River corridor plants revisited: What drives their unique distribution patterns?

References

• Aguiar FCF, Ferreira MT. 2013. Plant invasions in the rivers of the Iberian Peninsula, south-western Europe: A review. Plant Biosyst 147: 1107–1119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson E, Nilsson C. 2002. Temporal variation in the drift of plant litter and propagules in a small boreal river. Freshwater Biol 47: 1674–1684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benkert D, Fukarek F, Korsch H, editors. 1996. Verbreitungsatlas der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen Ostdeutschlands [Distribution atlas for ferns and flowering plants of Eastern Germany]. Jena, Stuttgart, Lübeck, Ulm: Gustav Fischer Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Boedeltje G, Bakker JP, Bekker RM, van Groenendael JM, Soesbergen M. 2003. Plant dispersal in a lowland stream in relation to occurrence and three specific life-history traits of the species in the species pool. J Ecol 91: 855–866.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, Stevens MHH, et al. 2009. Generalized linear mixed models: A practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24: 127–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkart M. 2001. River corridor plants (Stromtalpflanzen) in Central European lowland: A review of poorly understood plant distribution pattern. Global Ecol Biogeogr 10: 449–468.
   Google Scholar
• Burkart M, Alsleben K, Lachmuth S, Schumacher J, Hofmann R, Jeltsch F, et al. 2010. Recruitment requirements of the rare and threatened Juncus atratus. Flora 205: 583–589.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bykova O, Chuine I, Morin X, Higgins I. 2012. Temperature dependence of the reproduction niche and its relevance for plant species distribution. J Biogeogr 39: 2191–2200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cousens R, Dytham C, Law R. 2008. Dispersal in plants: A population perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Danin A, Orshan G. 1990. The distribution of Raunkiaer life forms in Israel in relation to the environment. J Veg Sci 1: 41–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donath TW, Holzel N, Otte A. 2003. The impact of site conditions and seed dispersal on restoration success in alluvial meadows. Appl Veg Sci 6: 13–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dynesius M, Nilsson C. 1994. Fragmentation and flow regulation of river systems in the northern third of the world. Science 266: 753–762.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellenberg H, Weber HE, Düll R, Wirth V, Werner W, Paulißen D. 1992. Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa [Indicator values of plants in Central Europe], 2nd ed. Scr Geobot 18: 1–258.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer M, Burkart M, Pasqualetto V, van Kleunen M. 2010. Experiment meets biogeography: Plants of river-corridor distribution are not more stress-tolerant but benefit less from more benign conditions elsewhere. J Plant Ecol 3: 149–155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gołaszewski D. 2004. Próba oceny wpływu dolin rzecznych na kształtowanie się wybranych parametrów meteorologicznych [Assessment of influence of river valleys on meteorological parameters]. Prz Nauk Inż Kszt Środ 2: 55–64.
   Google Scholar
• Haeupler H, Schönfelder P. 1988. Atlas der Farn- und Blütenpfl anzen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Atlas of Ferns and Flowering Plants of Germany]. Stuttgart: Ulmer.
   Google Scholar
• Hensgen F, Albrecht C, Donath TW, Otte A, Eckstein RL. 2011. Distribution of gastropods in floodplain compartments and feeding preferences for river corridor plant species: Is there an effect of gastropod herbivory on the distribution of river corridor plants? Flora 206: 534–543.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jentsch H, Seitz B. 1997. Stromtalpflanzen im Spreewald [River corridor plants in Spreewald]. Verh Bot Vereins Berlin Brandenburg 129: 25–36.
   Google Scholar
• Matuszkiewicz W. 2001. Przewodnik do oznaczania zbiorowisk roślinnych Polski [A guide for identification of plant communities in Poland]. In: Faliński JB, editor. Vademecum Geobotanicum. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
   Google Scholar
• Mirek Z, Piękoś-Mirkowa H, Zając A, Zając M, editors. 2002. Flowering plants and pteridophytes of Poland. A checklist. Biodiversity of Poland Vol. 1. Kraków: Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences. p.442.
   Google Scholar
• Müller-Schneider P. 1986. Verbreitungsbiologie der Blütenpflanzen Graubündens [Diasporology of the spermatophytes of the Grisons (Switzerland)]. Veröffentlichungen des Geobotanischen Institutes der ETH, Stiftung Rübel 85: 1–264.
   Google Scholar
• Müller-Stoll WR, Fischer W, Krausch H-D. 1962. Verbreitungskarten brandenburgischer Leitpflanzen [Distribution maps of indicator plants in Brandenburg]. Vierte Reihe. Wiss Z Pädagog Hochschule Potsdam, Math-Naturwiss Reihe 7: 95–150.
   Google Scholar
• Naiman RJ, Décamps H, Pollock M. 1993. The role of riparian corridors in maintaining regional biodiversity. Ecol Appl 3: 209–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson C, Brown RL, Jansson R, Merritt DM. 2010. The role of hydrochory in structuring riparian and wetland vegetation. Biol Rev 85: 837–858.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nobis M. 2007. Vascular plants of the western part of the Iłża Foreland (Małopolska Upland). Prace Bot 40: 1–458.
   Google Scholar
• Puth LM, Wilson KA. 2001. Boundaries and corridors as a continuum of ecological flow control: Lessons from rivers and streams. Conserv Biol 15: 21–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saldaña A, Stein A, Zinck JA. 1998. Spatial variability of soil properties at different scales within three terraces of the Henares River (Spain). Catena 33: 139–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slavík B. 1986. Phytocartographical syntheses of the ČSR 1. Průhonice: Botanical Institute of Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Slavík B. 1990. Phytocartographical syntheses of the ČR 2. Průhonice: Botanical Institute of Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Slavík B. 1998. Phytocartographical syntheses of the Czech Republic 3. Praha: Academia.
   Google Scholar
• Stolbrig OT. 1994. Plant traits and adaptive strategies: Their role in ecosystem function. In: Schulze E-D, Mooney HA, editors. Biodiversity and ecosystem function. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. pp. 97–116.
   Google Scholar
• Štěpanková J, editor. 2012. Phytocartographical syntheses of the Czech Republic 4. Praha: Academia.
   Google Scholar
• Tokarska-Guzik B. 2005. The establishment and spread of alien plant species (kenophytes) in Poland. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
   Google Scholar
• Ustrnul Z, Czekierda D. 2003. Zróżnicowanie przestrzenne warunków termicznych powietrza Polski z wykorzystaniem GIS. Warszawa: Instytut Meteorologii i Gospodarki Wodnej.
   Google Scholar
• Ward JV, Trockner K, Schiemer F. 1999. Biodiversity of floodplain river ecosystems: Ecotones and connectivity. Regul Rivers Res Manage 15: 125–139.
   Google Scholar
• Van Looy K, Meire P. 2009. A conservation paradox for riparian habitats and river corridor species. J Nat Conserv 17: 33–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vent W, Benkert D. 1984. Verbreitungskarten brandenburgischer Pflanzenarten. 2. Reihe. Stromtalpflanzen (1) [Distribution maps of plant species in Brandenburg. Part 2. River corridor plants (1)]. Gleditschia 12: 213–238.
   Google Scholar
• Zacharias D, Garve E. 1996. Verbreitung und Häufigkeit von Stromtalpflanzen im ehemaligen Amt Neuhaus (Mittelelbe Lkr. Lüneburg) [Distribution and abundance of river corridor plants in the former Amt Neuhaus]. Braunschw Geobot Arbeiten 4: 35–58.
   Google Scholar
• Zając A, Zając M, editors. 2001. Distribution atlas of vascular plants in Poland. Kraków: Laboratory of Computer Chorology, Institute of Botany, Jagiellonian University.
   Google Scholar