Biologia 65/5: 832—836, 2010 Section Botany DOI: 10.2478/s11756-010-0103-x
Nomenclatural types of Picea abies syntaxa reported from Slovakia Peter Kučera Botanical Garden of Comenius University, Detached unit in Blatnica, SK-03815 Blatnica 315, Slovakia; e-mail:
[email protected]
Abstract: The paper includes assignation of nomenclatural types to Slovak syntaxa dominated naturally by Picea abies, i.e. to 1 order (Athyrio filicis-feminae-Piceetalia Hadač ex Hadač et al. 1969) and 14 associations and 5 subassociations of the alliances Piceion excelsae Pawlowski ex Pawlowski et al. 1928, Athyrio alpestris-Piceion Sýkora 1971, Oxalido-Piceion Hadač et al. 1969 and Chrysanthemo rotundifolii-Piceion (Krajina 1933) Hadač et al. 1969. The association name Avenello-Piceetum excelsae Hadač et al. 1969 is validated. Essential syntaxonomical notes to syntaxa Athyrio alpestris-Piceion, Calamagrostio villosae-Piceetum are included as well as nomenclatural comments to Vaccinio-Piceetea and Athyrio-Piceetalia. Key words: Athyrio alpestris-Piceion, Athyrio-Piceetalia, Chrysanthemo-Piceion, Oxalido-Piceion, Piceion excelsae, Vaccinio-Piceetea.
Introduction The application of a name of a syntaxon is determined by means of its nomenclatural type (Weber et al., 2000: 750). Assignation of nomenclatural types provides clearer solution of questions of mutual syntaxonomical position of various units. From the territory of Slovakia, there are recognized several associations and higher syntaxa of the phytocoenoses dominated byPicea abies: the list of syntaxa of the class Vaccinio-Piceetea Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 prepared by Šomšák (in Mucina et al., 1985: 217–219) was the essential work for many authors till present. Recent version of accepted syntaxa from the territory of Slovakia was published by Jarolímek et al. (2008). Prevailing part of Slovak spruce-dominated syntaxa lack their own nomenclatural types as they were published before the year 1979 (cf. Weber et al., 2000: 747, Art. 5). The aim of this contribution is to publish a complete list of nomenclatural types of Picea abies syntaxa accepted recently from Slovakia. Material and methods Nomenclatural types for syntaxa are chosen according to the International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature (ICPN) published by Weber et al. (2000). Nomenclatural types are set only for vegetation units with natural dominance or naturally high abundance of Picea abies from the syntaxa list of the class Vaccinio-Piceetea Br.-Bl. in Br.Bl. et al. 1939 in Jarolímek et al. (2008: 321–322). Nomenclatural evaluation of the names according to the ICPN is added, too. Due to the aim of this contribution, it was not possible here to publish proposals on syntaxonomical evaluation of Picea abies woodlands of the Western Carpathians (e.g., Chrysanthemo-Piceion). The only exception is
c 2010 Institute of Botany, Slovak Academy of Sciences
the alliance Athyrio alpestris-Piceion since the alliance was wrongly classified into Athyrio-Piceetalia of Hadač (1962; cf. Hadač et al. 1969) as early as by its description by Sýkora (1971). Used names of plant taxa follow the checklist of Marhold et al. (1998).
Results Notes on accepted syntaxa names Before the list of nomenclatural types will be given, several important remarks should be presented: The class Piceetea excelsae Klika 1948: Although the class name Vaccinio-Piceetea Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 is widely used, the name was not published validly: the subordinated order GaultherioPiceetalia was a nomen nudum in the place of publication (cf. Braun-Blanquet et al., 1939: 2) and the manner of creation of the other subordinated order name Vaccinio-Piceetalia does not correspond to the rules of ICPN – Art. 3m (→ Art. 25, paragraph 1) (cf. Braun-Blanquet et al., 1939: 4 – “In der Ordnung der Vaccinio-Piceetalia sind die zwei fr¨ uher unterschiedenen Ordnungen der Piceetalia excelsae (Pawlowski 1928) und der Rhodoreto-Vaccinietalia (Br.-Bl 1926) zusammengefaßt.”). Thus, the name Vaccinio-Piceetea Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939, nom. inval. (Art. 2b) is rejected and the newer more appropriate name Piceetea excelsae Klika 1948 should be accepted in phytosociological works. Ad 1.1. Piceion excelsae Pawlowski ex Pawlowski et al. 1928 incl. Athyrio alpestris-Piceion Sýkora 1971: The alliance Athyrio alpestris-Piceion Sýkora 1971 was classified by Sýkora (1971: 44) into the order Athyrio-Piceetalia Hadač 1962. However, the second
Nomenclatural types of Picea abies syntaxa reported from Slovakia name is based on the species name of Athyrium filixfemina (cf. Hadač et al. 1969: 265) and A. distentifolium (= A. alpestre) does not occur neither in phytosociological relevés of the whole order AthyrioPiceetalia nor in relevés of the second order of coniferous forests Myrtilleto-Piceetalia Hadač ex Hadač et al. 1969. Moreover, the order differs much also in its ecological character and species composition (cf. Hadač et al. 1969) from the alliance Athyrio alpestris-Piceion Sýkora 1971, which belongs to the order Piceetalia excelsae Pawlowski ex Pawlowski et al. 1928. As the alliance consists of the sole association of Picea abies phytocoenoses – Athyrio alpestris-Piceetum Hartmann ex Hartmann et Jahn 1967, it is included in the alliance Piceion excelsae Pawlowski ex Pawlowski et al. 1928 in this contribution. Thus, the close ecological and floristic connection to the association Vaccinio myrtilliPiceetum Šoltés 1976 is emphasized. Ad 1.1.1. Calamagrostio villosae-Piceetum Schl¨ uter 1966: Following Šomšák (in Mucina et al. 1985: 217), Jarolímek et al. (2008: 321) mentioned the name “Calamagrostio villosae-Piceetum (R. Tx. 1937) Hartmann 1953 sensu Mucina et Maglocký 1985” by the name Calamagrostio villosae-Piceetum Schl¨ uter 1966. However, Hartmann (1953) did not use the name Calamagrostio villosae-Piceetum: Hartmann used the association name Lophozio-Piceetum Volk in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939. Surprisingly, many authors used such name as ascribed to Hartmann, also Hartmann & Jahn (1967). The name Calamagrostio villosae-Piceetum Schl¨ uter 1966 should be used instead of the younger and not validly published name Calamagrostio villosaePiceetum Hartmann et Jahn 1967, nom. inval. (Art. 25). However, it should be examined whether phytocoenoses of the two syntaxa could be united under one association name. The Western Carpathian phytocoenoses of natural spruce woodlands similar to the communities of the association Calamagrostio villosaePiceetum Schl¨ uter 1966 should be classified into Vaccinio myrtilli-Piceetum Šoltés 1976. Ad 2. Athyrio filicis-feminae-Piceetalia Hadač ex Hadač et al. 1969: The subordinated alliance name Oxalido-Piceion (Krajina 1933) Březina et Hadač in Hadač 1962 was published by Hadač (1962) as a new name for Oxalidion acetosellae Krajina 1933. However, the last name was not published validly (Art. 2b → Art. 8) as it is based on the invalidly published association name: Piceetum abietis oxalidetosum acetosellae silicicolum Krajina 1933, nom. inval. (Art. 3e) (Krajina 1933: 154). Hadač (1962: 53) did not present other sufficient original diagnosis, thus the name Oxalido-Piceion of Hadač (1962) cannot be treated as a validly published name of a new syntaxon. Only the later alliance name Oxalido-Piceion Hadač et al. 1969 should be used. Also the subordinated alliance name Chrysanthemo-Piceion for the alliance Chrysanthemion rotundifolii Krajina 1933 was not published validly by Hadač (1962) as Hadač [unfortunately] did not use au-
833
thor citation (ICPN, Def. XII, Art. 49) of the ‘basionym’ for nomen novum: “Chrysanthemeto-Piceion (Krajina) Břez. et Hč” (Hadač 1962: 53). The new name was validly published by Hadač et al. (1969: 275): Chrysanthemo-Piceion (Krajina 1933) Hadač et al. 1969. Thus, the order Athyrio-Piceetalia Hadač 1962 was published as a nomen nudum (Art. 2), and the name Athyrio filicis-feminae-Piceetalia Hadač ex Hadač et al. 1969 should be used. Such an interpretation clears also the complicated situation which originated from identification of very different ecological and floristical content of spruce-dominated syntaxa of Krajina (1933) and those of Hadač et al. (1969), i. e. Chrysanthemion rotundifolii/Chrysanthemo-Piceion and Oxalidion acetosellae/Oxalido-Piceion. The list of nomenclatural types Piceetea excelsae Klika 1948 Nomenclatural type: Klika (1948), p. 322, Piceetalia excelsae Pawlowski ex Pawlowski et al. 1928, holotypus (Art. 18). Syntax. syn.: Vaccinio-Piceetea Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 p. p. min., nom. inval. (Art. 2b). 1. Piceetalia excelsae Pawlowski ex Pawlowski et al. 1928 Validated name (Rec. 46D): Piceetalia excelsae Pawlowski 1928, nom. nud. (Art. 2b), (Pawlowski 1928: 19). Nomenclatural type: Pawlowski et al. (1928), p. 257 [cf. p. 218–220!], Piceion excelsae Pawlowski ex Pawlowski et al. 1928, lectotypus (Art. 20). Syntax. syn.: Vaccinio-Piceetalia Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 p. p. min., nom. inval. (Art. 3m → Art. 25). 1.1. Piceion excelsae Pawlowski ex Pawlowski et al. 1928 Validated name: Piceion excelsae Pawlowski 1928, nom. nud. (Art. 2b), (Pawlowski 1928: 19). Nomenclatural type: Pawlowski et al. (1928), p. 257 [cf. p. 218–220!], Piceetum excelsae [Pawlowski ex] Pawlowski et al. 1928, holotypus (Art. 18). Syntax. syn.: Vaccinio-Piceion Br.-Bl. ex Br.-Bl. et al. 1939* p. p. min. *Nomenclatural type: Berg et Clausnitzer (in Dengler et al. 2004), p. 380, Piceetum subalpinum Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939, nom. illeg. (Art. 34a), lectotypus. Incl.: Athyrio alpestris-Piceion Sýkora 1971* *Nomenclatural type: Athyrio alpestris-Piceetum Hartmann ex Sýkora 1971#, nom. illeg. (Art. 31), lectotypus (Art. 20). # Nomenclatural type for Athyrio alpestris-Piceetum Hartmann ex Sýkora 1971: Sýkora (1971: 47–48), tab. 6, rel. 6, lectotypus hoc loco. Jirásek (2002: 77) labelled as a nomenclatural type of the alliance Athyrio alpestris-Piceion Sýkora 1971 the name Athyrio alpestris-Piceetum Hartmann 1959 [the correct valid form of the name is Athyrio alpestrisPiceetum Hartmann ex Hartmann et Jahn 1967: cf. Jirásek 2002: 78]. Sýkora (1971: 44) used also the invalid name Athyrio alpestris-Piceetum Hartmann 1959 [nom inval., Art. 2b]: thus he validated the syntaxon name
834 in his work as the new association Athyrio alpestrisPiceetum Hartmann ex Sýkora 1971. 1.1.1. Calamagrostio villosae-Piceetum Schl¨ uter 1966 Nomenclatural type: Schl¨ uter (1966), tab. 1, rel. 5, lectotypus hoc loco. 1.1.2. Vaccinio myrtilli-Piceetum Šoltés 1976 Nomenclatural type: Šoltés (1976), tab. 4, rel. 3, lectotypus hoc loco. 1.1.2.1 Vaccinio myrtilli-Piceetum typicum Šoltés 1976 Nomenclatural type: Šoltés (1976), tab. 4, rel. 3, lectotypus hoc loco. 1.1.2.2. Vaccinio myrtilli-Piceetum calamagrostietosum variae Šoltés 1976 Nomenclatural type: Šoltés (1976), tab. 4, rel. 35, lectotypus hoc loco. Note: The subassociation was transferred by Fajmonová (1986) into the association Cortuso-Piceetum Fajmonová 1986. 1.1.3. Athyrio alpestris-Piceetum Hartmann ex Hartmann et Jahn 1967 Nomenclatural type: Hartmann & Jahn (1967: tab. 1), rel. 27, lectotypus (Jirásek, 1996: 250). 1.1.4. Cembro-Piceetum Myczkovski et Lesi´ nski 1974 Nomenclatural type: Myczkovski & Lesi´ nski (1974), p. 41, tab. 4, col. 3 (datum 27th May, 1968), lectotypus hoc loco. 1.1.5. Avenello-Piceetum excelsae Hadač et al. ex Kučera ass. nova hoc loco* Validated name: “Avenello-Piceetum excelsae Hadač et al. 1969, ass. nova provis.” (Hadač et al., 1969: 313). Original diagnosis: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 314–315, rel. 199, 200 and 237. Nomenclatural type: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 314, rel. 200, lectotypus hoc loco. *Hadač & Sofron (1980) and Sofron (1981) presented the association name already not as provisional one, however, the names were published without nomenclatural types thus not validly (Art. 5). 1.1.6. Mastigobryo-Piceetum (Schmid et Gaisberg 1936) Br.-Bl. et Sissingh in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 Jirásek (1996: 245) gived a neotype to the association Mastigobryo-Piceetum (Schmid et Gaisberg 1936) Br.Bl. et Sissingh in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 from the publication of J. Bartsch et M. Bartsch (1940). As Braun-Blanquet et al. (1939: 33) referred to original relevés of the association published earlier by Schmid et von Gaisberg (1936) (cf. Braun-Blanquet et al., 1939: 33), a lectotype should be chosen: Nomenclatural type: Schmid & Gaisberg (1936), tab. III [Piceetum excelsae Schmid et Gaisberg 1936*], rel. 98 [subass. Piceetum excelsae myrtilletosum Schmid et Gaisberg 1936], lectotypus hoc loco. *In the view of uniting of nomenclatural types of mentioned syntaxa, following types are chosen: Nomenclatural type for the association Piceetum excelsae Schmid et Gaisberg 1936: Schmid & Gaisberg (1936), tab. III, rel. 98 (subass. Piceetum myrtilleto-
P. Kučera sum Schmid et Gaisberg 1936#), lectotypus hoc loco. # Nomenclatural type for the subassociation Piceetum myrtilletosum Schmid et Gaisberg 1936: Schmid & Gaisberg (1936), tab. III, rel. 98, lectotypus hoc loco. Nomenclatural type for the subassociation Piceetum normale Schmid et Gaisberg 1936: Schmid & Gaisberg (1936), tab. III, rel. 86, lectotypus hoc loco. Nomenclatural type for the subassociation Piceetum vaccinietosum vitis-idaeae Schmid et Gaisberg 1936: Schmid & Gaisberg (1936), tab. III, rel. 112, lectotypus hoc loco. 1.1.7. Sphagno acutifolii-Piceetum (Březina et Hadač in Hadač et al. 1969) Hadač 1987 Nomenclatural type: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 312, rel. 16, lectotypus hoc loco. 1.1.8. Sphagno palustris-Piceetum Šomšák 1979 Nomenclatural type: Šomšák (1979), p. 26, tab. 3, rel. 13, holotypus (ut neotypus: Šomšák 1979: 23). 2. Athyrio filicis-feminae-Piceetalia Hadač ex Hadač et al. 1969 Validated name: Athyrio-Piceetalia Hadač 1962, nom. nud. (Art. 2b) (Hadač, 1962: 53). Nomenclatural type: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 265, Oxalido-Piceion Hadač et al. 1969, lectotypus hoc loco. 2.1. Oxalido-Piceion Hadač et al. 1969 Nomenclatural type: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 270, Oxalido-Piceetum excelsae Březina et Hadač in Hadač et al. 1969, lectotypus (Art. 20). 2.1.1. Mnio spinosi-Piceetum Hadač et al. 1969 Nomenclatural type: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 269, rel. 134, lectotypus hoc loco. 2.1.2. Oxalido-Piceetum excelsae Březina et Hadač in Hadač et al. 1969 Nomenclatural type: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 274, rel. 30, lectotypus hoc loco. 2.2. Chrysanthemo rotundifolii-Piceion (Krajina 1933) Hadač et al. 1969 ‘Basionym’: Chrysanthemion rotundifolii Krajina 1933, nom. illeg. (Art. 29b) (Krajina, 1933: 145). Nomenclatural type: Krajina (1933; ut Piceeto-Chrysanthemetum rotundifolii), p. 146, Chrysanthemo rotundifolii-Piceetum Krajina 1933, nom. invers. [cf. Hadač et al., 1969: 280], holotypus. 2.2.1. Chrysanthemo rotundifolii-Piceetum Krajina 1933, nom. invers. Nomenclatural type: Krajina (1933), p. 148–149, tab. 60, rel. 1, lectotypus hoc loco. 2.2.2. Adenostylo alliariae-Piceetum excelsae Březina et Hadač in Hadač et al. 1969 Nomenclatural type: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 287, rel. 223, lectotypus hoc loco. 2.2.3. Cortuso-Piceetum Fajmonová 1986 Nomenclatural type: Fajmonová (1986), p. 44, tab. 1, rel. 11 (Cortuso-Piceetum typicum Fajmonová 1986), lectotypus hoc loco. Fajmonová (1986) presented 5 subassociations of the association Cortuso-Piceetum and gave them nomenclatural types: Cortuso-Piceetum calamagrostietosum variae (Šoltés 1976) Fajmonová 1986, CortusoPiceetum calamagrostietosum arundinaceae Fajmonová
Nomenclatural types of Picea abies syntaxa reported from Slovakia 1986, Cortuso-Piceetum typicum Fajmonová 1986, Cortuso-Piceetum saxifragetosum rotundifolii Fajmonová 1986 and Cortuso-Piceetum adenostyletosum alliariae Fajmonová 1986. Fajmonová (1986: 50) chose a nomenclatural type also for the first of them from her own relevés, but such choice does not follow the rules of ICPN (Art. 26): an adequate nomenclatural type is chosen under 1.1.2.2. Vaccinio myrtilli-Piceetum calamagrostietosum variae Šoltés 1976. 2.2.4. Seslerio variae-Piceetum Fajmonová 1978 Nomenclatural type: Fajmonová (1978), p. 562 (tab. 1, rel. 6), holotypus. 2.2.5. Dryopterido filicis-maris-Piceetum Březina et Hadač in Hadač et al. 1969 Nomenclatural type: Hadač et al. (1969), p. 278, rel. 119, lectotypus hoc loco. 2.2.6. Polysticho lonchitidis-Piceetum W. Matuszkiewicz ex J. Matuszkiewicz 1977 Validated name: Polysticho-Piceetum W. Matuzskiewicz in Scamoni 1967, nom. nud. (Art. 2b, 3b) (Scamoni, 1967: 221), (cf. Matuszkiewicz 1977: 191 ut “Polysticho-Piceetum (W. Mat. 1967. prov.)”, p. 210 – tab. 2, col. 10). Nomenclatural type: Adamczyk (1962), tab. 19, rel. 134, lectotypus hoc loco. Acknowledgements I would like to thank to my colleagues RNDr. J. Kliment, CSc. for help in some difficult nomenclatural questions and Ing. J. Topercer, CSc. for corrections of the English text. Study was supported by grant project of VEGA No. 1/4349/07. References Adamczyk B. 1962. Studia gleboznawco-fitosocjologiczne w Dolinie Malej L aki w Tatrach. Acta Agrar. Silvestria, Ser Le´sna 2: 45–116. Bartsch J. & Bartsch M. 1940. Vegetationskunde des Schwarzwaldes. Pflanzensoziologie 4: 234 pp. Braun-Branquet J., Sissingh G. & Vlieger J. Prodromus der Pflanzengesellschaften : Prodrome des Groupements végétaux. Hauptred. J. Braun-Blanquet. Fasz. 6. Klasse der Vaccinio-Piceetea (Nadeholz- und Vaccinienheiden-Verb¨ ande der eurosibirisch-nordamerikanischen Region). Comité International du Prodrome Phytosociologique, 124 pp. Dengler J., Koska I., Timmermann T., Berg C., Clausnitzer U., Iserman M., Linke C., P¨ azolt J., Polte T. & Spangenberg A. 2004. New descriptions and typifications of syntaxa within the project ‘Plant communities of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and their vulnerability’ – Part II. Feddes Repert. 115: 343– 392. Fajmonová E. 1978. K syntaxonómii spoločenstiev radu AthyrioPiceetalia Hadač 62 v Západných Karpatoch. Biológia, Bratislava, 33: 551–563. Fajmonová E. 1986. K variabilite asociácie Cortuso-Piceetum na Slovensku. Preslia 58: 43–54. ¨ Hadač E. 1962. Ubersicht der h¨ oheren Vegetationseineiten des Tatragebirges. Vegetatio 11: 46–54. Hadač E. 1987. Plant ecological notes from the Belianske Tatry Mts. Biol. Práce 33/3: 96 pp. Hadač E., Březina P., Ježek V., Kubička J., Hadačová V., Vondráček M. et al. 1969. Die Pflanzengesellschaften des Tales “Dolina Siedmich prameňov” in der Belaer Tatra. Vegetácia Č.S.S.R., B 2: 344 pp.
835
Hadač E. & Sofron J. 1980. Notes on syntaxonomy of cultural forest communities. Folia Geobot. Phytotax 15: 245–258. Hartmann F.K. 1953. Waldgesellschaften der deutschen Mittelgebirge und des H¨ ugellandes: Nach ihren wichtigsten soziologischen und stand¨ ortlichen Merkmale in einer vorl¨ aufiger ¨ Ubersicht zusammengestellt. Umschaudienst Forschungsausschusses Landschaftspflege Landschaftsgestalt. Akad. Raumforsch. Landesplan. 4–6: 139–182, I–XIV. ¨ Hartmann F.-K. & Jahn, G. 1967. Okologie der W¨ alder und Landschaften. [Hrsg. F.-K. Hartmann]. Band 1. Waldgesellschaften des mitteleurop¨ aischen Gebirgsraumes n¨ ordlich der Alpen : Tabellen, Grundlagen und Erl¨ auterungen. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart, 2 vol. Jarolímek I., Šibík J., Heged¨ ušová K., Janišová M., Kliment J., Kučera P., Májeková J., Michálková D., Sadloňová J., Šibíková I., Škodová I., Uhlířová J., Ujházy K., Ujházyová M., Valachovič M. & Zaliberová M. 2008. A list of vegetation units of Slovakia, pp. 295–329. In: Jarolímek I., Šibík J. (eds.), Heged¨ ušová K., Janišová M., Kliment J., Kučera P., Májeková J., Michálková D., Sadloňová J., Šibíková I., Škodová I., Tichý L., Uhlířová J., Ujházy K., Ujházyová M., Valachovič M. & Zaliberová M., Diagnostic, constant and dominant species of the higher vegetation units of Slovakia, Veda, Bratislava. Jirásek J. 1996. Společenstva přirozených smrčin České republiky. Preslia 67: 225–259. Jirásek J. 2002. Třída: Vaccinio-Piceetea Br.-Bl. in BraunBlanquet, Sissingh et Vlieger 1939, pp. 18–86. In: Husová M., Jirásek J. & Moravec J., Přehled vegetace České republiky. Svazek 3. Jehličnaté lesy. Academia, Praha. Klika J. 1948. Rostlinná sociologie (Fytocoenologie). Melantrich, Praha, 384 pp. Krajina V. 1933. Die Pflanzengesellschaften des Mlynica-Tales in den Vysoké Tatry (Hohe Tatra): Mit besonderer Ber¨ ucksichtigung der ¨ okologischen Verh¨ altnisse. II. Teil. Beih. Bot. Centralbl. 51/2/1: 1–224. Sonderabdruck. Marhold K. (ed.), Goliašová K., Heged¨ ušová Z., Hodálová I., Jurkovičová V., Kmeťová E., Letz R., Michalková E., Mráz P., Peniašteková M., Šípošová H., Ťavoda O. et al. 1998. Papraďorasty a semenné rastliny, pp. 333–687. In: Marhold K. & Hindák F. (eds), Zoznam nižších a vyšších rastlín Slovenska, Veda, Bratislava. Matuszkiewicz J. 1977. Przegl˛ad fitosocjologiczny zbiorowisk le´snych Polski. Cz. 4. Bory ´swierkowe i jodlowe. Phytocoenosis 6/3: 151–226. Mucina L., Maglocký Š. (eds) et al. 1985. A list of vegetation units of Slovakia. Doc. Phytosoc. N.S. 9: 175–220. Myczkowski S. & Lesi´ nski J. 1974. Rozsiedlenie rodzimych gatunków drzew tatrza´ nskich. Studia O´srodka Dokumentacji Fizjograficznej 3: 13–70. Pawlowski B. 1928. Guide de l’excursion botanique dans les monts Tatras. In: Guide des excursions en Pologne, vol. 1 (I. Partie). Kraków, 64 pp. Pawlowski B., Sokolowski M. & Wallisch K. 1928. Die Pflanzenassoziationen des Tatra-Gebirges. VII. Teil. Die Pflanzenassoziationen und die Flora des Morskie Oko-Tales. Bull. Int. Acad. Polon. Sci., Cl. Math., Sér. B., Sci. Nat. Suppl. 2: 205–272. Scamoni A. 1967. Wst˛ep do fitosocjologii praktycznej. Wyd. I. Pa´ nstwowe Wydawnictvo Rolnicze i Le´sne, Warszawa, 248 pp. Transl. by W. Matuszkiewicz. from: Einf¨ uhrung in die praktische Vegetationskunde, Zweite, neu bearbeitete Auflage. Schl¨ uter H. 1966. Vegetationsgliederung und -kartierung eines Quellgebietes im Th¨ uringer Wald als Grundlage zur Beurteilung des Wasserhaushaltes. Arch. Naturschutz Landschaftsforsch. 6 (1/2): 3–44. Schmid H. & Gaisberg E. 1936. Untersuchungen u ¨ ber Standort und Ertragsleistung der Fichte in w¨ urttembergischen Waldgebieten. Mitt. W¨ urttemberg. Forstl. Versuchsanst. 1936/1: 129 pp. Sofron J. 1981. Přirozené smrčiny západních a jihozápadních Čech. Stud. Českoslov. Akad. Věd 7: 128. Sýkora,T. 1971. Lesní rostlinná společenstva Jizerských hor. Knižnice Jizer. Hor 11: 60 pp.
836 Šoltés R. 1976. Phytoz¨ onotische Analyse des Verbandes VaccinioPiceion Br.-Bl. 1938 in den Westkarpaten. Acta Fac. Rerum Nat. Univ. Comen., Bot. 24: 139–167. Šomšák L. 1979. Torfw¨ alder fluvioglazialen Ablagerungen der Hohen Tatra. Acta Fac. Rerum Nat. Univ. Comen., Bot. 27: 1–38.
P. Kučera Weber H.E., Moravec J. & Theurillat J.-P. 2000. International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature. 3rd ed. J. Veg. Sci. 11: 739–768. Received July 21, 2009 Accepted November 10, 2009
