pokrova (Information Technologies in Studies of Vegetation Cover), Tomsk: TML-Press, 2007.

  62. Zverev, A.A., Use of compliance indices in ecological analysis of vegetation, Materialy V Vserossiiskoi konferentsii “Flora i rastitel’nost’ Sibiri i Dal’nego Vostoka” (Proc. V All-Russ. Conf. “Flora and Vegetation of Siberia and Far East”), Krasnoyarsk, 2011, vol. 2, pp. 311–318.

  63. Zverev, A.A., Use of equivalence classes and factor sets in the analysis of botanical data, Contemp. Probl. Ecol., 2012a, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1995425512020163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Zverev, A.A., Comparative analysis of vegetation using phytoindication scales, Materialy IV Vserossiiskoi shkoly-konferentsii “Aktual’nye problemy geobotaniki” (Proc. IV All-Russ. School-Conf. “Current Problems in Geobotany”), Ufa: MediaPrint, 2012b, pp. 25–46.

Download references

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I express my sincere gratitude to P.S. Shirokikh and V.B. Martynenko (Ufa Institute of Biology, Ufa Federal Research Center, Russian Academy of Sciences, Ufa), who provided their geobotanical materials in IBIS format to illustrate phytoindication data processing methods, as well as to N.N. Lashchinsky (Central Siberian Botanical Garden, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk) for carefully and critically reading the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Research Tomsk State University, 634050, Tomsk, Russia

    A. A. Zverev

  2. Central Siberian Botanical Garden, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, 630090, Novosibirsk, Russia

    A. A. Zverev

Authors
  1. A. A. Zverev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. A. Zverev.

Additional information

Translated by M. Shulskaya

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zverev, A. Methodological Aspects of Using Indicator Values in Biodiversity Analysis. Contemp. Probl. Ecol. 13, 321–332 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1995425520040125

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1995425520040125

Keywords:

Search

Navigation