BROAD - LEAVED FOREST
PLANT COMMUNITIES IN
LATVIA
DACE SĀMĪTE
History of hardwoods in Latvia
• 8,000 – 7,800 years ago became Tilia cordata togeather
with Alnus incana, A. glutinosa and Populus tremula
•7,200 years ago at the begining of Atlantic peroiod Quercus robur, Fraxinus excelsior
•6,000 years ago hardwoods became established and
reached their maximum distribution, even Fagus
syvatica and Carpinus betulus apear in our forests
•1,500 years ago the forests covered ~80% of the area of
the country and mixed broad-leaved-spruce stands
predominate and until 13th century Latvian forest
preserved its primeval status well
History of hardwoods in Latvia
•14-16th century – intensive forest clearings for cropgrowing first devasted the most fertile broad-leved
forests
•18th century – due to Duchy of Courland where
manufacturing and trade rapidly developed, oakwoods
was total destroyed
•At the old crop-growing teretorys soil fertility foal,
and hardwoods were replased by Betula pendula,
Popula termula and Picea abies
Due to previous forest management in naw days
forest composition is more like boreal, than it
can be in our climatic and vegetation zone
Boreo-nemoral forest zone in
Europe
Due to – among
boreal and nemoral
zone, Latvian forests
represent nordic
coniferous, Europ
broad-leaved and
mixed stands
European broad-leaved forests in
Latvia
Dominant tree species are
Quercus robur
0.3%*
Fraxsinus excelsior
0.6%
Tilia cordata
0.06%
Ulmus glabra
0.03%
* - percentage from all forest stands in Latvia
oca
l lu
no
sa
Va
cc
in
os
a
M
yr
ti ll
os
Hy
a
lo
co
m
ios
a
O
xa
l id
os
Ae
a
go
M
yr
p
od
ti ll
io
os
M
sa
o
yr
s
ti ll
pa
os
gn
oos
po
a
l yt
ri c
ho
Dr
sa
yo
pt
er
io
Ca
sa
Sp
ric
ha
os
gn
oos
Dr
ph
a
yo
ra
pt
g
m
er
ito
io
sa
so
-c
ar
i co
Fi
sa
l ip
en
du
Va
los
cc
a
in
os
a
m
M
el
yr
.
ti ll
os
M
er
a
cu
m
el.
ri a
M
li o
yr
s
a
ti ll
m
os
el.
a
O
tu
xa
r
f.
l id
m
os
el.
a
tu
rf.
m
el
.
Cl
ad
ino
s
Broad-leaved forest representation
among forest types
60,0
50,0
30,0
ME
E
40,0
Lime
10,0
ME
Oak
ME
Ash
M
20,0
E
E
ME
E
0,0
Quercus robur – oak
•Demand temperate light and
worm;
•Grow moustly in riverine
forests on rich soils
•Best represented in eastern
part of Latvia (Lubana lake,
Pededzes and Aiviekstes
river)
Quercus robur forest distribution in
Latvia
0.1-0.4%
0.5-0.9%
1% and more
20
1
1
1
age
1
1
1
1
1
1
an
d
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
1
12
1
11
10
91
20
10
00
0
e
00
90
80
70
60
50
or
m
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
40
-1
30
-1
-1
-1
-9
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
600,0
81
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
200,0
71
61
51
41
31
21
11
1
area (ha)
Stand age of Quercus robur in
Latvia
1400,0
1200,0
1000,0
800,0
Private forest
400,0
State forest
0,0
Fraxinus excelsior - ash
•Feel good in shadoved places
•Grow on carbonatic and
humus rich soils
•Offen make stands
togeather with oak
•Best represented in central
and north-eastern part of
Latvia
Fraxinus excelsior forest
distribution in Latvia
0.1-0.4%
0.5-0.9%
1-3.9%
4% and more
age
20
1
an
d
19
1
18
1
17
1
16
1
m
or
e
-2
00
-1
90
-1
80
-1
70
-1
60
-1
50
-1
30
-1
40
-1
20
-1
10
-1
00
-9
0
-8
0
-7
0
-6
0
-5
0
200,0
15
1
14
1
13
1
12
1
11
1
10
1
91
81
71
61
51
41
-4
0
-3
0
-2
1
-1
0
400,0
31
21
11
1
area (ha)
Stand age of Fraxinus excelsior in
Latvia
1800,0
1600,0
1400,0
1200,0
1000,0
800,0
600,0
Private forest
State forest
0,0
Tilia cordata – small-leaved lime
Ulmus glabra – wych elm
lime
•Lime and elm monodominant forest
stands meake very rear (river valleys,
lake and bog islands)
•Mostly they make mixed stands
togeather with oak, ash and spruce
elm
•Elm feels good at mor shadowed and
humus rich places than lime
Tilia cordata forest distribution in
Latvia
Liepāja
Jelgava
Bauska
0.01- 0.04%
0.05 – 0.09%
0.1% and more
Ulmus glabra forest distribution in
Latvia
0.01-0.04%
0.05-0.09%
0.1% and more
20
1
1
1
age
1
1
1
1
1
1
an
d
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
1
12
1
11
10
20
10
00
0
0
m
00
90
80
70
60
50
or
e
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
40
-1
30
-1
-1
-1
-9
-8
0
0
0
0
0
1
120,0
91
81
71
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
40,0
61
51
41
31
21
11
1
area (ha)
Stand age of Tilia cordata in Latvia
180,0
160,0
140,0
Private forest
100,0
80,0
60,0
State forest
20,0
0,0
Broad-leaved forest characteristics
• Gap disturbance – main factor of stand
development
• Total change from vernal to summer vegetation
• Forest communities are similar to ones in central
Europe, the lack of some characteristic species
confined to the Fagus sylvatica and Carpinus
betula forests are due to geographical limitations
Diagnostic species of European
broad-leaved forests
Tree species
Ulmus glabra
Acer platanoides
Fraxinus excelsior
Quercus robur
Carpinus betulus
Shrub species
Euonymus europaea
Lonicera xylosetum
Padus avium
Corylus avellana
Brachypodium sylvaticum
Mercurialis perennis
Carex digitata
Milium effusum
Lathraea squamaria
Phyteuma spicatum
Actea spicata
Polygonatum multiflorum
Adoxa moschatellina
Pulmonaria obscura
Allium ursinum
Ranunculus lanuginosus
Asperula odorata
Ranunculus cassubicus
Corydalis solida
Sanicula europaea
Corydalis cava
Festuca altisima
Galeobdolon luteum
Dentaria bulbifera
Impatiens noli-tangere
Stellaria holostea
Circaea alpina
Matteuccia struthiopteris
Circaea lutetiana
Carex remota
Main biodiversity structures
•Multi-layered and multi-aged tree stand
•Abundance of cryptogams on stems and trunks
•Dead wood in diferent satges of decay
•Woodpecker signs and trees with holes
•Rich shrub layer
•Many gaps
•Low admixture of conifers
•Trees with trunk diameter more than 30cm
Broad-leaved forest
syntaxonomy in Latvia
Cl. Alnetea glutinosae Br.-Bl. et Tx. 1943
O. Alnetalia glutinosae Tx. 1937 em. Oberd. 1953
All. Alnion Glutinosae (Malc. 1929) Meijer Drees 1936
em.Th. Müll. et Görs 1958
Ass. Carici elongatae – Alnetum Schwick. 1936
(N. Priedītis)
Wetland forests with Fraxinus excelsior and
Alnus glutinosa
Broad-leaved forest
syntaxonomy in Latvia
Cl. Querco- fagetea Br.-Bl. et Vlieger em Klima 39
O. Fagetalia sylvaticae Pawl. ap. Pawl. et al. 28
All. Alno – Ulmion Br.-Bl. et Tx.ex Tchou 1984 em.Th.
Müll. et Görs 1958
SubAll. Alnenion glutinosae – incanae Oberd. 1953
Padus avium – Fraxinus excelsior community
Geum rivale – Fraxinus excelsior community
Carex vaginata – Fraxinus excelsior community
Crepis paludosa – Fraxinus excelsior community
Mercurialis perennis - Fraxinus excelsior community
(D. Mangale, D.Sāmīte)
Broad-leaved forest
syntaxonomy in Latvia
All. Carpinion betuli Oberd. 1953
Ass. Tilio-Carpinetum Traczyk 1962
All. Carpinion
Ass. Querco - Tilietum Laiviņš 1983
Hepatica nobilis – Quercus robur community
Calamagrostis arundinacea - Quercus robur community
Picea abies - Quercus robur community
(D. Sāmīte)
Broad-leaved forest
syntaxonomy in Lithuania
Vaccinium vitis-idaea – Quercus robur
(P. Snarskis, A. Jansons)
Scorzonera humilis – Quercus robur
Lathyrus niger – Quercus robur
Pteridium aquilinum – Quercus robur
Polygonatum verticilatum
Campanula trachelium – Quercus robur
Galeobdolon luteum – Quercus robur
Oxalis acetosella – Quercus robur
Deschampsia cespitosa – Quercus robur
Populus tremula – Quercus robur
Geum rivale – Quercus robur
Filipendula ulmaria – Quercus robur
Calamagrostis canescens – Quercus robur
Alnus glutinosa – Quercus robur
The future of broad-leaved forest
•
•
•
•
Forest management
Wood cultivation on agriculture land
Nature protection
Game animal influence
• PRESENT COMPOSITION AND PATTERNS OF CHANGE
CAN BE DUE TO PREVIOUS MAJOR DISTURBANCES AND
CHANGES IN LAND USE, WHICH HAPPENED MANY
HUNDREDS, EVEN THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO
E. van der Maarel
Forest management in broad-leaved
forests
300
250
Oak
Ash
246,2
242,1
area (ha)
200
150
130,1
100
50
82,5
45,3
35,2
35,0
25,2
16,8
15,7
0,6
0
State
Private
Final felling
State
Private
Cleaning cutting
State
Private
Sanitary felling
Reforestation
60,0
51,2
50,0
area (ha)
40,0
Oak
30,0
20,0
Ash
11,2
Lime
10,0
0,2
1,9
1,3
0,0
Natural
Artifical
Natural
Artifical
Artifical