Thermophilous oak forests, traditionally classified within the class
The most typical are communities in Southern and Southeastern Europe (Blasi
Moving away from the main Mediterranean centre of diversity toward the north and east, communities lose their typical thermophilous characteristics, while gaining features of those forest vegetation classes for which the climatic conditions are more suitable. Because of this, most of the thermophilous oak forests in the northern part of the temperate zone have a transitional nature, which complicates syntaxonomic decisions.
In Eastern Europe thermophilous (or more accurately the use of the term “xeromesophytic” or “dry-mesic”) oak forests demonstrate considerable differences from Central European ones (Semenishchenkov, 2012; Semenishchenkov & Poluyanov, 2014; Goncharenko
In this study, we focus on a comparative analysis of Central European, Eastern European and South Uralian alliances, namely
The aims of the present study were: 1) to perform a formal classification of syntaxa of the Central European, Eastern European and South Uralian groups, taking into account new data from the Southern Urals, Kazakhstan and Central Europe; 2) to determine the main ecological gradients underlying their differentiation; 3) to identify the specificities of the phytosociological structure of syntaxa, taking into account their ecotonic nature in syntaxonomic terms; 4) to carry out a comparative analysis of the main layer-forming species, which are also habitat-forming, significantly influencing the growth of other species.
For further analysis, we selected 28 syntaxa that are representative of three alliances
To perform a formal classification, the synoptic data matrix (syntaxa in columns and species in rows) is subjected to cluster analysis, taking into account the logarithmically transformed values of species constancies. A Bray-Curtis distance matrix and a flexible beta algorithm (with beta = −0.25), which are very popular and well-proven in phytosociological studies, were used for agglomeration (Bray & Curtis, 1957; Lance & Williams, 1967; Legendre & Legendre, 2012). The resulting groups (clusters) of syntaxa at higher levels were compared with the original classification given by the authors at the level of alliances.
To understand the ecological drivers underlying syntaxa differentiation, we conducted the non-metric multidimensional ordination, or NMDS, (Kruskal, 1964) and tested the relationship between ordination axes and environmental variables (Legendre & Legendre, 2012). The environmental variables were obtained using the phytoindication method, which was performed using the Didukh ecological scales (Didukh, 2011). Vectors of the environmental variables were projected into the ordination space using the environmental variable fitting function, or
Given that thermophilous oak forests are a heterogeneous group especially in the northern part of their distribution range, we measured the affinity to different vegetation classes using the proportions of diagnostic species in the species composition of each syntaxon. The EuroVegChecklist served as a basis for the species-to-class classification (Mucina
To discover the peculiarities of the layer structure of the thermophilous oak forests in different regions of Europe, we compared the species of the highest frequency in each of the main layers, namely tree, shrub and herbaceous layers. The average value of species constancy in the groups of syntaxa identified by the cluster analysis was first calculated. Then the species were ranked according to the value of average constancy and the five topmost species (conventionally defined threshold) in each layer were tabulated for comparison.
According to the results of the agglomerative cluster analysis, 28 analyzed syntaxa (see Table S1) were divided into three groups, conventionally designated as A, B, C (Figure 1). The cluster A united Central European syntaxa (1–10). The cluster B consists of Eastern European syntaxa with the main distribution in the Middle Russian Upland (11–20). The cluster C unites the South Uralian group of syntaxa (21–28).
Figure 1
Cluster analysis dendrogram of the syntaxa of thermophilous oak forests. Syntaxa numbers are the same as in Table S1.

The clusters of syntaxa coincide with the division into the alliances of
According to the cluster analysis results, the geographic boundaries of cluster B proved wider than previously assumed (Goncharenko
The floristic differentiation of Central and Eastern European forests is multilevel (Table S2). It is based on 5 groups (blocks) of differential species. In addition to groups A, B, and C, whose species are concentrated in a single cluster, there are groups AB and BC the species of which overlap pairs of clusters, specifically A + B and B + C, respectively. The group ABC consists of common species for all three groups of syntaxa. Each of the mentioned groups is supported by a significant number of differentiating species.
The multilevel floristic differentiation is explained by the presence of not only local ecological but geographical reasons. Group A (
Cluster B (
Although associations from Kazakhstan joined the
Restrictions on the distribution of eastern species in the reverse western direction are much less expressed. Most of the differentiators of groups C and BC are also found in Ukraine and other European countries. However, the differential species in these groups are associated with other habitats, mainly the meadow-steppe and steppe, due to which they have much less constancy in the composition of thermophilous oak forests.
Thus, there are two trends revealed in Table S2. In the eastward spreading, there are climatic constraints due to harsh continental conditions and especially low winter temperatures, to which western thermophilous species are not adapted. Conversely, in the opposite western direction, restrictions on the distribution of species of groups B and BC are less pronounced, which is explained by a milder climate of Central Europe and therefore, coenotic and edaphic constraints prevail.
In the ordination space, three groups of thermophilous oak forests syntaxa extend mainly along the first axis. The Central European (A) and the South Uralian (C) clusters are located at opposite ends (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Ordination diagram of groups of syntaxa of thermophilous oak forests and projection of phytoindicational variables. Hd – moisture, Rc – soil acidity, Nt – soil nitrogen, Lc – light regime, Tm – temperature, Kn – continentality. Letters A, B and C correspond to the groups of syntaxa in Figure 1.

The first axis is most correlated with the continentality variable
Based on the comparison of mean values and results of Tukey’s HSD test, we observed significant differences in the continentality variable
Figure 3
Boxplots showing differences in mean values of phytoindicational variables calculated for three groups of thermophilous oak forests syntaxa. Group labels are provided below each figure and correspond to Figure 1. Italic letters above the figures indicate the Tukey’s HSD results.

The mean values of
Although thermophilous oak forests are formally categorised within the class
Shares of diagnostic species of different vegetation classes in the syntaxa of thermophilous oak forests. Groups A, B, and C correspond to those identified by the cluster analysis (Figure 1). Syntaxa numbers are the same as in Table S1. Designations of the vegetation classes: PUB –
Syntaxa num. | Group of syntaxa | PUB | FAG | QUE | BRA | FES | GER | MOL | RHA |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | A | 0.16 | 0.22 | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.22 | 0.09 | 0.05 |
2 | A | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.20 | 0.23 | 0.06 | 0.05 |
3 | A | 0.16 | 0.24 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.16 | 0.19 | 0.10 | 0.05 |
4 | A | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.11 | 0.21 | 0.12 | 0.05 |
5 | A | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.10 | 0.04 |
6 | A | 0.16 | 0.20 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.24 | 0.09 | 0.06 |
7 | A | 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.26 | 0.06 | 0.06 |
8 | A | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.17 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.05 |
9 | A | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.29 | 0.22 | 0.05 | 0.04 |
10 | A | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.19 | 0.25 | 0.07 | 0.05 |
11 | B | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.01 |
12 | B | 0.14 | 0.13 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.17 | 0.24 | 0.12 | 0.03 |
13 | B | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.21 | 0.10 | 0.05 |
14 | B | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.10 | 0.15 | 0.24 | 0.16 | 0.04 |
15 | B | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.06 | 0.10 | 0.18 | 0.20 | 0.15 | 0.03 |
16 | B | 0.12 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.07 | 0.19 | 0.17 | 0.01 |
17 | B | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.16 | 0.20 | 0.22 | 0.01 |
18 | B | 0.16 | 0.23 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.18 | 0.14 | 0.01 |
19 | B | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.11 | 0.26 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.04 |
20 | B | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.23 | 0.20 | 0.19 | 0.02 |
21 | C | 0.05 | 0.19 | 0.07 | 0.28 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.16 | 0.01 |
22 | C | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.06 | 0.20 | 0.13 | 0.20 | 0.12 | 0.04 |
23 | C | 0.08 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.20 | 0.12 | 0.23 | 0.12 | 0.01 |
24 | C | 0.08 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.19 | 0.10 | 0.22 | 0.10 | 0.05 |
25 | C | 0.08 | 0.15 | 0.05 | 0.22 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.13 | 0.01 |
26 | C | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.22 | 0.18 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.01 |
27 | C | 0.08 | 0.22 | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.11 | 0.19 | 0.11 | 0.04 |
28 | C | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.19 | 0.13 | 0.03 |
Average by Group A | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.22 | 0.09 | 0.05 | |
Average by Group B | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.02 | |
Average by Group C | 0.07 | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.19 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 0.13 | 0.02 |
The shares of species of some classes vary within a narrow range, and this may be both in low numbers, e.g., as for the class
While similar in the sense that all syntaxa are a phytosociological mixture of species in which no single vegetation class plays a dominant role, they nevertheless differ in the proportions in which species of the different classes are combined in the different regions. Major differences between Central European and Eastern European forests are mainly observed not concerning a single class, but if we take into account the proportions of species of the classes
In addition to floristic, ecological and phytosociological differences between the three groups of thermophilous forests discussed in the previous sections, there is a differentiation in the lists of the main layer-forming species. In Table 2 species that are ranked by the constancy value in each of the clusters A, B and C form a diagonal-like pattern in three main layers.
Species with the highest scores of average constancy in each cluster of syntaxa of thermophilous oak forests. Five topmost species are shown in each cluster. The numbers represent ranks and the upper indexes are percentages of the average constancy of the species.
Species (grouped by the layers) | Clusters of syntaxa | ||
---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | |
Tree layer | |||
180 | |||
245 | |||
328 | |||
426 | 198 | 188 | |
240 | 57 | ||
518 | 334 | ||
433 | |||
258 | |||
444 | |||
527 | 353 | ||
Shrub layer | |||
146 | |||
241 | |||
327 | |||
427 | |||
525 | |||
149 | 248 | ||
248 | |||
344 | |||
436 | |||
530 | |||
152 | |||
347 | |||
444 | |||
540 | |||
Herbaceous layer | |||
179 | 262 | ||
273 | 576 | ||
352 | 454 | ||
450 | |||
550 | |||
164 | |||
357 | |||
553 | |||
184 | |||
283 | |||
380 | |||
477 |
In the western syntaxa of cluster A, the most constant species are
Differences in the main layer-forming species extend to all main layers. The species
One of the most characteristic features of thermophilous oak forests is a floristically rich herbaceous layer. Although it usually has no clearly expressed dominants, there is also a differentiation in the herbaceous layer, similar to that in the tree and shrub layers. The most constant species in cluster A are
Two factors seem to play a major role in the succession of major layer-forming species. The first one is the degree of tolerance of species to climate continentality, and the second reason is in contact with what types of vegetation the thermophilous oak forests form in each region. Although the species listed in Table 2 are not exclusive to just one of the clusters, their constancies vary greatly depending on whether the climatic conditions are optimal or not for one or another species. This causes a change in the constancy-ranked series of the layer-forming species, as shown in Table 2. Regarding the role of surrounding communities, this environment is different in different regions of Europe, as the ecological conditions and predominant substrates on which communities are formed change, too.
In this study, we conducted a comparison of thermophilous oak forests in the northern part of their distribution, where they are the most problematic from a syntaxonomic point of view. A cluster analysis of syntaxa, including new data from Central and Eastern Europe, confirms the presence of three geographically and floristically distinct groups, corresponding to the level of alliances. Moreover, Eastern European forests were divided into two groups, namely the
Analysis of the distribution boundaries of differentiating species in groups A and AB, as well as B and BC, allowed us to preliminarily outline the boundaries of the three European alliances. The boundary between the alliances
According to the results of ordination analysis, the leading factor influencing the division of the three identified groups of thermophilous oak forests is the increasing continentality of the climate towards the east. Edaphic factors also play an obvious role but concerning the differentiation of syntaxa at a lower, local level. Comparison of the mean values showed significant differences between all groups of thermophilous oak forests by the continentality variable, while only the extreme groups, namely the Central European
In the phytosociological structure, species of the
The Central European and Eastern European thermophilous oak forests are also differentiated by the main layer-forming species, and this applies to all layers, including tree, shrub and herbaceous layers. The extent to which climatic conditions are optimal for particular layer-forming species causes their variation from west to east and, consequently, leads to differences in the constancy-ranked series of layer-forming species as well as the physiognomy and habitats of communities.
Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Shares of diagnostic species of different vegetation classes in the syntaxa of thermophilous oak forests. Groups A, B, and C correspond to those identified by the cluster analysis (Figure 1). Syntaxa numbers are the same as in Table S1. Designations of the vegetation classes: PUB – Quercetea pubescentis, FAG – Carpino-Fagetea, QUE – Quercetea robori-petraeae, BRA – Brachypodio-Betuletea pendulae, FES – Festuco-Brometea, GER – Trifolio-Geranietea, MOL – Molinio-Arrhenatheretea, RHA – Crataego-Prunetea.
Syntaxa num. | Group of syntaxa | PUB | FAG | QUE | BRA | FES | GER | MOL | RHA |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | A | 0.16 | 0.22 | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.22 | 0.09 | 0.05 |
2 | A | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.20 | 0.23 | 0.06 | 0.05 |
3 | A | 0.16 | 0.24 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.16 | 0.19 | 0.10 | 0.05 |
4 | A | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.11 | 0.21 | 0.12 | 0.05 |
5 | A | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.10 | 0.04 |
6 | A | 0.16 | 0.20 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.24 | 0.09 | 0.06 |
7 | A | 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.10 | 0.26 | 0.06 | 0.06 |
8 | A | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.17 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.05 |
9 | A | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.29 | 0.22 | 0.05 | 0.04 |
10 | A | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.19 | 0.25 | 0.07 | 0.05 |
11 | B | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.01 |
12 | B | 0.14 | 0.13 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.17 | 0.24 | 0.12 | 0.03 |
13 | B | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.21 | 0.10 | 0.05 |
14 | B | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.10 | 0.15 | 0.24 | 0.16 | 0.04 |
15 | B | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.06 | 0.10 | 0.18 | 0.20 | 0.15 | 0.03 |
16 | B | 0.12 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.07 | 0.19 | 0.17 | 0.01 |
17 | B | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.16 | 0.20 | 0.22 | 0.01 |
18 | B | 0.16 | 0.23 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.18 | 0.14 | 0.01 |
19 | B | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.11 | 0.26 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.04 |
20 | B | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.23 | 0.20 | 0.19 | 0.02 |
21 | C | 0.05 | 0.19 | 0.07 | 0.28 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.16 | 0.01 |
22 | C | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.06 | 0.20 | 0.13 | 0.20 | 0.12 | 0.04 |
23 | C | 0.08 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.20 | 0.12 | 0.23 | 0.12 | 0.01 |
24 | C | 0.08 | 0.19 | 0.06 | 0.19 | 0.10 | 0.22 | 0.10 | 0.05 |
25 | C | 0.08 | 0.15 | 0.05 | 0.22 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.13 | 0.01 |
26 | C | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.22 | 0.18 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.01 |
27 | C | 0.08 | 0.22 | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.11 | 0.19 | 0.11 | 0.04 |
28 | C | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.19 | 0.13 | 0.03 |
Average by Group A | 0.14 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.22 | 0.09 | 0.05 | |
Average by Group B | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.02 | |
Average by Group C | 0.07 | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.19 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 0.13 | 0.02 |
Species with the highest scores of average constancy in each cluster of syntaxa of thermophilous oak forests. Five topmost species are shown in each cluster. The numbers represent ranks and the upper indexes are percentages of the average constancy of the species.
Species (grouped by the layers) | Clusters of syntaxa | ||
---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | |
Tree layer | |||
180 | |||
245 | |||
328 | |||
426 | 198 | 188 | |
240 | 57 | ||
518 | 334 | ||
433 | |||
258 | |||
444 | |||
527 | 353 | ||
Shrub layer | |||
146 | |||
241 | |||
327 | |||
427 | |||
525 | |||
149 | 248 | ||
248 | |||
344 | |||
436 | |||
530 | |||
152 | |||
347 | |||
444 | |||
540 | |||
Herbaceous layer | |||
179 | 262 | ||
273 | 576 | ||
352 | 454 | ||
450 | |||
550 | |||
164 | |||
357 | |||
553 | |||
184 | |||
283 | |||
380 | |||
477 |
Effect of interaction between Fusarium solani andRhizoctonia solani on damping-off and root rot disease ofTetraclinis articulata seedlingsEffect of growth conditions on wood properties of Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.)Suitability of the boreal ecosystem simulator (BEPS) model for estimating gross primary productivity in hemi-boreal upland pine forest Composition of live, dead and downed trees in Järvselja old-growth forest Changes in the forest structure of the Bashkortostan Republic over two decades The effect of implementation on successful forest management policy, moderated by actor-network and stakeholder collaboration Facilitating long-term 3D sonic anemometer measurements in hemiboreal forest ecosystems Optimizing the pine wood drying process using a critical diffusion coefficient and a timed moistening impulse Comparative study of Central and Eastern European alliances of thermophilous oak forests ( Quercion petraea ,Betonico-Quercion , andLathyro-Quercion ) within the temperate zone of EuropePuhtpuistute hinna- ja kasumiküpsuse empiiriline analüüs Eesti majandusmetsades ning selle võrdlus uuendusraiet lubava vanusega Variations in habitat metrics along plantation chronosequences: contrasting tree plantations in subtropical forest and grassland The changes of extractive contents of young Swietenia mahagoni (L.) Jacq trees during heartwood formationTree diversity and species composition of tropical dry forests in Vietnam's Central Highlands Region Seed viability and optimal germination conditions of Cedrus atlantica (Manetti ex Endl.) Carrière