CC BY
48
Бюлог1чний вюник МДПУ iMeHi Богдана Хмельницького 6 (3) стор. 419—429 2Ш6
Biological Bulletin of Bogdan Chmelnitskiy Melitopol State Pedagogical University, 6 (3), pp 419—429, 2016
ARTICLE UDK581.95(582)
ANALYSIS OF THE ALIEN FLORA OF DNIPROPETROVSK PROVINCE
B. Baranovski*, N. Khromykh, L. Karmyzova, I. Ivanko, Y. Lykholat
Oles Honchar Dnepropetrovsk National University, Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine E-maih boris_baranovski@mail.ru
Plant invasion in the Northern Steppe Dnieper has a long history complicated by excessive anthropogenic transformation of territory. Alien species status, origin areas, life history, and invasive tendency of alien species in Dnipropetrovsk region were investigated. The presence of 286 alien species of 61 families was registered. Some 7 families had the greatest species diversity (156 alien species that was 55% of total species number); 30 families were represented by 2—9 alien species, and 24 families contained only 1 alien species. So, the current proportion of the alien species was almost 17% in the regional flora. Archaeophytes consist of 40% of the total alien species, while neophytes had more than 60%. The proportion of naturalized species amounted 58% from alien species, whereas the share of casual species was 42%. The greatest abundance of alien species was typical for Brassicaceae, Asterasea, and Poaceae (14, 13, and 9% of the total species number). We proved invasive status of 28 species and positive trend regard alien species ratio for last years. Key words: adventives species, archaeophytes, neophytes, casual species, naturalized species, invasiveness
АНАЛИЗ АДВЕНТИВНОЙ ФЛОРЫ ДНЕПРОПЕТРОВСКОЙ ОБЛАСТИ
Б. Барановский, Н. Хромых, Л. Кармизова, И. Иванько, Ю. Лихолат Днепропетровский национальный университет имени Олеся Гончара, Днепропетровск, Украина
E-mail: boris_baranovski@mail.ru
Инвазия растительных видов в Северном Степном Приднепровье имеет долгую историю, усложненную значительным антропогенным преобразованием территории. Исследованы статус чужеродных растений, их жизненные формы и тенденции развития инвазионности в Днепропетровской области. Установлено наличие 286 адвентивных видов, принадлежащих к 61 семейству. Среди них 7 семейств с наибольшим обилием чужеродных видов (156 видов или 55% от общего количества); 30 семейств представлены 2—9 видами, а 24 содержали только по одному адвентивному виду. Таким образом, на долю чужеродных видов во флоре региона приходится почти 17%. В общем количестве адвентивных видов археофиты составляют 40%, неофиты — 60%. Доля натурализованных видов насчитывает 58% от всех чужеродных растений, а случайных видов было зарегистрировано 42%. Наибольшее обилие адвентивных видов найдено в семействах Brassicaceae, Asterasea и Poaceae (14, 13 и 9% от общего количества соответственно). Среди чужеродных видов 28 определены как инвазионные. Отмечена тенденция к усилению инвазионности некоторых видов в последние годы. Ключевые слова: адвентивные виды, археофиты, неофиты, случайные виды, натурализованные виды, инвазионность
Citation:
Baranovski, B., Khromykh, N., Karmyzova, L., Ivanko, I., Lykholat, Y. (2016). Analysis of the alien flora of
Dnipropetrovsk Province. Biological Bulletin of Bogdan Chmelnitskiy Melitopol State Pedagogical University, 6 (3), 419—429.
Поступило в редакцию / Submitted: 25.11.2016
Принято к публикации / Accepted: 22.12.2016
eros http: / /dx.doi.org/10.15421 /2016113
© Baranovski, Khromykh, Karmyzova, Ivanko, Lykholat, 2016
Users are permitted to copy, use, distribute, transmit, and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0. License
INTRODUCTION
Biological invasions were defined as a fundamental driver of ecosystem degradation (Pysek & Richardson, 2010; Schindler et al., 2016). Therefore, it is not unusual that spread of alien plants in different regions became the important
research topic in recent years (Richardson et al., 2000; Pysek et al., 2012). Describing the negative effects of plant invasion, Blackburn et al. (2014) emphasize such danger for the native flora as decrease in species extinction probabilities, richness and abundance; significant changes in genetic composition of native populations, phylogenetic and taxonomic diversity, ecosystem productivity, and more. Analysis of alien flora composition and dynamics is an essential element for assessing infestation degree of different taxa (Pysek, 2003). Blackburn et al. (2011) mentioned the need of integrated model, which could clarify the history and the pattern of invasions, and predict the time and ways to stop them.
In Ukraine, alien species propagation process manifested itself very clearly in areas having a long history of anthropogenic transformation. In Dnipropetrovsk province, located within the geographic area of Northern Steppe Dnieper, the extended anthropogenic impact resulted in overgrazing, quarrying, and pollutants action (Brygadyrenko & Reshetniak, 2014; Tsvetkova et al., 2016). In such circumstances, autochthonous flora undergoes profound destruction, rapid degradation, and loss of typical components replaced on synanthropic species, including aliens (Protopopova, 1991, 1999). Unfortunately, for various reasons, the process of alien species intrusion into the regional flora has not been received adequate attention of researchers (Holoborodko et al., 2016). At present, there are no reported complete lists of alien species confined to the Dnipropetrovsk province. At the same time, alien species discovering in regional flora was not a rare event 35 years ago (Tarasov, 1981), as well as during next years (Tarasov, 2012; Baranowski et al., 2012). European researchers (Pysek et al., 2012) emphasize the research importance of the regional alien flora for better understanding the invasion process. In this paper, we provided the first checklist of alien species founded in the regional flora and assessed the current state of the alien species invasion process.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The territory of Dnipropetrovsk province covering 31.974 km2 is a plowed steppe (over 80% of territory) with minor forest areas on the river banks (Pakhomov & Brygadyrenko, 2005). Continental climate characterized by the sharp temperature fluctuations, unstable moisture, and seasonal drought periods. Annual evaporation exceeds precipitation by 2—3 times; an average rainfall is 472 mm, while it could fall to 250 mm in the dry years (Furdychko et al., 2006). Regional population density is 103 people per km2; the densities of railways and highways are 49.5 km and 283 km per 1,000 km2 respectively. Ecological situation is exacerbated by emissions of 587 industrial enterprises, including 57 mining and metallurgical, and 17 chemical plants. In addition, two international airports and two river ports contribute to process of alien species penetration and propagation within the territory of the Dnipropetrovsk province.
The basis for checklist preparation were the numerous literary sources, own results and the herbarium collections of Oles Honchar Dnipropetrovsk National University. The earliest documentary evidences on floristic studies in the Northern Steppe Dnieper belong to the 18th century (Pallas, 1796). Grossgeim (1913) was one of the first researchers, who reported on plants previously unknown in flora of the region. Belgard (1950) has paid much attention to study of Steppe Dnieper woody vegetation. In different years, regional flora was presented in such fundamental catalogs as "Flora of the USSR" (1935-1965) and "Flora of the European part of the USSR" (1974-1989). During last period, a great contribution to regional alien flora exploration have made by Tarasov (1981, 1991, 2012), and Baranowski (1998, 2000).
Taxa names were given in accordance with Flora Europaea (Moore, 1982) and the modern species nomenclature adopted in Ukraine (Mosyakin & Fedoronchuk, 1999). Alien species have been identified in accordance with generally accepted approach (Pysek, 1998; Blackburn et al., 2014) as a species appeared due to human activity in regions where previously it does not naturally occur. Definition of invasive status of alien species was made on the basis of the Richardson et al. (2000) criterion, which involves the species classification according to its stage along the introduction-naturalization-invasion continuum (INIC). In line with the approach used by Pysek et al. (2012) alien plants were classified as naturalized species if they form self-sustaining populations for several life cycles without direct people intervention, or despite it; and plants were named as casual species if they do not form self-sustaining populations in the invaded region.
Following the concept used traditionally in plant invasions studies (Protopopova, 1991, 1999; Pysek, 1998, 2004), we distinguished archaeophytes (for taxa introduced before 1500 AD) and neophytes (for taxa introduced after that date). Life histories of the species had been classified according to conventional approach (Pergl et al., 2016), namely: annual, over wintering herbaceous plants (biennial or perennial), shrub, and tree. As for the origin areas of the alien species, we stuck to the traditional approach (Pysek et al., 2012) and identified the following geographical regions as Europe together with the separate Mediterranean region, Asia, Northern and South Americas.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The checklist of regional alien flora consisted of 286 species, which belong to 61 different families and 210 genera. Considering the total number of regional flora includes 1,714 species (Tarasov, 2012), the current proportion of the alien species exceeds 16.7%. Taking into account the Dnipropetrovsk province area, it can be assumed there are 9 alien species per km2. This index is much higher than the data shown by Pysek (2003) for the Czech Republic alien flora (about 4 alien species per square kilometer). High aliens' abundance can be attributed by combination of such regional factors as a complex geomorphologic structure and suitable climatic conditions, as well as an active anthropogenic
transformation and transport communications plexus. Results obtained are in accordance with Fuentes et al. (2015) data, that economic activities and climate are substantial factors in alien plants establishment and invasion.
Most of the alien species were presented by herbaceous plants (252 species or 88% of total) with domination of annual species (Table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of the alien species according to their life history_
Annual Biennial Perennial Shrub Tree Number of the species 144 52 56 21 13 % of total_50,3_182_19,6_7,3_4,6
In our study, the distribution of alien species between different families wasn't uniform, and there were only 7 families with large (10 species or more) presence of the aliens (Figure 1).
Fabaceae, Основной Chenopodiaceae, , Основной Lamiaceae, Основной Rosaceae, Основной Основной
Brassicaceae, Основной Основной
Poaceae, Основной
Asteraceae, Основной
Fig. 1. Families with the highest abundance of alien species. Species number is given after the family title
The number of families with the highest diversity of alien species accounted for only 12% of the total number, however it consisted of 156 alien species covering 55% of the total number. Within this group, three families (Brassicaceae, Asteraceae, and Poaceae) were clearly dominant, embracing together more than 36% of total alien species number.
Substantial part of the families (30 or 49% of total) were represented by a smaller number of alien species (2—9 species), and 24 families (39% of total) contained only one alien species (Table 2).
Table 2. Families with the middle and lower abundance of alien species
Families containin g 2—9 alien species Families containing only 1 alien species
Aceraceae Onagraceae Araceae Peganaceae
Amaranthaceae Orobanchaceae Cyperaceae Portulacaceae
Apiaceae Oxalidaceae Liliaceae Rubiaceae
Boraginaceae Papaveraceae Anacardiaceae Rutaceae
Caprifoliaceae Polygonaceae Apoynaceae Simarubaceae
Caryophylbceae Primulaceae Asclepiadaceae Thymelaeaceae
Cucurbitaceae Ranunculaceae Balsaminaceae Urticaceae
Cuscutaceae Resedaceae Caesapiniaceae Valerianaceae
Euphorbiaceae Salicaceae Cannabaceae Verbenaceae
Fumariaceae Scrophulariaceae Convolvvulaceae
Geraniaceae Solanaceae Flaeagnaceae
Hydrocharitaceae Ulmaceae Grossulariaceae
Juglandaceae Violaceae Hydrangeaceae
Malvaceae Vitaceae Moraceae
Oleaceae Tygophylhceae Nyctaginaceae
Studies allowed establishing the percentage of archaeophytes and neophytes in the total number of alien plants. It was found that archaeophytes make up 40% of the total alien species abundance, while neophytes had 60% of alien plants (Fig. 2).
% 150
Archaeophytes
Neophytes
Total
□ Naturalized □ Casual
Fig. 2. Distribution of alien species according to invasion status (casual or naturalized) among archaeophytes,
neophytes, and all aliens.
It is obvious that such a ratio indicates an active invasion of alien plants into the flora of Dnipropetrovsk province. Confirming this, Tarasov (1981) has found 51 new alien species in the regional flora in the 70s of the last century; whereas he has reported already about 75 new alien species two decades later (Tarasov, 2005). Overall, over the last 40 years, Tarasov (2012) has discovered and identified a large number of alien species in the regional flora, such as Impatiens parviflora, Artemisia annua, Petrorhagia saxifrage, Hibiscus trionum, Malva mauritiana, Echinocystis lobata, Althaea armeniaca, Solidago serotinoides, Galinsoga parviflora, Galinsoga ciliata, Nicandra physaloides, Bidens frondosa, Solanum cornutum, Zygophyllum fabago, Artemisia tournefortiana, Ambrosia trifida.
In our study, percentage of naturalized species reached 58% of total alien species number. However, index increased to 73% among the archaeophytes, while it reached only 48% among neophytes. Part of the casual species in regional alien flora (42% of total aliens' number) diminished to 27% among the archaeophytes, and covered 52% of the neophyte's number. The results obtained are much higher than data presented by Pysek (2003), which showed a lower percentage (41% only) of the naturalized alien species in the flora of Czech Republic.
It was established that alien species penetrated into the territory of Dnipropetrovs'k province from the five main areas (Fig. 3). Among them, the greatest contribution to the regional alien flora was made by species originating from the Mediterranean region. At the same time, the definition of the origin areas had not been possible for some alien species; so they were combined into a single group. Using the approach described by Walter et al. (2009), we have identified this species as a cryptogenic (i.e, species of unknown origin).
South America, 3% North America, 15%
Mediterranean, 43%
Cryptogenic, 5% Europe, 8%
Fig. 3. Distribution of alien species according to the origin areas. Proportion of the alien species is given after the
origin area title.
In our study, various propagation paths of alien species have been identified (Table 3). In particular, Baranovski (1998, 2000) had shown that alien trees and shrubs distribution was associated with introduction and subsequent naturalization in such habitats as coastal areas, ravines, and natural and planted forests. Currently, the most widespread aliens in arboreal regional flora are Acer negundo, Robiniapseudacacia, Ulmuspumila, Ailanthus altissima, Amorpha fruticosa, and Partenocissus quinquefoia. It was established, that alien species Cenchrus pauciflorus, Z.i%ania latifolia, and Juncellus serotinus (Baranovski, 2000) were first discovered in the Dnieper River surrounding, indicating the waterway penetration. It was shown, that Viola hissarica (Tarasov, 2005) and Thladiantha dubia (Mytsyk & Baranovski, 2006) spread over the region, going beyond the territory of the Dnipropetrovs'k University Botanical Garden.
Table 3. Checklist of the alien species in Dnipropetrovsk province
No
Family 2
Liliopsida
Araceae
Cyperaceae
Hydrocharitacea
e
Liliaceae Poaceae
Magnoliopsida Aceraceae
Amaranthaceae
Anacardiaceae Apiaceae
Species Life history Origin area Naturalized arche- neo-ophyt phyt Casual arche- neo-ophyt phyt
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Acorus calamus L. Per As +
Juncellus serotinus (Rottb.) Clarke Per As +
Elodea canadensis Michx. Per NA +
ValEsneria spiralis L. Per As +
Gagea villosa (M.Bieb.) Duby Per M +
Anisantha sterilis (L.) Nevski Ann M +
Anisantha tectorum (L.) Nevsli (Bromus L.) Ann M +
Apera spica-venti (L.) Beauv. Ann Crypt. +
Avenafatua L. Ann As +
Avena persica Steud. Ann M +
Bromus arvensis L. Ann M +
Bromus commutatus Schrad Ann E +
Bromus squarrosus L. Bien M +
Cenchrus longispinus (Hack.) Fernald Ann NA +
Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. Per As +
Digitaria aegyptica (Retz.) Willd. Ann As +
Digitaria ischaemum (Schreb.) Muehl. Ann E +
Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop. Ann As +
Echinochloa crusgalli (L.) Beauv. Ann As +
Eragrostis minor Host Ann E +
Eragrostispilosa (L.) Beauv. Ann M +
Hordeumjubatum L. Ann NA +
Hordeum leporinum Link. Ann M +
Hordeum murinum L. Ann M +
Lolium temulentum L. Ann M +
Panicum capillare L. Ann NA +
Sclerochloa dura (L.) Beauv. Ann M +
Setaria glauca (L.) Beauv. Ann As +
Setaria verticillata (L.) H. B. Ann As +
Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. Ann M +
Tragus racemosus (L.) All. (Cenchruss) Ann M +
Zizania latifolia Stapf. Per As +
Acer negundo L. Arb NA +
Acerpseudoplatanus L. Arb NA +
Amaranthus albus L. Ann NA +
Amaranthus blitoides S. Wats. Ann NA +
(A. blitus L.)
Amaranthus blitum (A. lividum L.) Ann E +
Amaranthus caudatus L. Ann SA +
Amaranthus cruentus L. (paniculatus) Ann SA +
Amaranthus retroflexus L. Cotinus coggygria Scop. Ann Fr NA M + +
Aethusa ynapium L. Bien E +
Bupleurum rotundifolium L. Ann M +
Caucalis platycarpos L. Ann M +
Conium maculatum L. Bien M +
1
Levisticum ofiánale W.D.J. Koch Per As +
Turgenia latifolia (L.) Hoffm. Ann M +
Apocynaceae Vinca minor L. Per M +
Asclepiadaceae Asclepias syriaca L. Per NA +
Asteraceae Ambrosia artemisifolia L. Ann NA +
Ambrosia trífida L. Ann NA +
Anthemis cotula L. Ann M +
Artemisia absinthium L. Per As +
Artemisia annua L. Ann As +
Artemisia dracunculus L. Artemisia tournefortiana Rchnb. Bidensfrondosa L. Per Ann Ann As As NA + + +
Carduus acanthoides L. Bien M +
Carduus nutans L. Bien M +
Centaurea yanus L. Bien M +
Centaurea diffusa Lam. Bien M +
Cichorium inthybus L. Per M +
Coniza canadensis (L.) Cronq. Bien NA +
Galinsoga urúculata (Kunth) Benth (G. Ann SA +
Mata (Raf.) S.F.Blake)
Galinsoga parviflora Cav. Ann SA +
Grindelia squarrosa (Pursh) Dunal. Per NA +
Helianthus tuberosus L. Per NA +
Cyclachaena xanthiifolia (Nutt.) Fresen. Ann NA +
Lactuca serriola Torner Bien M +
Lepidotheca suaveolens (Pursh) Nutt. Ann NA +
Matricaria recutita L. Ann E +
Onopordum acanthium L. Bien M +
Petasites spurius (Retz.) Rchb. Per E +
Phalacroloma annuum (L.) Dumort. Bien NA +
Senecio vulgaris L. Ann As +
Solidago canadensis L. Per NA +
Sonchus arvensis L. Per M +
Sonchus asper (L.) Hill Bien M +
Sonchus oleraceus L. Ann M +
Tripleurospermum inodorum (L.) Sch. Bien As +
Xantium albinum (Widd.) H. Scholtz Ann E +
Xantium brasilicum Vellozo Ann M +
Xantium californicum Greene Ann NA +
Xantium spinosum L. Ann SA +
Xantium strumarium L. Ann As +
Verbesina encelioides (Cav.) Benth. & Ann NA +
Hook. f. ex A. Gray
Balsaminaceae Impatiensparviflora DC. Ann As +
Boraginaceae Anchusa officinalis L Bien M +
Buglossoides arvensis (L.) I.M. Johnst. Ann M +
Cynoglossum officinale L. Ann M +
Lappula patula (Lehm.) Menyharth Bien As +
Lappula squarrosa (Retz.) Dumort. Bien M +
Myosotis arvensis (L.) Hill Ann M +
Nonea pallens Petrovic Ann M +
Symphytum caucasicum M. Bieb. Per M +
Brassicaceae Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. Brassica campestris L. Bien Ann M As + +
Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. Ann As +
Brassica nigra (L.) W.J. Koch Ann M +
Bunias arvensis Jordan Ann M +
Bunias orientalis L. Bien M +
Camelina microcarpa Andrcz. Ann M +
Camelina rumelica Velen. Ann M +
Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz. Ann Crypt. +
Camelina sylvestris Wallr. Bien Crypt. +
Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medik. Ann Crypt. +
Cardaria draba (L.) Desv. Per E +
Chorispora tenella (Pall.) DC. Ann
Conringia orientalis (L.) Dumort. Ann
Descurainia sophia (L.) Webb et Plantl Ann
Diplotaxis muralis (L.) DC. Bien
Diplotaxis tenuifolia (L.) DC. Per
Erysimum cheiranthoides L. Bien
Erysimum repandum L. Bien
Euclidium syriacum (L.) R.Br. Per
Isatis tmctoria L. Bien
Lepidium campestre (L.) R. Borbas Bien
Lepidium densiflorum Schrad. Bien
Lepidium perfoliatum L. Bien
Lepidium ruderale L. Bien
Leepidium sativum L. Ann
Microthlaspi perfoliata (L.) F. K. Meyer Ann
Nesliapaniculata (L.) Desv. Ann
Raphanus raphanistrum L. Ann
Rapistrumperenne (L.) All Per
Sinapis alba L. Ann
Sinapis arvensis L. Ann
Sinapis dissecta Lag. Ann
Sisymbrium altissimum L. Bien
Sisymbrium loeselii L. Bien
Sisymbrium officinale (L.) Scop. Bien
Sisymbrium orientale L. Bien Sisymbriumpolymorphum (Murray) Roth (S. ^ junceum M. B.)
Sisymbrium volgense M. Bieb. ex Fourn. Per
Thlaspi arvense L. Ann
Caesalpiniaceae Gleditschia triacanthos L. Arb
Cannabaceae Cannabis ruderalis Janisch. Ann
Caprifoliaceae Lonicera tatarica L. Fr
Sambucus racemosa L. Fr
Caryophyllaceae Agrostemma githago L. Ann
Gypsophila acutifolia Fish. ex Spreng. Per
Gypsophila paulii Klokov Per
Lychnis chalcedonica L. Per
Petrorhagia saxifrage (L.) Link Per
Saponaria officinalis L. Per
Scleranthus annuus L. Ann
Spergula arvensis L. Ann
Vaccaria hispanica (Mill.) Rauschert Ann
Chenopodiaceae Atriplex aucheri Moq. Ann
Atriplex micrantha C.A.Mey. Ann
Atriplex prostrata Boucher Ann
Atriplex sagittata Borkh Ann
Atriplex tatarica L. Ann
Chenopodium botrys L. Ann
Chenopodium hybridum L. Ann
Chenopodium opulifolium Schrad. Ann
Chenopodium polyspermum L. Ann
Chenopodium rubrum L. Ann
Chenopodium suecicum J. Murr Ann
Chenopodium vulvaria L. Ann
Corispermum hyssopifolium L. Ann
Kochia laniflora (S. G. Gmel.) Borb. Ann
Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad. Ann
Polycnemum arvense L. Ann
Convolvulaceae Ipomaeapurpurea (L.) Roth Ann
Cucurbitaceae Bryonia alba L. Per Echinoystis lobata (Michx.) Torr. et Gray Ann
Cuscutaceae Cuscuta campestris Yunck. Ann
Cuscuta cesatiana Bertol. Ann
Elaeagnaceae Elaeagnus angustifolia L._Arb
As +
M +
As +
E +
M +
Crypt. +
As +
As +
As +
M +
NA +
M +
As +
As +
As +
Crypt. +
M +
M +
M +
E +
M +
E +
M +
M +
M +
As +
M +
As +
NA +
As +
As +
E +
Crypt. +
M +
E +
As +
M +
M +
M +
M +
As +
As +
As +
M +
As +
M +
M +
M +
M +
Crypt. +
As +
As +
M +
M +
M +
As +
M +
SA +
M +
NA +
NA +
As +
M +
Euphorbiaceae Euphorbiafalcata L. Ann M +
Euphorbia helioscopia L. Ann M +
Euphorbia humifusa Willd. ex Schlecht. Ann M +
Euphorbia peplus L. Ann M +
Euphorbia salicifolia Host Per E +
Fabaceae Amorphafruticosa L. Fr NA +
Caragana arborescens Lam Fr As +
Lathyrus tuberosus L. Per As +
Medicago sativa L. Per As +
Ornithopus perpusillus L. Ann M +
Robinia pseudacacia L. Arb NA +
Tetragonolobus purpureus Moench Ann M +
Trifolium hybridum L. Bien M +
Trigonella caerulea (L.) Ser. Ann M +
Vicia angustifolia Reichard Ann M +
Vicia hirsuta (L.) S. F. Grag Ann M +
Vicia pannonica Crantz Ann M +
Vicia tetrasperma (L.) Schreb. Ann M +
Vicia villosa Roth Bien M +
Fumariaceae Fumaria offiinais L. Ann M +
Fumaria parviflora Lam. Ann M +
Fumaria schleicheri Soy.-Willem. Ann As +
Fumaria vailantii Loisel. Ann M +
Geraniaceae Geranium molle L. Ann M +
Geranium pusillum L. Ann As +
Grossulariaceae Ribes aureum Pursh Fr NA +
Hydrangeaceae Philadelphus coronarius L. Fr E +
Juglandaceae Juglans mandshurica Maxim. Arb As +
Juglans regia L. Arb As +
Lamiaceae Ballota nigra L. Per M +
Dracocephalum thymiflorum L.* Bien Crypt. +
Elsholtzia ciliata (Thunb.) Hyl. Ann As +
Lamium album L. Per As +
Lamium amplexicaule L. Bien M +
Lamium purpureum L. Bien M +
Leonurus cardiaca L. Per M +
Marrubium vulgare L. Per M +
Menthapiperita L. Per E +
Nepeta cataria L. Per M +
Salvia reflexa Hormem. Ann NA +
Stachys annua (L.) L. Bien M +
Malvaceae Abutilon theophrastii Medik. Ann As +
Althaea officinalis L. Per As +
Hibiscus trionum L. Ann M +
Malva mauritiana L. Bien M +
Malva neglecta Wallr. Per As +
Malva pusilla Smith Ann Crypt. +
Malva sylvestris L. Bien M +
Moraceae Morus alba L. Arb As +
Nyctaginaceae Oxybaphus nictagineus (Michx.) Sweet Per NA +
Oleaceae Fraxinus lanceolata Borkh. Arb NA +
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marschall Arb NA +
Syringa vulgaris L. Fr E +
Onagraceae Oenothera biennis L. Bien NA +
Oenothera renneri H. Scholz. Bien E +
Orobanchaceae Orobanche cumana Wallr. Bien As +
Pheliplanche ramosa (L.) Pomel. Ann As +
Oxalidaceae Xanthoxalis corniculata (L.) Small Bien SA +
Xanthoxalis dillenii (Jacq.) Holub Per NA +
Xanthoxalis stricta L. (L.) Small Bien As +
Papaveraceae Papaver dubium L. Ann M +
Papaver rhoeas L. Ann M +
Peganaceae Peganum harmala L. Per M +
Polygonaceae Fallopia convolvulus (L.) A. Love Ann As +
Reynoutria sachalinensis (F. Schmidt ex A c 1
Maxim.) Nakai Per As +
Rumex longifolius DC. Per Crypt. +
Rumex patientia L. Per M +
Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea L. Ann As +
Primulaceae Anagallis arvensis L. Ann M +
Anagallisfoemina Mill. Per M +
Ranunculaceae Clematis vitalba L. Fr M +
Consolida regalis S.F.Gray Ann M +
Nigelia arvensis L. Ann E +
Resedaceae Reseda lutea L. Ann M +
Reseda inodora Rchb. Bien M +
Rosaceae Cerasus tomentosa (Tumb.) Wall. Fr As +
Malus domestica Borkh. Per As +
Potentilla orientalis Juz. Per As +
Prunus armeniaca L. Arb As +
Prunus cerasus L. Arb E +
Prunus divaricata Ledeb. Arb E +
Prunus domestica L. Arb As +
Prunus mahaleb L. Arb E +
Prunus serotina Ehrh. Per NA +
Prunus virginiana L. Per NA +
Rubiaceae Galium spurium L. Ann Crypt. +
Rutaceae Ptelea trifoliata L. Fr NA +
Salicaceae Populus deltoides Marsh. Arb NA +
Populus x canadensis Moench Arb NA +
Salixfragilis L. Arb As +
Scrophulariaceae Linderniaprocumbens (Krock.) Borb. Ann M +
Veronica arvensis L. Bien M +
Veronica opaca Fr. Ann Crypt. +
Veronica persica Poir. Ann As +
Veronica polita Fries Bien M +
Veronica triphyllos L. Bien As +
Simarubaceae Ailanthus altissima (Mill.) Swingle Arb As +
Solanaceae Datura stramonium L. Ann As +
Hyosyamus niger L. Bien M +
Lycium barbatum L. Fr As +
Lycopersicon esculenthum Mill. Ann SA +
Nicandraphysaloides (L.) P. Gaern. Ann SA +
Solanum cornutum Lam. Ann NA +
Solanum nigrum L. Ann E +
Thymelaeaceae Thymelea passerine (L.) Coss. et Germ. Ann M +
Ulmaceae Celtis occidentalis L. Arb NA +
Ulmus pumila L. Arb As +
Urticaceae Urtica urens L. Ann M +
Valerianaceae Valerianella locusta (L.) Laterr. Bien M +
Verbenaceae Verbena officinalis L. Per M +
Violaceae Viola arvensis Murray Per M +
Viola hissrica Juz. Per As +
Vitaceae Partenocissus quinquefolia (L.) Planch. Fr NA +
Vitis vinifera L. Fr M +
Zygophyllaceae Tribulus terrestris L. Ann M +
Zygophyllum fabago L. Per M +
In accordance with approach of Pysek et al. (2012), we investigated the naturalized species ability to spread over long distances from parent habitats in order to identify a subset of aliens with the obvious trend to invasiveness. Naturalized alien plants demonstrating the potential to spread over long distances were defined as invasive species in Dnipropetrovs'k province. The results obtained allowed to allocate group of invasive alien plants, which consisted of 28 species from 15 different families: Cenchrus longispinus (Hack.) Fernald, Echinochloa crusgalli (L.) Beauv., Hordeum murinum L., Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. — Poaceae; A. negundo L. — Aceraceae; Asclepias syriaca L. — Asclepiadaceae; Ambrosia artemisifolia L., Artemisia absinthium L., Carduus acanthoides L., Centaurea diffusa Lam., Coni%a canadensis (L.) Cronq., Lactuca serriola Torner, Onopordum acanthium L. — Asteraceae; Capsella bursapastoris (L.) Medik., Descurainia sophia (L.) Webb et Plantl, Sisymbrium
loeselii L. — Brassicaceae; Sambucus racemosa L. — Caprifoliaceae; Echinocystis lobata (Michx.) Torr. et Gray — Cucurbitaceae; A. fruticosa L., R.pseudacacia L. — Fabaceae; Ballota nigra L. — Lamiaceae; Prunus serotina Ehrh. — Rosaceae; Salixfragilis L. — Salicaceae; A. altissima (Mill.) Swingle — Simarubaceae; Celtis occidentals L., U. pumila L. — Ulmaceae; P. quinquefolia (L.) Planch. — Vitaceae; Tribulus terrestris L. — Zygophyllacea.
The majority of invasive aliens was typical for such families: Acteraceae (7 alien species), Poaceae (4 species), and Brassicaceae (3 species) with high domination of the annual and biennial herbaceous plants. The woody invasive plants were presented by R. pseudacacia (Khromykh et al., 2015; Holoborodko et al., 2016), and A. negundo (Lykholat et al., 2016b).
Our study revealed the positive invasion trend during recent years. According to Baranovski (1998), A. fruticosa has acquired the invasive status over last 30 years; at present invasion of this species resulted in a significant distortion of natural structure of lowland habitat vegetation. Besides, the young growths of P. serotina and C. occidentalis have been found in the old-year urban plant communities as well as in the natural forests; A. syriaca could spread not only in the ruderal habitats, but also penetrate into the crops of wheat and other cultures. This invasion trend can be caused by the climatic changes typical for last years (Lykholat et al., 2016a; Walter et al., 2009).
CONCLUSION
Nowadays, the alien species occupy almost 17% in the flora of Dnipropetrovsk province, due to a combination of environmental and anthropogenic factors. The uneven alien species distribution between the families together with prevalence of Brassicaceae, Asterasea, and Poaceae was established. Results of our study allowed revealing various patterns and mechanisms of alien species intrusion into the regional flora (purposeful introduction, unintentional entering, and escape from a culture). Number of the neophytes was much higher than the archaeophytes, indicating constant invasion of alien species into the local flora and threats to natural floristic diversity of Dnipropetrovsk province. Invasion positive trend some alien species can be explained by the impact of climatic changes during last years.
REFERENCES
Baranovski, B.A. (1998). Pasprostranenie amorfy kystarnikovoy v dneprovskoy poyme v usloviyah kaskada. Voprosy stepnogo lesovedeniya
i rekultivatsiy zemel, 147—151. (In Russian). Baranovski, B.A. (2000). Rasitelnost ruslovogo ravninnogo vadohranilischa. Dnepropetrovsk.: Izd-vo DNU, 172 pp. (In Russian). Baranovski, B.O., Tarasov, V.V., Ivanko, I.A., Karmyzova, L.O. (2012). Adventyvna flora m. Dnipropetrovsk. Mat. II Vseukr. Nauk.
Konf. „Synantmpi%atsiya Roslynnogo Pokryvu Ukrainy, 15—18 (In Ukrainian). Belgard, A.L., 1950. Lesnaja rastitel'nost' jugo-vostoka USSR [Forest vegetation of south-eastern part of Ukraine]. KGU im.
Shevchenko Press, Kyiv 227 pp. (in Russian). Blackburn, T.M., Pysek, P., Bacher, S., Carlton, J.T., Duncan, R.P., Jarosik, V., Wilson, J.R.U., Richardson, D.M. (2011). A proposed
unified framework for biological invasion. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 26(7), 333—339. Blackburn, T.M., Essi, F., Evans, T., Hulme, P.I., Jeschke, J.M. (2014). A Unified Classification of Alien Species Based on the
Magnitude of their Environmental Impacts. PRO S Biol., 12(5). Doi 10.1371. Brygadyrenko, V.V., Reshetniak, D.Y. (2014). Morphological variability among populations of Harpalus rufipes (Coleoptera, Carabidae): What is more important — the mean values or statistical peculiarities of distribution in the population? Folia Oecologica, 41(2), 109-133.
Fuentes, N., Saldana, A., Kühn, I., Klotz, S. (2015). Climatic and socio-economic factors determine the level of invasion by alien
plants in Chile. Plant Ecology & Diversity. 8(3), 371-377. Furdychko, O.I., Gladun, G.B., Lavrov, V.V. (2006). Lis u stepu: osnoby stalogo rozvytku (Monografiya). Kyiv: Osnova, 496 pp. (in Ukrainian).
Grossgeim, A.A. (1913). Zametki o bolee redkih i novyh dlya flory okrestnostey g. Ekaterinoslava vidah. Protokoly v„Trudah obsch. isp. pr.", 46(2), 11-18. (In Russian).
Holoborodko, KK, Marenkov, O.M., Gorban, V.A., Voronkova, Y.S. (2016). The problem of assessing the viability of invasive species in the conditions of the steppe zone of Ukraine. Visnyk of Dnipropetrovsk University Biology, Ecology, 24(2), 466472. doi:10.15421/011663
Khromykh, N.O., Ivanko, I.A., Kovalenko, I.M., Lykholat, Y.V., Alekseeva, A.A. (2015). Vplyv asotsiovanyh z altitudoyu shylu umov mikroklimatu ta osvitlenosti na fiziologo-biohimichni protsesy v lysti derev pribereznogo lisu. Visnyk of Dnipropetrovsk University Biology, Ecology, 23(2), 177-182. (In Ukrainian). doi:10.15421/011525 Lykholat, Y.V., Khromykh N., Ivanko I., Kovalenko, I., Shupranova, L., Kharytonov, M. (2016a). Metabolic responses of steppe
fores rees to altitude-associated local environmental shanges. Agriculture & Forestry, 62(2), 163-171. Lykholat, Y., Alekseeva, A., Khromykh N., Ivanko I., Kharytonov, M., Kovalenko, I. (2016b). Assessment and prediction of viability
and metabolic activity of Tiliaplatyphyllos in arid steppe climate of Ukraine. Agriculture & Forestry, 62(3), 57-64. Moore, D. M. (1982). Flora Europaea, checklist and chromosome index. Cambridge University Press, London, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sydney, 423 pp.
Mosyakin, S.L., Fedoronchuk, M.M. (1999). Vascular plants of Ukraine (Nomenclatural checklist). Kyiv, Naukova Dumka, 346 pp. Mytsyk, L.P, Lykholat, Y.V., Tarasov, V.V. Adventives Herbaceous Plants of Technological Areas of Steppe Dnieper. (2000).
Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 57(3), 289-293. Mytsyk, L. & Baranovski, B. (2006). Nahodka Thladiantha dubia Bunge (Cucubritaceae) na Dnepropetrovschine. Tezy dop. mizpnar. konf. "Problemy lisovoy rekultyvatsiyporushenyh %emel Ukrainy", 64-65 (In Russian).
Pakhomov, O.Y., Brygadyrenko, V.V. (2005). Koncepcija systemy zahodiv z ohorony navkolyshn'ogo pryrodnogo seredovyshha Dnipropetrovs'koi' oblasti na 2005—2015 roky [Concept of system for actions on environment protection in Dnipropetrovsk re-gion for 2005-2015]. Visnyk of Dnipropetrovsk University Biology, Ecology, 13(1), 213-225. doi:10.15421/010538
Pallas, P. S. (1796). Verzeichniss der in Taurien wildwacksenden Pflancengattungen. Neue Nordisch. Beitrage, St.-Petersb, 7, 426-438. (In German).
Pergl, J., Sadlo, J., Petrik, P., Danihelka, J., Chrtek, J., Hejda, M., Moravcova, L., Perglova, I., Stajerova, K & Pysek, P. (2016). Dark side of the fence: ornamental plants as a source of wild-growing flora in the Czech Republic. Preslia, 88: 163-184.
Protopopova, V. (1991). Synantropnaja flora Ukrainy i puti ee pazvitija. Kiev: Naukova dumka, 200 pp. (In Russian).
Protopopova, V. (1999). Some aspects of the expansions invasive plants in Ukraine. Proceedings of XVI International Botanical Congress, 1540.
Pysek, P. (1998). Alien and native species in Central European urban floras: a quantative comparison. Journal of Biogeography, 25, 155163.
Pysek, P. (2003). How reliable are data on alien species in Flora Europea? Flora, 198, 499-507.
Pysek, P., Richardson, D.M., Redjmanek, M., Webster, G., Williamson, M., Kirschner, J. (2004). Alien plants in checlist and floras: toward better communication between taxonomists and ecologists. Taxonomy, 53, 131-143.
Pysek, P., Richardson, D.M. (2010). Invasive Species, Environmental Change and Management, and Health. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 35, 25-55.
Pysek, P., Danihelka, J., Sadlo, J., Chrtek, J.J., Chytry, M., Jarosik, V., Kaplan, Z., Krahulec, F., Moravkova, L., Pergl, J., Stajerova, K., Tichy, L. (2012). Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic (2nd edition): checklist update, taxonomac diversity and invasion patterns. Preslia, 84, 155-255.
Richardson, D.M., Pysek, P., Redjmanek, M., Barbour, N.G., Panetta, F.D., West, S.J. (2000). Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. Diversity & Distributions, 6, 93-107.
Schindler, S., O'Neill, F.H., Biro, V., Damm, C., Gasso, V., Kanka, R., Sluis, T., Krug, A., Lauwaars, S.G., Sebesvari, Z., Pusch, M., Baranovski, B., Ehlert, T., Neukirchen, B., Martin, J.R., Euller, K., Mauerhofer, V., Wrbka, T. (2016). Multifunctional floodplain management and biodiversity effects: a knowledge synthesis for six European countries. Biodiversity and Conservation, 25, 13491382.
Tarasov, V.V. (1981). K voprosu o bio-ekologicheskoy pasportizatsiy sornyh rasteniy lesnyh kultur Dnepropetrovskoy oblasty. Voprosy stepnogo lesovedeniya i rekultivatsiy zemel, 122-139. (In Russian).
Tarasov, V.V. (1991). Dopolnenye k adventivnoy flore Dnepropetrovskoy oblasty. In: Kadastrovye issledjvaniya stepnyh biogeotsenozov Prysamarya Dneprovskogo, ih antropogennaya dinamika i ohrana. Dnepropetrovsk.: Izd-vo DGU, 216 pp. (In Russian).
Tarasov, V.V. (2005). Flora Dnipropetrovskoy ta Zaporizkoy oblastey. Sudynni roslyny. Biologo-ekolkgichna harakterystyka vydiv (Monografiya). Dnipropetrovsk: Vyd-vo DNU, 276 pp. (In Ukrainian).
Tarasov, V.V. (2012). Flora Dnipropetrovskoy ta Zaporizkoy oblastey. Dnipropetrovsk: Vyd-vo DNU ta Lira, 296 pp. (In Ukrainian).
Tsvetkova, N.M., Pakhomov, O.Y., Serdyuk, S.M., Yakyba, M.S. (2016). Biologichne riznomanittja Ukrajiny. Dnipropetrovs'ka oblast'. Grunty. Metaly u gruntah [Biological diversity of Ukraine. The Dnipropetrovsk region. Soils. Metalls in the soils]. Lira, Dnipropetrovsk (in Ukrainian).
Walther, G.-R., Roques, A., Hulme, P. E., Sykes, M. T., Pys'ek, P., Kuhn, I., Zobel, M. (2009). Alien species in a warmer world: risks and opportunities. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 24(12): 686-693.
