1986
DOI: 10.2307/2260246
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Handbook of European Sphagna.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Noteworthy, many specimens of Asian S. talbotianum kept in herbaria were previously assigned to S. rubellum for which the oceanic tendency in distribution was mentioned (Daniels & Eddy, 1990). Our results confirm this point of view since our revision did not reveal Asian specimens of this species yet.…”
Section: Morphologysupporting
confidence: 83%
“…Noteworthy, many specimens of Asian S. talbotianum kept in herbaria were previously assigned to S. rubellum for which the oceanic tendency in distribution was mentioned (Daniels & Eddy, 1990). Our results confirm this point of view since our revision did not reveal Asian specimens of this species yet.…”
Section: Morphologysupporting
confidence: 83%
“…As expected, we found a clear distinction in moss composition in the fen compared to the raised bogs that followed a gradient of acidity and nitrogen availability (Figure 1 and Table 2). The two mosses that occurred exclusively in the fen were Sphagnum subnitens and Calliergonella cuspidata (Table 2): the first typically grows in poor fens, but also in oligo‐ to mesotrophic habitats (Daniels & Eddy, 1990; Frahm & Frey, 1987), and the second is found in marshes and wet meadows, but also on wet stems and rocks (Frahm & Frey, 1987). On the contrary, the two most common species that were absent in the fen are typical raised bog Sphagna: Sphagnum magellanicum agg.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nutrient dynamics of 12 Sphagnum species, categorized into three groups, slower‐ ( S. papillosum , S. magellancium , S. fuscum , S. rubellum , S. austinii ), medium‐ ( S. palustre , S. centrale ) and fast‐growing ( S. denticulatum , S. fallax , S. riparium , S. fimbriatum , S. squarrosum ), were examined under similar nutrient‐rich and constantly wet field conditions. Generally, the species categorized as fast‐growing are better adapted to these minerotrophic conditions, whereas the slower‐growing species, mostly ombrotrophic bog species occupying hummocks and dry lawns, do not usually grow under such nutrient‐rich conditions (Sjörs 1950; Daniels & Eddy 1985; Lamers et al . 1999; Rydin & Jeglum 2013).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2006; Hájková & Hájek 2007). As such, the slower‐growing group (corresponding to hummock/bog species) are not well adapted to such conditions, as opposed to most of the fast‐growing species, which occur under more minerotrophic conditions (Daniels & Eddy 1985; Wojtuń 1994). Consequently, the high Mg and Ca concentrations might have reduced C and nutrient sequestration through reduced K uptake of the slower‐growing group (Rice 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation