Endangered weed species in Hungarian vineyards

38 Endangered weed species in Hungarian vineyards Róbert Pál Research Group for Biological Adaptation, Hungarian Academy of Sciences University of Pécs, H-7624 Pécs, Ifjúság u. 6, Hungary, palr@gamma.ttk.pte.hu Abstract The weed flora of the Hungarian vineyards is highly influenced by intensive growing technologies. Abundance of sensitive therophytes (Androsace maxima, Calepina irregularis, Fumaria vaillantii, Lathyrus sphaericus, Medicago arabica, Thlaspi alliaceum) and bulbous geophytes (Gagea arvensis, Muscari racemosum, Ornithogalum boucheanum, O. degenianum, O. umbellatum) is decreasing. Frequency of invasive newcomers (Amaranthus retroflexus, Conyza canadensis, Erigeron annuus) and stolonous plants (Convolvulus arvensis, Cynodon dactylon, Elymus repens) showed however a great upsurge. Rare weeds can usually be found on extensive managed fields and vineyards, some of them are legally protected and some are listed in the Red Data Book of Hungary. The aim of this study is to assemble a list of the endangered weed species of the Hungarian vineyards. Key words: endangered weeds, vineyards, bulbous geophytes 1 Introduction Many reports have been published about decreasing biodiversity of vineyards in Europe (Germany, Switzerland) recently (Arn et al. 1997a; Wilmanns 1999). The weed flora of the Hungarian vineyards is highly influenced by intensive growing technologies (high mulching intensity, frequent soil management, use of herbicides) as well. Besides invasive newcomers have a great transforming effect to the native weed vegetation of the vineyards (Pál 2004). Several regional red lists and flora works have appeared in Hungary recently (Frank et al. 1998; Bauer & Barna 1999; Farkas 1999; Csiky 2004). Even a list about rare weeds of high botanical value of the arable land was published (Pinke 1995), but no paper has been written about the floristical rarities of the Hungarian vineyards. There are already preservation programs going on to protect rare weed species of vineyards in some European countries (Arn et al. 1997a; Brunner et al. 2001). This new list can contribute to a possible introduction of similar programmes in the Hungarian winegrowing areas. 2 Materials and methods Regular investigations have been carried out on Hungarian winegrowing areas, especially in the Transdanubian region between 2000-2005. More than thousand vegetation relevés were made in differently cultivated vineyards. After six years of field experiences and according to the literature data (Arn et al. 1997b; Gombocz-Horvát 1939; Molnár 2003; Pál 2002; Pinke 1995; Ujvárosi 1973a; Wilmanns 1999) there were attempts to work out a category system for evaluating the weed flora of these areas. Species being once frequent, but during the survey period they had showed a retreat were ranked into the vulnerable category. Species being rare were ranked into the endangered category, and those which were so rare that conservation measures should be introduced in order to preserve them, were pronounced strongly endangered. The below assembled species were usually found in cultivated rows of vines, but

special attention has been paid to plants occurring on banks, borderland and abandoned vineyards. The categories of the list are valid only for the Hungarian vineyards. There are some species among them e.g. Ornithogalum umbellatum, Muscari racemosum which became rare in vineyards but are common in other habitats. The list was compared with the red lists of the neighbouring Slovakia and with that of Germany. This way an overview can be obtained of the same endangered species in the three countries lying along a gradient from south to north. Information on taxonomical nomenclature was gained from Simon (2000). 3 Results and Discussion The species recorded in the list (Tab. 1) are mainly Submediterranean (41 %) and Eurasian (24 %) flora elements. Examining the weed flora of the vineyards these data are not surprising since the vine originates from this region, too. Tab. 1 Endangered weeds of the Hungarian vineyards and their status in some European countries Name Degree of endangerment in H SK D Hungarian vineyards 1. Allium scorodoprasum vulnerable + 2. Allium vineale strongly endangered + 3. Alyssum alyssoides endangered + 4. Anchusa barrelieri strongly endangered 5. Androsace maxima strongly endangered + 6. Anthemis tinctoria endangered + 7. Calepina irregularis endangered + 8. Campanula rapunculoides endangered 9. Carthamus lanatus strongly endangered + 10. Centaurea solstitialis strongly endangered + 11. Cephalaria transsylvanica endangered + 12. Corispermum canescens strongly endangered + 13. Corispermum nitidum strongly endangered + 14. Crepis capillaris endangered + 15. Erodium ciconium strongly endangered + 16. Filago arvensis strongly endangered + 17. Filago lutescens strongly endangered + + 18. Fumaria officinalis vulnerable + 19. Fumaria rostellata endangered + 20. Fumaria vaillantii vulnerable + 21. Gagea arvensis strongly endangered + 22. Gagea pratensis strongly endangered + 23. Geranium columbinum vulnerable + 24. Geranium dissectum vulnerable + 25. Geranium rotundifolium strongly endangered + + 26. Lactuca saligna vulnerable + + 27. Lathyrus aphaca strongly endangered + + 28. Lathyrus sphaericus strongly endangered 29. Medicago arabica strongly endangered + 30. Medicago minima endangered + 31. Moenchia mantica endangered 32. Muscari comosum endangered + 33. Muscari racemosum endangered + 34. Myosurus minimus strongly endangered + + 39

35. Orlaya grandiflora strongly endangered + 36. Ornithogalum boucheanum strongly endangered + 37. Ornithogalum pyramidale strongly endangered 38. Ornithogalum umbellatum endangered + 39. Ornithogalum x degenianum strongly endangered 40. Papaver dubium endangered + + 41. Petrorhagia prolifera endangered + 42. Pisum elatius strongly endangered 43. Rapistrum perenne strongly endangered + 44. Reseda phyteuma strongly endangered + 45. Senecio vernalis endangered + + 46. Spergularia rubra strongly endangered 47. Thlaspi alliaceum strongly endangered + 48. Tordylium maximum strongly endangered + + 49. Vicia angustifolia vulnerable 50. Vicia grandiflora vulnerable 51. Vicia hirsuta vulnerable + 52. Vicia lathyroides vulnerable + + 53. Vicia pannonica endangered 54. Vicia pannonica subsp. striata strongly endangered + 55. Viola tricolor endangered + 56. Vulpia myuros endangered + Signs and abbreviations used: The species printed in bold are legally protected in Hungary, H: Species listed in the Red List of Hungary, SK: Species listed in the Red List of Slovakia, D: Species listed in the Red List of Germany, +: present, : extinct Bulbous geophytes are represented in great numbers (18 %) in the list which are characteristic elements of vineyards. These species used to be frequent also on arable fields, but as a result of deep and regular soil management they have nearly disappeared (Pinke 1999). However vineyards have given them temporarily a refuge, but owing to increasingly used intensive growing technologies (high mulching intensity, frequent soil movement, use of herbicides), they are not defended anymore. Bulbous geophytes occurring in our vineyards originate from the Mediterranean, Submediterranean and Subatlantic regions and they followed the early wine growers up to northern Europe (Arn et al. 1997b; Simon 2000; Ujvárosi 1973a). These plants have never meant serious weed problems in vineyards, so no prevention was necessary against them (Ujvárosi 1973b). The most important observation among the bulbous geophytes was a great abundance of Ornithogalum x degenianum in extensive managed vineyards of the Balatonfelvidék area. The plant is a consolidated hybrid of Ornithogalum boucheanum and Ornithogalum umbellatum (Simon 2000; Molnár 2003). Only literature data are the evidence of massive occurrence of certain species. For example Centaurea solstitialis was a frequent weed in winegrowing areas when Paul Kitaibel visited South Hungary in 1799 (Gombocz-Horvát 1939). The plant extincts today from this part of the country. The legally protected Androsace maxima is a countrywide endangered species, growing mainly in extensive managed orchards and vineyards (Farkas et al. 1999; Molnár 2000; Pál 2001). Countrywide endangered species like Thlaspi alliaceum were only found in great numbers in some extensive managed, acidic vineyards of Western Hungary (Göcsej, South Zala). It was remarkable where the plant occurred in large numbers, Capsella bursa-pastoris was rare to find. Anchusa barrelieri appeared only on banks and borderlands of the vineyards on loess areas. 40

Leguminosae species (Medicago minima, Vicia pannonica, Vicia angustifolia, Vicia grandiflora, Vicia hirsuta, Vicia lathyroides, Vicia pannonica subsp. striata) show a great upsurge on steep and nutrient-poor hillsides in both extensive and intensive managed vineyards. Medicago arabica is a Mediterrenean element and was present only in some vineyards of the Mecsek Mountains (South-Western Hungary). Lathyrus sphaericus is also a characteristic Mediterranean element which prefers extensive managed vineyards on southern slopes. Corispermum canescens and Corispermum nitidum are frequent on sandy soils of the Great Hungarian plain. Filago arvensis, Filago lutescens, Spergularia rubra and Vulpia myuros occured only in extensive managed acidic vineyards. 4 Conclusions The aim of this study is to assemble a list of the endangered weed species of the Hungarian vineyards. From the 56 enumerated plants 34 (2 extinct) appear in the German (Jedicke 1997), 21 (3 extinct) in the Slovakian (Feráková et al. 2001) and only 4 (+ 5 legally protected plants) in the Hungarian (Németh 1989) Red List. Interesting observation is that most of the common Hungarian weeds are already listed in the Red Lists of northern countries. There are already preservation programs going on to protect rare weed species in some European countries. This new list can contribute to a possible introduction of similar programmes in the Hungarian winegrowing areas. 5 References ARN, D., GIGON, A., GUT, D., 1997a: Zwiebelgeophyten in Rebbergen der Nordostschweiz: Artenschutz und naturnaher Weinbau. Zeitschrift für Ökologie und Naturschutz 6: 65-74. ARN, D., GIGON, A., GUT, D., 1997b: Bodenpflege-Massnahmen zur Erhaltung gefährdeter Zwiebelpflanzen in begrünten Rebbergen der Nordostschweiz. Schweiz. Z. Obst-Weinbau 133: 40-42. BAUER, N., BARNA, J., 1999: Dorog és Esztergom környékének növényvilága. Feichtinger Sándor esztergomi orvos-botanikus emlékének. Bakonyi Természettudományi Múzeum, Zirc. 80 pp. BRUNNER, A., GIGON, A. (2001): Erhaltung und Förderung attraktiver Zwiebelpflanzen in Rebbergen der Nordostschweiz. Obst- und Weinbau 5: 102-105. CSAPODY, V., 1932: Mediterrán elemek a magyar flórában. Don Bosco Nyomda, Rákospalota. 22 pp. CSIKY, J., 2004: Flora and vegetation mapping of the Karancs, the Medves region and the Cernová vrchovina (Nógrád-Gömör basalt region). Pécs, 451 pp. FARKAS, S. (eds.), 1999. Magyarország védett növényei. Mezőgazda Kiadó, Budapest 416 pp. FARKAS, S., 1999: Paks határának védett növényei. Paksi Városi Múzeum, Paks, 96 pp. FRANK, N., KIRÁLY, G., TÍMÁR, G., 1998: Vörös lista a hazai Laitaicum védett és veszélyeztetett edényes növényfajai. Soproni Műhely, 68 pp. FERÁKOVÁ,V., MAGLOCKÝ, Š., MARHOLD, K., 2001: Červený zoznam papraďorastov a semenných rastlín Slovenska. In: BALÁŽ, D., MARHOLD, K., URBAN, P. eds.: Červený zoznam rastlín a živočíchov Slovenska, Ochr. Prír. 20: 48-81. GOMBOCZ, E. HORVÁT, A. O., 1939: Kitaibel Pál Baranyában. - Ciszterci Rend pécsi Nagy Lajos-gimn. Ért. (1938-1939): 21-72. 41

JEDICKE, E., 1997: Die Roten Listen Gefährdete Pflanzen, Tiere, Pflanzengesellschaften und Biotope in Bund und Ländern. Ulmer, Stuttgart. 581 pp. MOLNÁR, V. A., 2000. A nagy gombafű. Élet és Tudomány. 34: 1072-1073. MOLNÁR, V. A., 2003: Rejtőzködő kincseink - Növényritkaságok a Kárpát-medencében. WinterFair, Szeged. 232 pp. NÉMETH, F., 1989: Növényvilág. Száras növények. In: RAKONCZAY Z. (eds.): Vörös Könyv. Akadémiai Kiadó, Bp. pp.: 263-321. PÁ,L R., 2002: Az Androsace maxima L. előfordulása a mecseki flórajárás területén. In: S.- ALBERT É. (eds.): Magyar botanikai kutatások az ezredfordulón. Pécs. pp.: 275-282. PÁL, R., 2002: Gyomflorisztikai ritkaságok a Mecseki flórajárás területéről. Kitaibelia 7(2): 225-230. PÁL, R., 2004: Invasive Plants threaten Segetal Weed Vegetation of South-Hungary. Weed Technology 18: 1314-1318. PINKE, GY., 1995: Kísérlet a botanikai szempontból értékes gyomnövényeink összeírására. Acta Agronomica Óváriensis 37 (2): 153-175. PINKE, GY., 1999a: Veszélyeztetett szegetális gyomnövények és fenntartásuk lehetőségei európai tapasztalatok alapján. Kitaibelia 4: 95-110. SIMON, T., 2000: A magyarországi edényes flóra határozója. Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest. 976 pp. UJVÁROSI, M., 1973a: Gyomnövények. Mezőgazdasági Kiadó, Budapest, 833 pp. UJVÁROSI, M., 1973b: A szőlő gyomnövényzete. In: Gyomirtás Mezőgazdasági Kiadó, Budapest. 153 pp. WILMANNS, O., 1989: Vergesellschaftung und Strategie-Typen von Pflanzen mitteleuropäischer Rebkulturen. Phytocoenologia 18: 83-128. WILMANNS, O., 1999: Lebensweisen der Pflanzen der Rebflurbefunde und Gedanken zu Strategie und Epharmonie. Carolinea 57: 9-18. 42