Nicola Arndt und Matthias Pohl - Neobiota

vegetation descriptions and tables from the series ‘De Vegetatie van Nederland’ (SCHAMINÉE et al.
1995-1998; STORTELDER et al. 1999), the maps of the current and historical distribution from the
series ‘Atlas van Plantengemeenschappen in Nederland’ (WEEDA et al. 2000), a comprehensive
description of the environmental conditions of the different physiotopes in text as well as in figures
and schemata, succession schemes of the individual plant communities and vegetation complexes, a
phytosociological bibliography that comprises about 7,000 titles and hundreds of vegetation and
landscape pictures.
The combination of vegetation- and other data (for example floristic data, different data from
geographic information systems [GIS] and Ellenberg indicator values [ELLENBERG et al. 1992]) has
led to a series of new facts, knowledge and perceptions. This forms the second, analytical part of the
information system. Using Ellenberg indicator values, ecological graphics are calculated for every
plant community, for instance for reaction and trophic level. With the help of the existing vegetation
tables, it was possible to calculate a so-called sociological profile for every plant species and to mark
the diagnostic species for every plant community. Current and historical distribution maps are easily
combined with other thematic maps, for example topographic, climatic, phytogeographic or
environmental ones. In this way, the phytosociological content can be determined for every element of
these thematic maps.
The third part of SYNBIOSYS comprises instruments to evaluate particular management measures in
the fields of nature conservation and landscape management. The use of indicator values allows one to
calculate the effects of certain measures (e.g., the intensification or extensification of management
measures on changes in the groundwater table) on the floristic composition of a particular stand.
3 Towards a European information system
In the near future, the SYNBIOSYS concept will be copied into a European information system. For
this purpose, some building blocks are necessary, namely (1) a hierarchical system of European plant
communities, (2) a network of relevés, brought together into one European data bank, and (3) a
hierarchical system of landscape types for Europe.
(1) A hierarchical system of the plant communities of Europe is one of the main areas of focus of the
‘European Vegetation Survey’, a working group of the International Association of Vegetation
Science. Under this name, a group of vegetation scientists from all over Europe has met every year
(since 1992) in Rome. During these meetings, results of the classifications in the different countries
are presented. Every year, the main focus is on one biotope, for example beech forests, meadows or
saline vegetation. Furthermore, methodological foundations are discussed and a uniform construction
of national and international data bases is pursued (DIERSCHKE 1992; MUCINA et al. 1993; RODWELL
et al. 1995). Within the framework of this working group, MUCINA published in 1997 an overview of
vegetation classes in Europe. In total, 73 classes were distinguished. For every class, a short
description is given, as well as a list of synonyms, characteristic species and a literature overview. On
the basis of this publication, a further division into alliances was compiled (RODWELL et al. 1998,
2002). The goal of this overview is a standardized list of syntaxa that are valid in all of the territories
in question and are based on abstraction from regional databases. One of the aspects that lends
particular significance to this work is that it enables the comparison of this classification with the
biotope/habitat classification of the European Community, such as EUNIS and CORINE.
351