Pilot project to assess the feasibility of revising the European bryophyte Red List

Transcription

1 Pilot project to assess the feasibility of revising the European bryophyte Red List Photo: N.G. Hodgetts 2012

2 2

3 Pilot project to assess the feasibility of revising the European bryophyte Red List N.G. Hodgetts

4 Contents Preface 5 Abstract 6 Introduction 7 Why is a new bryophyte Red List for Europe necessary? 7 Aims 8 The importance of bryophytes 8 Ecological 8 Water retention 9 Colonisation, soil stabilisation, and accumulation of humus 9 Peat formation 9 Relationships with other organisms 9 The economic and medicinal uses of bryophytes 9 Bryophytes as indicators 10 The cultural and aesthetic qualities of bryophytes 11 Bryophytes in science and education 11 What is a Red List? 12 Towards a new bryophyte Red List for Europe 13 The quality of bryophyte data in Europe and gaps in the information resource 13 Who will produce a new Red List? 16 Funding 16 Project outline for a new European bryophyte Red List 18 Project structure 18 Red Listing categories and criteria 18 Geographical coverage 18 Taxonomy 19 Which taxa should be evaluated? 19 Data collection and mapping 19 Output 19 Draft Work Programme 20 References 21 Appendix 1. European bryophyte checklists and Red Lists 22 Appendix 2. European bryological societies and journals 33 Appendix 3. Floras 35 Appendix 4. Recording and mapping projects 36 References 40 Appendix 5. ECCB Country Contacts 43 4

5 Preface The Board of the ECCB (European Committee for the Conservation of Bryophytes) met in Zurich 2011 and agreed that the Bryophyte Red List for Europe from 1995 badly needed to be updated and replaced. The first step towards this was therefore to make a small pilot project to assess the scope of the task. The report you are holding now is the result of this first step. This task has been possible thanks to financial support from the Irish National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA). Nick Hodgetts has been editor of this report, with the help of other ECCB members, especially all the ECCB country representatives who have contributed with current information about the situation regarding checklists, Red Lists and bryophyte conservation generally in each European country. This report will hopefully be the starting point of a full Red List project and this booklet can be used as a basis for raising funds. We also hope that it will fill conservation-minded bryologists with enthusiasm! Tomas Hallingbäck Interim Chair of ECCB (European Committee for Conservation of Bryophytes) 5

6 Abstract Red Lists are essential tools for species conservation. The first attempt at producing a Red List for bryophytes covering all of Europe was in The last 17 years have seen an enormous improvement in our knowledge of the bryophytes of Europe, and especially of their taxonomy and distribution. A good example is Spain where an Atlas of Endangered Bryophytes of Spain project already in on line ( ABrA_english/Home.html). There have been some conservation successes but threats to our bryophyte flora continue. For a Red List to be credible, it needs to be updated regularly according to the best scientific information available, and it is now clear that the bryophyte Red List is in urgent need of updating. Over the last year, under the auspices of the ECCB, a small pilot project has been taking place to assess the feasibility of a new bryophyte Red List for Europe. Key products from this project is this report outlining the need for a new list and describing ways in which it could be taken forward, a list of current European checklists and Red Lists, an assessment of current relevant bryological work across Europe, an updated list of ECCB country contacts, and a draft spreadsheet showing the distribution of European mosses by country (similar to the one done for liverworts and hornworts by Söderström et al. 2007). It is now proposed to examine the results of the pilot project and determine a way forward for a full conservation reassessment of the European bryophyte flora and a new Red List. Söderström, L., Urmi, E. & Vána, J The distribution of Hepaticae and Anthocerotae in Europe and Macaronesia Update Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28:

7 Introduction Why is a new bryophyte Red List for Europe necessary? Red Lists are needed to underpin conservation action with the best scientific data available. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) produces a global Red List to highlight the most threatened organisms on the planet, but Red Lists are also produced regionally and on a country basis. Bryophytes, although individually small, are collectively a key part of vegetation communities and biodiversity. Like other organisms, bryophytes are under increasing threat of decline and ultimately extinction from anthropogenic pressures, and nowhere more so than in Europe, one of the most developed and densely-inhabited parts of the globe. New information is needed at a European level to inform the conservation of bryophytes and their habitats, and a Red List is a key element of this. The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2003; pdf) lists as one of its objectives understanding and documenting plant diversity, with a sub-objective to monitor the status and trends in global plant diversity and its conservation, and threats to plant diversity, and identify plant species, plant communities, and associated habitats and ecosystems, at risk, including consideration of Red Lists. This proposal for a new European bryophyte Red List therefore clearly links in with the Strategy. The European Committee for the Conservation of Bryophytes (ECCB) was inaugurated in 1990 to address the conservation of bryophytes in Europe. It is composed of a network of bryologists Europe-wide, with members from universities, museums, conservation agencies and private individuals in partnership. It has no funding, but has a loose membership and is run principally by a Board that is re-elected at conferences, which are held every 4 years or so. The ECCB has been less active since about 2001, because of increasing demands on the time of members, and decreasing resources at institutions. The ECCB produced the first Red List of bryophytes in Europe in 1995 (ECCB 1995), using the old IUCN categories and criteria. Since then, while there have been many positive conservation actions for bryophytes, the overall picture, both in Europe and globally, is still one of habitat loss and decline. Habitats sensitive to disturbance such as old-growth forest, fens and bogs and species-rich grassland continue to become smaller in extent and more vulnerable to pressures from the ever-increasing human population. It is now accepted by most of the scientific community that climate change is taking place, with a general warming resulting in a reduction in snow and ice. This is particularly noticeable in mountain ranges such as the Alps, where the glaciers are clearly shrinking. This is bound to have a knock-on effect on arctic-alpine plant communities, including the bryophytes. In northern Europe and Asia, areas of tundra that were once frozen in permafrost are now thawing, again with profound consequences for the flora and fauna and perhaps even the climate of Europe. Perhaps most seriously, Europe, and the world generally, has fallen on hard times. Countries such as Greece, Portugal and Ireland have been forced to accept financial help from outside their borders, and all over Europe nature conservation is taking a back seat while governments struggle with their main economic priorities. Resources for activities such as nature 7

8 conservation are becoming scarcer, and increasingly conservation, particularly of less highprofile organisms such as bryophytes, is seen as a luxury that cannot be afforded. This is, of course, a mistake. Surely now, if ever, it is time to look for new economic models, to prioritise sustainability over growth, incorporating care for our environment and the species with which we share the planet into our schemes for economic prosperity. Our knowledge of the European bryophytes is much better now than it was in 1995, with the discovery of new species, and the publication of many new checklists and country Red Lists. Furthermore, the IUCN has refined its criteria and categories and the European Red List needs to be updated to take this into account. For any Red List to be useful, it needs to use the most up-to-date information available, and it is now clear that, while ground-breaking, the 1995 Red List was based on inadequate information and is becoming increasingly outdated. In Zürich in 2011, the ECCB Board agreed that a new European Red List for bryophytes is both desirable and necessary, and that the present pilot project would be a good first step. Aims The aims of this pilot project are to: collate existing information relevant to a new European bryophyte Red List, including existing country and regional Red Lists and Checklists. assess the feasibility of establishing a network of bryologists across Europe willing to contribute to the scheme. identify gaps in the information resource. identify candidate species for the Red List. establish the geographical coverage of the scheme. identify the resources required for a European bryophyte Red List programme. determine which taxonomy to use in a European Red List programme. establish methodologies and protocols for data collection and mapping distribution of species. Many of the requirements of the project were discussed and decided at a meeting of the ECCB in Zürich, April 30-May The importance of bryophytes (see Hallingbäck & Hodgetts 2000 for a fuller account) Ecological Bryophytes are an important component of the vegetation in many regions of the world. They play a vital role in, and constitute a major part of, both the biomass and the biodiversity in forest, wetland, mountain, and tundra ecosystems. In temperate forests, for example, bryophytes form extensive mixed communities and contribute significantly to community structure and ecosystem functioning. In Arctic regions, bryophytes are important in maintaining permafrost whilst bryophyte-rich peatlands are important carbon sinks in both Arctic and temperate zones. Bryophytes frequently dominate (or co-dominate with lichens) severely stressed environments, such as exposed mountain summits, upland stream communities, and toxic environments (e.g., soil rich in heavy metals), where most vascular plants are unable to compete successfully. 8

9 Water retention Bryophytes have a high water-retention capacity due to their structure, and tend to be most abundant in regions with high levels of atmospheric humidity and low rates of evaporation. They can quickly absorb water and release it slowly into the surrounding environment, and can, therefore, contribute to the retention of humid forest microclimates and the regulation of water flow. Perhaps more importantly, these properties allow forests to gradually release water into watercourses, preventing flash floods, erosion, and landslides downstream. The water retention properties of bogs are particularly impressive because of the absorptive properties of Sphagnum moss. A bog within a watershed, as can be found on some upland moorlands, is important far beyond its own geographical extent. If such a bog is unable to function, the disruption to the local hydrology can be catastrophic. Colonisation, soil stabilisation, and accumulation of humus Mosses are often the first plants to colonise newly exposed ground, bare rocks, and other abiotic surfaces. They are important in stabilising the soil crust, both in recently established and existing habitats, such as steep, sloping banks in woodland. They are also valuable in controlling erosion and water cycling. Peat formation Peat is the accumulated and compressed remains of plants (mainly bryophytes, particularly Sphagnum). The vast and deep peat bogs in temperate and sub-arctic zones are estimated to cover 1% of the world s surface (Clymo 1970). A deposit 1.5 metres thick may have taken about 6,000 years to accumulate. Today, many of these peatlands are subject to exploitation. Peatlands are recognised as carbon sinks and it is, therefore, important that they remain undisturbed. Human activities, including drainage, fertilisation, and peatland cultivation, can increase the amount of carbon dioxide released from peat, owing to increases in microbiological activity. These disturbed peatlands then become sources rather than sinks for carbon in the global ecosystem (Francez and Vasander 1995). Relationships with other organisms Bryophyte communities are critical to the survival of a tremendous diversity of organisms, including insects, millipedes, and earthworms. Numerous invertebrates are dependent on mosses and liverworts as habitat, or as a food source. Birds use moss as nesting material and amphibians use it for protection. The nutrient-rich, spore-producing capsules are particularly palatable to some invertebrates. Bryophytes are also a food source for birds and mammals in cold environments. The economic and medicinal uses of bryophytes Peat, composed principally of bryophytes, has been exploited commercially for many years both as a fuel source and as a soil additive. The use of peat for fuel has increased in many countries, and it is now cheaper to exploit home-grown peat than to import other expensive raw fuel material. Ireland is a prime example of this, where peatlands have been exploited on a large scale and peatland habitat has been dramatically reduced in area. Because of the water-retentive properties of Sphagnum moss (it holds up to 20 times its own weight in water), peat is also highly valued as a soil conditioner and a plant-growing medium, and it can also be used as an 9

10 absorbing agent for oil spills. Sphagnum moss has also been used as a filtering and absorption agent in waste water treatment. Because Sphagnum is soft in texture it is useful as a packing material when shipping products such as fresh vegetables and flowers. Other, more minor but relatively well-documented, uses of bryophytes include the use of Sphagnum in babies nappies (because of its absorptive properties), hair-moss (Polytrichum) in home-made besoms, moss as a stuffing in pillows, and moss as decoration, particularly in the ceremonial costumes of indigenous peoples. Mosses are also often used as a topdressing for flowerpots to prevent desiccation of the underlying soil. Potentially more important is the use of bryophytes in medicine. Chemical analysis has revealed that most bryophytes, including Sphagnum, have antibiotic properties (Banerjee 1974). Extracts of many species of mosses and liverworts contain phenolic compounds that inhibit growth of pathogenic fungi and bacteria. Dried Sphagnum is, therefore, an excellent surgical dressing because of its absorptive qualities (absorbing more liquid than cotton pads [Richardson 1981]), and its ability to prevent infection. Because of these properties, it was used extensively during World War I. Adamek (1976) found that peat had a retarding effect on the growth of human cancer tissue cultures. Many other bryophytes, notably the liverworts, contain biologically active substances and research in the United States on the anticancer properties of bryophytes has been rewarding. Bryophytes as indicators Bryophytes are extremely sensitive to pollutants. They can therefore be used as indicator species, as the presence of pollution-sensitive species can help indicate low levels of air pollution. Air pollution can also create moss deserts and force many sensitive species to retreat. Heavy metal pollution can be measured using bryophytes, especially in large cities and in areas surrounding power stations and metallurgical works, since heavy metals, such as lead, chromium, copper, cadmium, nickel and vanadium, accumulate in the cell walls. Bryophytes are also suitable as bio-indicators of water pollution, and for the monitoring of radioactive caesium. Other species may indicate specific ecological conditions, such as ph levels in soil and water. Bryophytes are also sensitive to natural fluctuations in humidity. Many species are, therefore, restricted to microhabitats with specific microclimates, such as deep ravines. Unlike flowering plants, bryophytes are capable of gaining and losing water very quickly without sustaining damage. This means that bryophytes dry out and go dormant very quickly, but very rapidly resume physiological activity when they absorb moisture, which they can do almost instantaneously. Some species are strongly associated with calcareous substrates (e.g., Tortella tortuosa), while others will grow only on acid ground (e.g., Racomitrium lanuginosum). Certain bryophytes have been found to be closely associated with particular mineral or metal deposits such as copper ore. They can therefore assist in geobotanical prospecting and are very useful ecological indicators for botanical survey work, capable of revealing subtle changes in substrate. Bryophytes that are sensitive to disturbance may also be used as indicators of ecological continuity. For example, some species are characteristic of ancient, semi-natural temperate forests, others of undisturbed bogs. 10

11 The cultural and aesthetic qualities of bryophytes Bryophytes have a deep, but generally unappreciated and unrecognised place in the cultural heritage of many people. They are an intrinsic part of the diversity and beauty of life. They are worthy of protection at a level equivalent to that afforded to other species, habitats, ancient monuments, and great works of art. In Japan, growing mosses is a traditional part of horticulture, and there is a long history of bryophytes being used in gardening and as ornamental material for cultivation in landscape trays; the miniature landscapes beneath bonsai trees are created with mosses. Mosses are also planted in moss-gardens, particularly at Buddhist temples, where they create an atmosphere of beauty, harmony, and serenity, reflecting the spirit of Buddhism. In urban environments, bryophytes are very often a component of the surrounding vegetation, and can be found on buildings, trees, and walls. Recently, architect-designed moss walls have become a fashionable adornment to corporate buildings. Bryophytes can even prevent the negative effects of weathering of ancient buildings. The beauty of bryophytes and their contribution to the landscape has been an inspiration to many artists and writers, as demonstrated by John Keats Ode to a Nightingale in 1820: verdurous glooms and winding mossy ways. Mossy forests are magical places in which to walk. This is not something that can be quantified, but is definitely a part of the love that people have for nature E.O. Wilson s biophilia and the ability of nature to contribute to the wellbeing of the human population. Bryophytes in science and education Bryophytes are important as model organisms in basic research since they are sound subjects for physiological and biochemical experiments. They have the advantage of being relatively simple plants, with a potentially rapid turnover of generations, and a dominant generation that is haploid; they are, therefore, particularly suited for genetic studies. The teaching of botany can be greatly enhanced by using bryophytes; it is relatively easy to examine the leaf cells as they are transparent and usually only one cell thick. They are also good subjects for the study of reproduction as the sex organs are often clearly visible and easy to dissect. Because examining their parts is relatively easy, they are ideal organisms for learning how to use a microscope. 11

12 What is a Red List? A Red List is essentially a tool to determine which species are most threatened. According to the IUCN, the goals of the IUCN Red List are to: Identify and document those species most in need of conservation attention if global extinction rates are to be reduced; and Provide a global index of the state of change of biodiversity. According to the National Red Lists website, The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is internationally recognised as the most authoritative inventory on the conservation status of species on a global scale and has been extraordinarily successful at drawing attention to biodiversity loss ( In 2003, the IUCN published guidelines to assess the conservation status of species at the regional and national level (IUCN, 2003). Again according to the National Red Lists website, the functions of regional Red Lists are: To determine the conservation status and trends of species To identify species or ecosystems under greatest threat To inform conservation planning and priority setting To raise awareness of threatened species All Red Lists, whether global or regional, require a large amount of specialist input. This takes place largely through the IUCN Species Survival Commission, which has instituted a large number of specialist groups, one of which is for bryophytes. The ECCB is a sub-group of the global Bryophyte Specialist Group with responsibility for promoting the conservation of bryophytes in Europe, largely through Red Lists. 12

13 Towards a new bryophyte Red List for Europe The quality of bryophyte data in Europe and gaps in the information resource By global standards, the quality of bryophyte data in Europe is good. Not only are there Europewide checklists for liverworts and hornworts (Söderström et al. 2007) and mosses (Hill et al. 2006), but also most countries and even many territories at a more local level, have a checklist. In addition, there is a liverworts checklist for the Mediterranean region (Ros et al. 2007), a moss checklist for eastern Europe and north Asia (Ignatov et al. 2006) and separate moss and liverwort checklists covering all of south-eastern Europe (Sabovljević & Natcheva 2006, Sabovljević et al. 2008). However, there are a few gaps, some of them significant. The following territories do not have a bryophyte checklist (although all except Cyprus are included in the area covered by Hill et al and Söderström et al. 2007): France (checklist for mainland France in preparation; Corsica and some parts of mainland France have their own checklists) Gibraltar Kosovo (treated as part of Serbia in Sabovljević & Natcheva 2006 and Sabovljević et al. 2008) Moldova (no list for liverworts & hornworts; mosses are included in Ignatov et al. 2006) Monaco San Marino Vatican Many, but not all, countries and territories also have a Red List, although not all of them follow the IUCN threat categories and criteria. Even when the IUCN system is followed, it may have been interpreted in widely different ways. Thus, for example, the Slovakian Red List contains a much higher proportion of the country s flora than does the Norwegian Red List. This is unlikely to be because the bryophyte flora of Slovakia is significantly more threatened than the Norwegian flora. In addition, there are many initiatives under way for bryophyte recording and monitoring, especially for atlas production and work targeted on species listed in international legislation. The ECCB has produced a Red List covering all of Europe (ECCB 1995) but this was based on very patchy data and is now badly outdated. The following territories do not have a bryophyte Red List: Albania Azores Baleares Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Canary Islands Channel Islands Croatia Cyprus Denmark Faeroe Islands 13

14 France Gibraltar Greece Iceland Kosovo (included in Serbia in Sabovljević et al. 2004) Liechtenstein Macedonia Madeira Malta Moldova Monaco Svalbard (included in Norway by the Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre) San Marino Slovenia Turkey Vatican The ECCB has a network of bryologists that is intended to be Europe-wide, and almost is, but there are inevitably some areas where there are no bryologists to act as a contact point. The following territories do not have an ECCB contact: Andorra Bosnia-Herzegovina Cyprus (although the Greek contact has sent information) Faroe Islands (but part of the Kingdom of Denmark) Gibraltar Kazakhstan (partly in Europe) Kosovo (if regarded as separate from Serbia) Liechtenstein Macedonia Malta Moldova Monaco Fortunately, these are mostly small territories that can more or less be adequately covered by contacts outwith their boundaries. Kazakhstan is large but mostly outwith Europe. In addition, there are some larger countries with a nominal but largely inactive ECCB contact. A simple questionnaire was sent to all the known ECCB contacts in June The questions were: Does your country/territory have a bryophyte checklist? If so, please could you provide a copy electronically, or at least a reference, if it is different from the one on my list (attached)? Does your country/territory have a bryophyte Red List? Again, I would much appreciate it if you could provide a copy or a reference, if it is different from the one on my list (attached). If you have a bryophyte Red List, what criteria and categories have been used? e.g. the latest IUCN criteria, or some other system? 14

15 Do you have a bryophyte recording scheme or mapping project? If so, please provide a few details. e.g. what scale of mapping is used? Is the scheme computerised? Is the information available? Is there any other bryological initiative taking place in your country/territory that is relevant in the context of a European bryophyte Red List? In some cases, the questionnaire had to be sent several times, and to different contact addresses, but eventually replies were received from most ECCB contacts, and most of these were very positive and useful. The ECCB contacts representing the following territories did not responded to the questionnaire: Croatia Germany Iceland Italy Netherlands San Marino (same contact as Italy) Turkey Ukraine Vatican (same contact as Italy) It is difficult to establish whether territories have active programmes of fieldwork, recording and mapping, as there are so many different approaches, some of them entirely on a voluntary basis. However, contacts in the following territories have confirmed that there is no active recording/ mapping project currently taking place in these territories: Albania Czech Republic Montenegro Russia It is clear, therefore, that there has been much work on bryophytes in Europe that has resulted in a large body of information, including checklists, Red Lists and other initiatives. However, that information is scattered and often difficult to access. The internet has made it much easier to access many publications. There are still some large gaps in the information resource, most notably the absence of a bryophyte checklist for mainland France (but steps are being taken to remedy this situation), the lack of a moss checklist for Cyprus, and the lack of a liverwort checklist for Moldova (apparently no liverwort has ever been recorded from Moldova!). Bryophyte Red Lists are absent from many territories, and drawn up to widely differing standards in others. However, many countries have at least a basic knowledge of which bryophytes are rare and threatened. Other projects are taking place in some parts of Europe. There has just been a conference in France to try to find a way forward for bryological activity there; the UK is actively working towards a new Atlas; Germany has an excellent website showing the distribution and status of species. New recording initiatives depend largely on there being a core of relatively young and enthusiastic bryologists. Thus, there has been a recent upsurge of fieldwork in Ireland and Latvia, for example. There is a single very enthusiastic bryologist in Albania, but he lacks local support. 15

16 16 Who will produce a new Red List? It is clear that any new European Red List for bryophytes will need a considerable input of time and resources. It will also have to be a collaborative project. However, the problem for such projects is finding people with enough time to do the job properly. The options for producing a new Red List are: 1. Several/many bryologists Europe-wide co-operating as part of their jobs. 2. Several/many bryologists Europe-wide co-operating on a voluntary basis. 3. A bryologist in an institution taking the lead. 4. A non-bryologist in (for example) IUCN taking the lead. 5. A bryologist employed on a contract taking the lead. The first three options do not appear to be realistic. All the members of the ECCB are busy, and have no time to devote to a new Red List project. The fourth option has many difficulties, including persuading bodies such as IUCN to provide funding for a post, and the lack of expertise. The fifth option seems therefore to be the most realistic one. In this model, the ECCB would set up a steering group, and a single contractor would be employed to take the Red List project forwards, in full collaboration with ECCB country contacts and the IUCN. The main problem with this option is finding even the relatively small amount of funding necessary to pay such a contractor. Funding Compared to the many capital-intensive conservation projects underway at present, it will be relatively inexpensive to finance a new bryophyte Red List for Europe. It is estimated that a three-year contract with a bryologist at a rate of 20,000 per annum will be enough to produce a new European bryophyte Red List. It will mainly be a desk exercise, although some travel will be necessary. Many conservation funds deal in much larger sums than those required for a new bryophyte Red List; paradoxically, these seem to be easier to obtain than smaller amounts of money. There is a considerable amount of work involved in bidding for conservation funding: bidding for large sums for big projects is indeed a full-time job in itself. For example, applying for European Union (EU) funding through the LIFE programme is a lengthy and complicated process. The LIFE III and LIFE+ programmes are designed to complement other EU funding programmes, each of which also has a time-consuming application procedure. Small sums such as those required for this project do not justify that amount of effort. Other large corporate sources of funding include the United Nations Environment Fund (UNEP), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the World Bank. More realistically, it may be possible to achieve the sums needed through a number of relatively small grants or contracts. Possible sources include individual governments, conservation agencies, botanic gardens, museums and universities, the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), National Geographic, Conservation Capital, ARK and Wild Wonders of Europe. Bryological societies are also a possible source of funding. This pilot project has itself been jointly funded with small contracts from the Irish National Parks and Wildlife Service and the Swedish ArtDatabanken. Planta Europa may be able to offer further advice on funding.

17 The IUCN Accessing European Funding document is a useful source of information ( cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iuc_001_08_lr.pdf). It concentrates on EU funding, but also lists sources such as the Darwin Initiative and the Nordic Development Fund, which, however, concentrate on funding for projects in developing countries. The most realistic approach may be a strategic one. For example, the recent project to produce a bryophyte Red Data Book for Ireland was the result of ten years of incremental annual funding for fieldwork on rare and threatened species that gradually built into a body of work that formed the basis for the book. This initiative would never have been accepted for funding had it been presented in the first instance as a ten year project culminating in a Red Data Book. Instead, funding was applied for annually, with every year having its own set of aims and objectives. Whatever the funding sources, someone still has to take the lead in applying for them, and the only people available to do this are the members of the ECCB Board. 17

18 Project outline for a new European bryophyte Red List Many of the following preliminary details were more or less agreed at the ECCB Board meeting in April-May Others have been drawn up in the course of the pilot project. Project structure It is proposed that the project is overseen by an ECCB steering group, with a single contractor undertaking the work, in co-operation with ECCB members. The contractor will also have a co-ordinating role. Preliminary work for this pilot project has shown that there is a great willingness among most ECCB contacts to assist in the production of a new Red List. The steering group will probably, but not necessarily, be the ECCB Board. Any contractor(s) will report to the this steering group. Any financial arrangements will probably be through individual institutions rather than the ECCB itself. Red Listing categories and criteria The most up-to-date IUCN criteria and categories will be used for the Red List: at the time of writing, version 3.1 (IUCN 2000). These will be used in conjunction with the latest Guidelines (at the time of writing, version 9.0, IUCN 2011) and the regional guidelines (IUCN 2003), and special bryophyte guidelines (see Hallingbäck et al. 1995, and notes by Hallingbäck used at a meeting on European liverworts in Uppsala, 2006). It is important to use the official IUCN criteria because any Red List needs the backing of the IUCN to be credible. The criteria, which were initially developed for use with large animals at a global scale, need to be interpreted in a way applicable to bryophytes. Difficulties such as deciding what constitutes a mature individual and how to define generation time for bryophytes have been discussed by Hallingbäck et al. (1995), and will be taken into account. The naturally very wide but scattered distribution patterns of bryophytes are quite different from the mainly narrow ranges of many other organisms, so extent of occurrence must be used with caution. The IUCN recommends measuring area of occupancy on grid squares which are sufficiently small and appropriate for the organisms in question. This will have to be determined, but the 50 x 50 km UTM square seems to be an appropriate mapping unit at a European square. In the case of rare and threatened species, a single dot on a map at this level will often equate to a tiny area of occupancy in real terms, perhaps only a few square centimetres, but this will have to be decided on a species-by species basis. The concepts of extreme fluctuation and fragmentation also have to be used with caution, as both are natural features of the populations of some bryophytes. The IUCN criteria were used most recently for the Irish bryophyte Red Data Book (Lockhart et al. in press), which sets out a details rationale and justification for their use and interpretation. Geographical coverage The geographical coverage of the Red List should be nearly the same as was used in the 1995 list (ECCB 1995). This included all of Europe west of the Ural Mountains, north of the Caucasus, and west of the Straits of Bosporus, including Iceland, Svalbard and Novaya Zemlya. Greenland, although technically still a part of Denmark, was not included. The Mediterranean 18

19 islands of the Balearics, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Malta and Crete, as well as smaller associated islands, were included. No Mediterranean territories in North Africa or Asia Minor were included. However, the Canary Islands, Madeira and the Azores, all politically part of Europe although very isolated in the Atlantic Ocean, were included. It should be emphasized that these islands (collectively Macaronesia ) have a distinct and unique bryophyte flora of global importance, so it is important that its conservation is addressed. Cyprus was not included, but it is proposed that it should be included in a new Red List, as it joined the EU in It is therefore included in this pilot project. Turkey is also included in the pilot project, but it is possible that only the European part of Turkey (i.e. west of the Bosporus) will be included in any new Red List project. This has still to be discussed. Taxonomy Unless there are further relevant publications imminent (none are known), the Red List will use Söderström et al. (in prep.) for liverworts and hornworts and Hill et al. (2006), plus corrections and additions, for mosses as its taxonomic and nomenclatural basis. Which taxa should be evaluated? All the taxa in the European flora should initially be evaluated for a full Red List project. The liverworts and hornworts were last evaluated in 2006, at a meeting in Uppsala, during which all Least Concern species were struck off and IUCN criteria provisionally applied to the remaining species. The liverworts will need to be re-evaluated, using a fuller dataset, for a new Red List, and the same exercise needs to be done for the mosses. Data collection and mapping As mapping is a necessary part of the project. it will be necessary to collate data on which maps can be based. This largely exists already in individual countries, but obtaining it and integrating it with other data might not be straightforward. A new database might be, but is not necessarily, needed, but it will be necessary to access at least basic information from all the relevant existing databases, and if necessary extract records and grid references for map-making purposes. Some technical expertise from outside, or some training of the contractor, will be necessary for map production. It is considered that map production will be relatively straightforward if a suitably simple computer programme is used. For example, both DMAP and the system developed by Lars Söderström for liverwort mapping are relatively simple and easy to adapt for our purposes. Output The output of the project will be a report that will include; A Red List of bryophytes in Europe that follows all the necessary IUCN recommendations for such a list. Accounts for each species in the Red List, with a brief description of the species and photograph if possible, information on ecology and distribution of the species (both European and global), and information on population trends and threats to the species, where known. A European distribution map for each species. A full list of references and sources. 19

20 Draft Work Programme The following is an annual itemisation of the work that needs to be done to achieve a new European bryophyte Red List. Year 1 Initial meeting of ECCB steering group. Workshop meeting to produce a candidate list of species by refining 2006 liverwort list and producing moss list in the same way (i.e. striking off all those species that are undoubtedly too frequent to be considered for the Red List). Begin to collate occurrence data for candidate species from ECCB contacts and literature sources. Establish European distribution of candidate species by territory, and status in each territory (done for liverworts (Söderström et al. 2007) and already mostly done for mosses as part of pilot project). Start to produce distribution maps for all candidate species (some training probably required). Liaise with IUCN to agree approach for allocation of threat criteria and categories. Year 2 Continue to collate occurrence data and to produce maps. Collate detailed information about biology, ecology and distribution of, and threats to, candidate species. Start to apply IUCN criteria to allocate threat status and write accounts for liverworts and hornworts. ECCB meeting. Year 3 Finalise distribution maps. Continue to allocate threat status to species and write accounts for mosses. ECCB meeting. 20

21 References Adamek, W Introductory report on oncostatic and theropeutic nature of the peat preparation in human neoplastic disease. Pp In: Proc. 5 th Intern. Peat Congress, Poznan, Poland, September 21-25, Vol.1. Peat and peatlands in the natural environment protection. Warsaw, Wydawnictwa Czasopism Technicznych Not. Banerjee, R.D Studies on antibiotic activity of bryophytes and pteridophytes. PhD Thesis. Kalyani, University of Kalyani. Clymo, R.S The growth of Sphagnum: methods of measurement. Journal of Ecology 58: ECCB (ed.) Red Data Book of European bryophytes. Trondheim, European Committee for the Conservation of Bryophytes. Francez, A. & Vasander, H Peat accumulation and peat decomposition after human disturbance in French and Finnish mires. Acta Oecologica 16: Hallingbäck, T. & Hodgetts N.G. (eds.) Mosses, liverworts and hornworts. Status survey and conservation Action Plan for bryophytes. Gland, IUCN. Hallingbäck, T., Hodgetts, N.G. & Urmi, E How to apply the new IUCN Red List categories to bryophytes. Species 24: Hill, M.O., Bell, N., Bruggeman-Nannenga, M.A., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Enroth, J., Flatberg, K.I., Frahm, J.-P., Gallego, M.T., Garilleti, R., Guerra, J., Hedenäs, L., Holyoak, D.T., Hyvönen, J., Ignatov, M.S., Lara, F., Mazimpaka, V., Muñoz, J. & Söderström, L An annotated checklist of the mosses of Europe and Macaronesia. Journal of Bryology 28: Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15: IUCN IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 3.1. Gland, IUCN. IUCN Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional Levels. Version 3.0. Gland, IUCN. IUCN Guidelines for using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 9.0 (September 2011). Gland, IUCN. Richardson, D.H.S The biology of mosses. Blackwell, London. Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): Sabovljević, M., Cvetić, T. & Stevanović, V Bryophyte Red List of Serbia and Montenegro. Biodiversity and Conservation 13: Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity Global Strategy for Plant Conservation. Quebec, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Söderström, L., Urmi, E. & Váňa, J The distribution of Hepaticae and Anthocerotae in Europe and Macaronesia Update Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28: Söderström, L., Hagborg, A., von Konrat, M. & Renner, M Early land plants today: liverwort checklist of checklists. Fieldiana 47: Söderström et al. (in prep.). Early Land Plants Today project: world checklist of liverworts.(no further details available at present due for publication 2012.) 21

22 Appendix 1. European bryophyte checklists and Red Lists These references cover Europe as a whole, European regions and individual European countries or territories. Only the most recent and relevant references are included; there are many older works that have been superseded. For a more complete list of references for liverworts, see Söderström et al Europe European Committee for Conservation of Bryophytes (ECCB) Red Data Book of European Bryophytes. Trondheim, ECCB. Hill, M.O., Bell, N., Bruggeman-Nannenga, M.A., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Enroth, J., Flatberg, K.I., Frahm, J.-P., Gallego, M.T., Garilleti, R., Guerra, J., Hedenäs, L., Holyoak, D.T., Hyvönen, J., Ignatov, M.S., Lara, F., Mazimpaka, V., Muñoz, J. & Söderström, L An annotated checklist of the mosses of Europe and Macaronesia. Journal of Bryology 28: Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15: Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): [ An update has been prepared, to appear soon within Mediterranean moss list (M. Sabovljević, pers. comm )]. Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Séneca, A. & Söderström, L Sphagnophyta of Europe and Macaronesia: a checklist with distribution data. Journal of Bryology 31: Söderström, L., Urmi, E. & Váňa, J The distribution of Hepaticae and Anthocerotae in Europe and Macaronesia Update Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28: Albania Colacino, C. & Sabovljević, M Bryophyte flora of Albania: a preliminary check-list. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 27 (4): (for additions see also refs in pers. comm. from Jani Marka, ) Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Andorra Sérgio, C., Brugués, M., Cros, R.M. Casas, C. & Garcia, C The 2006 Red List and an updated checklist of bryophytes of the Iberian Peninsula (Portugal, Spain and Andorra). Lindbergia 31: Austria Grims, F Rote Liste gefährdeter Laubmoose (Musci) Österreichs. 2. Fassung. In: Niklfeld, H. et al., Rote Listen gefährdeter Pflanzen Österreichs. Wien, Grüne Reihe des Bundesministeriums für Umwelt, Jugend und Familie, pp Köckinger, H., Schröck, C., Krisai, R. & Zechmeister, H.G Checklist of Austrian bryophytes. Webpage. (which claims that the list will be updated continuously ) 22

23 Saukel, J. & Köckinger, H Rote Liste gefährdeter Lebermoose (Hepaticae) und Hornmoose (Anthocerotae) Österreichs. 2. Fassung. In: Niklfeld, H. et al., Rote Listen gefährdeter Pflanzen Österreichs. Wien, Grüne Reihe des Bundesministeriums für Umwelt, Jugend und Familie, pp Belarus Rykovsky, G. & Maslovsky, O Bryophytes - In: Belarus Red Book (3 ed.). Minsk, pp. Rykovsky, G. & Maslovsky, O Flora of Belarus. Bryophyta. (in 2 volumes). Minsk. Vol , 435 pp., Vol. 2, 213 pp. Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15: Belgium De Zuttere, P. & Schumacker, R Bryophytes nouvelles, méconnues, rares, menacées ou disparues de Belgique. Minist. Region Wallone, Serv. Conserv. Nature, Trav., 160 pp. Sotiaux, A. & Vanderpoorten, A Check-list of the bryophytes of Belgium. Belgian Journal of Botany 134 (2): Bosnia-Herzegovina Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Bulgaria Ganeva, A. & Natcheva, R Check-list of the bryophytes of Bulgaria with data on their distribution. I. Hepaticae and Anthocerotae. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 24 (3): (see also English/index.htm for updates) Natcheva, R. & Ganeva, A Check-list of the bryophytes of Bulgaria. II. Musci. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 26 (2): (see also for updates) Natcheva, R., Ganeva, A. & Spiridonov, G Red List of the bryophytes in Bulgaria. Phytologia Balcanica 12(1): Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Croatia Sabovljevic, M The hepatic check list of Croatia. Archives of Biological Sciences, Belgrade 55(1-2): Sabovljević, M Checklist of mosses of Croatia. Archives of Biological Sciences, Belgrade 58 (1): Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Cyprus Frahm J.-P., Lüth M. & van Melick H Die Moose Zyperns. Archive For Bryology 46: 1-8. Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, 23

24 K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): Czech Republic Kučera, J. & Váňa, J Check- and Red List of bryophytes of the Czech Republic (2003). Preslia 75: Kučera, J. & Váňa, J Seznam a červený seznam mechorostů České republiky (2005) Příroda, Praha, 23: Váňa, J Bryophytes of the Czech Republic an annotated check-list of species (1). Novit. Bot. Univ. Carol., Praha 11: Váňa, J Bryophytes of the Czech Republic an annotated check-list of species (2). Novit. Bot. Univ. Carol., Praha 12: Denmark Damsholt, K., Holmen, K. & Warncke, E A list of the bryophytes of Denmark. Botanisk Tidsskift 65: Damsholt, K Illustrated flora of Nordic liverworts and hornworts. Lund, Nordic Bryological Society. Damsholt, K., Goldberg, I. & Øllgaard, H Danish and Latin names for Liverworts and Hornworts that occur in Denmark ( Mogensen, G.S. & Goldberg, I Danske og latinske navne for Tørvenmosser, Sortmosser of Bladmosser, der forekommer i Danmark. Version 4. [Danish and Latin names for Sphagna, Andreaeas and Mosses that occur in Denmark. Version 4] Botanisk Have & Museum. Københavns Universitet, Danmark. 30 sider. Webpage. www. botaniskmuseum.dk/bot/div/danmos4.pdf (accessed 9 June 2001) Estonia Ingerpuu, N Sammaltaimed, Bryophyta. In: Lillelecht V (ed.), Eesti punane raamat. Tartu, Eesti Teaduste Akad. Lood., pp (see also (accessed 10 June 2011) Ingerpuu, N., Kalda, A., Kannukene, L., Krall, H., Leis, M. & Vellak, K Esti Sammalde Nimestik. [List of Estonian Bryophytes]. (accessed 9 June 2011); bryology/ (accessed 9 June 2011) Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15: Anon Red Data Book of Estonia. Bryophytes. Webpage. (accessed 9 June 2011) Faeroe Islands Boesen, D.F., Lewinsky, J. & Rasmussen, L A check-list of the bryophytes of the Faroes. Lindbergia 3: Finland Koponen, T., Isoviita, P. & Lammes, T The bryophytes of Finland: an annotated checklist. Helsinki, Societas pro fauna et flora Fennica. Kotiranta, H., Uotila, P., Sulkava, S. & Peltonen, S.-L. (eds.) Red Data Book of East Fennoscandia. Helsinki, Ministr. Envir., 351 pp. 24 Rassi, P., Alanen, A., Kanerva, T., Mannerkoski, I. (eds.) The Red List of Finnish Species. Helsinki, Ministry of the Environment & Finnish Environment Institute, 432 pp. Syrjänen, K., Anttila, S., Ulvinen, T., Laaka-Lindberg, S., Huttunen, S., Laitinen, T., Ahonen, I., Fagerstén, R., He, X., Juslén, A., Korvenpää,T., Korvenpää, T., Parnela, A., Sallantaus, T., Vainio, O., Virtanen, R., Piippo, S., Rikkinen, J Bryophytes. In: Rassi, P., Hyvärinen, E., Juslén, A. & Mannerkoski, I. (eds.). The 2010 Red List of Finnish Species. Ympäristöministeriö & Suomen ympäristökeskus, Helsinki. p (See also Syrjänen, K. et al Bryophytes, In: Rassi, P., Hyvärinen, E., Juslén, A. & Mannerkoski I. (eds.) The 2010 Red List of Finnish Species, 685 p. Ministry of the Environment and Finnish Environment Institute. (See also

25 Anon Extinct, Threatened and Near Threatened liverworts. Helsinki, Finnish Environment Institute. Webpage. (accessed 9 June 2011) Anon Extinct, Threatened and Near Threatened mosses. Helsinki, Finnish Environment Institute. Webpage. (accessed 9 June 2011) [Checklist also on website of Markku Savela (accessed 29 August 2011): bryophyta/bryopsida/ However, this is clearly very incomplete or out-of-date (compare with the 2010 Red List).] Ulvinen, T. ja Syrjänen, K. 2011: Suomen sammalten levinneisyys eliömaakunnissa (Distribution of Finnish bryophytes in biogeographic provinces). France Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): Upper Normandy Werner, J., Bardat, J., Vanot, M. & Prey, T Check-list des bryophytes (Anthocerotae, Hepaticae, Musci) de Haute-Normandie (France). Cryptogamie, Bryologie 30 (4) : Picardie Hauguel, J.C. & Wattez, J.R., Inventaire des bryophytes de Picardie: présence, rareté et menace. Conservatoire Botanique National de Bailleul. Rapport d étude. 38 p. Franche-Comté Bailly, G., Caillet, M., Ferrez, Y. & Vadam, J.C., Liste rouge des Bryophytes de Franche-Comté, version 2. Les Nouvelles Archives de la Flore jurassienne, 7 : Lorraine Werner, J., Schneider, T., Schneider, C. & Mahévas, T Les bryophytes de la Lorraine extra-vosgienne. Liste critique annotée. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 26 (4): Mahévas, T., Werner, J., Schneider, C. & Schneider, T Liste rouge des bryophytes de Lorraine (Anthocérotes, Hépatiques, Mousses). Conservatoire et Jardin Botanique, 61p. & annexe. Corsica Sotiaux, A., Pioli, A., Royaud, A., Schumacker, R. & Vanderpoorten, A A checklist of the bryophytes of Corsica (France): new records and a review of the literature. Journal of Bryology 29: Germany Ludwig, G., Düll, R., Philippi, G., Ahrens, M., Caspari, S., Koperski, M., Lütt, S., Schulz, F. & Schwab, G, Rote Liste der Moose (Anthocerophyta et Bryophyta) Deutschlands. Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 28: [What is effectively a German bryophyte checklist, including conservation status of species, is available at www. moose-deutschland.de ] Greece (including Crete) Düll, R Moose Griechenlands. Bryologische Beiträge 10: (not accessed) Phitos, D., Constantinidis, T. & Kamari, G. (eds.) The Red Data Book of rare and threatened plants of Greece. Patras, Hellenic Botanical Society. [Contains a single species of bryophyte Buxbaumia viridis] Preston, C.D A check-list of Greek liverworts. Journal of Bryology 11: Preston, C.D A check-list of Greek mosses. Journal of Bryology 13: Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4):

26 Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Hungary Erzberger, P. & Papp, B Annotated checklist of Hungarian bryophytes. Studia bot. hung. 35: Papp, B., Erzberger, P., Ódor, P., Hock, Zs., Szövényi, P., Szurdoki, E. & Tóth, Z Updated checklist and Red List of Hungarian bryophytes. Studia bot. hung. 41: Rajczy, M Mohák-Bryophyta. In: Rakonczai, Z. (ed.), Vöros könyv. Budapest, Akademiai Kiadó, pp Iceland Ingadóttir, Á Válisti 1. Plöntur. Reykjavik, Náttúrufrædistofnun Íslands, 82 pp. (mosses only) Jóhannsson, B Checklist of bryophytes in Iceland. Bergþór in Fjölrit Náttúrufræðistofnunar 44. Webpage. (accessed 9 June 2011) Ireland (incl. Northern Ireland) Hill, M.O., Blackstock, T.H., Long, D.G. & Rothero, G.P A checklist and census catalogue of British and Irish bryophytes updated Middlewich, British Bryological Society. Lockhart, N., Hodgetts, N.G. & Holyoak, D.T. in press. Rare and threatened bryophytes of Ireland. Belfast, Ulster Museum. (includes Red List) Italy (including Sicily and Sardinia) Aleffi, M New check-list of the Hepaticae and Anthocerotae of Italy. Fl. Medit. 15: Aleffi, M. & Schumacker, R Check-list and red-list of the liverworts (Marchantiophyta) and hornworts (Anthocerotophyta) of Italy. Fl. Medit. 5: Cortini-Pedrotti, C Check-list of the mosses of Italy. Fl. Medit. 2: (see also it/global/mosses1#init (accessed 9 June 2011)) Cortini Pedrotti, C. & Aleffi, M Lista rossa della briofite d Italia. In: Conti, F., Manzi, A. & Pedrotti, F. (eds.), Libro rosso delle piante d Italia. Roma, WWW & Soc. Bot. Italiana, pp Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): Kosovo (disputed territory regarded as independent by some, or as part of Serbia by others) No list known (but included in Serbia by Sabovljević et al. 2008) Latvia Abolina, A.A Latvijas retas un aizsargajamas sunas. Riga, LU Ekologiska Centra Apgads VIDE, 24 pp. Abolina, A.A Latvijas sūnu saraksts [List of bryophytes of Latvia]. Latvijas veģetācija 3: [Also available at (accessed )] Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15: Also Latvian Red List available at (accessed ). Liechtenstein Senn, H.-P Die Moose des Fürstentums Liechtenstein. Berichte der Botanisch-Zoologischen Gesellschaft Liechtenstein-Sargans-Werdenberg 27: Lithuania Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15:

27 Jukonien, I Rare and threatened bryophyte species in Lithuania. Bot. Lithuanica 2: Jukoniene I., Checklist of Lithuanian mosses [Lietuvos lapsamanių sąvadas]. Botanica Lithuanica 8(4): Naujalis, J., Kalinauskaite, N. & Grineviciene, M Vadovas Lietuvos kerpsamanėms pazinti. Vilnius. Rašomavičius V.(ed.), Lietuvos raudonoji knyga Vilnius. Luxembourg Werner, J Liste rouge des bryophytes du Luxembourg. Mesures de conservation et perspectives. Ferrantia 35: Werner, J Check-list et liste rouge des bryophytes du Luxembourg. [Checklist and Red List of the bryophytes of Luxembourg]. Webpage. JW CHECK LIS ROU 2009.pdf (accessed 9 June 2011) Macedonia Cekova, M Pregled na brioflorata na republika Makedonija [Survey of bryophyte flora of R. Macedonia]. PMF, Institut za biol., 40 pp. Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Malta Frahm, J.-P. & Lüth, M The bryophyte flora of the Maltese Islands. Archive for Bryology 29: Moldova Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15: Monaco No list known. Montenegro Dragićević, S. & Veljić, M Pregled mahovina Crne Gore [Survey of Bryophyta of Montenegro]. Prirodnjački Muzej Crne Gore [Natural History Museum of Montenegro], Podgorica, 99 pp. Erzberger, P., Papp, B. & Dragićević, S Notes on some newly recorded bryophytes from Montenegro. Journal of Bryology 30: Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4): Sabovljević, M Checklist of hepatics of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Lindbergia 25: (Data separated for Serbia and Montenegro) Sabovljević, M., Cvetić, T. & Stevanović, V Bryophyte Red List of Serbia and Montenegro. Biodiversity and Conservation 13: Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2):

28 Sabovljević, M. & Stevanovic, V Moss conspectus of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Fl. Medit. 9: (Data separated for Serbia and Montenegro) Netherlands Siebel, H.N., During, H.J. & van Melick, H.M.H Veranderingen in de Standaardlijst van de Netherlandse blad-, lever- en hauwmossen [Checklist of Dutch bryophytes and liverworts]/ Buxbaumiella 73: Siebel, H.N., Bijlsma, R.J. & Bal, D Toelichting op de Rode Lijst Mossen. Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and food quality, report DK2006/034. (see also (accessed 9 June 2011)) Norway Mainland Direktoratet for naturforvalning (DN) Nasjonal rødliste for truete arter 1998 [Norwegian Red List 1998]. DNrapport : See also (accessed 9 June 2011) Hassel, K., Blom, H.H., Flatberg, K.I., Halvorsen, R. & Johnsen, J.I Moser. Anthocerophyta, Marchantiophyta, Bryophyta. In: Kålås, J.A., Viken, Å., Henriksen, S. and Skjelseth, S. (eds.) The 2010 Norwegian Red List for Species. Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre. (See also and biodiversity.no/article.aspx?m=207&amid=8737) Up-to-date checklist available at the home pages of The Norwegian Biodiversity Information Center artsdatabanken.no/artsnavn/contentpages/sok.aspx. Also Checklist of Norwegian bryophytes at (accessed 24 September 2011). Svalbard Frisvoll, A.A. & Blom, H.H Trua moser i Noreg med Svalbard. Førebelse ark. NTNU, Vit.- mus., Bot. Notat : Frisvoll, A.A. Elvebakk, A Part 2. Bryophytes. In: Elvebakk, A & Prestrud, P. (eds.) A catalogue of Svalbard plants, fungi, algae and cyanobacteria, pp Oslo, Norwegian Polar Institute. Poland Klama, H Red list of the liverworts and hornworts in Poland, Czerwona lista watrobowców i glewików w Polsce. In: Mirek, Z., Zarzycki, K. Wojewoda, & W. Szelag, Z. Red list of plants and fungi in Poland, Czerwona lista roslin i grzybów Polski. Kraków, Polish Academy of Sciences, W. Szafer Institute of Botany. Ochyra, R Czerwona lista mchów zagroonych Polsce (Red list of threatened mosses in Poland). Kraków, Polish Academy of Sciences, pp Ochyra, R., Zarnowiec, J. & Bednarek-Ochyra, H Census Catalogue of Polish mosses. Kraków, Polish Academy of Sciences, W. Szafer Institute of Botany. Szweykowski, J Czerwona lista watrobowców zagroonych w Polske [List of threatened liverworts in Poland]. In: Zarzycki K., Wojewoda W., Heinrich Z. (eds.), List of threatened plants in Poland (2 nd ed.). Kraków, W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, pp Szweykowski, J An annotated checklist of Polish liverworts and hornworts. Kraków, Polish Academy of Sciences, W. Szafer Institute of Botany. Zarnowiec, J., Stebel, A. & Ochyra, R Threatened moss species in the Polish Carpathians in the light of a new Red List of mosses in Poland. In: Stebel, A. & Ochyra, R. (eds.), Bryological studies in the Western Carpathians. Poznań, Sorus. Portugal Mainland Sérgio, C., Casas, C., Brugués, M. & Cros, R.M Lista Vermelha dos Briófitos da Península Ibérica [Red List of Bryophytes of the Iberian Peninsula]. Lisboa, ICN, 45 pp. Sérgio, C. & Carvalho, S Annotated catalogue of Portuguese bryophytes. Portugaliae Acta Biologica 21: (Sérgio, pers. comm ) Sérgio, C., Brugués, M., Cros, R.M. Casas, C. & Garcia, C The 2006 Red List and an updated checklist of bryophytes of the Iberian Peninsula (Portugal, Spain and Andorra). Lindbergia 31:

29 Azores Gabriel, R., Sjögren, E., Schumacker, R., Sérgio, C., Frahm, J.-P. & Sousal, E Lista dos Briófitos (Bryophyta) [List of Bryophytes (Bryophyta)]. In: Lista de espécies terrestres dos Açores [List of terrestrial species from the Azores]. Gabriel, R., Sjögren, E., Schumacker, R., Sérgio, C., Aranda, S.C., Claro, D., Homem, N. & Martins, B List of bryophytes (Anthocerotophyta, Marchantiophyta, Bryophyta). In: PAV. Borges, A. Costa, R. Cunha, R.Gabriel, V. Gonçalves, A.F. Martins, I. Melo, M. Parente, P. Raposeiro, P. Rodrigues, R.S. Santos, L. Silva, P. Vieira & V. Vieira (eds.) A list of the terrestrial and marine fungi, flora and fauna from the Azores. pp , Princípia, Cascais. (Gabriel, pers. comm ) Gabriel, R., Homem, N., Couto, A., Aranda, S.C. & Borges, P.A.V. (submitted). Azorean Bryophytes: a preliminary review of rarity patterns. Açoreana (Gabriel, pers. comm ) Madeira Sérgio, C., Schumacker, R., Fontinha, S. & Sim-Sim, M, Evaluation of the status of the bryophyte flora of Madeira with reference to endemic and threatened European species. Biological Conservation 59: Sérgio, C., Sim-Sim, M. & Carvalho, M Annotated catalogue of Madeiran bryophytes. Bol. Mus. Munic. Funchal 10: Sérgio, C., Sim-Sim, M., Fontinha, S. & Figueira, R Lista dos briófitos (Bryophyta) (List of bryophytes (Bryophyta)). In: Borges, P.A.V. et al. Listagem dos fungos, flora e fauna terrestres dos arquipélagos da Madeira e Selvagens (A list of the terrestrial fungi, flora and fauna of Madeira and Selvagens archipelagos). Funchal, Direcção Regional do Ambiente do Governo Regional da Madeira. (Sérgio, pers. comm ) Sim-Sim, M., Luis, L., Garcia, C., Fontinha, S., Lobo, C., Martins, S. & Stech, M New data on the status of threatened bryophytes of Madeira Island. Journal of Bryology 30: Romania Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Ştefǎnuţ, S The hornwort and liverwort atlas of Romania. Bucharest, Edit. Ars Docendi, 510 pp. (see also (accessed 9 June 2011)) Ştefǎnuţ S. & Goia I. (in press) Checklist and Red List of Bryophytes of Romania. Biodiversity & Conservation. (Ştefǎnuţ, pers. comm ) Russia Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15: Konstantinova, N.A. & Bakalin, V.A Checklist of liverworts (Marchantiophyta) of Russia. Arctoa 18: Bardonov, L.V. & Ignatov, M.C Bryophytes. In: Red Data Book of the Russian Federation. (see also: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/red_data_book_of_the_russian_federation) Bashkortostan Baisheva, E.Z Bryophyta. In: Red Data Book of the Bashkortostan Republic. Vol. 2. Brtophytes, algae, lichens and fungi. Ufa, Tabigat: Dagestan Radzhi, A.D Bryophytes. In: Red book of Dagestan. Rare and endangered species of animal and plants. Makhachkala, Dagestanskoe Knizhnoe Izd.: Kabardino-Balkar Shkhagapsoev, S.H Bryophytes. In: Red book of Kabardino-Balkar Republic. Nalchik, Ael -Fa]: 298. Karelia Maksimov, A.I., Potemkin, A.D. & Maksimova, T.A Bryophytes. In: Ivanter, E.V. & Kuznetsov, O.L. (eds.). Red Data Book of the Republic of Karelia. Ministerstvo sel skogo, rybnogo khozyaijstva i ekologii Respublici Karelia, Karel skiij nauchnyij tsentr Rossiijskoij akademii hauk, Petrozavodskiij gosudarstvennyij universitet. Petrozavodsk, Karelia :

30 Komi Taskaeva, A.I Krasnaja kniga Respubliki Komi. Moskva, Syktyvkar: Izdatelstvo DIK. Krasnodar Konstantinova, N.A., Akatova, T.V., Ignatova, E.A. & Ignatov, M.S Bryophyta. In: Red Data Book of the Krasnodar Province. (Plants and fungi). 2d ed. Krasnodar, Dizain byuro No. 1: Kursk Province Popova, N.N Bryophyta. In: Red Data Book of Kursk Province. Vol. 2. Rare and endangeded plants and fungi. Tula, Centralno-Czernozemnyj Gos. Prir. Biospher. Zapovednik & al.: Lipetsk Popova, N.N & Abramova, L.I Bryophytes. In: Novikov, V.S. (ed.). Red Data Book of Lipetsk Province. Vol. 1. Plants, Fungi, Lichens. Moscow, KMK: Moscow (City) Ignatov, M.S Bryophyta. In: Red Data Book of Moscow City. Moscow Government: Moscow(Region) Ignatov, M.S Bryophytes. In: Zubakin, V.A. & Tikhomirov, V.N. (eds.). Red Data Book of Moscow Province. Moscow, Argus & Russki Univ. Ignatov, M.S Bryophytes. In: Varlygina, T.I., Zubakin, V.A. & Sobolev, N.A. (eds.). Red Data Book of Moscow Province. 2d edition. Moscow. Murmansk Konstantinova, N.A., Belkina, O.A. & Likhachev, A.Y Bryophytes - In: Konstantinova, N.A., Koryakin, A.S. & Makarova, O.A. (eds.). Red Data book of the Murmansk Province. Murmansk, Murmanskoe Knizhnoe Izdatelstvo. Nenetsky Afonina, O.M. & Konstantinova, N.A. (no date) Bryophytes. In: Matveeva, N.V. (ed.) Red Data Book of Nenetsky Autonomous District. Official edition. Naryan-Mar: Ryazan Volosnova, L.P. et al Bryophyta. In: Red book of Ryazan Province. Ryazan, Uzoroch e: St. Petersburg Andreeva, E.N., Afonina, O.M., Kuzmina, E.O. & Kurbaova, L.E Bryophyta. In: Red Data Book of St.- Petersburg. St.-Petersburg: Tzvelev, N.N Red Data Book of nature of the Leningrad region. Vol. 2 - Plants and Fungi. St. Petersburg, 671 pp. St. Petersburg, Karelia & Murmansk Kotiranta, H., Uotila, P., Sulkava, S. & Peltonen, S.-L. (eds.) Red Data Book of East Fennoscandia. Helsinki, Ministr. Envir., 351 pp. Tver Zykov, I.V., Notov, A.A. & Spirina, U.N Bryophyta. Divisio Bryophytes. In: Red Data Book of the Tver Province. Tver, Veche Tveri & ANTEK: San Marino No list known. 30 Serbia Sabovljević, M Checklist of hepatics of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Lindbergia 25: (Data separated for Serbia and Montenegro) Sabovljević, M. & Stevanovic, V Moss conspectus of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Fl. Medit. 9: (Data separated for Serbia and Montenegro) Sabovljević, M., Cvetić, T. & Stevanović, V Bryophyte Red List of Serbia and Montenegro. Biodiversity and Conservation 13: Ros, R.M., Mazimpaka, V., Abou-Salama, U., Aleffi, M., Blockeel, T.L., Brugués, M., Cano, M.J., Cros, R.M., Dia, M.G., Dirkse, G.M., El Saadawi, W., Erdağ, A., Ganeva, A., González-Mancebo, J.M., Herrnstadt, I., Khalil, K., Kürschner, H., Lanfranco, E., Losada-Lima, A., Refai. M.S., Rodríguez-Nuñez, S., Sabovljević, M., Sérgio, C., Shabbara, H., Sim-Sim, M. & Söderström, L Hepatics and Anthocerotes of the Mediterranean, an annotated checklist, Cryptogamie, Bryologie 28 (4):

31 Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Slovakia Kubinská, A., Janovicová, K. & Peciar, V The checklist of bryophytes in Slovakia. Biológia, Bratislava 48: Kubinská, A., Janovicová, K. & Peciar, V The list of extinct, missing and threatened bryophytes (Bryophyta) of Slovakia (1st version). Biológia, Bratislava 51: Kubinská, A. & Janovicová, K Bryophytes, pp In: Marhold, K. & Hindák, F. (eds). Checklist of non-vascular and vascular plants of Slovakia. Veda, Bratislava (see also php?lang=en). Kubinská, A., Janovicová, K. & Soltes, R. 2001: Red list of bryophytes of Slovakia (December 2001). In: Baláz, D., et al. (eds)., Cerveny zoznam rastlín a zivocichov Slovenska. Ochr. Prír. 20 (Suppl.): Kubinská, A., Janovicová, K. & Soltes, R Updated checklist of liverworts, hornworts and mosses of Slovakia. Bryonora, Praha 28: Slovenia Martinčič, A Rdeci seznam ogroženih listnatih mahov (Musci) v Sloveniji. Varstvo Narave 18: (mosses only) Martinčič, A Seznam listnatih mahov (Bryopsida) Slovenije [Survey of mosses of Slovenia]. Hacquetia 2 (1): Spain Mainland Sérgio, C., Casas, C., Brugués, M. & Cros, R.M Lista Vermelha dos Briófitos da Península Ibérica [Red List of Bryophytes of the Iberian Peninsula]. Lisboa, ICN, 45 pp. Sérgio, C., Brugués, M., Cros, R.M. Casas, C. & Garcia, C The 2006 Red List and an updated checklist of bryophytes of the Iberian Peninsula (Portugal, Spain and Andorra). Lindbergia 31: (see also pagines.uab.cat/briologia/en/content/bryophyte-lists) Baleares Cros, R.M., Saez, L. & Brugués, M The bryophytes of the Balearic Islands: an annotated checklist. Journal of Bryology 30: (see also Canary Isles Dirkse, G.M., Bouman, A.C. & Losada-Lima, A Bryophytes of the Canary Islands, an annotated checklist. Cryptogamie Bryologie Lichenologie 14 (1): Dirkse, G.M. & Losada-Lima, A Additions and amendments to the moss flora of the Canary Islands. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 32 (1): González-Mancebo, J.M., Romaguera, F., Ros, R.M., Patiño, J. & Werner, O Bryophyte flora of the Canary Islands: an updated compilation of the species list with an analysis of island distribution patterns in the context of the Macaronesian Region. Cryptogamie, Bryologie 29 (4): Sweden Gärdenfors, U. (ed.) Rödlistade arter i Sverige 2005 [The 2010 Red List of Swedish species]. Uppsala, ArtDatabanken, 590 pp. (See also Hallingbäck, T., Hedenäs, L. & Weibull, H Ny checklista för Sveriges mossor [Checklist of bryophytes recorded from Sweden]. Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift 100 (2): Switzerland Schnyder, N., Bergamini, A., Hofman, H., Müller, N., Schubiger-Bossard, C. & Urmi, E Rote Liste der gefährdeten Moose der Schweiz. Bern, Hrsg. BUWAL, FUB & NISM. BUWAL-reihe: Vollzug umwelt, 99 pp. Anon National inventory of Swiss bryophytes. Zürich, Institut für Systematische Botanik. Webpage. www. nism.uzh.ch/index.php?content=einleitung&lang=en (accessed 9 June 2011) 31

32 Turkey Kürschner, H. & Erdağ, A Bryophytes of Turkey: an annotated reference list of the species with synonyms from the recent literature and an annotated list of Turkish bryological literature. Turk. J. Bot. 29: Sabovljević, M. & Natcheva, R Check list of the liverworts and hornworts of South-Eastern Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 12 (2): Sabovljević, M., Natcheva, R., Dihoru, G., Tsakiri, E., Dragićević, S., Erdağ, A. & Papp, B Check-list of the mosses of SE Europe. Phytologia Balcanica 14 (2): Uyar, G. & Çetin, B A new check-list of the mosses of Turkey. Journal of Bryology 26: Ukraine Ignatov, M.S., Afonina, O.M., Ignatova, E.A. et al Check-list of mosses of East Europe and North Asia. Arctoa 15: Sheljag-Sosonka, J.R. (ed) Kniga Ukraïni. Roslinnij svit. Kiev, Vidavnictvo Ukrains ka Enciklopedija imeni M.P. Bazana. Váňa, J. & Virchenko, V.M A list of Anthocerotes and Hepatics of Ukraine. Ukrajins kyj Botaničnyj Žurnal 50: United Kingdom Hill, M.O., Blackstock, T.H., Long, D.G. & Rothero, G.P A checklist and census catalogue of British and Irish bryophytes updated Middlewich, British Bryological Society. Great Britain (incl. England, Scotland, Wales & Isle of Man) Church, J.M., Hodgetts, N.G., Preston, C.D. & Stewart, N.F British Red Data Books. Mosses and liverworts. Peterborough, JNCC, 168 pp. Hodgetts, N.G A revised Red List of bryophytes in Britain. Field Bryology 103: Northern Ireland See Ireland. Channel Islands Hill, M.O., Blackstock, T.H., Long, D.G. & Rothero, G.P A checklist and census catalogue of British and Irish bryophytes updated Middlewich, British Bryological Society. Gibraltar No list known. Vatican No list known. 32

33 Appendix 2. European bryological societies and journals Societies British Bryological Society Area covered: Britain and Ireland Website: Journals/Newsletters: Journal of Bryology; Field Bryology Bryological Association of South-Eastern Europe Area covered: SE Europe, principally the Balkans Website: - (only old address found) Contact: Dr. Marko Sabovljevic, Ass t. Prof. Insitute of Botany and Garden, Faculty of Biology, University of Belgrade, Takovska 43, Belgrade, Serbia (marko@bio.bg.ac.rs,) Journals/Newsletters: - Bryologisch-lichenologische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Mitteleuropa (BLAM) (The Bryological and Lichenological Working Group of Central Europe) Area covered: Central Europe Website: Journals/Newsletters: Herzogia Czech Botanical Society Bryological/Lichenological Section Area covered: Czech Republic Website: Journals/Newsletters: Bryonora Dutch Bryological and Lichenological Society (BLWG) Area covered: Netherlands Website: Journals/Newsletters: Lindbergia (with Nordic Bryological Society); Buxbaumiella Finnish Bryological Society Area covered: Finland Website: Journals/newsletters: Bryobrothera; Bryobrotherella Mossornas Vänner Area covered: Sweden Website: Journals/Newsletters: Myrinia Nordic Bryological Society Area covered: Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, & Sweden Website: Journals/Newsletters: Lindbergia (with Dutch Bryological and Lichenological Society) Spanish Bryological Society (Sociedad Española de Briología) Area covered: Spain Website: Journals/Newsletters: Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Briología Swiss Association of Bryology and Lichenology Area covered: Switzerland Website: Journals/Newsletters: Meylania 33

34 Other Journals or newsletters Arctoa Area covered: principally Russia Website: Cryptogamie, Bryologie Area covered: international, but based in France Website: Muscillanea Area covered: Belgium Website: - Contact: Herman Stieperaere, Nationale Plantentuin van Belgie, Domein de Bouchout, B-1860 Meise, Belgium. Nowellia Bryologica Area covered: Belgium Website: 34

35 Appendix 3. Floras There are many bryophyte Floras covering various geographical areas in Europe. The more relevant and modern ones, or the latest known for a territory, are presented here. Only major Floras are listed, not Floras of small subdivisions of countries, and not publications dealing only with a small taxonomic group of plants. Atherton, I., Bosanquet, S. & Lawley, M. (eds.) Mosses and liverworts of Britain and Ireland. A field guide. Plymouth, British Bryological Society. Cortini Pedrotti, C Flora dei Muscha d Italia, Parte 1: Sphagnopsida, Andreaeopsida, Bryopsida. Casalini Libri. Cortini Pedrotti, C Flora dei Muscha d Italia, Parte 2: Bryopsida. Antonio Delfino. Frey, W., Frahm, J.-P., Fischer, E. & Lobin, W The liverworts, mosses and ferns of Europe. English edition revised and edited by T.L. Blockeel. Colchester, Harley Books. Grims, F Die Laubmoose Osterreichs. Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Guerra, J. (ed.) Flora Briofitica Ibérica. Sociedad Espanola de Briologia. Hallingbäck, T., Lonnell, N. & Weibull, H Encyclopedia of the Swedish Flora and Fauna: Bladmossor: Sköldmossor-Blåmossor. Bryophyta: Buxbaumia-Leucobryum. Uppsala, ArtDatabanken (Swedish Threatened Species Unit). Hallingbäck, T., Lonnell, N. & Weibull, H Encyclopedia of the Swedish Flora and Fauna: Bladmossor: Kompaktmossor-Kapmossor. Bryophyta: Anoectangium-Orthodontium. Uppsala, ArtDatabanken (Swedish Threatened Species Unit). Hedenäs, L Flora of Madeiran pleurocarpous mosses (Isobryales, Hypnobryales, Hookeriales). Gebrüder Borntraeger Verlag. Ignatov, M.S. & Ignatova, E.A Moss Flora of the middle part of European Russia, Vol. 2: Fontinalaceae- Amblystegiaceae. KMK Scientific Press. Johannsson, B Icelandic bryophytes (various). Icelandic Museum of Natural History. Jukoniene, I Mosses of Lithuania. Institute of Botany. Lewinsky, J The vegetation and bryophyte flora of the Faroe Islands (Denmark): excursion guide..? Nyholm, E Illustrated Flora of Nordic mosses. Fasc. 3. Oikos editorial office. Paton, J.A The liverwort flora of the British Isles. Colchester, Harley Books. Smith, A.J.E The moss flora of Britain and Ireland. Second edition (2006 reprint). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Smith, A.J.E The liverworts of Britain and Ireland. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 35

36 Appendix 4. Recording and mapping projects The following text is copied from, or based largely on, personal communications from ECCB country contacts. It includes general comments on the state of bryology in the territory concerned, and answers to the questionnaire sent out in June Austria Formerly a website mapping bryophytes in Austria run by the University of Salzburg ( but this seems to have been discontinued. It is not known what has become of the mapping scheme. As regards bryophyte mapping in Austria: this is a longer and also a bit sad story. Years ago, after the Vienna meeting organized by Zechmeister, I made a first attempt and got a (small) funding by the Ministery of Agriculture and Environment; so we initiated a database (with maps) at the botanical institute, university of Salzburg ( After the end of funding I tried to continue on a volunteer basis, but three years ago the university stopped the support (the botanical institute was united with the zoology, and they were not interested...). So we transfered the database to the Haus der Natur (Museum of Natural History) in Salzburg, but so far I did not open it to the public, because it has to be updated before, especially the nomenclature, but also the data itself, and this I could not manage so far, this will take some time.. In the Austrian constitution is written, that nature conservancy belongs to the 9 provinces (Bundesländer), and so we have 9 different laws for nature conservancy; and the governement says that bryophyte mapping is a matter of nature conservancy. So some of us tried to interest the province governements for funding - with some success! In Carinthia bryophytes got mapped by Köckinger and Suanjak, The «Atlas» is published (Die Moose Kärntens, November 2008). To get a copy, please contact the Landesmuseum in Klagenfurt (nwv@landesmuseum-ktn.at). In the westernmost province Vorarlberg a mapping of bryophytes is on the way, done by Harald Zechmeister et al. (should be finished this year) and also in the largest province - Lower Austria - also done by Zechmeister et al. To know what is going on there, please contact Harald Zechmeister (Harald.Zechmeister@univie.ac.at). Upper Austria is almost completely mapped by private initiatives (without funding), done by Gerhard Schlüsslmayr, Franz Grims, Erich Wilhelm Ricek, Christian Schröck and myself. Remains Styria, where Heribert Köckinger already has done a lot, Salzburg (province, not town), where Peter Pilsl, Christian Schröck and I have done a lot, and Tyrol. In this provinces governements do not plan any mapping activity so far as I know. If You want to get data for any species I can preovide You a (incomplete) map; please contact me. As far as I know there is no initiative for a Red List on the way; but better You contact Harald Zechmeister, he perhaps is better informed than I am in the moment. (Robert Krisai, ) Azores We have been using the software ATLANTIS TIERRA 2.0 to map all terrestrial biodiversity records, including bryophytes. Moreover, there is a visible interface of this work within the Azorean Biodiversity Portal ( azoresbioportal.angra.uac.pt/index.php?lang=en); Species occurrence are mapped for the islands where they occur. I enclose a recently published paper regarding the Portal: Borges, P.A.V., Gabriel, R., Arroz, A., Costa, A., Cunha, R., Silva, L., Mendonça, E. Martins, A.F., Reis, F. & Cardoso, P. (2010). The Azorean Biodiversity Portal: an internet database for regional biodiversity outreach. Systematics and Biodiversity, 8: Besides the regular update of our database (bibliographic records, field work and herbaria analysis), there is a PhD student, Silvia Calvo Aranda, working in distribution patterns of bryophytes and a MSc grant student, Nídia Homem, working in the delimitation of micro-reserves for bryophytes. (Gabriel ) Belarus We have 2 mapping projects. Points and by squares according Florae Europea (UTM). Also I have mapping project about bryophytes of Eastern Europe. All information is available (HOW?). Across different projects, there are 2 most important: Belarus State Plant Cadastre with passports of all populations of threatened bryophytes and new project of investigate of threatened in Europe Bryophytes on the territory of Belarus (UNESCO). Head of the projects - O. Maslovsky (Maslovsky ) Belgium After so many trials we have now a bryophyte recording scheme for Flanders and the Brussels Capital region. The 36

37 database is at INBO; the initiative is a collaboration between the INBO, the National Botanical Garden and the Vlaamse Bryologische en Lichenologische Vereniging; however data are also provided by other bryologists (from Wallonia, the Netherlands, etc ). I know that André Sotiaux and Alain Vanderpoorten have collated much information on the distribution of bryophytes in Wallonia, but have no details at this moment. 1 km mapping (in Flanders). Computerised (in Flanders). Information is available - contact Wouter.Vanlanduyt@inbo.be - see flora.inbo.be//pages/common/default.aspx No other bryological initiative taking place at present apart from a group of active amateur bryologists of the Werkgroep; Alain Vanderpoorten and André Sotiaux (Raeymaekers, ). Belarus and Russian literature for western Europe bryologists is a problem. Now we works and we plane that new our botanical site will began to work. All maps and big publish works will be present (September of this year) (Maslovsky, pers. comm., ). Bulgaria The current Red List uses the most recent IUCN criteria. At the moment I am doing mapping of bryophyte records of Bulgaria entering them in geodatabases (separate for literature and herbarium records) using ArcGIS. The information is not published yet (hopefully at some point it will be available on-line). I am ready to provide geographic data on the species of the European Red List. There is the Natura2000 mapping of species and habitats in Bulgaria that starts in July Five bryophytes are included - Hamatocaulis vernicosus, Mannia triandra, Dicranum viride, Meesia longiseta, Buxbaumia viridis. Bryophytes are also included in the National System for Monitoring of Biological Diversity - Hamatocaulis vernicosus, Mannia triandra, Dicranum viride, Meesia longiseta, Buxbaumia viridis, Bazzania flaccida, Brachythecium geheebi, Riccia crustata, Neckera pennata, Frullania fragilifolia, Sphagnum cuspidatum, and Sphagnum fallax (Natcheva, pers. comm ). Cyprus Bryophyte research in Cyprus is limited. Data are from collections made mainly by foreign scientists. The basic information is still far from being complete, as it is also and the knowledge for the need of their protection. The restricted basic information makes impossible to use the new IUCN criteria (or the use of any criteria) that require details on the bryophyte distribution in the country. No Red List or mapping or recording scheme (Evdoxia Tsakiri, ). Denmark No official mapping projects are available. We do, however have a fair amount of recent records and collections of many species. In the course of the National Nature Monitoring Programme, quite a few persons have become interested in bryophytes. (Karen Thingsgaard, ). Estonia Mapping available at: Species maps will build up according to the data that are slowly inserted into the Estonian biodiversity database. But the maps of protected species are not public. (Ingerpuu, pers. comm ) Finland There is not a current scientific checklist, but the most current name list with scientific and vernacular names and distribution data in Finnish biogeographical provinces is available in internet (unfortunately only in Finnish). In the table there is also a IUCN category for each species. Ulvinen, T. ja Syrjänen, K. 2011: Suomen sammalten levinneisyys eliömaakunnissa (Distribution of Finnish bryophytes in biogeographic provinces). We are collecting data on all species at county (biogeographical provice) level. On threatened and near threatened species we have a database with coordinates of localities (accuracy varies from 1 m - 1 km). We continue to collect information on threatened species so that we can compile next red list and complete the assesment of Habitat directive species. There are also many initiatives going on where herbarium label data of university herbaria is put into databases and internet. (Kimmo Syrjänen, ) Also see Sweden. 37

38 France Strategy under discussion. Conference this year (October 2011). We start working with a national database, data are located are located with the name of the town (when we don t have geographic coordinates), all data are free of used. Checklist currently being worked on. No official red list with the IUCN criteria but there is the result of a preliminary study on the possibility of a national Red List (Deperiers-Robbe S., Etude préalable à l établissement du livre rouge des Bryophytes menacées de France métropolitaine. Ministère de l Environnement, D.N.P., Laboratoire de Phytogéographie, Université de Caen, 221 p). (Sébastien Leblond ) (See also Leblond, S., Hugonnot, V. & Bardat, J Increasing knowledge of the bryoflora of mainland France: recent initiatives. Field Bryology 102: ) Germany See for information, including maps. Greece Bryophyte research in Greece is limited. Data are from collections in different areas in Greece, with the majority from island areas, but the continental part of the country is still not studied and big areas have never been visited for bryophytes collections. The basic information for Greek bryophyte diversity is still far from being complete, as it is also and the knowledge for the need of their protection. The restricted available basic information makes impossible to use the new IUCN criteria (or the use of any criteria) that require details on the bryophyte distribution in the country. No recording scheme or mapping project, or other initiative. (Evdoxia Tsakiri, ). Hungary Legal protection In 2000, the number of bryophyte species legally protected in Hungary was increased to 80, as further 60 bryophytes were added to the already protected 20 Sphagnum species. Most of the newly protected species (50 species) are included in the Red Data Book of European Bryophytes (RDB) (ECCB 1995), and the others are locally rare species (Calliergon giganteum, C. stramineum, Campylium elodes, Warnstorfia exannulata, D. lycopodioides, D. revolvens incl. D. cossonii, D. sendtneri, Meesia triquetra, Scorpidium scorpioides, Sphagnum cuspidatum) living in endangered mires and wet meadows. A list of the Hungarian legally protected bryophyte species is given in Papp et al. (2002). Natura 2000 In Hungary 5 species (Buxbaumia viridis, Dicranum viride, Drepanocladus vernicosus, Mannia triandra, Orthotrichum rogeri) listed in the Bern Convention were taken into consideration during the selection of Natura 2000 sites. In Bulgaria these species were Buxbaumia viridis, Dicranum viride, Drepanocladus vernicosus, Mannia triandra and Meesia longiseta. Action plans In Hungary action plans were set up for the protection of existing populations of Buxbaumia viridis, Dicranum viride and Pyramidula tetragona. Monitoring activities In Hungary 6 species (Buxbaumia viridis, Dicranum viride, Drepanocladus vernicosus, Mannia triandra, Orthotrichum rogeri, Pyramidula tetragona) included in the Bern Convention are monitored. This monitoring activities are going on in the frame of The Hungarian National Biodiversity Monitoring System, which has started its operation in The aim of this project was (1) to trace the changes in the national distribution, local population sizes of selected species in time (species monitoring, Török & Kun 1997) and (2) to establish long-term investigation of the changes in living organisms in representative stands of different habitat types (plant and animal community monitoring, Kovácsné Láng & Török 1997). In the case of bryophytes two kinds of monitoring is going on in accordance of the general goals of species and plant and animal community monitoring of the National Biodiversity Monitoring System. 1. The species monitoring undertakes checking earlier known and potential new localities of selected species and tracing and estimating the population sizes found. These long-term investigations supply valuable data on the Hungarian distribution of selected species and changes in conditions, threat status of local populations. In the case of the 6 monitored species we failed to find any of the historic populations of 2 species (Drepanocladus 38

39 vernicosus, Orthotrichum rogeri). In case of 4 other species (Buxbaumia viridis, Dicranum viride, Mannia triandra, Pyramidula tetragona) the populations are also absent from most of their localities or if they are present, the size of their population is so small, that they are considered to be highly threatened on those locations. The population size estimation of existing populations of colonists (Buxbaumia viridis, Pyramidula tetragona) and short lived shuttle Mannia triandra is repeated yearly, while in the case of perennial Dicarnum viride the return interval is 3 years. Results of species monitoring were published in several papers including the methodology of species monitoring and preliminary results about the checking of earlier distribution of several species as in Papp et al. (2000). The prospects and problems of monitoring of species living on different substrata (shaded rocks, wetlands, decaying wood) were summarised in the publication of Papp et al. (2002). The estimation of threat status of some species and their categorization according to IUCN criteria in Hungary were published in Papp et al. (2003). 2. In the framework of the bryophyte vegetation monitoring, habitats rich in bryophytes (wetlands, dry grasslands, saline-alkali areas and forests) have been surveyed. Changes in species composition (species pool, frequency, distribution), distribution of functional groups (distribution of ecological indicator values, life strategies), characteristic variables of the assemblages (e.g. diversity) are examined. Monitoring of bryophyte vegetation was carried out in wetlands (20 stands representing 11 communities), dry grasslands (11 stands representing 8 communities), saline-alkaline grasslands (4 stands representing 2 communities) and forests (16 stands representing 8 communities). The return interval of sampling according to dynamics intensity of different habitat types is 3 years in wetlands, 2 years in dry grasslands, yearly in alkaline grasslands and 4 years in forests. The size of the permanent quadrates is 10 x 10 m in wetlands, dry grasslands and alkaline areas, while in forests quadrates of 16 x 16 m are used. The following methods are used for sampling of bryophyte assemblages: (1) list of species weighted with abundance; (2) systematic sampling on the ground level (including soil, rocks, decaying wood) recording presence/absence data; (3) sampling of epiphytic bryophyte vegetation (only in forests). A comprehensive report on the preliminary results on bryophyte biodiversity monitoring including both species and community monitoring can be found in Papp et al. (2006) in Hungarian language. Methodology of bryophyte biodiversity monitoring and a case study from community monitoring which also presents results on dynamics of bryophytes in a saline-alkaline area are published in Papp et al. (2005). Other projects Rare bryophytes of rare habitat types Saline-alkaline grasslands In Hungary a two years ( ) project was dedicated to the investigation of habitat requirements and population size of rare bryophytes of saline-alkaline areas of Duna-Tisza Interfluve, which are unique habitat types in Europe. Two European red-listed species, Entosthodon hungaricus and Phascum floerkeanum are characteristic species and appear in considerable abundance in such areas. Their main habitats are the tranzitional zones of different grassland communities, where the open areas among tussocks are colonized by them. Hence the grazing plays an important role to preserve the adequate structure and composition of the grasslands, but both the overgrazing and the lack of management cause considerable changes in the vegetation which affect the bryophytes as well (Papp 2003, Papp and Rajczy 2000). Loess cliffs A five years project was carried out in Hungary aiming the complete investigation of the cryptogamic vegetation of loess cliffs. Several new species to the Hungarian bryophyte flora were found (e. g. Dicranella howei, Ceratodon conicus, Chenia leptophylla) some Pterygoneurum and Bryum species ) and numerous records of European rarities (ECCB 1995) as Hilpertia velenovskyi, Pterygoneurum lamellatum, Tortula brevissima (Pócs 1999, Zanten 1999a, 1999b, 2000, 2006). IBrA-Important Bryophyte Areas In Hungary selection of Important Bryophyte Areas has been started on the base of the locality database of rare bryophytes of the Hungarian Natural History Museum. The first part of the selected areas are the recently known localities of European red-listed species (ECCB 1995). In Hungary 99 sites can be selected on the base of 125 populations of 26 species. The other part of the proposed areas will be the localities with high number of rarities of Hungary and indicator species. The selection of the areas according to this second criteria is an ongoing work recently. We are visiting the earlier known good bryophyte localities and registering the actual state of the bryophyte flora and vegetation (Papp 2008). 39

40 References ECCB (1995): Red Data Book of European Bryophytes. European Committee for Conservation of Bryophytes. Trondheim, pp Kovácsné Láng, E. & Török, K. (szerk.) (1997): Növénytársulások, társuláskomplexek és élőhelymozaikok. Nemzeti biodiverzitás-monitorozó rendszer III. [Plant communities, community complexes and habitat mosaics. National Biodiversity Monitoring System III.]. Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum, Budapest. Papp, B. (2003): A Fülöpszállás környéki szikes tavak mohaflórájának állapotfelmérése. (Investigation on the bryophyte flora of saline-alkali lakes around Fülöpszállás (Central Hungary) - Természetvédelmi Közlemények 10: Papp, B. (2008): Selection of Important Bryophyte Areas in Hungary. Folia Cryptog. Estonica, Fasc. 44: Papp, B. and Rajczy, M. (2000): Bryophytes of saline-alkali areas of the Danube-Tisza Interfluve, Hungary. - Lindbergia 25: Papp, B., Ódor, P. & Erzberger, P. (2000): Preliminary data about the present Hungarian local populations of rare European bryophytes. Studia Bot. hung : Papp, B., Ódor, P. & Szurdoki, E. (2002): An overview of options and limitations in the monitorozás of endangered bryophytes in Hungary. Novit. Bot. Univ. Carol., Praha, 15/2001: Papp, B., Ódor, P. & Szurdoki, E. (2003): Threat status of some protected bryophytes in Hungary. Acta Acad. Paed. Agriensis, Sectio Biologiae 24: Papp, B., Ódor, P. & Szurdoki, E. (2005): Methodological overview and a case study of the Hungarian Bryophyte Monitoring Program Bol. Soc. Esp. Briol : Papp, B., Ódor, P., Szurdoki, E. (2006): A mohák monitorozásának eredményei in Török K. és Fodor L. (szerk.) A Nemzeti Biodiverzitás-monitorozó Rendszer eredményei I. Élőhelyek, mohák és gombák. [Results of bryophyte monitoring in Török K. and Fodor L. (eds.) Results of the Hungarian National Biodiversity Monitoring System I. Habitats, Bryophytes and Fungi]. Környezetvédelmi és Vízügyi Minisztérium, Természetvédelmi Hivatal, Budapest, pp Pócs, T. (1999): A löszfalak virágtalan növényzete I. Orografikus sivatag a Kárpát-medencében. (Studies on the cryptogamic vegetation of loess cliffs, I. Orographic desert in the Carpathian Basin.) - Kitaibelia 4(1): Török, K. & Kun, A. (eds.) (1997): Növényfajok. Nemzeti biodiverzitás-monitorozó rendszer IV. [Plant species. National Biodiversity Monitoring System IV.]. Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum, Budapest. Zanten, B.O. van (1999a): Studies on the cryptogamic vegetation of loess cliffs, II. The genus Bryum Hedw. on loess cliffs in the Pannonian Basin, including Bryum gemmiferum Wilcz. & Demar. and Bryum violaceum Crundw. & Nyh., new to Hungary. - Kitaibelia 4: Zanten, B.O. van (1999b): Studies on the cryptogamic vegetation of loess cliffs, III. Ceratodon conicum (Hampe) Lindb., new to Hungary. - Kitaibelia 4: Zanten, B.O. van (2000): Studies on the cryptogamic vegetation of loess cliffs, IV. Chenia leptophylla (C. Müll.) Zander, new to Hungary. - Kitaibelia 5: Zanten, B.O. van (2006): Studies on the cryptogamic vegetation of loess cliffs, VIII. Dicranella howei Ren & Card., a new addition to the Hungarian bryoflora. - Kitaibelia 10: (Beata Papp, pers. comm, ) Ireland Active British Bryological Society recording scheme, driven by atlas production and National Biodiversity Network requirements. Survey and monitoring of rare and threatened species. Small active group based in Dublin. Online distribution maps available ( Latvia Small group of bryologists active and recording, led by Anna Mežaka (bryo82@gmail.com). Hampered by the unwillingness of A. Abolina to share information from her herbaium. Lithuania Distribution of bryophytes species is maped using grid system. Squares are arranged according to geographical coordinates with sites 6 latitude and 10 longitude (11. 2X10.4 km in the Northern part and 11.2X11.0 km in the 40

41 Southern part of Lithuania). The area of squares varies from to km 2. The Lithuanian territory is divided into 597 squares. All localities found in the same square are marked by one point. The system is computerised. Its use is restricted. (Jukoniene ) Netherlands Online distribution maps available ( Norway No specific mapping project are under way in Norway. However, see Sweden. The Red List follows the latest IUCN criteria. There is an ongoing project funded by the Norwegian Species Initiative that seeks to improve the knowledge about bryophyte species diversity on agricultural field and grassing fields in the lowlands of southern Norway and of mountain areas in the northern Norway (Kristian Hassel ). Poland Species in the present edition of the Red-list are still classified according to the old threat categories (IUCN 1978). Ten volumes of Atlas of geographical distribution of spore plants in Poland, Series IV. Liverworts (Hepaticae) have been published so far, the last one in 1980, with distribution maps (dot maps in 1 : scale) of 98 species and two subspecies (I 1962, II 1964, III 1966, IV 1967, V 1968, VI 1969, VII 1971, VIII 1974, IX 1977, X 1980). Professor Jerzy Szweykowski compiled the first seven volumes singlehandedly, and the last three with Dr. Maria Koźlicka. Acc. Szweykowski (1962): The areas of all the taxa within the frontiers of Poland was pictured with the point method even in the case of common species. Only in cases if plant is very common in a territory (grows in masses) such territory was lined. The points on maps are 1,7 mm in diameter corresponding to 5 km of the territory. The levels are marked on 150 m, 300 m, 500 m, 750 m and 1000 m a.s.l.. We have not an electronic database of liverwort distribution. General information about distribution of liverworts in Poland includes the following papers: Szweykowski J Prodromus Florae Hepaticarum Poloniae. Prace Komisji Biologicznej 20: (in Polish with English summary). Szweykowski J An annotated checklist of Polish liverworts and hornworts. W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków. Atlas of geographical distribution of spore-plants in Poland. Series IV. Liverworts (Hepaticae). Parts I-X ( ) 100 taxa. (Klama ) Romania For Hornworts and Liverworts the Atlas of Romania was published (Stefanut S., The Hornwort and Liverwort. Atlas of Romania). In that book are details about the program he used. The book is available on web Liverworts%20Altas%20of%20Romania.pdf. The Moss Atlas of Romania is in work. For the Nature 2000 species (Mannia triandra, Buxbaumia viridis, Dichelyma capillaceum, Dicranum viride, Hamatocaulis vernicosus, Encalypta mutica, Meesia longiseta, Orthotrichum rogeri, Leucobryum glaucum and Sphagnum species) I and Irina Goia are involved in a monitoring project. (Stephanaut, ) Irina Goia (pers. comm ) says that she and Stefanut have a bryophyte checklist and a Red List (using IUCN Guidelines 8.0, 2010), but they are not yet published (will be in Biodiversity & Conservation). Also monitoring of Natura 2000 spp. (Mannia triandra, Buxbaumia viridis, Dichelyma capillaceum, Dicranum viride, Hamatocaulis vernicosus, Encalypta mutica, Meesia longiseta, Orthotrichum rogeri). Russia Russia has many local Red Data Books (that is a sort of law for all political units, ca. 40 in European Russia) - they are too many too overview and sometimes include too many species. In 2007 was published Red Data Book of Russian Federation, pdf is attached but due to copyright problems, please do not distribute it further 41

42 For Red Lists, criteria list is certainly exist, but a bit indefinite, and species were selected by expert basing on somewhat general ideas and abailable information (especially in Asiatic Russia, where thousands km were explored in many areas once about 100 years ago - it would be difficult to apply IUCN criteria there). No mapping or recording project underway. Russia has a catalogue of bryophtes in strictly protected nature reserved territiories (in Russia there are 100 of them, and for more than half for mosses and a little less for hepatics the information is available). Attached are files, that are a bit strange formatted - easier to print them and see facing pages. In any case, I think this is a useful stuff. Suggested citations are: In adition, I must say, that the recent exploration change our knowledge a lot. For example, our Red Data book listed Indusiella (the only place in Europe, in Dagestan part of Caucasus - we visited that a bit dangerous area in 2009 and this year - Indusiella is very common there throughout! No any need to protect, I think, as a really endangered living being. However it may help to save some ecosystems that are overused now, and by this reason its Red status could work for Nature protection. Similar examples could be multiplied. (Ignatov, pers. comm.) See also from Konstantinova, , with lists of species in the regional checklists. Slovenia Martinčič prepared for this year to be published hepatics of Slovenia, annotated list. (Sabovljević, pers. comm ). Slovakia At the University of Žilina we have evolved plant recording scheme of the Tatra Mts., including bryophytes. The study is being prepared, database is being feeded. The records include source (published data or herbarium collection respectively), locality, altitude, ecology, IUCN category (the scheme will take place in ). The dates are not available for the present. (Soltes, ) Spain We have a project consisting in a virtual cartography of the bryophytes of the Iberian Peninsula and the Balearic Islands. The number of species mapped is increasing periodically. See In this moment, members of the Sociedad Española de Briologia are working in an Atlas of Endangered Bryophytes of Spain. See (Brugues, ) Sweden In Sweden we have a recording process to map both old records (from herbaria) and new findings through the Swedish Species portal ( I know that both Finland and Norway have similar systems, however, they are better to explain these (Hallingback ) There also exist preliminary distribution maps of Northwest Europe, published by the Nordic Bryological Society in three volumes. Switzerland There is a new checklist ready for Swiss Bryophytes. It follows in large parts Hill et al. and Söderström et al., but not in every detail. I think it will soon be available at least as an Excel list. We will then start the revision of the Red list in the next year and probably finish it in 2014 or Our mapping project has been finished in 2005 but since 2001 until now bryophytes are included in the biodiversity monitoring which yields 1500 relevées of 10 square meters within a period of 5 years. This year, the 3rd cycle has started (see: aktuell/portal.php) (Schnyder pers. comm ) On-line maps available ( United Kingdom Active British Bryological Society recording scheme, driven by atlas production and National Biodiversity Network requirements. Survey and monitoring of rare and threatened species. Online distribution maps available ( 42

43 Appendix 5. ECCB Country Contacts This table is updated from versions supplied by ECCB members at the beginning of the pilot project. Country Title Lastname Firstname Address Notes Albania Marka Jani Department of Biology Faculty of Natural Sciences Tirana University Blvd. Zog I Tirana markajani@yahoo. com Andorra Austria Dr. Krisai Robert Botanisches Institut Universität Salzburg Hellbrunnerstrasse 34 A-5200 Salzburg Azores (Portugal) Dr. Gabriel Rosalina Secção de Biologia Depto. Ciências Agrárias P-9702 Angra do Heroísmo Codex Belgium Dr. Raeymaekers Geert Marine Environment Unit Eurostation Victor Hortaplein 40/ Brussels Belarus Dr. Maslovsky Oleg Institute of Experimental Botany Academy of Science Scorina Street 27 BLR Minsk Bosnia- Herzegovina rokri@ping.at Robert.Krisai@sbg. ac.at rgabriel@uac.pt geert.raeymaekers@milieu.belgie. be tel fax Oleg.Maslovsky@ tut.by fax Supplied by Beata Papp, May 2011 in ECCB. in ECCB. in ECCB No known contact exists (B. Papp, May 2011, pers. comm.) Bulgaria Dr. Ganeva Anna Institute of Botany Acad. G. Boncher Str, Bl. 23 BG-1113 Sofia animoss@bio. bas.bg fax: Canary Islands (Spain) Crete (Greece) Croatia (i) Dr. (ii) Losada-Lima Bulgaria Natcheva Rayna rayna.natcheva75@abv.bg González- Mancebo Ana Juana María Universidad de La Laguna Dept de Botánica Fac. De Biologia Tenerife Dr. Hatzinikolaki Eleni Cretan National Museum Iraklion (i) Alegro (ii) Segota (iii) Sabovljević Antun Vedran Marko University of Zagreb See Serbia alosada@ull.es jglezm@ull.es elenhatz@cc.uch. gr elenhatz@nhmc. uoc.gr (2nd address according to B. Papp, May 2011) antun@botanic.hr vsegota@yahoo. com See Serbia in ECCB. Endorsed by Beata PaMay Supplied by Beata Papp, May 2011 in ECCB, and proposed another person to act jointly.. Not active in bryology any more. E Tsakiri will try to cover island as well as Greek mainland. However, B. Papp (May 2011) gives Dr. Hatzinikolaki as a Crete contact. Supplied by Beata Papp, May

44 Country Title Lastname Firstname Address Notes Czech Republic Prof. Váňa Jiři Department of Botany Charles University Benátska 2 CZ Praha 2 vana@tao.natur. cuni.cz tel fax in ECCB. Cyprus Denmark Dr. Thingsgaard Karen?? in ECCB. Moved back to Denmark (Lars Söderström pers. comm ), so new address and required. Estonia Dr. Ingerpuu Nele Institute of Zoology and Botany neleing@ut.ee in ECCB. Estonian Agricultural University 181 Riia str. EE-2400 Tartu Faroe Islands Finland Dr. Syrjänen Kimmo Finnish Environment Institute Species Protection Unit P.O.Box 140 FIN Helsinki France Germany (i) Prof. (ii) (iii) (i) Dr. Bardat Leblond Hugonnot Nebl Jaques Sébastien Vincent Martin Muséum nationale d Histoire naturelle 57 rue Cuvier F Paris Muséum nationale d Histoire naturelle 57 rue Cuvier F Paris Conservatoire Botanique National du Massif Central Le Bourg Chavaniac- Lafayette (ii) Ludwig Gerhard Bundesforschung für Naturschutz und Landschaftökologie Konstantinstr. 110 D- Bonn2 Gibraltar (United Kingdom) Greece Dr. Tsakiri Eudoxia Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Department of Botany Lab of Syst. Bot. & Phytogeogr. GR Thessaloniki Kimmo.syrjanen@ ymparisto.fi bardat@mnhn.fr sleblond@mnhn.fr Nebel.smns@ naturkundemuseum-bw.de gerhard.ludwig@ bfn.de tsakiri@bio.auth.gr in ECCB. in ECCB. Active bryologist, willing to participate. in ECCB. in ECCB. 44

45 Country Title Lastname Firstname Address Notes Hungary (i) Prof. (ii) Orban Papp Sandor Beáta Department of Botany Eszterházy Teacher s College pf. 43 H-3301 Eger Botanical Department Hungarian Nat. History Museum Pf. 222 H-1476 Budapest Iceland Dr. Kristinsson Hördur Náttúrufræðistofnun Íslands Hlemmi 3 Pósthólf 5320 IS-125 Reykjavík Ireland Dr. Lockhart Neil National Parks and Wildlife Service Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht 7 Ely Place Dublin 2 Italy Dr. Aleffi Michele Dipartimento di Botanica ed Ecologia, Laboratorio di Briologia Università degli Studi di Camerino Via Pontoni, I Camerino (MC) (Italy) orban@gemini. ektf.hu fax pappbea@bot. nhumus.hu fax hkris@ni.is tel fax Neil.Lockhart@ ahg.gov.ie tel.: fax: michele.aleffi@ unicam.it Ph.: fax: cell.: in ECCB. in ECCB. Main contact for Hungary. This is a lichenologist who replaces Dr. Bergpor Johannsson as the contact for Iceland. in ECCB. in ECCB. Kazakhstan Most of Kazakhstan is in Asia. Kosovo Sabovljević Marko See Serbia See Serbia Disputed territory. Latvia (i) Dr. (ii) Dr. Āboliņa Mežaka Austra Anna Latvian Forestry Research Institute Silava Rigas iela 111 LV-2169 Salaspils Department of Botany and Ecology Faculty of Biology University of Latvia Kronvalda bulv. 4 LV-1010 Latvia austra.abolina@ silava.lv bryo82@gmail.com in ECCB. However, no longer very active. Preferred contact, as very active and willing to participate Lithuania Dr. Jukonienė Ilona Institute of Botany Laboratory of Flora and Geobotany Zaliuju ezeru 47 LT-2021 Vilnius ilonet@botanika.lt in ECCB. Luxembourg Mr. Werner Jean 32, rue Michel-Rodange L-7248 Bereldange jean.werner@ mnhn.lu in ECCB. Jean Werner is also a useful contact for parts of France, notably Lorraine and Haute-Normandie. 45

46 Country Title Lastname Firstname Address Notes Macedonia No contact in Macedonia, according to Beata Papp (May 2011). Previous contact was Dr. Magdalena Cekova. Madeira (Portugal) Dr. Fontinha Suzana Jardim Botanico de Madeira Caminho do Meio - Bom Succeso P-9000 Funchal suzu.65@gmail. com Malta Moldova Monaco Montenegro (i) (ii) Dragicevic Sabovljević Snezana Marko Natural History Museum of Montenegro, Podgorica sneza. dragicevic@t-com. me Supplied by Beata Papp, May 2011 See Serbia See Serbia Netherlands Dr. Dirkse Gerard M. IBN-DLO PO Box 23 NL-6700 AA Wageningen g.m.dirkse@altera. weg-ur.nl gerard.dirkse@ natuurmuseum.nl in ECCB. Norway Dr. Hassel Kristian NTNU Department of Biology N-7491 Trondheim kristian.hassel@ vm.ntnu.no fax in ECCB. Poland (i) Dr. (ii)dr. Klama Żarnowiek Henryk Jan Technichal University of Łódź Branch in Bielsko-Biała Faculty of Textile Engineering and Environmental Protection Willowa 2 PL Bielska-Biała Portugal Prof. Sérgio Cecília Museu Laboratorio Botânico Faculdade de Ciências P-1294 Lisboa Codex Romania Russia 46 (i) Dr. (ii) (i) Dr. (ii)dr. Goia Stefanut Konstantinova Ignatov Irina Sorin Nadya Mikhail Grădina Botanică Al. Borza Universitatea Babeş- Bolyai str. Republicii, 42 R-3400 Cluj-Napoca Institute of Biology, Bucharest Romanian Academy Nadya Konstantinova The Polar-Alpine Botanical Garden Kola Science Center of the Russian Acad,. Sci. RUS Kirovsk 6, Murmansk Obl. Main Botanical Garden Academy of Science Botanicheskaya Moscow hklama@ath.bielsko.pl jzarnowiec@ath. bielsko.pl clgomes@fc.ul.pt Tel /22 ext. 229 Fx igoia@yahoo.com igoia@grbot. ubbcluj.ro sorin.stefanut@ ibiol.ro nadya4@ ns.kolasc.net.ru misha_ignatov@ list.ru Contact for liverworts. Contact for mosses. in ECCB. in ECCB. Supplied by Beata Papp, May in ECCB.

47 Country Title Lastname Firstname Address Notes San Marino Dr. Aleffi Michela See Italy See Italy Serbia Mr. Sabovljević Marko ul. Kornetska br Belgrade Slovakia Dr. Šoltés Rudolf Research Station of the Tatra National Park SK Tatranská Lomnica Slovenia Spain and the Balearic Islands Prof. Dr. Dr. Martinčič Andrej Biotechnical faculty Department of biology Aškerčeva 12 SLO-1000 Ljubljana Brugues Domenech Montserrat Botanica, Facultat de Ciencies Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona E Bellaterra Sweden Mr. Hallingbäck Tomas Threatened Species Unit Swedish Agricultural University Box 7072 S Uppsala Switzerland Dr. Urmi Edi Institut für Systematische Botanik Zollikerstrasse 107 CH-8008 Zürich Turkey (i) Dr. Erdag Adnan A. Menderes Univ. FEF Biyoloyi Aydin com rs uniza.sk siol.net tel fax Tomas.Hallingback@slu.se Tel Fx e.urmi@ggaweb.ch fax aerdag@adu.edu.tr in ECCB. in ECCB. in ECCB. in ECCB. in ECCB. in ECCB. (ii) Kirmaci Mesut Turkey Kirmaci Ukraine Dr. Virchenko Vitaly M. Institute of Botany Tershchenskiva str. 2 UKR Kyiv United Kingdom Mr. Hodgetts Nick Cuillin Views 15 Earlish Portree Isle of Skye IV51 9XL mkirmaci@gmail. com mkirmaci@adu. edu.tr box221@post001. kiev.ua inst@botany.kiev. ua nick1901@hotmail. co.uk Vatican Dr. Aleffi Michele See Italy See Italy Supplied by Beata Papp, May Suggested to try Dr. S. Ya. Kondratyuk, ksya_net@hotmail. com if other addresses do not work. Acting UK representative. 47

48