Search

The 2008 checklist of British bryophytes lists 1056 species (comprising 4 hornworts, 297 liverworts, 755 mosses), 15 subspecies and 94 varieties, in 304 genera. These are arranged in a full taxonomic hierarchy. The moss classification is broadly similar to that in the current standard flora, but the liverwort classification incorporates many new features resulting from recent genetic studies. Annotations provide literature references for all changes from the standard floras, including taxa newly added or deleted. For each taxon, there is a list of the vice-counties in which it has been found. Vice-county records are distinguished by whether or not there is a post-1959 record in the database of the Biological Records Centre at CEH Wallingford.

This report provides summary information on trends in the occurrence of vascular plants in Scotland as a whole and across seven groups of habitats. Further chapters look at arable weeds and plants of base-poor substrates.

The moss flora of Europe and Macaronesia comprises 278 genera, 1292 species, 46 subspecies and 118 varieties. Of the total 1292 species, 53 are confined to Macaronesia and 21 are thought to be non-native. The checklist was derived from those for the various component countries and regions. It is based on results published up to the end of 2005. Subspecies and varieties are included; hybrids are omitted. The taxonomic hierarchy is based on one published by Goffinet & Buck in 2004. While it has been strongly influenced by results of modern molecular methods, there are still many remaining uncertainties, even at family level. Because of these uncertainties, taxonomic innovation has generally been avoided. There are four new combinations and one change of status.

The period covered by this report is the first year of a new six-year partnership between CEH and JNCC. For this period, there is increased emphasis on targeted survey, on analysis and interpretation and on communications and outreach. These activities were always part of BRC’s work, but they have been given greater prominence as a result of rapid developments in information technology. Data are increasingly reaching BRC in electronic form, so that the effort of data entry and collation is reduced. The data, collected by many volunteers and then collated and analysed at BRC, document the changing status and distribution of plants and animals in Britain. Distribution maps are published in atlases and are available via the internet through the NBN Gateway. The effects of change or loss of habitats, the influence of climate change and the consequences of changing water quality are all examples of the environmental factors that affect our biodiversity and which BRC aims to document and understand. The results are vital for developing environmental policies, to support conservation, and for fundamental ecological research. BRC is funded jointly by JNCC and NERC through a partnership based on a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA). The partnership started in 1973 when the Nature Conservancy was divided to form the successor bodies Nature Conservancy Council (NCC) and Institute of Terrestrial Ecology (ITE). NCC was in turn divided further to form JNCC and three Country Agencies, while ITE was merged with other NERC units to form CEH. Through all these changes, the partnership has been maintained. A six-year memorandum of agreement ended on 31 January 2005 (Hill et al. 2005). The present report covers the first full year, 2005-6, of the new agreement for 2005-2010. Rapid progress in information technology continues to be highly beneficial for BRC, whose data are increasingly used by the UK country conservation agencies, environmental consultants, NGOs, research workers, policy mak

We examined the biodiversity of urban habitats in Birmingham (England) using a combination of field surveys of plants and carabid beetles, genetic studies of four species of butterflies, modelling the anthropochorous nature of the floral communities and spatially explicit modelling of selected mammal species. The aim of the project was to: (i) understand the ecological characteristics of the biota of cities model, (ii) examine the effects of habitat fragment size and connectivity upon the ecological diversity and individual species distributions, (iii) predict biodiversity in cities, and (iv) analyse the extent to which the flora and fauna utilise the ‘urban greenways’ both as wildlife corridors and as habitats in their own right. The results suggest that cities provide habitats for rich and diverse range of plants and animals, which occur sometimes in unlikely recombinant communities. The studies on carabids and butterflies illustrated the relative importance of habitat quality on individual sites as opposed to site location within the conurbation. This suggests that dispersal for most of our urban species is not a limiting factor in population persistence, although elements of the woodland carabid fauna did appear to have some geographical structuring. Theoretical models suggested that dormice and water voles may depend on linear habitats for dispersal. The models also indicated that other groups, such as small and medium sized mammals, may use corridors, although field-based research did not provide any evidence to suggest that plants or invertebrates use urban greenways for dispersal. This finding indicates the importance of identifying a target species or group of species for urban greenways intended as dispersal routeways rather than as habitat in their own right. Their importance for most groups is rather that greenways provide a chain of different habitats permeating the urban environment. We suggest that planners can have a positive impact on urban biodiver

1. Ellenberg's indicator values scale the flora of a region along gradients reflecting light, temperature, continentality, moisture, soil pH, fertility and salinity. They can be used to monitor environmental change. 2. Ellenberg values can be extended from central Europe, for which they were defined, to nearby parts of Europe. Given a database of quadrat samples, they can be repredicted by a simple algorithm consisting of two-way weighted averaging, followed by local regression. 3. A database of British samples was assembled from two large surveys. Ellenberg values were repredicted. 4. Except for the indicator of continentality, the correlation of repredicted and original values was in the range 0·72 (light) to 0·91 (moisture). The continentality indicator could not be adequately repredicted by the algorithm, and is unusable in Britain. 5. Discrepancies between original and repredicted values can be attributed to various causes, including wrong original values, differing ecological requirements in Britain and central Europe, biased sampling of the British range of habitats, and the occurrence of small plants in shaded or basic microhabitats within well illuminated or predominantly acid quadrats. 6. The repredicted values were generally reliable, but a small proportion was clearly wrong. Wrong values were due to either inadequate sampling of species' realized niches in Britain or sampling with quadrats that were too large and included species that were not close associates.