FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2, 83–127, LJUBLJANA 2012 ABSTRACT UDC 630*176.322(497.4): 581.55 Syntaxonomic problems of altimontane beech forests of the alliance Aremonio-Fagion in Slovenia The aim of the paper is to determine the syntaxonomic position of altimontane beech forests of Slovenia on the basis of a phytocenological synthesis table. At the same time, we are publishing analytical table for the associations Stellario mon- tanae-Fagetum (= Aceri-Fagetum dinaricum), Aconito panicu- lati-Fagetum (= Aceri-Fagetum austroalpinum) and Cardami- ne waldsteinii-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= Aceri-Fagetum po- horicum). The valid synthesis table for these associations was published in 1969 (Zupančič 1969). New sub-associations Stellario-Fagetum adenostyletosum alliariae, Stellario-Fage- tum typicum, Aconito paniculati-Fagetum typicum and Aconi- to paniculati-Fagetum sorbetosum chamaemespilus are de- scribed. Key words: phytocenology, altimontane beech forests, Slovenia. IZVLEČEK UDK 630*176.322(497.4): 581.55 Sintaksonomski problemi altimontanskih bukovih goz- dov zveze Aremonio-Fagion v Sloveniji V razpravi želimo na podlagi sintezne fitocenološke ta- bele opredeliti sintaksonomski položaj altimontanskih buko- vih gozdov Slovenije. Hkrati objavljamo analitično tabelo z asociacijami Stellario montanae-Fagetum (= Aceri-Fagetum dinaricum), Aconito paniculati-Fagetum (= Aceri-Fagetum au- stroalpinum) in Cardamine waldsteinii-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= Aceri-Fagetum pohoricum). Za te asociacije je bila vel- javna sintezna tabela, objavljena leta 1969 (Zupančič 1969). Opisane so nove subasociacije Stellario-Fagetum adenostyle- tosum alliariae, Stellario-Fagetum typicum ter Aconito panicu- lati-Fagetum typicum in Aconito paniculati-Fagetum sorbeto- sum chamaemespilus. Ključne besede: fitocenologija, altimontanski bukovi goz- dovi, Slovenija. SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION IN SLOVENIA SINTAKSONOMSKI PROBLEMI ALTIMONTANSKIH BUKOVIH GOZDOV ZVEZE AREMONIO-FAGION V SLOVENIJI Mitja ZUPANČIČ 1 1 Dr., SAZU, Novi trg 5, SI - 1000 Ljubljana M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 84 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 CONTENTS 1 Introduction 2 Method of work 3 Association Stellario montanae-Fagetum 4 Association Aconito paniculati-Fagetum 5 Problems of the association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. in relation to other altimontane beech communities 6 Discussion and conclusion 7 Povzetek – Summary 8 References – Literatura M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 85 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 This contribution is a response to the paper by Marin - ček & Čarni (2010), with parts of which we cannot agree, in particular with the syntaxonomic assessment of the association Stellario montanae-Fagetum, with the presentation of Aconito paniculati-Fagetum and with the syntaxonomic position of the associations Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum and Polysticho lonchitis-Fage- tum. In order to clarify the problems, we have produced analytical tables of the associations Stellario montanae- -Fagetum (= Aceri-Fagetum dinaricum), Aconito panicu- lati-Fagetum (= Aceri-Fagetum austroalpinum) and Car- damine waldsteinii-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= Aceri-Fa- getum pohoricum), and a synthesis table that embraces the aforementioned three associations, the association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum with geographic vari- ants Calamintha grandiflora, Isopyrum thalictroides and typica, the association Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum with geographic variants Allium victorialis and Salix waldste- iniana (Marinček & Čarni 2010), the association Rho- dodendro-Fagetum (Dakskobler 1998) and the associa- tion or geographic variant Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Helleborus niger (Marinček , Poldini & Zu- pančič 1989). The synthesis table has 19 columns, re- specting individual sub-associations within the associa- tion Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum, as published by the authors Marinček & Čarni (2010), and sub-associ- ations in the association Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum, as published in the paper by Marinček , Poldini & Zu- pančič (1989). We will not discuss ecological condi- tions, the construction of associations, their floristic composition or syntaxonomic classification into higher ranks, which the authors have already described in their papers. In some cases, we will critically discuss charac- teristic and distinguishing species of associations, namely comparatively and, consequently, in some cases in relation to floristic composition. 1 INTRODUCTION 2 METHOD OF WORK The phytocenological research is based on the standard Central European method (Braun-Blanquet 1964, Westhoff & Van Der Maarel 1973) respecting the phytocenological codex (Weber , Moravec & Theuril - lat 2000). The taxonomic nomenclature of flora is har- monised according to Mala flora Slovenije (Martinčič et al. 2007). 3 ASSOCIATION STELLARIO MONTANAE-FAGETUM The association was first described in 1967 as Aceri-Fa- getum dinaricum Wraber 1960 (n. nud.) (Zupančič 1967) and a separate added synthesis table for compari- son between the Dinarid geographic variant and the Central-European association Aceri-Fagetum J. & M. Bartsch 1940. The geographic variant Aceri-Fagetum di- naricum was again published in a comparative study of maple-beech forests in 1969 in a synthesis table (Zupan - čič 1969). In view of the new Codex of Phytocenological Nomenclature (Barkman et al. 1976) in 1993, we re- named the geographic variant Aceri-Fagetum dinaricum as the association Stellario glochidispermae-Fagetum (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1993 ( Marinček et al. 1993). Subsequently, Dakskobler et al. (1999) per- formed a revision of the aggregate Stellaria nemorum L. in Slovenia and established that the species Stellaria glo- chidisperma (Murb.) Freyn is classified or included in the species Stellaria montana Pierrat, so we had validly named the association Stellario montanae-Fagetum (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1992 nom. nov. The as - sociation Stellario montanae-Fagetum was properly (validly) published in 1969 according to the Codex of Phytocenological Nomenclature, with 16 relevés in the synthesis table (article 1) and then corrected in relation to the name according to floristic principles (article 34) (Weber et al. 2000). In the paper on altimontane beech forests of the Il- lyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion Marinček & Čarni (2010: 23–24) they briefly state the following: “We did not place the syntaxon Stellario glochidispermae-Fage- tum (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1993 in the suballi - ance Saxifrago-Fagenion. Phytocenological investiga- tion showed that the taxon has only the value of a subas- sociation. It is recorded in both the Pre-Alpine geo- graphic variants of the association Ranunculo platanifo- lii-Fagetum (Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica stellarietosum) and in a Dinaric geographic vari- ant (Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Cala- M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 86 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 mintha grandiflora stellarietosum).” Because of these claims, we are publishing an analytical table of the as- sociation Stellario montanae-Fagetum, in which it is evi- dent that 13 phytocenological relevés from the area of Trnovski gozd and one each relevé from Kočevje, Idrija and Blegoš, which is located in the Pre-Alpine phytoce- nological region but has a specific position. This is found by Marinček & P . Košir (1998), when they describe Di- naric beech forests Omphalodo-Fagetum (Tregubov 1957) Marinček et al. 1992 ranunculetosum platanifolii Marinček & P. Košir 1998 on Blegoš, which in their opinion has an “intrazonal distribution”. It is a disjunct Dinaric association. It is similar with the phytoceno- logical relevés of the association Stellario montanae-Fa- getum on Blegoš. So the claim that the syntaxon Stellario montanae-Fagetum is recorded in Dinaric and Pre-Al- pine geographic variants is inexact. The claim that the syntaxon Stellario montanae-Fa- getum is only a subassociation of the syntaxon Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. is not acceptable, since the authors should have respected the time precedence of more than forty years of the previously published syn- taxon Stellario montanae-Fagetum and included the syntaxon Ranunoculo platanifolii-Fagetum in the first published syntaxon Stellario montanae-Fagetum and not the reverse, as they did. According to Sørensen, there is great similarity be- tween the phytocenoses Stellario montanae-Fagetum and Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Cala- mintha grandiflora (σs = 86.8), the coefficient accord- ing to Jaccard is lower (σj = 50.3). Sørensen’s coefficient leads us to the conviction that it is a single phytocenosis with the precedential name Stellario montanae-Fage- tum, and the synthesis table shows the f loristic and eco- logical particularities between them. The association Stellario montanae-Fagetum has clearly expressed diag- nostic species, such as the characteristic species Stella- ria montana, Polystichum aculeatum and Cardamine pentaphyllos and distinguishing species Acer pseudo- platanus, Scrophularia nodosa and Corydalis cava. The characteristic and especially the distinguishing species indicate a damper habitat and they are numerous or only represented (Cardamine pentaphyllos) in the asso- ciation Stellario montanae-Fagetum. They are only pre- sent here and there in the geographic variant Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum, as is evident from the synthesis table. More often there is only maple – Acer pseudopla- tanus, which has a low median level of presence and still smaller median cover value. In the association Stel- lario montanae-Fagetum for the most part there are no characteristic or distinguishing species of the associa- tion Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum or only four of eight appear, with low presence or low cover values (Lu- zula sylvatica 32 II, Ranunculus platanifolius 3 II, Are- monia agrimonioides 4 III, Veratrum album subsp. album 2 II). It must be noted here that the characteristic and distinguishing species of the association Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. are relative and appear more or less in all altimontane and subalpine beech as- sociations of the Illyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion. The association Stellario montanae-Fagetum cannot be classified either in the Dinaric geographic Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflo- ra or in the Pre-Alpine geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, since the distin- guishing species of the two geographic variants are not present in it. It must be noted that the association Stel- lario montanae-Fagetum is in general poor in charac- teristic and distinguishing species of the Illyrian alli- ance of beech forests Aremonio-Fagion, especially in comparison with the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflo- ra. Further analyses will show a considerably lower co- efficient of similarity between the phytocenoses Stella- rio montanae-Fagetum and Ranunculo platanifolii-Fa- getum s. lat. The characteristic species Stellaria montana of the association Stellario montanae-Fagetum appears more numerously in the phytocenosis of Ž. Košir Isopyro-Fa- getum var. Adenostyles alliariae, which Marinček in- cluded in the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides, specifically in the subassociation stellarietosum nemorosae. In addi- tion to the species Stellaria montana, the distinguishing species Corydalis cava is also present in the geographic variant Ranunculo-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalic- troides. Other diagnostic species for the association Stel- lario montanae-Fagetum are not in the geographic vari- ant Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides. Only the very rare individual appearance of sycamore maple must be mentioned, which essential- ly distinguishes the phytocenosis. The indexes of simi- larity are Sørensen σs = 59.4 and Jaccard σj = 42.3, which means different phytocenoses. If in the first phase we accept the thesis of Marin - ček & Čarni (2010: 19) that the association Isopyro-Fa- getum is only a geographic variant of the association Ranunculo platinifolii-Fagetum with the species Iso- pyrum thalictroides, this, together with the species Cro- cus vernus, would be a distinguishing species for the geographic variant Ranunculo platinifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides. Comparison of this with the association Stellario montanae-Fagetum indicates difference but also slight relatedness (σs = 58, σj = 40.8), and difference with the association Aconito paniculati- -Fagetum (σs = 48.0, σs = 31.5). M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 87 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 We also compared the association Stellario monta- nae-Fagetum with three phytocenoses; specifically with the geographic variant Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victorialis, in which σs = 59.5 and σj = 42.4, and Rhododendro hirsuti-Fagetum var. geogr. Ane- mone trifolia subvar. geogr. Omphalodes verna, in which σs = 34.5 and σj = 22.0, and with the combined associa- tions Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. and Polysti- cho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat., in which σs = 58.9 or σs = 47 .7 . All coefficients of similarity confirm the difference or independence of the cited phytocenoses. More detailed research into the association Stellario montanae-Fagetum have shown that the association is articulated into two subassociations. Subassociation Stellario montanae-Fagetum typi- cum subass. nova is generally widespread on limestone or dolomite, thus carbonate brown soils on colluvial deposits, in which the A horizon is deep, less skeletal. The holotype of the subassociation is relevé number 8 from the Analytical Table. Subassociation Stellario montanae-Fagetum ade- nostyletosum alliariae subass. nova thrives on fresher habitats than the previous one. The distinguishing spe- cies are: Doronicum austriacum, Adoxa moschatelina, Adenostyles alliariae, Cicerbita alpina and Myosotis syl- vatica. Except for the species Adoxa moschatelina all the others are from the order Adenostyletalia s. lat. The beech-associated species Adoxa moschatelina mainly grows on fresh to moist soil. The leaching of sesquiox- ides can be observed in smaller quantities in the soils, which causes less acidification of the soil and here and there indicates a slightly greater presence of acidophil- ous species. The holotype of the subassociation is rel- evé number 15 in the Analytical Table. 4 ASSOCIATION ACONITO PANICULATI-FAGETUM The first presentation of the association Aconito panicu- lati-Fagetum was in 1969 under the name Aceri-Fage- tum austroalpinum (Zupančič 1969). In 1993 we re- named it according to the Codex of Phytocenological Nomenclature into Aconito paniculati-Fagetum (Ma- rinček et al. 1993). In a paper from 1969 the cited asso- ciation was presented in a synthesis table with eight phy- tocenological relevés and a short ecological composition (Zupančič 1969: 120–121). In renaming the association Aceri-Fagetum austroalpinum into the valid name Aco- nito paniculati-Fagetum we used for the nomenclature type the phytocenological relevé of M. Wraber (Marin - ček et al. 1993: 129–130). The claim by Marinček & Čarni (2010: 27) that “The syntaxon was established on the basis of one rel- evé, which was done in 1960” is inexact or is even mis- leading, or that “More precise synsystematic classifica- tion will be possible when an analytical table is pub- lished with at least five relevés”. This comment is even more odd given that the authors cite in the Literature Zupančič’s paper from 1969 ( Marinček & Čarni 2010: 39). The characteristic and distinguishing species of the association Aconito paniculati-Fagetum in the group of altimontane beech forests of Slovenia of the Illyrian alli- ance Aremonio-Fagion appear only in it. The character- istic species are: Aconitum lycoctonum subsp. ranunculi- folium, Aconitum degenii subsp. paniculatum, Crepis paludosa, Geranium sylvaticum, Salix appendiculata, Rumex alpestris and Senecio cacaliaster. All are taken from the order Adenstyletalia s. lat. and show exempla- rily the fresh habitat of the association. The distinguish- ing species are Acer pseudoplatanus, with the highest median cover value among altimontane beech associa- tions, Myrrhis odorata and Geum rivale. All the afore- mentioned diagnostic species for the association are present with the highest level of presence and for the most part also with the highest median cover values. All confirm the freshness and high mountain nature of the association Aconito paniculati-Fagetum. Phytocenological inventories were taken in Triglav National Park in the Julian Alps at altitudes from 1260– 1500 m, thus for the most part above the zone of the as- sociation Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum s. lat., on lime- stone and dolomite on which carbonate brown soils have developed, occasionally rendzinas. The habitats of the association are damper than in the case of the asso- ciation Stellario montanae-Fagetum, which is reflected in the higher representation of species of the order Ade- nostyletalia s. lat. We have described two subassociations within the framework of the association, namely Aconito panicu- lati-Fagetum typicum subass. nova, which grows on warmer, southern less steep slopes on fresh, biologically more active soil. The holotype of the subassociation is relevé number 18 from the Analytical Table. The second subassociation, Aconito paniculati-Fa- getum sorbetosum chamaemespilus subass. nova, is an M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 88 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 upland, colder phytocenosis on fresher to damper and also slightly acidic soils, as is confirmed by the distin- guishing species of the subassociation and the numer- ous spruce-associated species. The distinguishing spe- cies are: Viola biflora, Polystichum lonchitis, Sorbus cha- maemespilus and Ribes alpinum. The enumerated spe- cies are representatives of the subalpine zone. The holo- type of the subassociation is relevé number 22 from the Analytical Table. Because of linkage, we also studied the relation be- tween similar or vegetatively close phytocenoses. The bulk of the flora of altimontane beech associations is fairly homogenous, from species of the class Querco-Fa- getea s. lat. or beech-associated flora and high stemmed species – Adenostylatelia s. lat. The association Stellario- -Fagetum is most closely related to the association Aco- nito paniculati-Fagetum, the coefficient of similarity of the associations is σs = 78.8 or σj = 65.0, which is to be expected. They are distinguished by characteristic and distinguishing species and Southeast European-Illyrian species, on the one hand, and Southeast Alpine species on the other. There is less similarity with the phytocenosis Poly- sticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana, which is a neighbour in the space (σs = 64.2 or σj = 47.6), indicating their difference. There is even less similarity with the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii-Fa- getum var. geogr. typica, where σs = 51.1 or σj = 34.3, although characteristic species of the associations Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., Ranunculus platani- folius and Polystichum lonchitis are present in the asso- ciation, just as in the majority of other altimontane beech forests in Slovenia. The lowest similarity is with the geographic variant Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Helleborus niger (σs = 43.3 or σj = 27.7). The com- parisons confirm the independence of the association Aconito paniculati-Fagetum. Characteristic and distin- guishing species of the association Aconito paniculati- -Fagetum indicate with their presence and cover values its ecological conditions and its independence. 5 PROBLEMS OF THE ASSOCIATION RANUNCULO PLATANIFOLII-FAGETUM S. LAT. IN CONNECTION WITH OTHER ALTIMONTANE BEECH ASSOCIATIONS The division of the boundary between altimontane and lower subalpine vegetation levels in Slovenia still today causes difficulties. The classical zonal division of the central eastern Alps of H. Mayer presents problems for the boundary of the altimontane zone from 1000/1100 to 1300 m, and this rises towards the southeast because of the warmer climatic influences that come from the Mediterranean and Pannonia. Phytocenoses from the Synthesis Table certainly grow in the altimontane zone. Some are already present in the lower montane zone (e.g., 880 a.s.l.) and extend to the lower subalpine zone (e.g., above 1420 m). The association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum is a typical altimontane beech association with poorly ex- pressed characteristic species. Marinček & Čarni (2010) state as characteristic species Ranunculus plata- nifolius, Polygonatum verticillatum and Adenostyles gla- bra. All are relative characteristic species, among which the species Ranunculus platanifolius is the only one that is more or less acceptable, the other two, Polygonatum verticillatum and Adenostyles glabra, are mainly present in all altimontane and subalpine beech associations of Slovenia of the Illyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion. The authors (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21) are mistaken in the statement: “The group of distinguishing species of syntaxons of the association Polysticho lonchitis-Fage- tum negatively distinguishes against subalpine beech forests of the altimontane syntaxon Ranunculo platani- folii-Fagetum”, and continue: “Some of the species also appear as coincidental species in the region of the asso- ciation Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum.” The Codex of Phytocenological Nomenclature (Weber et al. 2000) does not allow for characteristic negative differentiation of an association, particularly with relative characteristic and distinguishing species that are more or less present in all altimontane and sub- alpine beech associations. Of the species that distin- guish the association Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. from the association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21), because of the high- er level of presence in the association Polysticho lonchi- tis-Fagetum s. lat., only Salix waldsteiniana, Carex ferru- ginea, Viola biflora and Allium victorialis are more or less acceptable, although they also grow in other phyto- cenoses of altimontane beech forests, mainly in the as- sociation Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. (see Synthesis Table). Probably because they are aware of the relativity of the characteristic species of the association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., the authors stress the differ- ence of growth of beech in subalpine beech forests, namely: “The finding is important that subalpine beech forests, because of low habit due to snow, have a particu- lar appearance, which physiognomically distinguishes M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 89 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 them from high growing altimontane beech forests.” (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21). The physiognomic ap- pearance of beech stands is not a category of the Codex of Phytocenological Nomenclature. Above all this find- ing is not acceptable because it is the same species in the two phytocenoses, i.e., beech – Fagus sylvatica. The next finding, that “altimontane beech forests differ from subalpine species with partially thermophil- ous character”, is a weak finding. Of the species cited in the paper by Marinček & Čarni (2010: 21) the follow- ing are not in the tables: Tamus communis, Acer platano- ides, Asarum europaeum and Hedera helix. The species Melittis melisophyllum, Polygala chamaebuxus, Rha- mnus fallax and Carex flacca are present very little, and the species Carex alba, Erica carnea, Lamium orvala, Omphalodes verna and Primulala vulgaris are satisfac- tory. For the species Carex alba and Erica carnea, which are represented only in the geographic variant Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, it could be said that the cause of their appearance is the geological base, since the two species are dolomitophilous, as is the spe- cies already mentioned Polygala chamaebuxus. The tak- sons Lamium orvala and Omphalodes verna are fresh loving species. The species Primula vulgaris, which is more represented in the association Ranunculo platani- folii-Fagetum s. lat. than in other altimontane beech for- ests, has an even more thermophilous character. The authors state with regard to the association Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. that in it are present “some species of the order Fagetalia sylvaticae or class Querco-Fagetea, with a slight thermophilous character” (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21). We agree with this find- ing, although the following species are not mentioned in the tables: Acer platanoides, Asarum europaeum and Hedera helix. We agree in relation to the appearance of some ecologically more demanding species only in alti- montane beech forests. Marinček & Čarni (2010: 22) continue by citing the species that distinguish the geographic variants. For the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, they state 22 species, of various ecological properties, which are supposed to be present only in this geographic variant. Among them, the species Astrantia bavarica and Digitalis grandiflora do not appear in the tables. The species Helleborus niger subsp. niger, Aposeris foetida, Lonicera xylosteum, Luzula luzuloides, Dryopte- ris expansa, Gymnocarpium dryopteris and Hieracium murorum, which are present everywhere, cannot be con- sidered in this group. Some of them are barely sufficiently represented, e.g., Astantia carniolica, Epipactis hellebori- ne, Corylus avellana and Helleborus odorus. For the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora, Marin - ček (1998: 104) envisaged five distinguishing species: Festuca altissima, Calamintha grandif lora, Vicia oroboi- des, Allium victorialis and Aremonia agrimonioides. In the tabular material (Marinček & Čarni 2010), the species Vicia oroboides and Allium victorialis are not given as distinguishing species, but only in passing in the text (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 23). In corrobora- tion of the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora, the au- thors add the completely widespread species Lathyrus vernus and Cirsium erisithales and in the tables the un- published species Sesleria autumnalis and the species Carex pilosa, which has greater diagnostic weight but is only present with minor permanence. The species Are- monia agrimonioides and Festuca altissima are more or less widespread in all beech forests, also in the altimon- tane zone. The only quality distinguishing species is Ca- lamintha grandiflora, which the authors also establish. The geographic variants Ranunculo platanifolii-Fa- getum var. geogr. Calamintha grandif lora and Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica are very simi- lar, as the coefficients also indicate (σs = 70.3 and σj = 54.2) and they confirm common membership of the macroassociation Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. The synsystematic position of the geographic vari- ant Ranuculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides (= Isopyro-Fagetum var. Adenostyles alliari- ae Ž. Košir 1979) is uncertain within the complex of the macroassociation Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., as the indices of similarity of the phytocenoses confirm, σs = 43.7 and σj = 27.9. The indices of the geographic variants Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, for which σs = 43.7 and σj = 31.4 and Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandif lora, for which the indices are σs = 55.7 and σj =38.6, indicate a similar relation. Marinček & Čarni (2010: 23) state that the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii-Fage- tum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides is close to the Di- naric geographic variant: “In view of the edaphic condi- tions, it is close to the Dinaric variant.” This is partially true but the indices of similarity indicate an independ- ent association, as originally described Isopyro-Fagetum var. Adenostyles alliariae (Ž. Košir 1979). It is evident from the Synthesis Table that, of the characteristic spe- cies, only the species Ranunculus platanifolius is ade- quately represented. The finding that: “The complete absence of some species of the alliance Aremonio-Fagion negatively distinguishes it from both the Dinaric and the Pre-alpine geographic variants.” is awkward. The presence of three of its characteristic species (Isopyrum thalictoides, Corydalis cava, Rumex alpestris) and six distinguishing species (Scilla bifolia, Veratrum album s. lat., Adoxa moschatelina, Polygonatum verticillatum, M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 90 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Chrysosplenium alternifolium and Stellaria montana) (see Synthesis Table, column 7) indicates the independ- ence of the association Isopyro-Fagetum. It is question- able how diagnostically suitable some of the distin- guishing species are. In view of the appearance of the species Stellaria montana and Corydalis cava in the association Isopyro- -Fagetum one might consider a similarity with the as- sociation Stellario montanae-Fagetum, but the indices of similarity indicate a difference between the phyto- cenoses (σs = 59.4 and σj = 42.3), although they are clos- er than all other altimontane beech associations. They are similar in terms of a standard floristic composition of beech-associated species in the wider sense, of high stemmed and partially also spruce-associated species, just like more or less all altimontane beech associations of the alliance Aremonio-Fagion. They are also similar in terms of ecological conditions. The difference is clear in the characteristic and distinguishing species of the associations and the presence of the species Acer pseudo- platanus, which explicitly dominates in the association Stellario montanae-Fagetum. The species Isopyrum tha- lictroides, Crocus vernus, Leucojum vernum and Ranun- culus ficaria (= Ficaria verna), which Marinček & Čarni (2010: 23) state, distinguish the association Iso- pyro-Fagetum from other altimontane beech forests. Comparison between the phytocenoses Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandif lora and Rhododendro hirsuti-Fagetum var. geogr. Anemone trifolia subvar. geogr. Omphalodes verna also interested us, where σs = 49.7 and σj = 33.0, as well as with the phy- tocenosis Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, where σs = 57.8 and σj = 35.1. The indices and the Synthesis Table demonstrate in an exemplary manner the independence of the phytocenoses. In relationship terms, the phytocenoses Ranunculo platanifolii-Fage- tum var. geogr. typica and Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Helleborus niger are closer, where σs = 66.4 and σj = 49.8. The next synsystematic problem of interest is the relation between the phytocenoses Ranunculo platanifo- lii-Fagetum s. lat. and Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. Both phytocenoses have two, or the latter three (?) geo- graphic variants: Dinaric, Pre-alpine and a third unde- fined Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Anemone trifolia (?). Marinček & Čarni (2010: 25) give distin- guishing species of the association Polysticho lonchitis- -Fagetum s. lat., namely the generally widespread spe- cies in altimontane and subalpine beech associations Polystichum lonchitis, then the species Carex ferruginea and Rhododendron hirsutum, which are more numerous in the association Rhododendro hirsuti-Fagetum, and Pinus mugo with equal presence. The species Salix appendiculuta, Sorbus chamaemespilus and Lonicera ca- erulea are modestly represented in the phytocenosis Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. and the last two even not at all in the geographic variant Polysticho lonchitis- -Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana (see Synthesis Table). The selection of two subalpine species Salix waldste- iniana and S. glabra as distinguishing species of the geo- graphic variant Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana is sensible but the species Salix gla- bra, with the same level of presence, is also present in the association Rhododendro hirsuti-Fagetum (see Synthesis Table). For the geographic variant Polysticho lonchitis-Fa- getum var. geogr. Allium victorialis, the distinguishing species are Allium victorialis, which is an Alpine-Altai species that grows here in the alpine world (Julian Alps, Karavanke, Savinja Alps), and because of the ecological conditions (snow cover, long-lasting snow) also on high mountain Snežnik, Trnovski gozd and in Kočevje, and the species Calamintha grandif lora, which is a southeast European-Illyrian species, generally distributed in Slo- venia in the Dinaric and Pre-dinaric phytogeographic regions. Irrespective of phytogeographic affiliation, the distinguishing species Allium victorialis is well chosen. This cannot be said for the wider distinguishing group, in which the species Euphorbia carniolica and Lamium orvala are modestly represented. Marinček & Čarni (2010: 26) additionally find that “the favourable ecologi- cal conditions are shown by a lot of ecologically more demanding taxons, such as: Adoxa moschatelina, Arum maculatum, Ranunculus lanuginosus, Carex pilosa, Euphorbia amygdaloides, Lathyrus vernus, Cardamine bulbifera, Prenanthes purpurea and some others.” This ecological specification holds true, although the major- ity of the enumerated species are also represented in other subalpine and altimontane beech forests, which is nothing special. Among these species only the species Lathyrus vernus is an exception, which decisively pre- dominates in the phytocenosis Polysticho lonchitis-Fage- tum var. geogr. Allium victorialis. The geographic variant Polysticho lonchitis-Fage- tum var. geogr. Anemone trifolia (?) (Poldini & Nardi - ni 1993: 248–255) is represented with five relevés. Com- pared to the other geographic variant, the phytocenosis is floristically impoverished and is in between the phy- tocenoses Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., Polysti- cho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. and Anemono trifoliae-Fa- getum s. lat. It could be said that it is fairly undefined so we have not entered it in the Synthesis Table. For the phytocenosis Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. Marinček & Čarni (2010: 25) again state that “pre- dominantly pure beech stands of low habit as a result of M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 91 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 snow prevail, with individual interspersed sycamore, spruce and fir.” They had already previously noted that the physiognomic appearance of beech is probably an important factor in judging the autonomy of an associa- tion (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21). It is evident from the Synthesis Table that the flo- ristic compositions of altimontane and subalpine beech forests are fairly similar or uniform. The floristic dif- ferences are sometimes minimal and there are no good characteristic or distinguishing species for individual phytocenoses, although their ecological conditions and phenological development and the shape of tree species can be different. Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. is such an association, which has fairly even ecological conditions in the high mountains and there are there- fore not exaggerated differences between the flora of altimontane and subalpine beech forests, especially with the phytocenosis Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. The coefficients of similarity of phytocenoses among these phytocenoses, in relation to the geograph- ic variants, are the following: between Ranunculo plata- nifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora and Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victoria- lis, σs = 75.0 and σj = 60.0, between Ranunculo platani- folii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica and Polysticho lonchitis- -Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana, σs = 63.5 and σj = 46.6. The coefficients confirm the great mutual similarity of the mentioned phytocenoses, especially if these are compared with the similarities between the geographic variants Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victorialis and Polysticho lonchitis-Fage- tum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana, where σs = 71.0 and σj = 55.0, or between the geographic variants Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandi- flora and Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, where σs = 70.3 and σj = 54.2. The combination of the associations Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. and Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. into a uni- form association with two geographic variants and two altitudinal variants is a question. Although the associa- tion Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. is poorly de- fined with the present characteristic species, with spe- cific corrections and supplementary distinguishing species, the association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. could be retained, and the phytocenosis Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. with two altitudinal variants included in it. It would be sensible to retain the associa- tion Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. such that new characteristic and distinguishing species are deter- mined for it. Its beech stands are economically interest- ing and, together with the association Anemono trifoli- ae-Fagetum s. lat., they cover a considerable area. The decision of the Austrian phytocenologists Willner & Grabherr (2007: 157-158) is interesting and more or less questionable, who combined the associations Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum and Polysticho lonchitis- -Fagetum with the associations Aconito paniculati-Fa- getum and Isopyro-Fagetum var. Adenostyles alliariae into an altimontane beech association Saxifrago rotun- difolii-Fagetum. For updating the association Ranunculo platanifo- lii-Fagetum s. lat. the characteristic species would be Lu- zula sylvatica subsp. sylvatica, Ranunculus platanifolius and Polystichum lonchitis. The generally widespread and numerical species in this region Polygonatum verticilla- tum and Adenostyles glabra would be removed (see Syn- thesis Table). The distinguishing species of the associa- tion are more convincing, namely Aremonia agrimonio- ides, Veratrum album subps. album, Galeobdolon flavi- dum, Hacquetia epipactis and Anthriscus nitida. These are ecologically more demanding species, which stress the specific productivity and freshness of the habitat (see Synthesis Table). For the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora, the distin- guishing species are Calamintha grandiflora and Carex pilosa. The altitudinal variant Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum var. alt. Allium victorialis would be in the framework of this geographic variant. For the geographic variant Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum var. geogr. typica the distinguishing species are Primula vulgaris and Polygonatum multiflorum. The next altitudinal variant would be Ranunculo platanifo- lii-Fagetum var. alt. Salix waldsteiniana (see Synthesis Table). By this specification, the similarity between the geographic and altitudinal variants would be σs = 71.5 and σj = 55.7 (see Table, compare column 7), which con- firms the wisdom of combining the associations Ranun- culo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. and Polysticho lonchitis- -Fagetum s. lat. The habit of one species, in this case beech, plays no role from a theoretical point of view al- though from the point of view of practical forestry, this is stressed with the altitudinal variants. The phyto- cenoses could be divided, despite the similarity, only if another numerically sufficiently strong co-dominant tree species were available, which would stress more or less specific ecological conditions. We also compared other altimontane and subalpine beech associations, as is evident from the Synthesis Table and the Table of Comparison of Similarity of alti- montane and subalpine beech associations of Slovenia of the Illyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion according to Sø- rensen and Jaccard. The coefficients in the main con- firm the independence of associations and, in some cases, closer or more distant relatedness (see Table of Comparison). M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 92 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Compared phytocenoses 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Sørensen 70.3 55.7 47.8 43.7 75.0 63.5 71.5 86.859.4 58.9 51.1 49.7 57.8 66.4 59.5 34.578.864.243.3 71.0 42.651.6 69.4 62.358.048.0 Jaccard 54.238.6 31.4 27.9 60.046.655.7 50.342.341.7 34.333.0 35.1 49.8 42.422.065.0 47.6 27.7 55.0 27.1 34.853.2 45.340.8 31.5 1 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica 2 Ranuculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides 3 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g.. Calamintha grandiflora: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides 4 Ranunculo-Fagetum s. lat.: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides 5 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis 6 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 7 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora & Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis: Ranunculo-Fage- tum v. g. typica & Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 8 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Stellario-Fagetum 9 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides: Stellario-Fagetum 10 Ranunculo-Fagetum s. lat. & Polysticho-Fagetum s. lat.: Stellario-Fagetum 11 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica: Aconito-Fagetum 12 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandif lora: Rhododendro-Fagetum v. g. Anemone trifolia sv. g. Omphalodes verna 13 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica: Rhododendro-Fagetum v. g. Anemone trifolia sv. g. Omphalodes verna 14 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica: Anemono-Fagetum v. g. Helleborus niger 15 Stellario-Fagetum: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis 16 Stellario-Fagetum: Rhododendro-Fagetum v. g. Anemone trifolia sv. g. Omphalodes verna 17 Stellario-Fagetum: Aconito-Fagetum 18 Aconito-Fagetum: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 19 Aconito-Fagetum: Anemono-Fagetum v. g. Helleborus niger 20 Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 21 Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis: Rhododendro-Fagetum v. g. Anemone trifolia sv. g. Omphalodes verna 22 Anemono-Fagetum v. g. Helleborus niger: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 23 Cardamine-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= Aceri-Fagetum pohoricum): Cardamine-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= Savensi- -Fagetum var. Abies alba) 24 Cardamine-Fagetum: Cardamine-Fagetum var. Abies alba 25 Stellario-Fagetum: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides 26 Aconito-Fagetum: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides Statistical review of comparisons between altimontane beech of Slovenia according to Sørensen and Jaccard. 6 DISCUSSION WITH CONCLUSIONS The contribution of Marinček & Čarni (2010) in the main brings a short note of numerous relevés (199) of the altimontane phytocenosis Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum s. lat., a short description of some other alti- montane phytocenoses, which are or are supposed to be found in Slovenia. “Among other things, the aim is to present the rich articulation of the suballiance Saxifra- go-Fagenion.” (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 4). A funda- mental presentation of their results is lacking, or conclu- sions on the appearance and relations among phyto- cenoses of altimontane and subalpine beech associations of Slovenia of the Illyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion, which would most authentically be presented by a syn- thesis table, perhaps with the support of some of the available computer methods. It is mentioned in passing, for example, in the case of the association Stellario mon- tanae-Fagetum that “phytocenological research has shown”. We wished to supplement this deficiency with the present paper by comparing the most relevant alti- montane and subalpine beech associations of Slovenia of the Illyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion. The position and relation among them is exemplarily shown by the Syn- thesis Table, on the basis of which we have noted and based our comments. In relation to statistical computer methods, we are of the opinion that they can be of assistance but not without critical judgement, which is especially neces- sary in the treatment of both floristically and ecologi- M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 93 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 cally sensitive phytocenoses of altimontane and subal- pine beech forests. The coefficients of similarity have relative value, the researcher’s diagnosis of the floristic and partially ecological basis, insofar as it is well known, is decisive. The synsystematic position of the altimontane beech forests in Slovenia discussed is made more diffi- cult because of some uneven ecological conditions, such as a carbonate bedrock, mezoclimate and relief. These condition the coordinated development of beech, par- tially spruce vegetation and high stemmed vegetation, which have a decisive role in these beech forests. So the content of the f lora is very uneven in these phytocenoses. There are differences in the soil layers and in very rarely perceived microclimatic phenomena. Marinček & Čarni (2010: 23) already draw attention to this when, in the case of individual geographic variants of the associa- tion Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., they note “that despite the evident ecological particularities of the geographic variants, these are not ref lected to an expect- ed extent in the vegetation cover”. Thus the position of the association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. with its geographic variants is fairly complicated in comparison with other altimontane and some subalpine beech associations on a carbonate base. Irrespective of the evenness of the vegetation cover of altimontane beech associations on carbonates, we ac- cept the existence of the association Ranunculo platani- folii-Fagetum s. lat., with correction of its characteristic species and additional distinguishing species, which more reinforce its synsystematic position in the circle of carbonate altimontane beech associations of the Illyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion. In this, we must first stress the independence of the associations Stellario monta- nae-Fagetum, Aconito paniculati-Fagetum and Isopyro- -Fagetum (Isopyro-Fagetum var. Adenostyles alliariae) and second, combine the phytocenosis Polysticho lonchi- tis-Fagetum s. lat. with its “geographic variants” of the association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. The specification of a variant with the Alpine-Altai species Allium victorialis and the northern Alpine-Arctic spe- cies Salix waldsteiniana is more suitable for the altitudi- nal variant, if we follow as model W. & A. Matuszki - ewicz (1981 ). Thus the association Ranunculo platanifo- lii-Fagetum s. lat. would have two geographic and two altitudinal variants. The floristic composition of the phytocenoses Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. and Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. is very much the same and only the species Carex ferruginea and Rhododen- dron hirsutum satisfactorily distinguish them, which are represented in the association Rhododendro hirsuti-Fa- getum, and the species Pinus mugo, with the same pres- ence in both associations. The species Polystichum lon- chitis, though, is distributed throughout altimontane and subalpine beech associations. Thus understood, the association Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., with its geographic variants with the species Calamintha grandiflora and typical species, and altitudinal variants with the species Allium victorialis and Salix waldsteinia- na, is acceptable. The proposed solution enables an un- derstanding of Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., although in view of the Codex, we must include the geo- graphic variant Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. in the previously (Zupančič 1967, 1969, Marinček et al. 1993), first published associations Stellario montanae- -Fagetum and Aconito paniculati-Fagetum, which would not be completely sensible. The geographic variant Polysticho lonchitis-Fage- tum var. geogr. Anemone trifolia (?) (Poldini & Nardi - ni 1993), presented with five phytocenological relevés, is unclear, floristically impoverished and more similar to poorer forms of the association or the geographic vari- ant Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Luzula nivea. In short, the table presents untypical forms of one or other phytocenoses, in our opinion least of all the phy- tocenosis Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. Because of the incomplete specification, mainly the mosaic of rel- evés, we have not entered it in the Synthesis Table. It is incomprehensible that Marinček accepted it as repre- sentative and first published it. In our opinion the first publication of the altitudinal variant Ranunculo platani- folii-Fagetum var. alt. Salix waldsteiniana (= Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana) is the table with ten relevés in the article Sub-alpine beech for- ests in the Škofja Loka hills (Marinček 1985: 186–189). This publication is not cited in the literature of the paper by Marinček & Čarni (2010). In the Synthesis Table, we have included for com- parison of altimontane beech associations of the Illyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion, the association or geographic variant Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Hellebo- rus niger with two tables, which best represent this alti- montane association (Marinček et al. 1989: Tables 1 and 2). We have specified in this the following charac- teristic species: Carex alba, Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis- -idaea, Picea abies and Larix decidua. The Synthesis Table showed that these species to a large extent also ap- pear in other altimontane beech associations. The spe- cies Picea abies and Larix decidua are present slightly less in other altimontane beech associations, which, in terms of median cover values and level of permanence, stand out in the association Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum s. lat., so we have reassessed them in the distinguishing species. We have left out other characteristic species and in place of them chosen the species Polygala chamae- buxus and Orthilia secunda. Both species thrive in mod- M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 94 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 erately acidic or neutral habitats on sandy soils. The spe- cies Polygala chamaebuxus, though, is an indicator of dolomite or dolomiticised limestone bedrock, which is characteristic of the association Anemono trifoliae-Fage- tum s. lat. In the publication by Zupančič (1969), we present- ed with eight relevés a third geographic variant Aceri- -Fagetum pohoricum from the ranks of altimontane beech associations although we cannot place it in the Illyrian but in the Central-European floral province. We did not subsequently discuss this further. It seemed worthwhile to include this phytocenosis in the Synthesis Table and the similar phytocenosis of Ž. Košir (1979: 105–150) Savensi-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= var. silicico- lum) on Pohorje. We classify these two phytocenoses in altimontane beech associations with the co-dominant species Acer pseudoplatanus. The result of comparison showed the identity of the phytocenoses Aceri-Fagetum pohoricum and Savensi-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= var. silicicolum). According to the Codex of Phytocenologi- cal Nomenclature, we validly designated the association Cardamine waldsteinii-Fagetum Ž. Košir 1962 var. Abies alba (Zupančič 1969) Ž. Košir 1979 (the original, invalid name was Aceri-Fagetum pohoricum ). The characteristic species of the association are Cardamine waldsteinii (= Cardamine savensis = Dentaria savensis), Milium effu- sum and Luzula pilosa, and the distinguishing species Abies alba and Acer pseudoplatanus. The characteristic species and the distinguishing species Abies alba explic- itly distinguish the phytocenosis Cardamine waldstei- nii-Fagetum var. Abies alba from other altimontane beech phytocenoses. The distinguishing species Acer pseudoplatanus is a co-constructor of the association because of its numerical appearance. The characteristic and distinguishing species define the phytocenosis as fresh loving, moderately acidic, on neutral to moder- ately acidic habitats. We classify altimontane and subalpine beech asso- ciations of the Illyrian floral province into the Illyrian alliance of beech forests Aremonio-Fagion. We agree with Marinček & Čarni (2010: 3) that in 1993, with the nomenclature revision of the alliance it was identified with twelve more or less southeast European-Illyrian species or their characteristic species (Marinček et al. 1993). In the alliance Aremonio-Fagion we must further include Southeasteuropean-Illyrian species that are dis- tributed in submontane and montane sub-alliances, i.e.: Hacquetia epipactis, Knautia drymeia subsp. drymeia, Cardamine kitaibeliana, C. waldsteinii, Lamium orvala, Scopolia carniolica, Ruscus hypoglossum, Geranium no- dosum. Other southeast European-Illyrian species can also be present, which are characteristic of other synsys- tematic units (e.g., Homogyne sylvestris, Aposeris foetida etc.). The division of the alliance Aremonio-Fagion into four sub-alliances was risky. Among them, the best de- fined with its own four southeast European-Illyrian species is the montane alliance Lamio orvalae-Fagenion, others are poorly defined, of which the worst defined is the altimontane-subalpine sub-alliance Saxifrago rotun- difoliae-Fagenion with only one southeast European-Il- lyrian species Homogyne sylvestris, which belongs in the order Vaccinio-Piceetalia, all the others are Central Eu- ropean species. Willner & Grabherr (2007: 157–158) classified the suballiance Saxifrago-Fagenion in the suballiance Lonicero alpigenae-Fagenion, which com- bines Alpine-dinaric beech and spruce-fir beech phyto- cenoses on a carbonate base. A paper has been published on our doubts in relation to Illyrian suballiances (Zu- pančič 2003). The mentioned species, some of which are called “Illyrian” or “Illyricoid”, occupy a wider region than the Illyrian province or are only here in disjunct areas, so we have characterised them as Southeast Euro- pean-Illyrian species. (Real) Illyrian species are in non- forest habitats. The suballiance Saxifrago rotundifoliae-Fagenion was created with the revision of the association Anemo- no trifoliae-Fagetum (Marinček et al. 1989: 34–37 and 57–58) under the influence of the Hungarian phytoce- nologist Borhidi, who more or less successfully pub- lished submontane-montane Illyrian suballiances from 1963 to 1966. Our presentation of the suballiance Saxi- frago rotundifoliae-Fagenion is undoubtedly unsuccess- ful. With suballiances, especially the suballiance Saxi- frago rotundifoliae-Fagenion, we give rise to undesirable criticism about the existence of the Illyrian alliance of beech associations Aremonio-Fagion. With such a suballiance, which has distinguishing species only from Central European species and does not even have its own characteristic species, we create among critics doubts that, even for our Illyrian floral province, the Central European alliance Fagion sylvaticae is enough or perhaps with more tolerant European phytocenolo- gists, as a suballiance, e.g., Aremonio-Fagenion. Will - ner & Grabherr (2007: 144–148) can thus be seen to include the Illyrian alliance Aremonio-Fagion in the Central European alliance Fagion sylvaticae, which em- braces European beech and spruce-fir-beech forests. We must be aware that the suballiance Saxifrago rotun- difoliae-Fagenion, presented with Central European species, also or above all applies as a Central European alliance of beech forests Fagion sylvaticae. There are also difficulties with some Southeast European-Illyrian species from the alliance Aremonio-Fagion, with a wide distribution through the Illyrian floral province and there are only relative characteristic or distinguishing species of the alliance, e.g., Cardamine enneaphyllos, M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 95 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Knautia drymeia subsp. drymeia, Cyclamen purpura- scens, Helleborus niger subsp. niger, Euphorbia carnioli- ca, Anemone trifolia, Calamintha grandiflora, Hacque- tia epipactis, Festuca drymeia etc. Some authors persis- tently classify some species as Southeast European spe- cies, which they are not, e.g., Primula vulgaris, Astran- tia carniolica, Lonicera caprifolium, Fraxinus ornus, Ostrya carpinifolia etc. It would be wise to consolidate the alliance Aremonio-Fagion with phytogeographical- ly suitable Southeast European-Illyrian species and ex- clude unsuitable Central European species as charac- teristic or distinguishing species of “Illyrian” suballi- ances. With this paper, substantiated with synthesis and analytical tables, we have attempted to clarify the ap- pearance of altimontane and subalpine beech forests on a carbonate base of the Illyrian floral province (Aremo- nio-Fagion) and their synsystematic position and the syntaxonomic arrangement of individual phytocenoses on the basis of their characteristic and distinguishing species, and to avoid broad claims of the kind “phytoce- nological research has shown”. 7 POVZETEK – SUMMARY Vsebina 7.1 Uvod 7.2 Metoda dela 7.3 Asociacija Stellario montanae-Fagetum 7.4 Asociacija Aconito paniculati-Fagetum 7.5 Problematika asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. v zvezi z drugimi altimon- tanskimi bukovimi združbami 7.6 Razprava z zaključki 7.1 UVOD Pričujoča razprava je odgovor na razpravo Marinčka & Čarnija (2010), s katero se v nekaterih delih ne more- mo strinjati, zlasti ne s sintaksonomskim ovrednote- njem asociacije Stellario montanae-Fagetum, s predsta- vitvijo asociacije Aconito paniculati-Fagetum ter sinta- ksonomskim položajem asociacij Ranunculo platanifo- lii-Fagetum in Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum. Za razjasni- tev problemov smo izdelali analitično tabelo asociacij Stellario montanae-Fagetum (= Aceri-Fagetum dinari- cum), Aconito paniculati-Fagetum (= Aceri-Fagetum au- stroalpinum) in Cardamine waldsteinii-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= Aceri-Fagetum pohoricum), ter sintezno tabelo, ki zajema prej imenovane tri asociacije, asociaci- jo Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum z geografskimi vari- antami Calamintha grandiflora, Isopyrum thalictroides in typica, asociacijo Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum z geo- grafskima variantama Allium victorialis in Salix wald- steiniana (Marinček & Čarni 2010), asociacijo Rhodo- dendro-Fagetum (Dakskobler 1998) in asociacijo ozi- roma geografsko varianto Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Helleborus niger (Marinček , Poldini & Zu- pančič 1989). Sintezna tabela ima 19 stolpcev, upošteva- joč posamezne subasociacije znotraj asociacije Ranun- culo platanifolii-Fagetum, kot sta jih objavila avtorja Marinček & Čarni (2010), ter subasociacije v asociaci- ji Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum, kot so objavljene v raz- pravi avtorjev Marinčka , Poldinija & Zupančiča (1989). V razpravi ne bodo omenjene ekološke razmere, zgradbe asociacij, njihova floristična sestava in sinta- ksonomske uvrstitve v višje range, kar so avtorji že opi- sali v svojih razpravah. V nekaterih primerih pa bomo kritično obravnavali značilnice in razlikovalnice asocia - cij, in sicer primerjalno in posledično v nekaterih pri- merih glede na floristično sestavo. 7.2 METODA DELA Fitocenološke raziskave temeljijo na standardni srednje- evropski metodi (Braun-Blanquet 1964, Westhoff & Van Der Maarel 1973) in upoštevajo fitocenološki kodeks (Weber , Moravec & Theurillat 2000). Ta- ksonomska nomenklatura flore je usklajena po Mali flori Slovenije (Martinčič et al. 2007). 7.3 ASOCIACIJA STELLARIO MONTANAE- FAGETUM Asociacija je bila prvič opisana leta 1967 kot Aceri-Fage- tum dinaricum Wraber 1960 (n. nud.) (Zupančič 1967) in separatom dodana sintezna tabela za primerjavo med M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 96 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 dinarsko geografsko varianto in srednjeevropsko asocia- cijo Aceri-Fagetum J. & M. Bartsch 1940. Ponovno je bila geografska varianta Aceri-Fagetum dinaricum objavljena v primerjalni študiji javorovo-bukovih gozdov leta 1969 v sintezni tabeli (Zupančič 1969). Glede na novi Kodeks fitocenološke nomenklature (Barkman et al. 1976) smo leta 1993 geografsko varianto Aceri-Fagetum dinaricum preimenovali v asociacijo Stellario glochidispermae-Fa- getum (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1993 ( Marinček et al. 1993). Kasneje je Dakskobler s sodelavcema ( 1999) napravil revizijo agregata Stellaria nemorum L. v Slove- niji in ugotovil, da se vrsta Stellaria glochidisperma (Murb.) Freyn uvršča oziroma vključuje v vrsto Stellaria montana Pierrat, zato validno imenujemo asociacijo Stellario montanae-Fagetum (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1992 nom. nov. Asociacija Stellario montanae-Fage- tum je bila leta 1969 po kodeksih fitocenološke nomen- klature pravilno (validno) objavljena s 16 popisi v sinte- zni tabeli (člen 1) in nato glede na ime popravljena po florističnem principu (člen 34) (Weber et al. 2000). V razpravi o altimontanskih bukovih gozdovih ilir- ske zveze Aremonio-Fagion Marinček & Čarni (2010: 23–24) kratko navajata naslednje: “V podzvezo Saxifra- go-Fagenion nismo uvrstili sintaksona Stellario glochidi- spermae-Fagetum (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1993. Fitocenološke raziskave so pokazale, da ima takson le vrednost subasociacije. Zabeležen je tako v predalpski geografski varianti asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fa- getum (Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typi- ca stellarietosum) kot v dinarski geografski varianti (Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora stellarietosum ).” Zaradi te trditve objavljamo analitično tabelo asociacije Stellario montanae-Fage- tum, kjer je razvidno, da je 13 fitocenoloških popisov z območja Trnovskega gozda, po en popis pa s Kočevske - ga, z Idrijskega in Blegoša. Morda bi lahko bil vprašljiv popis z Blegoša, ki leži v predalpskem fitogeografskem območju, vendar ima specifičen položaj. To ugotavljata Marinček & P. Košir (1998), ko na Blegošu opisujeta dinarski bukov gozd Omphalodo-Fagetum (Tregubov 1957) Marinček et al. 1992 ranunculetosum platanifolii Marinček & P. Košir 1998, ki je po njunem mnenju “in- trazonalno razširjen” . Gre za disjunkt dinarske asociaci- je. Podobno je s fitocenološkim popisom asociacije Stel- lario montanae-Fagetum na Blegošu. Torej trditev, da je sintakson Stellario montanae-Fagetum zabeležen v di- narski in predalpski geografski varianti, ni točna. Trditev, da je sintakson Stellario montanae-Fagetum le subasociacija sintaksona Ranunculo platanifolii-Fage- tum s. lat., ni sprejemljiva, saj bi morala avtorja upošte- vati časovno prednost več kot štirideset let prej objavlje - nega sintaksona Stellario montanae-Fagetum in sinta- kson Ranunoculo platanifolii-Fagetum vključiti v prvo objavljen sintakson Stellario montanae-Fagetum in ne obratno, kar sta storila. Podobnost med fitocenozama Stellario montanae- -Fagetum in Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora je po Sørensenovi velika (σs = 86,8), manjši je količnik po Jaccardu (σj = 50,3). Količnik Sørensenove nas vodi k prepričanju, da gre za eno fito- cenozo s prednostnim imenom Stellario montanae-Fa- getum, sintezna tabela pa nam kaže floristične in ekolo- ške posebnosti med njima. Asociacija Stellario monta- nae-Fagetum ima jasno izražene diagnostične vrste, kot so značilnice Stellaria montana, Polystichum aculeatum in Cardamine pentaphyllos ter razlikovalnice Acer pseu- doplatanus, Scrophularia nodosa in Corydalis cava. Zna- čilnice in zlasti razlikovalnice kažejo na večjo vlažnost rastišča in so številno ali samo zastopane ( Cardamine pentaphyllos) v asociaciji Stellario montanae-Fagetum. V geografski varianti Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum so prisotne le tu in tam, kar je razvidno iz Sintezne tabele. Pogostejši je le javor – Acer pseudoplatanus, ki pa ima majhno srednjo stopnjo navzočnosti in še manjšo sre- dnjo pokrovno vrednost. V asociaciji Stellario monta- nae-Fagetum večinoma ni značilnic in razlikovalnic asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum oziroma se od osmih pojavljajo le štiri, z nizko navzočnostjo oziro- ma s slabo pokrovnostjo (Luzula sylvatica 32 II, Ranun- culus platanifolius 3 II, Aremonia agrimonioides 4 III, Veratrum album subsp. album 2 II). Pri tem moramo opozoriti, da so značilnice in razlikovalnice asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. relativne in se bolj ali manj pojavljajo v skoraj vseh altimontanskih in su- balpinskih bukovih združbah ilirske zveze Aremonio- -Fagion. Asociacije Stellario montanae-Fagetum ne mo- remo uvrstiti niti v dinarsko geografsko varianto Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora niti v predalpsko geografsko varianto Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, saj niso v njej prisotne razlikovalnice obeh geografskih variant. Opozoriti moramo, da je asociacija Stellario montanae- -Fagetum na splošno revna z značilnicami in razlikoval - nicami ilirske zveze bukovih gozdov Aremonio-Fagion, še posebej v primerjavi z geografsko varianto Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora. Nadaljnje analize bodo pokazale precej nižje količnike podobnosti med fitocenozama Stellario montanae-Fage- tum in Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. Značilnica Stellaria montana asociacije Stellario montanae-Fagetum se številneje pojavlja v fitocenozi Ž. Koširja Isopyro-Fagetum var. Adenostyles alliariae, ki jo je Marinček vključil v geografsko varianto Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides, in sicer k subasociaciji stellarietosum nemorosae. Poleg vrste Stellaria montana je v geografski varianti Ranun- M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 97 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 culo-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides prisotna še razlikovalnica Corydalis cava. Drugih diagnostičnih vrst za asociacijo Stellario montanae-Fagetum ni v geo- grafski varianti Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides. Omeniti moramo le zelo redko posamično pojavljanje gorskega javorja, ki fitoce- nozi bistveno ločuje. Indeksa podobnosti sta po Sørensenovi σs = 59,4 in po Jaccardu σj = 42,3, kar po- meni različnost fitocenoz. Če v prvi fazi sprejmemo tezo Marinčka & Čarni - ja (2010: 19), da je asociacija Isopyro-Fagetum le geo- grafska varianta asociacije Ranunculo platinifolii-Fage- tum z vrsto Isopyrum thalictroides, bi bila le-ta z vrsto Crocus vernus razlikovalnica za geografsko varianto Ranunculo platinifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroides. Primerjava te z asociacijo Stellario monta- nae-Fagetum kaže na različnost, vendar tudi majhno sorodnost (σs = 58, σj = 40,8), z asociacijo Aconito pani- culati-Fagetum pa sta si različni (σs = 48,0, σs = 31,5). Asociacijo Stellario montanae-Fagetum smo pri- merjali še s tremi fitocenozami, in sicer z geografsko va- rianto Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victorialis, kjer je σs = 59,5 oziroma σj = 42,4, in Rhodo- dendro hirsuti-Fagetum var. geogr. Anemone trifolia subvar. geogr. Omphalodes verna, kjer je σs = 34,5 oziro- ma σj = 22,0, ter z združenima asociacijama Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. in Polysticho lonchitis-Fage- tum s. lat., kjer je σs = 58,9 oziroma σs = 47,7. Vsi količ- niki podobnosti fitocenoz potrjujejo različnost oziroma samostojnost imenovanih fitocenoz. Podrobnejša raziskava asociacije Stellario monta- nae-Fagetum je pokazala, da se asociacija členi na dve subasociaciji. Subasociacija Stellario montanae-Fagetum typi- cum subass. nova je splošno razširjena na apnenčastih ali dolomitnih, torej karbonatnih rjavih tleh na koluvi- alnem nanosu, kjer je A horizont globok, z manj skeleta. Holotip subasociacije je popis številka 8 iz Analitične tabele. Subasociacija Stellario montanae-Fagetum ade- nostyletosum alliariae subass. nova uspeva na bolj sve- žih rastiščih od prejšnje. Razlikovalnice so: Doronicum austriacum, Adoxa moschatelina, Adenostyles alliariae, Cicerbita alpina in Myosotis sylvatica. Razen vrste Adoxa moschatelina so vse druge iz reda Adenostyletalia s. lat. Fagetalna vrsta Adoxa moschatelina pa predvsem pora- šča sveža do vlažna tla. V manjši količini je v tleh opazi - ti izpiranje seskvioksidov, kar povzroča manjše zakiso- vanje tal in se tu in tam kaže v nekoliko večji prisotnosti kisloljubnih vrst. Holotip subasociacije predstavlja popis številka 15 iz Analitične tabele. 7.4 ASOCIACIJA ACONITO PANICULATI- FAGETUM Prva predstavitev asociacije Aconito paniculati-Fagetum je bila leta 1969 pod imenom Aceri-Fagetum austroalpi- num (Zupančič 1969). Leta 1993 smo jo po Kodeksu o fitocenološki nomenklaturi preimenovali v Aconito pa- niculati-Fagetum (Marinček et al. 1993). V razpravi iz leta 1969 je bila omenjena asociacija predstavljena v sin- tezni tabeli z osmimi fitocenološkimi popisi in kratkim ekološkim sestavkom (Zupančič 1969: 120–121). Pri preimenovanju asociacije Aceri-Fagetum austroalpinum v veljavno ime Aconito paniculati-Fagetum smo za no- menklaturni tip uporabili fitocenološki popis M. Wra- berja (Marinček et al. 1993: 129–130). Trditev “Sintakson je bil postavljen na podlagi enega popisa, ki je bil narejen leta 1960” Marinčka & Čarni - ja (2010: 27) ni točna ali celo zavajajoča oziroma da “Na - tančnejša sinsistematska uvrstitev bo mogoča, ko bo ob - javljena analitična tabela vsaj s petimi popisi”. Ta ko- mentar je toliko bolj nenavaden, ko avtorja v Literaturi navajata Zupančičevo razpravo iz leta 1969 ( Marinček & Čarni 2010: 39). Značilnice in razlikovalnice asociacije Aconito pa- niculati-Fagetum se v skupini altimontanskih bukovih gozdov Slovenije ilirske zveze Aremonio-Fagion poja- vljajo le v njej. Značilnice so: Aconitum lycoctonum subsp. ranunculifolium, Aconitum degenii subsp. panicu- latum, Crepis paludosa, Geranium sylvaticum, Salix appendiculata, Rumex alpestris in Senecio cacaliaster. Vse so izbrane iz reda Adenstyletalia s. lat. in nazorno kažejo na sveže rastišče asociacije. Razlikovalnice so: Acer pseudoplatanus z najvišjo srednjo pokrovno vre- dnostjo med altimontanskimi bukovimi združbami, Myrrhis odorata in Geum rivale. V se imenovane diagno- stične vrste za asociacijo so prisotne z najvišjo stopnjo navzočnosti in večinoma tudi z najvišjo srednjo pokrov - no vrednostjo. Vse potrjujejo svežost in visokogorstvo asociacije Aconito paniculati-Fagetum. Fitocenološki popisi so bili vzeti v Triglavskem na- rodnem parku v Julijskih Alpah v nadmorskih višinah od 1260–1500 m, torej večinoma nad pasom asociacije Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum s. lat. na apnencu in dolomi- tu, kjer so se razvila karbonatna rjava tla, redkeje rend- zine. Rastišča asociacije so bolj vlažna kot v asociaciji Stellario montanae-Fagetum, kar se zrcali v višji zasto- panosti vrst reda Adenostyletalia s. lat. V okviru asociacije smo opisali dve subasociaciji, in sicer Aconito paniculati-Fagetum typicum subass. nova, ki porašča toplejša južna, manj strma pobočja na svežih, biološko bolj aktivnih tleh. Holotip subasociaci- je je popis številka 18 iz Analitične tabele. M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 98 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Druga subasociacija Aconito paniculati-Fagetum sorbetosum chamaemespilus subass. nova je višinska, hladnejša fitocenoza na bolj svežih do vlažnih pa tudi nekoliko zakisanih tleh, kar potrjujejo razlikovalnice subasociacije in številnejše piceetalne vrste. Razlikoval- nice so: Viola biflora, Polystichum lonchitis, Sorbus cha- maemespilus in Ribes alpinum. Naštete vrste so pred- stavnice subalpinskega pasu. Holotip subasociacije je popis številka 22 iz Analitične tabele. Zaradi povezanosti smo proučili tudi razmerja med podobnimi ali vegetacijsko bližnjimi fitocenozami. Glavnina f lore altimontanskih bukovih združb je precej homogena iz vrst razreda Querco-Fagetea s. lat. oziroma fagetalne flore in visokih steblik – Adenostylatelia s. lat. Asociaciji Aconito paniculati-Fagetum je najbolj soro- dna asociacija Stellario-Fagetum, količnik podobnosti fitocenoz je σs = 78,8 oziroma σj = 65,0, kar je pričako- vano. Medsebojno jih ločujejo značilnice in razlikoval - nice ter jugovzhodnoevropsko-ilirske na eni strani in jugovzhodnoalpske vrste na drugi strani. S fitocenozo Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana, ki sta v prostoru sosedi, je podob- nost manjša (σs = 64,2 oziroma σj = 47,6) a kaže na njuno različnost. Še manjša je podobnost z geografsko varianto Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, kjer je σs = 51,1 oziroma σj = 34,3, čeprav sta v asociaciji prisotni značilnici asociacije Ranunculo plata- nifolii-Fagetum s. lat., Ranunculus platanifolius in Poly- stichum lonchitis, tako kot v večini drugih altimontan- skih bukovih gozdovih Slovenije. Najmanjša podobnost je z geografsko varianto Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Helleborus niger (σs = 43,3 oziroma σj = 27 ,7). Pri- merjave potrjujejo samostojnost asociacije Aconito pani- culati-Fagetum. Značilnice in razlikovalnice asociacije Aconito paniculati-Fagetum s svojo navzočnostjo in po- krovnostjo nakazujejo njene ekološke razmere in njeno samostojnost. 7.5 PROBLEMATIKA ASOCIACIJE RANUN- CULO PLATANIFOLII-FAGETUM S. LAT. V ZVEZI Z DRUGIMI ALTIMONTANSKIMI BU- KOVIMI ZDRUŽBAMI Delitev meje med altimontansko in spodnjo subalpin- sko vegetacijsko stopnjo v Sloveniji še danes povzroča težave. Klasična pasovna delitev srednjevzhodnih Alp H. Mayerja predstavlja mejo za altimontanski pas od 1000/1100 do 1300 m, ta pa se proti jugovzhodu zvišuje zaradi toplejših klimatskih vplivov, ki prihajajo iz Sre- dozemlja in Panonije. Fitocenoze iz Sintezne tabele vse- kakor poraščajo altimontanski pas. Nekatere so prisotne že v spodnjem montanskem pasu (npr. 880 m n. m.) in segajo v spodnji subalpinski pas (npr. nad 1420 m). Asociacija Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum je tipič- na altimontanska bukova združba s slabo izraženimi značilnicami. Marinček & Čarni (2010) navajata za značilnice Ranunculus platanifolius, Polygonatum verti- cillatum in Adenostyles glabra. Vse so relativne značilni- ce, med njimi je edino kolikor toliko sprejemljiva vrsta Ranunculus platanifolius, ostali dve Polygonatum verti- cillatum in Adenostyles glabra, sta predvsem prisotni v vseh altimontanskih in subalpinskih bukovih združbah Slovenije ilirske zveze Aremonio-Fagion. Zato se avtorja (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21) zatekata k ugotovitvi: “Proti subalpinskim bukovim gozdovom altimontanski sintakson Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum negativno razlikuje skupina razlikovalnih vrst sintaksona asocia- cije Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum”, v nadaljevanju pa: “Nekatere od naštetih vrst se pojavljajo kot slučajnice tudi na območju asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fage- tum.” Kodeks o fitocenološki nomenklaturi (Weber et al. 2000) ne dopušča, da bi bilo za asociacijo značilno nega - tivno razlikovanje in še to z relativnimi značilnicami in razlikovalnicami, ki so bolj ali manj prisotne v vseh alti- montanskih in subalpinskih bukovih združbah. Od vrst, ki ločujejo asociacije Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. od asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21), so zaradi višje stopnje navzočnosti v asociaciji Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. bolj ali manj sprejemljive le Salix waldsteiniana, Carex ferruginea, Viola biflora in Allium victorialis če- prav uspevajo tudi v drugih fitocenozah altimontanskih bukovih gozdov, predvsem v asociaciji Ranunculo plata- nifolii-Fagetum s. lat. (glej Sintezno tabelo). Verjetno zavedajoč se relativnosti značilnic asocia - cije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., avtorja pou- darjata različnost rasti bukve v subalpinskih bukovih gozdovih, in sicer: “Pomembna je ugotovitev, da imajo subalpinski bukovi gozdovi zaradi nizke od snega pole- gle rasti, poseben videz, ki jih fiziognomsko loči od viso- koraslih altimontanskih bukovih gozdov.” (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21). Fiziognomski izgled bukovega sesto- ja ni kategorija Kodeksa fitocenološke nomenklature. Predvsem pa ta ugotovitev ni sprejemljiva, ker gre v obeh fitocenozah za isto vrsto, tj. bukev – Fagus sylvatica. Naslednja ugotovitev, da “altimontanske bukove gozdove razlikujejo od subalpinskih vrste z delnim ter- mofilnim značajem”, je šibka ugotovitev. Od navedenih vrst v razpravi Marinčka in Čarnija (2010: 21) ni v tabelah naslednjih: Tamus communis, Acer platanoides, Asarum europaeum in Hedera helix. Zelo malo so priso- tne vrste Melittis melisophyllum, Polygala chamaebuxus, Rhamnus fallax in Carex flacca, zadovoljivo pa vrste M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 99 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Carex alba, Erica carnea, Lamium orvala, Omphalodes verna in Primulala vulgaris. Za vrsti Carex alba in Erica carnea, ki sta zastopani le v geografski varianti Ranun- culo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, bi lahko rekli, da je vzrok za njuno pojavljanje v geološki podlagi, saj sta vrsti dolomitofilni, kot tudi že prej omenjena vrsta Polygala chamaebuxus. Taksona Lamium orvala in Omphalodes verna pa sta svežoljubni vrsti. Še najbolj “delni termofilni značaj” ima vrsta Primula vulgaris, ki je v asociaciji Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. bolj zastopana kot v drugih altimontanskih bukovih gozdo- vih. V prid asociaciji Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. avtorja navajata, da so v njej prisotne “nekatere vrste reda Fagetalia sylvaticae oziroma razreda Querco-Fage- tea, z rahlim termofilnim značajem” ( Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21). S to ugotovitvijo se strinjamo, vendar v tabelah niso navedene naslednje vrste: Acer platanoides, Asarum europaeum in Hedera helix. Glede pojavljanja nekaterih ekološko zahtevnejših vrst le v altimontan- skih bukovih gozdovih se strinjamo. V nadaljevanju Marinček & Čarni (2010:22) na- vajata vrste, ki ločijo geografske variante. Za geografsko varianto Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica navajata 22 vrst, različnih ekoloških lastnosti, ki naj bi bile prisotne le v tej geografski varianti. Med temi pa v tabelah ni vrst Astrantia bavarica in Digitalis gran- diflora. V to skupino ni mogoče šteti vrst Helleborus niger subsp. niger, Aposeris foetida, Lonicera xylosteum, Luzula luzuloides, Dryopteris expansa, Gymnocarpium dryopteris in Hieracium murorum, ki so navzoče pov - sod. Nekatere med njimi so komaj zadovoljivo zastopa- ne, npr. Astantia carniolica, Epipactis helleborine, Co- rylus avellana in Helleborus odorus. Za geografsko varianto Ranunculo platanifolii-Fa- getum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora je Marinček (1998: 104) predvidel pet razlikovalnic: Festuca altissi- ma, Calamintha grandiflora, Vicia oroboides, Allium victorialis in Aremonia agrimonioides. V tabelarnem gradivu (Marinček & Čarni 2010) med razlikovalni- cami nista navedeni vrsti Vicia oroboides in Allium vic- torialis oziroma le mimogrede v besedilu (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 23). V podkrepitev geografske variante Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora avtorja dodajata še povsod razširjeni vrsti Lathyrus vernus in Cirsium erisithales in v tabelah neo- bjavljeno vrsto Sesleria autumnalis ter vrsto Carex pilo- sa, ki ima večjo diagnostično težo, vendar je prisotna z manjšo stalnostjo. Vrsti Aremonia agrimonioides in Fe- stuca altissima sta bolj ali manj razširjeni v vseh buko- vih gozdovih, tudi v altimontanskih. Kvalitetna razliko- valnica je le Calamintha grandiflora, kar ugotavljata tudi avtorja. Geografski varianti Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora in Ranunculo plata- nifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica sta si zelo podobni, kar kažeta tudi količnika (σs = 70,3 oziroma σj = 54,2) in potrjujeta skupno pripadnost ma k roasociaciji Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. Sinsistematski položaj geografske variante Ranucu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Isopyrum thalictroi- des (= Isopyro-Fagetum var. Adenostyles alliariae Ž. Košir 1979) je v sklopu makroasociacije Ranunculo pla- tanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. negotov, kar nam potrjujejo in- deksi podobnosti fitocenoz, kjer je σs = 43,7 oziroma σj = 27,9. Podobno razmerje kažejo indeksi v geografski varianti Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, kjer je σs = 43,7 oziroma σj = 31,4, in Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflo- ra, kjer sta indeksa σs = 55,7 oziroma σj =38,6. Marin - ček & Čarni (2010: 23) navajata, da je geografska vari- anta Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Iso- pyrum thalictroides blizu dinarski geografski varianti: “Glede na edafske razmere je blizu dinarski varianti.” Deloma je to res, toda indeksi podobnosti kažejo na sa- mostojno asociacijo, kot je prvotno opisana Isopyro-Fa- getum var. Adenostyles alliariae (Ž. Košir 1979). Iz Sin- tezne tabele je razvidno, da je od značilnic zadovoljivo zastopana le vrsta Ranunculus platanifolius. Nerodna je ugotovitev: “Tako od dinarske kot predalpske geograf- ske variante jo negativno loči popolna odsotnost neka- terih vrst zveze Aremonio-Fagion”. Na samostojnost asociacije Isopyro-Fagetum kaže prisotnost treh njenih značilnic ( Isopyrum thalictoides, Corydalis cava, Rumex alpestris) in šestih razlikovalnic (Scilla bifolia, Vera- trum album s. lat., Adoxa moschatelina, Polygonatum verticillatum, Chrysosplenium alternifolium in Stellaria montana) (glej Sintezno tabelo, stolpec 7). Vprašanje je, kakšna je diagnostična primernost nekaterih razliko- valnic. Glede na pojavljanje vrst Stellaria montana in Cory- dalis cava v asociaciji Isopyro-Fagetum bi lahko pomisli- li na podobnost z asociacijo Stellario montanae-Fage- tum, vendar kažeta indeksa podobnosti različnost fito- cenoz (σs = 59,4 oziroma σj = 42,3), sta si pa bližje kot vse druge altimontanske bukove združbe. Podobni sta si po standardni floristični sestavi fagetalnih vrst v najšir - šem smislu, po visokih steblikah in deloma tudi picee- talnih vrstah, tako kot bolj ali manj vse altimontanske bukove združbe zveze Aremonio-Fagion. Podobni sta si tudi po ekoloških razmerah. Razlika je očitna v značil - nicah in razlikovalnicah asociacij in prisotnosti vrste Acer pseudoplatanus, ki izrazito dominira v asociaciji Stellario montanae-Fagetum. Vrste Isopyrum thalictroi- des, Crocus vernus, Leucojum vernum in Ranunculus fi- caria (= Ficaria verna), ki jih navajata Marinček & M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 100 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Čarni (2010: 23), ločijo asociacijo Isopyro-Fagetum od drugih altimontanskih bukovih gozdov. Zanimala nas je tudi primerjava med fitocenozama Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora in Rhododendro hirsuti-Fagetum var. geogr. Anemone trifolia subvar. geogr. Omphalodes verna, kjer je σs = 49,7 oziroma σj = 33,0, kot tudi med fitocenozo Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, kjer je σs = 57,8 oziroma σj = 35,1. Indeksi in Sintezna tabela nam nazorno kažejo samostojnost fitocenoz. Sorodstveno bližji sta si fitocenozi Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum va r. geogr. typica in Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Helleborus niger, kjer je σs = 66,4 oziroma σj = 49,8. Naslednja sinsistematska problematika, ki nas zani- ma, je odnos med fitocenozama Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum s. lat. in Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. Obe fitocenozi imata dve oziroma slednja tri (?) geograf- ske variante, dinarsko, predalpsko in tretjo nedorečeno Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Anemone trifo- lia (?).Marinček & Čarni (2010: 25) navajata razliko- valnice asociacije Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat., in sicer splošno razširjeno vrsto v altimontanskih in subal- pinskih bukovih združbah Polystichum lonchitis, nato vrsti Carex ferruginea in Rhododendron hirsutum, ki sta številnejši v asociaciji Rhododendro hirsuti-Fagetum, ter Pinus mugo z enakovredno navzočnostjo. Vrste Salix appendiculuta, Sorbus chamaemespilus in Lonicera cae- rulea so v fitocenozi Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. skromno zastopane oziroma zadnjih dveh celo ni v geo- grafski varianti Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana (glej Sintezno tabelo). Izbira dveh subalpinskih vrst Salix waldsteiniana in S. glabra za razlikovalnici geografske variante Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana je smi- selna, vendar je vrsta Salix glabra z enako stopnjo nav- zočnosti prisotna v asociaciji Rhododendro hirsuti-Fage- tum (glej Sintezno tabelo). Za geografsko varianto Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victorialis sta razlikovalnici Allium victorialis, ki je alpsko-altajska vrsta in je pri nas naselje- na v alpskem svetu (Julijske Alpe, Karavanke, Savinjske Alpe), zaradi ekoloških razmer (snežni zameti, dolgo- trajna zasneženost) pa še v visokogorju Snežnika, Trno- vskega gozda in na Kočevskem, ter vrsta Calamintha grandiflora, ki je jugovzhodnoevropsko-ilirska vrsta, splošno razširjena pri nas v dinarskem in preddinar- skem fitogeografskem območju. Ne glede na fitogeo- grafsko pripadnost je razlikovalnica Allium victorialis dobro izbrana. To pa ne moremo trditi za širšo razliko- valno skupino, v kateri sta skromno zastopani vrsti Euphorbia carniolica in Lamium orvala. Marinček & Čarni (2010: 26) nadalje ugotavljata, da “ugodne ekolo- ške razmere nakazuje kopica ekološko zahtevnejših ta- ksonov, kot so: Adoxa moschatelina, Arum maculatum, Ranunculus lanuginosus, Carex pilosa, Euphorbia amyg- daloides, Lathyrus vernus, Cardamine bulbifera, Pre- nanthes purpurea in še nekatere.” Ta ekološka določitev drži, vendar je večina naštetih vrst zastopana tudi v dru- gih subalpinskih in altimontanskih bukovih gozdovih, kar ni nič posebnega. Med temi vrstami je izjema le vrsta Lathyrus vernus, ki odločno prevladuje v fitoceno- zi Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victo- rialis. Geografska varianta Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Anemone trifolia (?) (Poldini & Nardini 1993: 248–255) je predstavljena s petimi popisi. Fitoce- noza je glede na druge geografske variante floristično revna in je vmes med fitocenozami Ranunculo platani- folii-Fagetum s. lat., Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. in Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum s. lat. Lahko bi rekli, da je precej nedorečena, zato je nismo uvrstili v Sintezno ta- belo. Za fitocenozo Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. Marinček & Čarni (2010: 25) ponovno navajata, da “prevladujejo pretežno čisti, od snega polegli nizki bu- kovi sestoji s posamično primesjo belega javora, smreke in jelke.” To pa sta že predhodno objavila, da naj bi bil fiziognomski videz bukve verjetno pomemben dejavnik pri presoji avtonomne asociacije (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 21). Iz Sintezne tabele je razvidno, da sta si f loristični se- stavi altimontanskih in subalpinskih bukovih gozdov precej podobni oziroma enotni. Včasih so floristične razlike minimalne in dobrih značilnic in razlikovalnic za posamezne fitocenoze ni, čeprav so lahko njihove ekološke razmere ter fenološki razvoj in oblika dreve- snih vrst različni. Taka asociacija je Ranunculo platani- folii-Fagetum s. lat., ki ima uravnotežene ekološke raz- mere v visokogorju in zato ni pretiranih razlik med floro altimontanskih in subalpinskih bukovih gozdov, zlasti s fitocenozo Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. Količniki podobnosti fitocenoz med tema fitocenozama so glede na geografske variante naslednji: med Ranun- culo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. Calamintha grandi- flora in Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victorialis je σs = 75,0 oziroma σj = 60,0, med Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica in Polysticho lon- chitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana je σs = 63,5 oziroma σj = 46,6. Količniki potrjujejo veliko med- sebojno podobnost omenjenih fitocenoz, zlasti če te pri- merjamo s podobnostjo med geografskima variantama Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victoria- lis in Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Salix wald- steiniana, kjer sta σs = 71,0 oziroma σj = 55,0, ali pa med geografskima variantama Ranunculo platanifolii-Fage- tum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora in Ranunculo M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 101 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 platanifolii-Fagetum var. geogr. typica, kjer je σs = 70,3 oziroma σj = 54,2. Vprašanje je združitev asociacij Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. in Polysticho lonchi- tis-Fagetum s. lat. v enotno asociacijo z dvema geograf- skima variantama in dvema višinskima variantama. Čeprav je asociacija Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. slabo določljiva s sedanjimi značilnicami, bi z dolo - čenimi popravki in dopolnitvijo razlikovalnic obdržali asociacijo Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., v njo pa vključili fitocenozo Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. z dvema višinskima variantama. Smiselno bi bilo ob- držati asociacijo Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. tako, da ji določimo nove značilnice in razlikovalnice. Njeni bukovi sestoji so gospodarsko zanimivi in poleg asociacije Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum s. lat. pokrivajo precejšnje površine. Zanimiva in bolj ali manj vprašljiva je odločitev avstrijskih fitocenologov Willner & Grab - herr (2007: 157-158), ki sta združila asociaciji Ranuncu- lo platanifolii-Fagetum in Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum z asociacijami Aconito paniculati-Fagetum in Isopyro-Fa- getum va r. Adenostyles alliariae v altimontansko bukovo asociacijo Saxifrago rotundifolii-Fagetum. Za prenovljeno asociacijo Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum s. lat. bi bile značilnice Luzula sylvatica subsp. sylvatica, Ranunculus platanifolius in Polystichum lon- chitis. Odpadli bi splošno razširjeni in številčni vrsti v tem območju Polygonatum verticillatum in Adenostyles glabra (glej Sintezno tabelo). Bolj prepričljive so razliko- valnice asociacije, in sicer Aremonia agrimonioides, Ve- ratrum album subps. album, Geleobdolon flavidum, Ha- cquetia epipactis in Anthriscus nitida. To so ekološko zahtevnejše vrste, ki poudarjajo določeno produktiv - nost in svežost rastišča (glej Sintezno tabelo). Za geografsko varianto Ranunculo platanifolii-Fa- getum var. geogr. Calamintha grandiflora sta razlikoval- nici Calamintha grandif lora in Carex pilosa. V sklopu te geografske variante bi bila višinska varianta Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. alt. Allium victorialis. Za geografsko varianto Ranunculo platanifolii-Fa- getum var. geogr. typica sta razlilkovalnici Primula vul- garis in Polygonatum multiflorum. Naslednja višinska varianta bi bila Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. alt. Salix waldsteiniana (glej Sintezno tabelo). Po tej določi- tvi bi bila podobnost med geografskima in višinskima variantama σs = 71,5 oziroma σj = 55,7 (glej tabelo, pri- merjaj stolpec 7), kar potrjuje smiselnost združitve aso- ciacij Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. in Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. Oblika rasti ene vrste, v našem primeru bukve, s teoretičnega vidika ne igra nobene vloge, s stališča praktičnega gozdarstva pa to poudarja - mo z višinskima variantama. Fitocenozi bi kljub podob- nosti lahko delili le tedaj, če bi imeli na voljo drugo šte- vilčno dovolj močno kodominantno drevesno vrsto, ki bi poudarjala bolj ali manj določene ekološke razmere. Medsebojno smo primerjali še druge altimontanske in subalpinske bukove združbe, kar je razvidno iz Sinte- zne tabele in Tabele primerjav podobnosti altimontan- skih in subalpinskih bukovih združb Slovenije ilirske zveze Aremonio-Fagion po Sørensenovi in Jaccardu. Ko- ličniki v glavnem potrjujejo samostojnost asociacij in v nekaterih primerih bližnjo ali daljno sorodnost (glej Ta- belo primerjav). Primerjane fitocenoze 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Sørensen 70,3 55,7 47,8 43,7 75,0 63,5 71,5 86,859,4 58,9 51,1 49,7 57,8 66,459,5 34,578,864,243,3 71,0 42,651,6 69,4 62,358,048,0 Jaccard 54,238,6 31,4 27,9 60,046,655,7 50,342,341,7 34,333,0 35,1 49,8 42,422,065,0 47,6 27,7 55,0 27,1 34,853,2 45,340,8 31,5 1 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica 2 Ranuculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides 3 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides 4 Ranunculo-Fagetum s. lat.: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides 5 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis 6 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 7 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora & Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis: Ranunculo-Fage- tum v. g. typica & Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 8 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Stellario-Fagetum 9 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides: Stellario-Fagetum 10 Ranunculo-Fagetum s. lat. & Polysticho-Fagetum s. lat.: Stellario-Fagetum 11 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica: Aconito-Fagetum 12 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Calamintha grandiflora: Rhododendro-Fagetum v. g. Anemone trifolia sv. g. Omphalodes verna 13 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica: Rhododendro-Fagetum v. g. Anemone trifolia sv. g. Omphalodes verna 14 Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. typica: Anemono-Fagetum v. g. Helleborus niger M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 102 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 15 Stellario-Fagetum: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis 16 Stellario-Fagetum: Rhododendro-Fagetum v. g. Anemone trifolia sv. g. Omphalodes verna 17 Stellario-Fagetum: Aconito-Fagetum 18 Aconito-Fagetum: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 19 Aconito-Fagetum: Anemono-Fagetum v. g. Helleborus niger 20 Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 21 Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Allium victorialis: Rhododendro-Fagetum v. g. Anemone trifolia sv. g. Omphalodes verna 22 Anemono-Fagetum v. g. Helleborus niger: Polysticho-Fagetum v. g. Salix waldsteiniana 23 Cardamine-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= Aceri-Fagetum pohoricum): Cardamine-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= Saven- si-Fagetum var. Abies alba) 24 Cardamine-Fagetum: Cardamine-Fagetum var. Abies alba 25 Stellario-Fagetum: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides 26 Aconito-Fagetum: Ranunculo-Fagetum v. g. Isopyrum thalictroides Statistična preglednica primerjav med altimontanskim bukovjem Slovenije po Sørensenovi in Jaccardu. 7.6 RAZPRAVA Z ZAKLJUČKI Razprava Marinčka & Čarnija (2010) v glavnem pri- naša zabeležko številnih popisov (199) altimontanske fitocenoze Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., kratek opis nekaterih drugih altimontanskih fitocenoz, ki so ali naj bi bile v Sloveniji. “Med drugim je namen pred- staviti bogato členitev podzveze Saxifrago-Fagenion.” (Marinček & Čarni 2010: 4). Pogrešamo utemeljeno predstavitev njunih rezultatov oziroma zaključkov o po- javljanju in odnosih med fitocenozami altimontanskih in subalpinskih bukovih združb Slovenije ilirske zveze Aremonio-Fagion, ki bi jih najbolj verodostojno predsta- vila sintezna tabela, morda s podporo katerih od raču- nalniških metod. Npr., mimogrede je v primeru asocia- cije Stellario montanae-Fagetum omenjeno, da so “fito- cenološke raziskave pokazale.” To pomanjkljivost smo želeli dopolniti z našo razpravo s primerjanji najbolj aktualnih altimontanskih in subalpinskih bukovih združb Slovenije ilirske zveze Aremonio-Fagion. Položaj in odnos med njimi nazorno kaže Sintezna tabela, na osnovi katere smo zapisali in utemeljili naše pripombe. Glede statistično-računalniških metod smo mne - nja, da so nam lahko v pomoč, vendar ne brez kritične presoje, ki je posebno potrebna pri obravnavi tako f lori- stično in ekološko občutljivih fitocenozah altimontan - sko-subalpinskega bukovja. Količniki podobosti imajo relativno vrednost, odločilna je raziskovalčeva diagnoza na f loristični in deloma ekološki osnovi v kolikor nam je dobro poznana. Sinsistematski položaj obravnavanih altimontan- skih bukovih gozdov v Sloveniji je otežen zaradi nekate- rih izenačenih ekoloških razmer, kot so karbonatna podlaga, mezoklima in relief. Ti pogojujejo skladen ra- zvoj fagetalnega, deloma piceetalnega rastlinstva in ra- stlinstva visokih steblik, ki imajo odločilno vlogo v teh bukovih gozdovih. Zato je vsebina flore v teh fitoceno- zah zelo izenačena. Razlike so v talni plasti in v zelo redko zaznavnih mikroklimatskih pojavih. Na to opo- zarjata že Marinček & Čarni (2010: 23), ko v primeru posameznih geografskih variant asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. zapišeta, “da kljub eviden- tnim ekološkim posebnostim geografskih variant se te ne odražajo v pričakovani meri v vegetacijski odeji.” Tako je položaj asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fage- tum s. lat. s svojimi geografskimi variantami precej za- pleten v primerjavi z drugimi altimontanskimi in neka- terimi subalpinskimi bukovimi združbami na karbona- tni podlagi. Ne glede na izenačenost vegetacijske odeje altimon- tanskih bukovih združb na karbonatih obstoj asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. sprejemamo, s po- pravkom njenih značilnic in dodatkom razlikovalnic, ki bolj utrjujejo njen sinsistematski položaj v krogu karbo- natnih altimontanskih bukovih združb ilirske zveze Aremonio-Fagion. Pri tem moramo, prvič, poudariti sa- mostojnost asociacij Stellario montanae-Fagetum, Aco- nito paniculati-Fagetum in Isopyro-Fagetum (Isopyro- -Fagetum var. Adenostyles alliariae) in, drugič, pridruži - ti fitocenozo Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. z njuni- ma “geografskima variantama” asociaciji Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. Določitev variant z alpsko-al- tajsko vrsto Allium victorialis in severnoalpsko-arktično vrsto Salix waldsteiniana je primernejša za višinsko va- rianto, če se zgledujemo po W. & A. Matuszkiewicz (1981). Tako bi imela asociacija Ranunculo platanifolii- -Fagetum s. lat. dve geografski in dve višinski varianti. Floristična sestava fitocenoz Ranunculo platanifolii-Fa- getum s. lat. in Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum s. lat. je zelo izenačena in zadovoljivo ju ločita le vrsti Carex ferrugi - nea in Rhododendron hirsutum, ki pa sta bolj zastopani v asociaciji Rhododendro hirsuti-Fagetum, ter vrsta M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 103 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Pinus mugo, z enako prisotnostjo v obeh asociacijah. Vrsta Polystichum lonchitis pa je razširjena povsod v al- timontanskih in subalpinskih bukovih združbah. Tako razumljena asociacija Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. s svojima geografskima variantama z vrsto Cala- mintha grandiflora in tipično, ter višinskima varianta- ma z vrstama Allium victorialis in Salix waldsteiniana, je sprejemljiva. Predlagana rešitev omogoča razumeva- nje asociacije Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat., sicer moramo, glede na Kodeks, geografski varianti Ra- nunculo platanifolii-Fagetum s. lat. vključiti v predhodni (Zupančič 1967, 1969, Marinček et al. 1993), prvo ob- javljeni asociaciji Stellario montanae-Fagetum in Aconi- to paniculati-Fagetum, kar pa ne bi bilo popolnoma smi- selno. S petimi fitocenološkimi popisi predstavljena geo- grafska varianta Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Anemone trifolia (?) (Poldini & Nardini 1993) je neja- sna, floristično revna in bolj podobna revnejši obliki asociacije oziroma geografski varianti Anemono trifoli- ae-Fagetum var. geogr. Luzula nivea. Skratka, tabela predstavlja netipično obliko te ali one fitocenoze, po našem mnenju najmanj fitocenozo Polysticho lonchitis- -Fagetum s. lat. Zaradi nedorečenosti, predvsem moza- ičnosti popisov, je nismo uvrstili v Sintezno tabelo. Ne- razumljivo je, da jo je Marinček sprejel za reprezentačno in prvo objavljeno. Po našem mnenju velja za prvo obja- vo višinske variante Ranunculo platanifolii-Fagetum var. alt. Salix waldsteiniana (= Polysticho lonchitis-Fage- tum var. geogr. Salix waldsteiniana) tabela z desetimi popisi v članku Subalpsko bukovje Škofjeloškega hri- bovja (Marinček 1985: 186–189). Ta publikacija v lite- raturi razprave Marinčka & Čarnija (2010) ni navede- na. V Sintezno tabelo smo za primerjavo altimontan- skih bukovih združb ilirske zveze Aremonio-Fagion vključili asociacijo oziroma geografsko varianto Ane- mono trifoliae-Fagetum var. geogr. Helleborus niger z dvema tabelama, ki najboljše predstavljata to altimon- tansko asociacijo (Marinček et al. 1989: tabeli 1 in 2). Ob tem smo določili naslednje značilnice: Carex alba, Vaccinium myrtillus, V. vitis-idaea, Picea abies in Larix decidua. Sintezna tabela je pokazala, da se te vrste v ve- liki meri pojavljajo tudi v drugih altimontanskih buko- vih združbah. Nekoliko manj sta v drugih altimontan- skih bukovih združbah prisotni vrsti Picea abies in Larix decidua, ki po srednji pokrovni vrednosti in sto- pnji stalnosti izstopata v asociaciji Anemono trifoliae- -Fagetum s. lat., zato smo ju prevrednotili v razlikoval- nici. Druge značilnice smo opustili in namesto njih iz- brali vrsti Polygala chamaebuxus in Orthilia secunda. Obe vrsti uspevata na zmerno zakisanem ali nevtralnem rastišču na peščenih tleh. Vrsta Polygala chamaebuxus pa je še kazalka dolomitne oziroma dolomitizirane apnenčeve podlage, kar je značilno za asociacijo Anemo - no trifoliae-Fagetum s. lat. V publikaciji Zupančiča (1969) smo predstavili še tretjo geografsko varianto z osmimi popisi Aceri-Fage- tum pohoricum iz vrst altimontanskih bukovih združb, ki pa je ne moremo uvrstiti v ilirsko, temveč v srednjee- vropsko florno provinco. O njej kasneje nismo več raz- pravljali. Zdelo se nam je vredno, da v Sintezno tabelo vključimo še to fitocenozo in podobno fitocenozo Ž. Koširja (1979: 105–150) Savensi-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= var. silicicolum) na Pohorju. Ti dve fitocenozi uvrščamo v altimontanske bukove združbe s kodomi- nantno vrsto Acer pseudoplatanus. Rezultat primerjave je pokazal istovetnost fitocenoz Aceri-Fagetum pohori- cum in Savensi-Fagetum var. Abies alba (= var. silicico- lum). Po Kodeksu o fitocenološki nomenklaturi asocia- cijo validno označujemo kot Cardamine waldsteinii-Fa- getum Ž. Košir 1962 var. Abies alba (Zupančič 1969) Ž. Košir 1979 (prvotno invalidno ime je Aceri-Fagetum pohoricum). Značilnice asociacije so vrste Cardamine waldsteinii (= Cardamine savensis = Dentaria savensis), Milium effusum in Luzula pilosa, razlikovalnici pa vrsti Abies alba in Acer pseudoplatanus. Značilnice in razli- kovalnica Abies alba izrazito ločijo fitocenozo Cardami- ne waldsteinii-Fagetum var. Abies alba od drugega alti- montanskega bukovja. Razlikovalnica Acer pseudopla- tanus je sograditeljica združbe zaradi njenega številnega pojavljanja. Značilnice in razlikovalnici ekološko dolo- čajo fitocenozo za sveželjubno, zmerno kislo na nevtral- nem do zmerno kislem rastišču. Altimontanske in subalpinske bukove združbe ilir- ske florne province uvrščamo v ilirsko zvezo bukovih gozdov Aremonio-Fagion. Soglašamo z Marinčkom & Čarnijem (2010: 3), da je bila leta 1993 z nomenklatur- no revizijo zveza določena z bolj ali manj zanesljivimi dvanajstimi jugovzhodnoevropsko-ilirskimi vrstami oziroma njenimi značilnicami ( Marinček et al. 1993). V zvezo Aremonio-Fagion moramo šteti še jugovzho- dnoevropsko-ilirske vrste, ki so porazdeljene v submon- tanski in montanski podzvezi, te so: Hacquetia epipac- tis, Knautia drymeia subsp. drymeia, Cardamine kitai- beliana, C. waldsteinii, Lamium orvala, Scopolia carnio- lica, Ruscus hypoglossum, Geranium nodosum. Prisotne so lahko še druge jugovzhodnoevropsko-ilirske vrste, ki pa so značilne za druge sinsistematske enote (npr. Ho- mogyne sylvestris, Aposeris foetida idr.). Razdelitev zveze Aremonio-Fagion v štiri podzveze pa je bila tvegana. Med temi je najbolj določena z lastnimi štirimi jugo- vzhodnoevropsko-ilirskimi vrstami montanska zveza Lamio orvalae-Fagenion, druge so ohlapne, med njimi je najslabše definirana altimontansko-subalpinska pod- zveza Saxifrago rotundifoliae-Fagenion z eno samo jugo- M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 104 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 vzhodnoevropsko-ilirsko vrsto Homogyne sylvestris, ki pa pripada redu Vaccinio-Piceetalia, vse druge so sre- dnjeevropske vrste. Willner & Grabherr (2007: 157– 158) uvrščata podzvezo Saxifrago-Fagenion v podzvezo Lonicero alpigenae-Fagenion, ki združuje alpsko-dinar- sko bukovje in smrekovo-jelovo bukovje na karbonatih. O naših pomislekih glede ilirskih podzvez je bila obja- vljena razprava (Zupančič 2003). Omenjene vrste, ki jih nekateri imenujejo “ilirske” ali “ilirikoidne”, zasedajo širša območja od ilirske province ali pa so pri nas le v disjunktih, zato smo jih označili kot jugovzhodnoe- vropsko-ilirske vrste. (Prave) ilirske vrste so v negoz- dnih habitatih. Podzveza Saxifrago rotundifoliae-Fagenion je nasta- la ob reviziji asociacije Anemono trifoliae-Fagetum (Ma- rinček et al. 1989: 34–37 in 57–58) pod vplivom ma- džarskega fitocenologa Borhidija, ki je bolj ali manj uspešno objavil submontansko-montanske ilirske buko- ve podzveze v letih od 1963 do 1966. Brez dvoma pa je neuspešna naša predstavitev podzveze Saxifrago rotun- difoliae-Fagenion. S podzvezami, zlasti s podzvezo Saxi- frago rotundifoliae-Fagenion, ustvarjamo nezaželene kritike o obstoju ilirske zveze bukovih združb Aremo- nio-Fagion. S tako podzvezo, ki ima razlikovalnice samo iz srednjeevropskih vrst in nima niti svojih značilnic, ustvarjamo pri kritikih pomisleke, da je tudi za našo ilirsko florno provinco dovolj srednjeevropska zveza Fagion sylvaticae, ali morda, pri strpnejših evropskih fi- tocenologih, kot podzveza, npr. Aremonio-Fagenion. Tako že pri Willnerju & Grabherrju (2007: 14 4–148) zasledimo, da ilirsko zvezo Aremonio-Fagion vključuje- ta v srednjeevropsko zvezo Fagion sylvaticae, ki zajema ev ropska bu kov ja in smrekovo-jelova-bu kov ja. Zavedat i se moramo, da s srednjeevropskimi vrstami predstavlje- na podzveza Saxifrago rotundifoliae-Fagenion tudi ali predvsem velja za srednjeevropsko zvezo bukovih goz- dov Fagion sylvaticae. Težave so tudi z nekaterimi jugo- vzhodnoevropsko-ilirskimi vrstami iz zveze Aremonio- -Fagion, s široko razširjenostjo prek ilirske florne pro- vince in so le relativne značilnice ali razlikovalnice zveze, npr. Cardamine enneaphyllos, Knautia drymeia subsp. drymeia, Cyclamen purpurascens, Helleborus niger subsp. niger, Euphorbia carniolica, Anemone trifo- lia, Calamintha grandiflora, Hacquetia epipactis, Festu- ca drymeia idr. Nekateri avtorji pa v jugovzhodnoevrop- sko-ilirske vrste vztrajno uvrščajo vrste, ki to niso, npr. Primula vulgaris, Astrantia carniolica, Lonicera caprifo- lium, Fraxinus ornus, Ostrya carpinifolia idr. Modro bi bilo, da s fitogeografsko ustreznimi jugovzhodnoevrop- sko-ilirskimi vrstami utrdimo zvezo Aremonio-Fagion in izločimo neustrezne srednjeevropske vrste za značil - nice ali razlikovalnice “ilirskih” podzvez. S to razpravo, podkrepljeno s sintezno in analitično tabelo, smo skušali pojasniti pojavljanje altimontanskih in subalpinskih bukovih gozdov na karbonatni podlagi ilirske florne province (Aremonio-Fagion) ter njihov sinsistematski položaj in sintaksonomsko ureditev po- sameznih fitocenoz na osnovi njihovih značilnic in raz- likovalnic ter se izogniti pavšalni trditvi “fitocenološke raziskave so pokazale”. 8 REFERENCES – LITERATURA Barkman , J. J., J. Moravec & S. Rauschert , 1976: Code of phytosociological nomenclature. Vegatatio (The Hague) 32 (3): 131–185. Braun-Blanquet , J., 1964: Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde. 3. Auflage. Springer, Wien-New York. Dakskobler , I., 1998: Vegetacija gozdnega rezervata Govci na severozahodnem robu Trnovskega gozda (zahodna Slovenija). 19. gozdarski študijski dnevi. Zbornik referatov “Gorski gozd” (Logarska dolina): 269–301. Dakskobler , I., A. Seliškar & B. Vreš , 1999: Stellaria nemorum L. and S. montana Pierrat (Caryophylaceae) in the Forest Communities of Slovenia. Folia geobotanica (Praha) 34: 115–125. Košir , Ž., 1979: Ekološke, fitocenološke in gozdnogospodarske lastnosti Gorjancev v Sloveniji. Zbornik gozdarstva in lesarstva (Ljubljana) 17 (1): 1–242. Marinček , L., 1985: Subalpsko bukovje Škofjeloškega hribovja. Loški razgledi (Škofja Loka) 33: 182–190. Marinček , L., L. Poldini & M. Zupančič , 1989: Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Gesellschaft Anemono-Fagetum. Razprave 4. razr. SAZU (Ljubljana) 30 (1): 3–64. Marinček , L., L. Mucina , M. Zupančič , L. Poldini , I. Dakskobler & M. Accetto , 1993: Nomenklatorische Revi- sion der Illyrischen Buchenwälder (Verband Aremonio-Fagion). Studia Geobotanica (Trieste) 12: 121–135. Marinček , L., 1995: Subalpine Buchenwälder in den westlichen Dinariden (Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum var. geogr. Allium victorialis var. geogr. nova). Supplemento II agli Annali dei Musei Civici di Rovereto, Sezione Archeologia, Storia e Scienze Naturali (Rovereto) 11: 197–204 + tabela. M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 105 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Marinček , L. & P. Košir , 1998: Dinarski jelovo-bukovi gozdovi [Omphalodo-Fagetum (Tregubov 1957) Marinček et al. 1993] na Blegošu. Hladnikia (Ljubljana) 10: 29–40. Marinček , L., 1998: Hochmontane Buchenwälder Illiriens. Annales (Koper) 13: 103–108. Marinček , L. & A. Čarni , 2010: Altimontanski bukovi gozdovi podzveze Saxifrago-Fagenion (Aremonio-Fagion). Scopolia (Ljubljana) 69: 1–107. Martinčič , A., T. Wraber , N. Jogan , A. Podobnik , B. Turk & B. Vreš , 2007. Mala flora Slovenije. Tehniška založba Slovenije, Ljubljana. Matuszkiewicz , W. & A., 1981: Das Prinzip der merhdimesionalen der Vegetation-seinheiten, erläutert der Eichen- -Hainbuchenwälder in Polen. Ber. Internat. Sym. der Internat. Ver. f. Vegktd. Syntaxonomie (Vaduz): 123–148. Poldini , L. & S. Nardini , 1993: Boschi di forra, faggete e abieteti in Friuli (NE Italia). Studia Geobotanica (Trieste) 13: 215–298. Weber , H. E., J. Moravec & J.-P . Theurillat , 2000: International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature. 3rd edi- tion. Journal of vegetation Science 11 (5): 39–68, 89–95. Westhoff , V . & E. V an Der Maarel , 1973: The Braun-Blanquet approach. V: Whittaker , R. H. (ur.). Ordination and classification of communites. W. Junk, The Haque. Willner , W. & G. Grabherr , 2007: Die Wälder und Gebüsche Österreichs. 1 Textband. Sprektrum, München. Zupančič , M., 1967: Der dinarische Bergahorn-Buchenwald (Aceri-Fagetum dinaricum) im slowenischen Hochkarst- gebiet. Mitt. ostalp.-din. pflanzensoz. Arbeitsgem. (Trieste) 7: 89–95. Zupančič , M., 1969: Vergleich der Bergahorn-Buchengesellschaften (Aceri-Fagetum) im alpinen und dinarschen Raume. Mitt. ostalp.-din. Pflanzensoz. Arbeitsgem. (Camerino) 9: 119–131. Zupančič , M., 2003: Kritični pregled fitocenoloških in fitogeografskih raziskav v Sloveniji. Razpr. 4. razr. SAZU (Lju- bljana) 44 (2): 103–149. M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 106 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 PHYTOCOENOLOGICAL TABLE (Fitocenološka tabela) 1: ACERI-FAGETUM s. lat. Number of relevé (Zaporedna številka popisa) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 A lt it ude i n m (Nad morsk a v iši na v m ) 1250 1360 1420 1170 1210 1270 1300 1220 1280 1090 1220 1420 1380 1200 1320 1410 1260 1400 1280 1450 1400 1500 1500 1430 1240 1280 1340 1320 1400 1420 1430 1380 Aspect (Nebesna lega) S - SE W-SW NE W - N-NW - W S-SW SE N NE-E N SW SE S S-SW SE SE-S E-NE NE-E NE-E-SE SE N-NE NE-E NE-E N-NE N W N-NW Slope in degrees (Nagib v stopinjah) 0-30 - 25 20 35 25-30 20-25 0-3 20-30 0 0-20 20-25 20 25-30 10-20 25-30 15-25 35-40 25 20-30 20-30 30-40 35-45 10-25 30-40 5-15 5-10 15-20 20-25 10-15 15-20 10-15 12-15 Bedrock (Geološka podlaga) limestone, dolomite, dolomitized limestone (apnenec, dolomit, dolomitizirani apnenec) limestone, dolomite, dolomi- tized limestone (apnenec, dolomit, dolomitizirani apnenec) metamorphic, igneous rocks (metamorfne, magmatske kamnine) Stoniness in % (Kamnitost v %) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cover (Pokrovnost) %: Tree layer (Drevesna pl.) I 80-90 80-90 80-90 80 90 80-90 80-90 90-100 70-80 80-90 100 90 70-80 90-100 90 90 40-50 60-70 100 90-100 70-90 70 40-50 80-90 80-90 90 90-100 70-80 90-100 60-70 100 90-100 Sinsistematical characteristic (Sinsistematska pripadnost) Shrub layer (Grmovna plast) II 0 10 40 0 10 10 30 0 5 0 0 20 30 10 10 20 20 40 20 30 30 50 40-50 30 30-40 0 5 0 10 10 0 0 Herb layer (Zeliščna plast) III 90-100 85 40-50 40 40 60 80-90 60 80 80 60 50 70-80 90 60-70 60 90 90 50-60 30 90 60-70 80-90 90 80-90 90 30 95 80 100 70-80 90 Moss layer (Mahovna plast) IV 0 10 20 30 10 20 5 30 2 10 15 10 30 10 10 20 3 3 5 20 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 Relevé (Velikost popisne ploskve) m2 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 Country (Država) Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Location (Kraj popisov) Blegoš Javorska dolina Trnovski gozd Praprot Trnovski gozd Smrekov vrh Kočevsko Debeli vrh Idrijsko Javorniki Trnovski gozd Mali in Veliki Modrasovec Trnovski gozd Praprot Trnovski gozd Nemški hrib Trnovski gozd Trnovo Trnovski gozd Trnovski gozd Pod Iztokovo kočo Trnovski gozd Hribarjev vrh Trnovski gozd Smrekov vrh Trnovski gozd Poslušanje Trnovski gozd Smrekov vrh Trnovski gozd Hribarjev vrh TNP (Triglavski narodni park) Komarča TNP Spodnja Komna TNP Pekel pod Komno TNP Spodnja Komna TNP Spodnja Komna TNP Spodnja Komna TNP Spodnja Komna TNP (Triglavski narodni park) Komna Pohorje Hudi Vrh Pohorje Klopni vrh Pohorje Konjiška planina Pohorje Črni vrh Pohorje Črni vrh Pohorje Črni vrh Pohorje Mala Kopa Pohorje Mala Kopa M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 107 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Association (asociacija) STELLARIO - FAGETUM ACONITO - FAGETUM CARDAMINE - FAGETUM var. geogr. ABIES ALBA Presence (Prezenca) 1-32 Presence (Prezenca) 1-16 Presence (Prezenca) 17-24 Presence (Prezenca) 25-32 Subassociation (Subasociacija)/ Stand (Stadij) TYPICUM ADENOSTYLETOSUM ALLIARIAE TYPICUM SORBETOSUM TYPICUM DORONICETOSUM STELLARIO-FAGETUM (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1992 CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (Značilnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 F 2 Polystichum aculeatum III . + 1.1 + 1.2 + . + . 1.1 + + 1.1 + 1.2 +.2 + . + . . . + + . . . . . . . . 17 13 4 - F 2 Stellaria montana 1.2 + + . . +.2 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.2 . 1.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - - - F 2 Cardamine pentaphyllos + . . . 2.2 . . . . . . . . . (+.2) + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 - DIFERENTIAL SPECIES (Razlikovalnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 I 4.1 2.1 1.1 3.1 + 1.1 2.1 3.1 3.1 2.1 3.1 2.1 2.1 4.1 2.1 2.1 3.1 3.2 3.1 5.2 3.1 2.2 3.2 5.1 2.1 1.1 + 3.1 2.1 + 2.1 1.1 32 16 8 8 F 2 Acer pseudoplatanus II . 1.1 1.1 . + + + . +.2 . + + 1.1 1.1 + 1.2 1.2 2.2 + 1.1 2.2 2.2 . 2.2 3.3 . . . . + . + 22 32 12 16 7 8 3 8 III . 1.1 . . . 1.2 . . . + 1.1 . . 1.1 . . . . . . . . . . + + + 1.1 + 1.1 + . 12 5 - 7 F 2 Scrophularia nodosa + 1.1 + + + + + . + + + + + +.2 . + . . + + + . . + . . . + . . + + 21 14 4 3 F 2 Corydalis cava . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 1.2 . . 1.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - - - STELLARIO-FAGETUM ADENOSTYLETOSUM ALLIARIAE subas. nova 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 A 3 Doronicum austriacum III . . . + . . . . . +.2 . + 1.1 . + +.2 . 1.2 1.2 1.1 2.2 +.2 2.2 2.2 . + +0. 1.1 1.2 + + 2.2 20 6 7 7 F 2 Adoxa moschatellina . . . . 1.1 . . . . + 1.2 +.2 . 1.2 +.2 +.2 + . . + + . +.2 +.2 . . + 1.2 +.2 + +.2 +.2 18 7 5 6 A 3 Adenostyles alliariae . . . . . . . . 2.2 . (+.2) + 2.2 + 3.2 +.2 . . + +.2 + . 2.2 2.2 . . +0. . . + +0. 3.3 16 7 5 4 A 3 Cicerbita alpina . . . . . . . . . . . + + +.2 1.2 +.2 +.2 . 2.2 1.2 + +.2 . 3.3 . +0. . . +0. 1.2 2.1 1.1 16 5 6 5 A 3 Myosotis sylvatica . . . . . +.2 +.2 +.2 1.2 +.2 +.2 . +.2 1.2 . + 1.2 +.2 +.2 . 1.2 . +.2 +.2 . . . . . . . . 15 9 6 - ACONITO PANICULATAE-FAGETUM (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1992 CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (Značilnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 A 3 Rumex alpestris (=R. arifolius) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (+) . 1.1 +.2 . 1.2 +0. + 1.1 . . . . + + . + 10 1 6 3 A 3 Crepis paludosa . . . . . . . . . . . . + . (+.2) . . + + 1.1 + + + 1.2 . . . . . (+) . . 10 2 7 1 A 3 Aconitum degenii subsp. paniculatum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 2.2 + + 1.2 2.2 1.2 1.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . 9 1 8 - A 3 Salix appendiculata II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 +.2 . +.2 + +.2 1.2 . . . . . . . . 6 - 6 - A 3 Geranium sylvaticum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . +0. + + +.2 + . . . . . . . . 6 - 6 - A 3 Aconitum lycoctonum subsp. ranunculi- folium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 + . . . . 2.2 . 2.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . 5 2 3 - A 3 Senecio cacaliaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 . 1.1 2.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . 4 - 4 - DIFERENTIAL SPECIES (Razlikovalnici) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 - ART Myrrhis odorata III . 1.2 . . . . . . . . . + . . +.2 +.2 +.2 . +.2 2.2 . + 3.3 2.2 . . . . . . . . 10 4 6 - MA Geum rivale . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + + + . 1.1 + + 1.2 . . . . . . . . 8 1 7 - M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 108 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 ACONITO-FAGETUM SORBETOSUM CHAMAEMESPILUS subas. nova 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 A 3 Viola biflora III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 +.2 1.2 1.2 . . . . + + . 1.2 7 - 4 3 VP 2 Polystichum lonchitis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 + 1.1 + + . . . . . . . . 5 - 5 - VP 2 Sorbus chamaemespilus II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + +.2 1.2 +.2 +.2 . . . . . . . . 5 - 5 - A 3 Ribes alpinum . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 + . +.2 . . . . . . . . 4 1 3 - CARDAMINE WALDSTEINIANAE-FAGETUM Ž. Košir 1962 var. geogr. ABIES ALBA (Zupančič 1969) Ž. Košir 1979 CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (Značilnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 F2 Milium effusum III . +.3 . . . . 2.2 +.2 1.2 2.3 +.2 . . . 1.2 +.2 . + . . 1.2 . . 1.2 . . 1.2 1.2. 2.2. 2.2 +.2 1.2 17 8 3 6 F 1 Cardamine waldsteinii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 1.1 +0. 2.2 (+) 1.2 . +.2 7 - - 7 VP 3 Luzula pilosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 + + + . (+.2) . . 5 - - 5 DIFERENTIAL SPECIES (Razlikovalnica) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 I . . . 1.1 . (rr) . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 1.1 1.1 + 1.1 + . . 9 3 - 6 VP 3 Abies alba II . . . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . . . . . . . . + + 1.1 . + + r . 8 11 2 4 - 6 7 III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 + 1.1 . . + . . 4 - - 4 CARDAMINE-FAGETUM DORONICETOSUM AUSTRIACEA subas. nova 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 F 1 Phyteuma spicatum III . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + + + 5 1 - 4 F 1 Leucojum vernum . . . 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + + 4 1 - 3 F 1 AREMONIO-FAGION (Ht. 1938) Török, Podani & Borhidi 1989 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Cardamine trifolia III + . 2.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 2.2 . 1.2 2.3 1.2 1.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 . . . +.2 . . . . . 1.2 +.2 . +.3 . 1.2 +0. . 19 13 1 5 Cardamine enneaphyllos . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 1.2 . + 1.2 2.2 . . . + . + + + . . . . . (+) + . 11 5 4 2 Lamium orvala . + + 2.2 . . +0. + + 1.2 1.3 . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9 - - Cardamine waldsteinii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 1.1 +0. 2.2 (+) 1.2 . +.2 7 - - 7 Aremonia agrimonoides . + . + + + + . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6 - - Cyclamen purpurascens . . 1.1 . . (+) . . . . . (+) . . . . . . +.2 . . 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 2 - Knautia drymeia subsp. drymeia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . + + +0. 1.1 . . 5 - 1 4 Anemone trifolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 1.2 . 1.1 . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3 - Vicia oroboides + . . . . . . . . . . + . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 - - F 2 FAGETALIA SYLVATICAE Pawl. 1928 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 I 4.1 2.1 1.1 3.1 + 1.1 2.1 3.1 3.1 2.1 3.1 2.1 2.1 4.1 2.1 2.1 3.1 3.2 3.1 5.2 3.1 2.2 3.2 5.1 2.1 1.1 + 3.1 2.1 + 2.1 1.1 32 16 8 8 Acer pseudoplatanus II . 1.1 1.1 . + + + . +.2 . + + 1.1 1.1 + 1.2 1.2 2.2 + 1.1 2.2 2.2 . 2.2 3.3 . . . . + . + 22 32 12 16 7 8 3 8 III . 1.1 . . . 1.2 . . . + 1.1 . . 1.1 . . . . . . . . . . + + + 1.1 + 1.1 + . 12 5 - 7 I 3.1 5.1 5.1 2.2 5.2 5.1 5.1 4.1 3.1 5.2 4.1 5.1 4.1 3.1 5.1 5.1 1.1 2.2 4.1 2.2 2.1 3.2 +.2 1.1 4.1 3.1 4.1 3.1 4.1 3.1 5.1 3.1 32 16 8 8 Fagus sylvatica II . 1.1 3.2 + 2.2 + 1.2 + 1.2 + + 2.2 2.2 1.2 2.2 2.2 + 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 3.2 . 1.2 1.2 . . + . + . . 25 32 15 16 7 8 3 8 III . + . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 . 1.1 + + 1.2 + . 8 2 - 6 Galeobdolon montanum + + + . + 1.1 + + . + 2.2 + 1.1 + + + 2.2 1.2 1.2 + 2.2 2.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 30 14 8 8 M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 109 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Actaea spicata . + + + + + . + + + . + + + + +.2 + + . 1.1 + + + + + . . 1.1 (+0) . . + 24 13 7 4 Epilobium montanum + + . . + + . . + + + + + + + + + 1.1 + + + . + + + + + + . + . . 24 12 7 5 Paris quadrifolia . . . . + + . . . + + + + + + 1.1 + + + 1.1 + 1.1 + + . + . + + + 1.2 + 23 9 8 6 Ranunculus lanuginosus + . . . + (+) + . 2.2 + (+) . + + (+) + . + 1.2 + + . 1.2 1.2 . + . . . 1.2 + + 21 11 6 4 Scrophularia nodosa + 1.1 + + + + + . + + + + + +.2 . + . . + + + . . + . . . + . . + + 21 14 4 3 Galium odoratum . 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.3 2.2 1.2 . 2.3 1.2 3.3 1.2 . 1.3 1.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . . 1.3 1.2 4.4 (+.30) 1.3 3.4 2.3 20 13 - 7 Adoxa moschatellina . . . . 1.1 . . . . + 1.2 +.2 . 1.2 +.2 +.2 + . . + + . +.2 +.2 . . + 1.2 +.2 + +.2 +.2 18 7 5 6 Prenanthes purpurea . . r0. . + + . . . . + 1.2 . . . . . (+) 1.1 + + 2.2 . . + + + + (+0) (+) 1.2 + 18 5 5 8 Milium effusum . +.3 . . . . 2.2 +.2 1.2 2.3 +.2 . . . 1.2 +.2 . + . . 1.2 . . 1.2 . . 1.2 1.20. 2.20. 2.2 +.2 1.2 17 8 3 6 Mycelis muralis + . + . + + . +0. + + + + + + + + . . + . + . . . + . . . . (+) . . 17 13 2 2 Polystichum aculeatum . + 1.1 + 1.2 + . + . 1.1 + + 1.1 + 1.2 +.2 + . + . . . + + . . . . . . . . 17 13 4 - Mercurialis perennis + 1.2 1.1 . . 2.2 . . . . . (+) . . . . 2.3 1.2 +.2 2.2 1.2 2.2 +.2 1.2 . . . . . . 1.2 1.3 15 5 8 2 Stellaria montana 1.2 + + . . +.2 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.2 . 1.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 13 - - Daphne mezereum II . + . + + + . . . + . + + . . . + . 1.2 + . 1.2 + +.2 . . . . . . . . 13 7 6 - Geranium robertianum III 1.2 + . . . + . + 1.2 + 1.2 . . + . + + + + . + . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9 4 - Lilium martagon . . . . . . . . . . + + + . + + . . . + . + + + . +0. . . + . + + 13 5 4 4 Carex sylvatica . . + + + +.2 . . +.2 + . + . + . (+) . . . . . . . . + + + . . . . . 12 9 - 3 Lonicera alpigena II . . +.2 . . 1.2 . . . . . (+) +.2 . . . . . 2.2 1.2 +.2 1.2 . +.2 . . . . . . . . 9 4 5 - Aruncus dioicus III . . + . . . . . + . . + . . + . + . 1.1 + . 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . 8 4 4 - Sambucus racemosa II + . . . + +0. . . . . . . . + . . +.2 . . +.2 . . . . . + . . . . r . 8 4 2 2 Sanicula europaea III + . . . +.2 2.3 +.2 . . . . . . . . +.2 . . . . . . . . . + +.2 . . (+.2) . . 8 5 - 3 Symphytum tuberosum subsp. tubero- sum . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 . + 2.2 1.2 1.2 + + 8 1 - 7 Cardamine bulbifera . . . . . . . . . + 1.2 + . 1.1 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 - - Eurhynchium zetterstedtii IV +.3 . . 2.4 . . . . . +.3 . . +.3 . . . . . . . . . . . +.5 . . . . . . . 5 4 - 1 Lathyrus vernus III . . + . . + . . . . . + + . . (+) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 - - Lunaria rediviva 1.2 . . . . . . 3.3 . . 1.2 . . . . . 2.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 2 - Phyteuma spicatum . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + + + 5 1 - 4 Pulmonaria officinalis . . . + . (+) . . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +0. . . . . . . . 5 4 - 1 Viola reichenbachiana + . . + . . . . . . . (+) . . . . . . . . . r . . 1.1 . . . . . . . 5 3 1 1 Corydalis cava . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 1.2 . . 1.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 - - Cardamine pentaphyllos + . . . 2.2 . . . . . . . . . (+.2) + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 - - Impatiens noli-tangere . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 . 1.2 +.2 +.2 . . +.2 . +.30 . (+.30) . . 4 1 - 3 Leucojum vernum . . . 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + + 4 1 - 3 Melica nutans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 . 1.2 +.2 +.2 . . . . . . . . . 4 1 - 3 Salvia glutinosa +.2 . . 1.2 + . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 1 - Festuca altissima . . . . . +.2 . . . . 2.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 . . . (+) . . 4 2 - 2 Petasites albus + . . 3.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.3 . . 3 2 - 1 Phyllitis scolopendrium . + . . . . . + . . . . . . . . 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 1 - Poa nemoralis . . +.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 . +.2 . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 2 - Heracleum sphondylium subsp. monta- num . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + . . + . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 2 - Q 2 QUERCETALIA PUBESCENTIS Br.-Bl. (1931) 1932 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Camptothecium lutescens IV . 1.4 +.4 . . 1.5 +.3 1.5 . +.3 2.5 2.5 . . . 2.5 1.5 . +.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9 2 - M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 110 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Galium schultesii III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r . 1.2 . 1.2 . . +.2 . . . . . . . . 4 - 4 - F 3 QUERCO-FAGETEA Br.-Bl. & Vlieger in Vlieger 1937 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Ctenidium molluscum IV . +.4 2.4 +.4 1.4 2.5 +.3 1.5 +.4 1.4 . 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.5 +.5 +.5 . 1.5 . +.5 +.4 +.5 +.5 . . . . . . . . 20 14 6 - Anemone nemorosa III . . . . . . . . . + . 1.2 . +.2 + +.2 . . 1.2 1.2 + 1.2 + + . . . . . + . + 13 5 6 2 Isothecium myurum . +.3 +.4 . +.2 1.5 . 2.5 . 2.4 +.5 . 2.5 1.4 +.5 . . +.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10 1 - Lonicera xylosteum II . . . . + + . . . . . . . . . + +.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 1 - Carex digitata III . . + . . +.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 1 - Polypodium vulgare . . +0. . . . . r0 . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 - - VP 1 VACCINIO-PICEION Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 I . . . 2.1 . . + 2.1 . 2.1 1.1 . . + . . . . . + (1.2) + . 1.1 . 3.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 3.3 17 6 4 7 Picea abies II . . . + . . . . . + . . . + . . . + . . + . . + + . . + 2.1 + r + 12 19 3 6 3 5 6 8 III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + + . . 3 - - 3 Luzula sylvatica subsp. sylvatica . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 1.2 . (+.3) . . . . . . . . +.2 +.2 . r + +0. 1.2 +.2 +.2 11 3 1 7 Mnium spinosum IV . . . . +.3 . . . . +.3 . +.5 +.3 . . +.2 +.3 . . +.3 . . +.5 +.3 . . . . . . . . 9 5 4 - Lonicera nigra II . . . . . (+) . . . +.2 . . + . + . . . +.2 . . +.2 . . (+) . . . . . . + 8 4 2 2 Gymnocarpium dryopteris III . . . . . (+) . . . +.2 . . + . (+) . . . . . . . . . +.2 . . . +.2 . . . 6 4 - 2 Melampyrum sylvaticum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . + . + . . 3 - - 3 VP 2 VACCINIO-PICEETALIA Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 emend. K.-Lund 1967 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Adenostyles glabra III . 1.2 2.2 . + +.2 +.2 . + . 1.2 2.2 2.2 . . . + + . + . + +.2 +.2 . . . + . . . +.2 17 9 6 2 Dryopteris expansa (?) D. dilatata . + . + + . +.2 . +.2 +.2 . . . + +.2 . . . . + + . . . + + + . + + . + 16 8 2 6 I . . . 1.1 . (rr) . . . - . . . + . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 1.1 1.1 + 1.1 + - . 9 3 - 6 Abies alba II . . . - . - . . . + . . . + . . . . . . . . . . + + 1.1 - + + r . 8 11 2 4 - - 6 7 III . . . - . - . . . - . . . - . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 + 1.1 - - + - . 4 - - 4 Peltigera leucophlebia IV . +.2 . . . +.2 . +.2 . + . . +.2 . . . +.3 . . . +.3 . +.2 . . . . . . . . +.2 9 5 3 1 Rosa pendulina II . . . . + + . . . . . . + . . . . +.2 + 1.2 + 1.2 . 1.2 . . . . . . . . 9 3 6 - Valeriana tripteris III . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . +.2 +.2 +0. + . +.2 . +.2 . . . . . . . . 7 1 6 - Veronica latifolia . . . . . . . . . . . (+) + . . . . . + + . 1.2 . +.2 . . . . . . . . 6 2 4 - Sorbus chamaemespilus II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + +.2 1.2 +.2 +.2 . . . . . . . . 5 - 5 - Polystichum lonchitis III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 + 1.1 + + . . . . . . . . 5 - 5 - Atrichum undulatum . . . . +.3 . . . . . . +.5 +.4 . . + . . . . . . . . +.5 . . . . . . . 5 4 - 1 Sorbus aucuparia var. glabrata II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 1.2 + . + . . . . . . . . 4 4 - 4 4 - III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1 - Polytrichum formosum IV . . . . +.3 . . . . +.3 . . . . +.5 . . . . . . . . . +.3 . . . . . . . 4 3 - 1 Mnium punctatum +.2 . . +.4 +.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 1 - Thelypteris phegopteris III . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 . . . . . . +.2 . . . . . . . . + + . . 4 1 1 2 Rubus saxatilis II . . . . . . . . . . . (+) . . . . . . . . . 1.1 + . . . . . . . . . 3 1 2 - Vaccinium myrtillus III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 . . +.2 . . . . . . . +.2 . . 3 - 2 1 M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 111 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 VP 3 VACCINIO-PICEETEA Br.-Bl. 1939 emend. Zupančič (1976) 2000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Oxalis acetosella III . 1.2 1.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 +.2 1.2 2.3 1.2 +.2 1.2 2.2 1.2 . . . . +.2 +.2 . . +.3 2.2 4.5 2.3 1.3 +.2 1.3 +.2 2.2 25 14 3 8 Gentiana asclepiadea . +.2 + . + 1.2 +.2 . . + . +.2 +.2 . +.2 +.2 . + + + +.2 + + +.2 + . + + +0. +.2 + + 24 10 7 7 Calamagrostis arundinacea . . . . . . . . . + . 2.3 . . . . +.2 . 1.20 . +.2 . +.20 +.2 +.2 . . +.2 . +.2 1.20 . 11 2 5 4 Maianthemum bifolium . . . . +.2 +.2 + . . + . +.2 . . 1.2 +.2 . . + . . + . . . . . . . . . . 9 7 2 - Grimmia pulvinata . +.2 +.3 . . +.3 +.2 +.3 . . . . . . . . . +.3 . +.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5 2 - Luzula luzuloides . +.2 +.2 . . (+) . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 . + . . . +.20 . 7 4 - 3 Luzula pilosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 + + + . (+.2) . . 5 - - 5 Hypnum cupressiforme . . . . +.3 . +.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.3 . . 3 2 - 1 Solidago virgaurea subsp. minuta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . + . . + . . . 3 - 1 2 Solidago virgaurea subsp. virgaurea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . + . . . . . + . 3 - 1 2 EP 3 ERICO-PINETEA Ht. 1959 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Calamagrostis varia III . 2.2 1.20 . . +.2 1.2 . +.2 . . . +.2 . . . . +.2 . + . +.2 . . . . . . . . . . 9 6 3 - Cirsium erisithales . . + . . . . . . . . (+) . . . . + + + + 1.1 1.1 . + . . . . . . . . 9 2 7 - Buphthalmum salicifolium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + . + . . . . . . . . . . 3 - - 3 Laserpitium latifolium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + +0. . . . +.2 . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3 - A 1 ADENOSTYLION ALLIARIAE Br.-Bl. 1925 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Dryopteris filix-mas III 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 1.2 +.2 2.2 1.2 3.3 3.3 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 +.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 + + 1.2 1.1 1.3 + 1.2 32 16 8 8 Athyrium filix-femina 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 2.2 +.2 1.2 + 1.2 2.2 +.2 1.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 . 1.2 1.2 2.2 1.2 1.2 . 1.2 2.2 1.2 + 2.2 1.1 3.3 1.2 3.3 30 16 6 8 Senecio ovatus +.2 2.2 . 1.1 + 2.2 3.3 . 2.2 1.2 + +.2 + 2.1 1.2 2.2 3.3 3.3 2.2 2.2 3.3 . . . 2.2 + + + 1.2 3.3 2.2 + 27 14 5 8 Polygonatum verticillatum + . . + 1.2 1.20 . . + + + +.2 + + + + . . 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 +.2 +.2 + + +0. +0. (+0) . + + 25 12 6 7 Doronicum austriacum . . . + . . . . . +.2 . + 1.1 . + +.2 . 1.2 1.2 1.1 2.2 +.2 2.2 2.2 . + +0. 1.1 1.2 + + 2.2 20 6 7 7 Cicerbita alpina . . . . . . . . . . . + + +.2 1.2 +.2 +.2 . 2.2 1.2 + +.2 . 3.3 . +0. . . +0. 1.2 2.1 1.1 16 5 6 5 Stellaria nemorum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (+) . 2.2 . 2.2 1.2 r 1.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 1.2 +.2 2.3 3.4 +.2 1.2 15 1 6 8 Ranunculus platanifolius . . . . + + . . . . . + + . (+) . . . 1.1 + + + . + . . . . (+0) + + + 14 5 5 4 Thalictrum aquilegiifolium . . . . . (+) . . . . . . . . . +.2 + . + 1.1 + + +.2 1.2 . . . +0. . 1.2 +0. + 13 2 7 4 Veratrum album subsp. lobelianum . . . . + . . . + . + 1.1 . . + 2.2 . . . + + 1.1 1.1 + . . . . . . . . 11 6 5 - Myrrhis odorata . 1.2 . . . . . . . . . + . . +.2 +.2 +.2 . +.2 2.2 . + 3.3 2.2 . . . . . . . . 10 4 6 - Aconitum degenii subsp. paniculatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 2.2 + + 1.2 2.2 1.2 1.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . 9 1 8 - Geum rivale . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . + + + . 1.1 + + 1.2 . . . . . . . . 8 1 7 - Heracleum sphondylium subsp. sphon- dylium . . . . . +0. . . . . . + + 1.1 + . . . . . 2.2 . . 1.1 . . . . . . . . 7 5 2 - Veratrum album subsp. album +.2 . . + . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + + (+) . + 7 3 - 4 Aconitum lycoctonum subsp. ranunculi- folium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 + . . . . 2.2 . 2.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . 5 2 3 - Ribes alpinum II . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 + . +.2 . . . . . . . . 4 1 3 - Phyteuma ovatum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 + . + . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 3 - A 2 ADENOSTYLETALIA G. et J. Br.-Bl. 1931 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Rubus idaeus II 1.2 +.2 1.1 . + + 2.2 . +.3 . + + 2.1 1.1 + 1.2 + 2.3 + + 1.2 . . 1.2 1.2 + 1.1 + + 1.2 + . 27 14 6 7 M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 112 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Saxifraga rotundifolia III . + + . + +.2 . . . + + +.2 1.2 . +.2 +.2 +.2 +.2 + 1.2 + +.2 1.2 1.2 . . . . . 1.2 . . 19 10 8 1 Adenostyles alliariae . . . . . . . . 2.2 . (+.2) + 2.2 + 3.2 +.2 . . + +.2 + . 2.2 2.2 . . +0. . . + +0. 3.3 16 7 5 4 Myosotis sylvatica . . . . . +.2 +.2 +.2 1.2 +.2 +.2 . +.2 1.2 . + 1.2 +.2 +.2 . 1.2 . +.2 +.2 . . . . . . . . 15 9 6 - Chrysosplenium alternifolium 2.2 . . . . . +.2 +.2 1.2 +.2 . . +.2 2.2 +.2 . . +.2 . . +.2 . . 1.2 . . +.2 . . . . . 12 8 3 1 Crepis paludosa . . . . . . . . . . . . + . (+.2) . . + + 1.1 + + + 1.2 . . . . . (+) . . 10 2 7 1 Deschampsia caespitosa . . . . . . +.2 . . + . . . +.2 . . . . +.2 . . . . . 1.2 +.2 +.2 +.2 +.2 2.3 . . 10 3 1 6 Rumex alpestris (=R. arifolius) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (+) . 1.1 +.2 . 1.2 +0. + 1.1 . . . . + + . + 10 1 6 3 Viola biflora III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 +.2 1.2 1.2 . . . . + + . 1.2 7 - 4 3 Aconitum lycoctonum subsp. vulparia . +.2 . . . . . . . . . . . + . . +.2 . + + . 1.1 . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 4 - Geranium sylvaticum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . +0. + + +.2 + . . . . . . . . 6 - 6 - Salix appendiculata II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +.2 +.2 . +.2 + +.2 1.2 . . . . . . . . 6 - 6 - Senecio cacaliaster III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 . 1.1 2.2 2.2 . . . . . . . . 4 - 4 - E EPILOBIETEA ANGUSTIFOLII R. Tx. & Prsg. in R. Tx. 1950 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Galeopsis speciosa III . . . . + +.2 + . + . . . . 1.1 . . +.2 + + . + . . + + . . + . . + . 13 5 5 3 Fragaria vesca . . . . + . . . . . . + . . . + . . + + + . . . 1.2 . + . . . . . 8 3 3 2 TG TRIFOLIO-GERANIETEA SANGUINEI Th. Müller 1961 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Galium aristatum III . . 1.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . +.2 . 2.2 . . . . . . . . . . 4 1 3 - Fragaria viridis . + + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 1 - MA MOLINIO-ARRHENATHERETEA R. Tx. 1937 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Chaerophyllum villarsii (C. hirsutum) III 1.2 . . + . . . . 2.2 + . . 1.2 . + +.2 1.2 +.2 + + 2.2 . + 2.2 . . . . +0. +.2 + +0. 18 7 7 4 Dactylorhiza maculata agg. . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . (+) . + 4 1 1 2 ART ARTEMISIETEA Lohm., Prsg. & R. Tx. in R. Tx. 1950 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Urtica dioica 2.3 1.2 +.2 1.2 . . +.2 +.2 1.3 + 1.2 + +.2 2.2 + 1.2 1.2 . +.2 1.1 +.2 . . 1.2 1.2 + . +.2 . . . . 22 14 5 3 Silene dioica (Melandrium rubrum) III + + . + . . . . . . . . . . . . + + . + + . + + + + . + + + . . 14 3 6 5 Lamium maculatum +.5 . . r . . . . . . . . . 2.2 . . . . . + . . . 1.2 . . . + . . . . 6 3 2 1 AS ASPLENIETEA TRICHOMANIS Br.-Bl. in Meier & Br.-Bl. 1934 corr. Oberd. 1977 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Cystopteris fragilis III . +.2 + . . . . . . + +.2 +.2 + . +.2 . . + + + +.2 +.2 1.2 . . . . . . . . . 13 7 6 - Asplenium viride . + . . . . . . . + . . + . . . . . . . + + + + . . . . . . . . 7 3 4 - O OTHER SPECIES (Ostali vrsti) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 I . - + . . - - . . 1.1 - - + . + - - - . . . . . . - + + . (+) + . 3.3 9 4 - 5 Sorbus aucuparia subsp. aucuparia II . + + . . (+) + . . + + + 1.1 . - + + 1.2 . . . . . . + + 1.1 . - 1.2 . + 16 18 9 10 2 2 5 6 III . - - . . - - . . - - - - . - - - - . . . . . . - - - . - 1.2 . - 1 - - 1 Hypericum maculatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 . . +.2 +.2 . . +.2 . 1.2 . . 5 - 2 3 M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 113 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 ML MOSSES AND LICHENS (Mahovi in lišaji) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Anomodon attenuatus IV . 1.4 +.4 . . 1.4 1.4 +.3 +.4 . . +.5 +.4 +.3 . . . . 1.5 2.4 2.5 1.4 2.5 +.5 . . . . . . . . 15 9 6 - Plagiochila asplenioides . . +.3 1.4 . +.4 . 1.3 . 1.3 . . +.3 +.3 +.5 . +.5 . . . +.5 . . +.5 +.5 . . . . . +.5 +.5 14 8 3 3 Taxiphyllum depressum +.3 +.3 . +.3 +.2 . +.4 +.3 +.3 +.3 . . +.3 +.4 . . . +.3 . +.4 . . . . +.3 . . . . +.4 . . 14 10 2 2 Orthodicranum montanum . +.3 . +.4 +.3 . . . +.4 . . +.5 +.4 . +.5 +.5 . . . . . +.4 . . . . . . . . . +.5 10 8 1 1 Mnium seligeri . . . . . . . +.3 . . . . +.2 +.3 +.5 . . . . . . . +.5 1.5 . . . . +.2 +.2 . +.3 9 4 2 3 Fissidens taxifolius +.2 . . . +.2 +.2 . . . +.2 . . . . . . +.5 . 1.3 . . . +.5 +.3 . . . . . . . . 8 4 4 - Tortella tortuosa +.3 . +.3 . +.2 +.3 . . . . . . . +.2 +.5 . . +.3 . . . +.4 . . . . . . . . . . 8 6 2 - Tortella fragilis . . . . . . . . . . . +.5 . . . . +.5 . . . +.5 . +.5 +.5 . . . . . . . . 5 1 4 - Amblystegiella subtilis . . . . . . . . . . +.5 +.5 . . +.5 +.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 - - Anomodon viticulosus . . . . . . +.4 . . . . . . 1.4 . . . . . 2.4 +.5 . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 2 - Cladonia pyxidata . . +.2 . . . . . . . . +.5 +.2 . . . . . . . +.3 . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 1 - Pellia epiphylla . . . . . . . . +.2 . . . +.2 . . . . . . . . . +.3 +.5 . . . . . . . . 4 2 2 - Conocephalum conicum . . . . +.2 . . . . + . . . . . . . . . 1.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 1 - Mnium undulatum . . . +.4 + . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 - - Thamnium alopecurum . . . +.2 . . . +.2 . +.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 - - M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 114 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 PHYTOCOENOLOGICAL SYNTHETIC TABLE (Fitocenološka sintezna tabela) 2: ALTIMONTANOUS BEECH FORESTS IN SLOVENIA (Altimontanski bukovi gozdovi Slovenije) Number of anal. tab. (Številka analitične tabele) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Author of analitical table (Avtor analitične tabele) Zupančič Marinček & Čarni Marinček & Čarni Marinček & Čarni Marinček & Čarni Marinček Marinček & Čarni Marinček & Čarni Marinček & Čarni Marinček & Čarni Marinček & Čarni Marinček & Čarni Marinček Zupančič Dakskobler Marinček, Pol-dini & Zupančič Marinček, Pol-dini & Zupančič Zupančič Košir Altitude (Nadmorska višina) 1090-1420 1100-1480 1210-1560 1220-1550 1250-1470 1370-1600 910-1460 910-1480 1100-1400 980-1430 880-1420 1260-1430 1430-1560 1260-1500 760-1180 730-1330 800-1550 1240-1420 590-1400 Sinsistematical characteristic (Sinsistematska pripadnost) Aspect (Nebesna lega) N-W-S all (vse) S-N S N all (vse) all (vse) all (vse) S-W S all (vse) N N N-S-E N-NE S-N all (vse) N-W-E N Slope in degrees (Nagib v stopinjah) 0-30 5-35 0-40 0-40 20-40 15-40 0-35 0-35 5-40 0-35 25-40 20-40 20-35 10-45 30-40 0-40 8-40 5-25 2-35 Bedrock (Geološka podlaga) apn apn dol apn apn apn r. dol apn apn apn dol da apn dol da dol da dol (apn) dol da dol da apn apn dol apn da dol dol da apn dol da m m gd b a Stonines % (Kamnitost %) - 0-30 0-20 0-40 0-50 5-60 0-25 0-25 0-50 0-40 0-80 1-30 1-50 - 10-40 0-20 0-50 - - Location (Kraj popisov) Trnovski g. Idrijski Javorniki Karavanke Dolenjska Dolenjska Dolenjska Dolenjska Dolenjska Štajeska Menina planina P r e - A l p i n e r e g i o n o f S l o v e n i a Blegoš Ratitovec Porezen Julijske Alpe Trnovski gozd Julijske Alpe Karavanke Julijske Alpe Karavanke Pohorje Pohorje State (Država) Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Slovenija Number of relevé (Število popisov) 16 34 19 21 14 29 20 20 26 21 14 10 10 8 11 32 28 8 24 M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 115 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Association (Asociacija) STELLARIO-FAGETUM RANUNCULO - FAGETUM ACONITO-FAGETUM RHODODENDRO-FAGETUM ANEMONO-FAGETUM CARDAMINE-FAGETUM Geographic variant (Geografska varianta) C A L A M I N T H A G R A N D I F L O R A ISOPYRUM TYPICA HELLEBO- RUS NIGER Altitudinal variant (Višinska varianta) ALLIUM V. SALIX W. ABIES ALBA STELLARIO MONTANAE-FAGETUM Characteristic species (Značilnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 F 2 Stellaria montana III 783 V 15 I . . . . 452 IV 1 I . . . . . . . . . . 366 IV F 2 Polystichum aculeatum 161 V 33 III 54 II . 2 II 18 I 3 II 22 I 20 I 2 II 39 III 6 IV 1 I 5 III 2 II 1 I 57 III 1 I . F 2 Cardamine pentaphyllos 111 II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distinguishing species (Razlikovalnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 2530 V 108 IV 529 IV 159 IV 42 IV 117 IV 1 I 54 III 60 II 14 III 39 II - - 2 II 4751 V 5 IV 16 I 19 I 1251 V 118 III F 2 Acer pseudoplatanus II 161 IV 36 IV 268 IV 4 III 3 II 3 II 28 II 303 IV 63 IV 3 II 4 III - - 7 IV 1001 V 3 III 3 II 2 II 472 V 203 IV III 126 II 122 IV 212 III 2 II 72 II 1 I - - 53 II 80 III 28 III 3 II 7 IV - - - - 55 V - - 1 I 131 V 147 II F 2 Scrophularia nodosa 39 V 1 I 5 II . . 2 I . 5 III 3 II 2 II . . . 5 III . . . 4 III . F 2 Corydalis cava 203 II . . . . 34 I 216 III 375 I . . . . . . . . . . . RANUNCULO PLATANIFOLII-FAGETUM Characteristic species (Značilnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 VP Luzula sylvatica subsp. sylvatica III 32 II 113 II 29 II 75 III 504 IV 305 V 25 I 25 I 1 I 25 I 73 II 57 V 503 V 1 I 1 I . 109 III 69 V 189 II A 3 Ranunculus platanifolius 3 II 106 III 5 III 30 IV 76 IV 108 IV 55 IV 4 II 5 III 51 III 109 III 53 III 7 IV 68 IV . . . 4 III 115 II VP 3 Polystichum lonchitis . 1 I 1 I 3 II 76 IV 160 V . 129 IV . 1 I 37 II 9 V 157 V 129 IV 1 III 2 II 76 III . . Distinguishing species (Razlikovalnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 F 1 Aremonia agrimonoides III 4 III 35 IV 32 III 29 III . 1 I 33 V 4 II 23 II 4 III 37 II 4 III . . . . 21 II . . A 3 Veratrum album subsp. album 2 II 167 V* 280 IV 385 V 254 V 529 V 268 V 428 IV 4 II 160 IV 39 II 10 V 251 V . 3 III . . 4 III 398 III* F 2 Galeobdolon flavidum . 168 V* 229 V* 51 III* 4 III 37 II 78 III 217 IV* 159 V* 100 IV 40 III 8 V . . - I 19 III* 147 IV* . . F 1 Hacquetia epipactis . 45 I 1 I 726 IV 1 I 553 III . 1 I . 609 IV 36 I . 176 II . . - I - I . . A 3 Anthriscus nitida . . . 2 II . 2 I 77 II 115 II . 2 II . . 154 IV . . . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 116 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Distinguishing species of the geographic variants (Razlikovalnice geografskih variant) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 F 1 Calamintha grandiflora III . 33 IV 56 III 52 III 39 II 73 III . 1 I - I . . . . . . 1 I . . . F 2 Carex pilosa . 235 I . 383 II 36 I 18 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . F 2 Allium victorialis . 1 I . 83 I . 477 III . . . . . . . . . . . . . F 1 Isopyrum thalictroides . 15 I 16 I 24 I . . 2275 V . . . . . . . . . . . 42 I MA Crocus vernus . . . . . . 489 IV . . . . . . . . . . . . F 2 Primula vulgaris . . . . . . . 26 I 21 II 27 III 2 II 2 II 1 I . . 2 II . 1 I . F 2 Polygonatum multiflorum . . . . . . . 2 I 60 II 28 III 2 II . . . . 2 I . . . A 3 Salix waldsteiniana II . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 III . . . . . . ACONITO PANICULATI-FAGETUM Characteristic species (Značilnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 A 3 Aconitum lycoctonum subsp. ranunculifolium III 32 I 1 I 1 I . . 5 III . . . . . . . 656 III . . 19 I . . A 3 Aconitum degenii subsp. paniculatum 1 I . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . 846 V . . . . . A 3 Crepis paludosa 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . 102 III 131 V . . . - I 9 I A 3 Geranium sylvaticum . . 1 I . . 4 III . . . . . . 2 II 8 V . . 1 I . . A 3 Salix appendiculata II . . . . . 2 II . . . . . . . 69 V 2 II . . . . A 3 Rumex alpestris (=R. arifolius) III . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 V . . . . . A 3 Senecio cacaliaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 III . . . . . Distinguishing species (Razlikovalnici) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ART Myrrhis odorata III 33 II . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 V . . . . . MA Geum rivale 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . 56 IV 131 V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RHODODENDRO HIRSUTI-FAGETUM . . . . . . . . . . . Characteristic species (Značilnice) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 VP 3 Clematis alpina II . . . 1 I 4 III 20 II . . 1 I - I 4 III 3 II 1 I . 139 IV 1 I 3 II . . VP 3 Rhododendron hirsutum . . . . 1 I 191 III . . . - I . 1 I 7 IV . 3296 V . 1 I . . AS Paederota lutea III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 V . . . . VP 3 Laserpitium peucedanoides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 IV . . . . VP 3 Rhodothamnus chamaecistus II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 III . . . . Distinguishing species (Razlikovalnici) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 F 3 Convallaria majalis III . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . 5 III . . . . I . . . . . . . . - - . - - - - - - . 5 IV - - - - . . F 2 Laburnum alpinum II . . . . . . . . 1 I . 1 I 2 II 1 I . 3 II 17 I 2 II . . III . . . . . . . . - - . - - - - - - . 5 IV - - - - . . Distinguishing species of the geographic variant (Razlikovalnice geografske variante) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 F 1 Omphalodes verna III . 30 I . 108 I . . . 1 I 106 I 1 I 1 I . . . 5 III . . . . AS Phyteuma scheuchzeri subsp. columnae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 V . . . . F 1 Anemone trifolia . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . 138 III 140 IV 273 V 521 V . . Primula carniolica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 III . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 117 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 ANEMONO TRIFOLIAE-FAGETUM Characteristic species (Značilnici) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 EP Polygala chamaebuxus III . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . 4 III 66 III . . . VP 3 Orthilia secunda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 II 3 II . . Distinguishing species (Razlikovalnici) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 360 III 16 I 34 II 50 III 39 III 1 I 32 IV 29 III 435 III 228 II 184 V 704 V 352 III 65 III - II 1189 IV 646 V 2032 V 275 IV VP 3 Picea abies II 2 II 5 III 2 I 3 II 2 II -1 82 V 3 II 243 III 134 III 75 III 53 III 2 II 4 III - II 394 V 183 IV 224 V 5 III III - - 1 I - - - - - - - - 29 I - - 1 I 1 I - - 2 II - - - - - I 2 II 1 I 4 III - I VP 3 Larix decidua I . . . . . . . . 2 I . 36 I 1400 V . . . 64 II 1903 V . . II . . . . . . . . - - . - - 1 I . . . - - - - . . CARDAMINE WALDSTEINIANAE-FAGETUM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 F 2 Milium effusum III 294 III 1 I . . . 36 I 6 III 62 II . . . . . 126 III . . . 626 V 595 III VP 3 Luzula pilosa . . . . . . . 1 I 1 I . . . . . . 1 I 1 I 5 IV 139 III F 1 Cardamine waldsteinii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408 V 1553 IV Distinguishing species of the variant (Razlikovalnica variante) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 32 II 16 I 2 I 1 I 2 II . . 1 I 22 II 26 II 36 I 53 III . . 45 II 18 II 3 II 252 V 879 V VP 3 Abies alba II 1 I 3 II 1 I 1 I 1 I . . - - 2 I 24 I 1 I 51 II . . 1 I 32 II 21 II 68 V 86 III III - - 2 II 1 I 1 I 1 I . . 2 I 1 I - - - - 2 II . . 1 I - - 1 I 128 III 44 II F 1 AREMONIO-FAGION (Ht. 1938) Török, Podani & Borhidi 1989 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Cardamine trifolia III 765 V 414 V 395 III 195 V 217 V 277 IV 426 V 401 V 444 IV 216 IV 396 IV 625 V 352 V 1 I 3 III 34 II 190 III 129 IV 1188 V Lamium orvala 175 III 66 I 199 III . . 1 I . 3 II 2 II 50 II . . . . . 1 I - I . . Aremonia agrimonoides III 4 III 35 IV 32 III 29 III . 1 I 33 V 4 II 23 II 4 III 37 II 4 III . . . . 21 II . . Cardamine enneaphyllos 282 II 671 V 791 V 836 IV 411 V 726 V 1176 V 451 III 370 IV 159 IV 1073 IV 109 V 476 V 5 III . 112 II 244 III 1 II 887 IV Cyclamen purpurascens 3 II 2 II . 52 III 74 III 90 III . 51 I 141 V 218 V 357 IV 52 II 4 III 64 II 229 V 176 IV 148 V . . Vicia oroboides 2 II 79 III 29 II 30 IV 3 II 4 III . 1 I 1 I 4 III 71 I . 5 III . 143 V . . . . Calamintha grandiflora III . 33 IV 56 III 52 III 39 II 73 III . 1 I - I . . . . . . 1 I . . . Helleborus niger subsp. niger . 221 I . 109 III 429 IV 182 III 4 III 2 I 1117 V 288 III 556 IV 504 V 2 II . 141 IV 441 IV 690 V . . Hacquetia epipactis . 45 I 1 I 726 IV 1 I 553 III . 1 I . 609 IV 36 I . 176 II . . - I - I . . Omphalodes verna . 30 I . 108 I . . . 1 I 106 I 1 I 1 I . . . 5 III . . . . Isopyrum thalictroides . 15 I 16 I 24 I . . 2275 V . . . . . . . . . . . 42 I Cardamine kitaibelii . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Euphorbia carniolica . 1 I 1 I . 3 II 19 II . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Rhamnus fallax IIa . 1 I 1 I . 1 I . . . - I 1 I . . . . 5 III - I 1 I . . IIb . - - - - . - - . . . - - - - . . . . 46 III - I - - . . Knautia drymeia s. lat. III . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . 3 II 1 I 3 III 57 II - I 66 III 9 I Anemone trifolia . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . 138 III 140 IV 273 V 521 V . . Cardamine waldsteinii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408 V 1553 IV M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 118 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 F 2 FAGETALIA SYLVATICAE Pawlowski1928 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Ia 6906 V 8235 V 7855 V 8274 V 8036 V 7302 V 7688 V 8000 V 7788 V 7383 V 7679 V 5250 V 6000 V 2035 V 7159 V 7336 V 7161 V 5313 V 7396 V Ib - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 319 IV - - - - - - - - Fagus sylvatica IIa 909 V 599 V 256 V 740 V 775 V 1053 V 5 III 119 IV 254 IV 231 V 789 V 277 III 1979 V 1251 V 455 V 613 V 299 IV 65 III 203 V IIb - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 II - - - - - - - - III 110 I 196 III 82 III 50 II 38 II 34 II 28 II 26 I 2 I 25 I 4 III 5 III - - - - 53 V 17 II 3 II 191 V 114 II I 2530 V 108 IV 529 IV 159 IV 42 IV 117 IV 1 I 54 III 60 II 14 III 39 II - - 2 II 4751 V 5 IV 16 I 19 I 1251 V 118 III Acer pseudoplatanus II 161 IV 36 IV 268 IV 4 III 3 II 3 II 28 II 303 IV 63 IV 3 II 4 III - - 7 IV 1001 V 3 III 3 II 2 II 472 V 203 IV III 126 II 122 IV 212 III 2 II 72 II 1 I - - 53 II 80 III 28 III 3 II 7 IV - - - - 55 V - - 1 I 131 V 147 II Galium odoratum 1078 V 172 III 1198 IV . . . 535 V 939 III 790 III 562 III 37 II . 1 I 2156 V . . . 2156 V 698 IV Stellaria montana III 783 V 15 I . . . . 452 IV 1 I . . . . . . . . . . 366 IV Galeobdolon montanum 179 V 168 V* 229 V* 51 III* . 54 II . 217 IV* 159 V . . . 105 IV 179 V . 19 III* 147 IV* 908 V 513 IV Polystichum aculeatum 161 V 33 III 54 II . 2 II 18 I 3 II 22 II 20 I 2 II 39 III 6 IV 1 I 5 III 2 II 1 I 57 III 1 I . Scrophularia nodosa 39 V 1 I 5 II . . 2 I . 5 III 3 II 2 II . . . 5 III . . . 4 III . Actaea spicata 8 V 18 II 2 I . 1 I 6 IV . 27 II 3 II 1 I 74 III . 1 I 70 V 2 II 2 II 37 II 65 III 189 III Mycelis muralis 8 V 6 IV 6 III 1 I 6 IV 2 II 28 II 30 III 45 IV 28 III 76 IV 4 III . 3 II 1 III 82 III 41 IV 1 II 3 II Ranunculus lanuginosus 114 IV 35 IV 201 III 1 I . 53 II 93 IV 29 III 2 II 27 II 1 I . 52 II 191 V . . . 66 III . Epilobium montanum 8 IV . 5 III . 2 II 3 II 2 I 2 II . 2 II 6 IV 70 V . 1 I . 63 IV 64 II Milium effusum 294 III 1 I . . . 36 I 6 III 62 II . . . . . 126 III . . . 626 V 595 III Geranium robertianum 98 III 1 I 3 II . . . . 2 I 1 I 1 I . . . 5 III . 1 I . . . Adoxa moschatellina 96 III 15 I 30 III . . 20 II 28 II 55 III . 1 I . . 1 I 6 IV 1 I . . 69 V 439 III Paris quadrifolia 36 III 4 III 6 IV 2 II 5 III 4 III 59 V 555 IV 42 III 4 III 2 II 53 III . 133 V 1 I 1 I 3 II 69 V 285 V Carex sylvatica 5 III 63 III 56 III 26 II . . 57 IV 4 III 34 II 1 I . . . . . 1 I . 4 III 65 II Daphne mezereum II 4 III 8 V 29 II 31 IV 8 V 144 V 31 IV 29 III 4 III 28 III 77 IV 6 IV 156 V 130 V 141 V 36 III 39 III . 21 I Lunaria rediviva III 297 II . . . . . . . . . . . . 438 II . . . . . Corydalis cava 203 II . . . . 34 I 216 III 375 I . . . . . . . . . . . Mercurialis perennis 172 II 553 IV 2 II 419 IV 449 V 383 V . 190 II 368 IV 991 V 894 V 100 II 402 III 846 V 277 V 142 II 52 IV 125 V 115 I Sanicula europaea 112 II 1 I 2 II 1 I . . 1 I 117 III 89 II 26 II 36 I . . . . 7 II 36 I 3 III 22 I Cardamine pentaphyllos 111 II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Eurhynchium zetterstedtii IV 111 II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . Cardamine bulbifera III 95 II 19 III 111 IV 26 II 2 II 5 III 317 V 104 III 98 II 50 III 37 II . 1 I . . . . . 397 III Prenanthes purpurea 33 II 394 IV 108 III 101 IV 148 V 99 III . 29 III 5 III 29 III 76 IV 4 III 1 I 284 III 276 V 52 III 74 III 69 IV 275 IV Salvia glutinosa 32 II . . . . . . 1 I 2 I 4 III 1 I . . 1 I 1 I 152 III 3 II . . Lilium martagon 3 II 1 I 5 III 2 II . 56 III . 28 II 4 III 4 III . 2 II 4 III 5 III 5 IV . . 5 III 345 III Aruncus dioicus 2 II 1 I . . 5 III 2 II . 2 II 1 I - I 38 II 2 II . 128 III 1 I . . . - I Lathyrus vernus 2 II 18 II . 4 III 5 III 6 IV . 52 II . 1 I . . . . . . . . . Pulmonaria officinalis 2 II . . . . . . 2 I 5 III 1 I . . . . . 1 I . 1 I . Sambucus racemosa II 2 II . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II - II . . 1 II 2 I Viola reichenbachiana III 1 II 16 II 2 II . . . . 2 I 2 I 1 I 38 II . . . 2 II 7 IV 21 III 63 I 22 I Petasites albus 235 I . . . . . . 27 II 1 I 3 II 2 II . . . . 18 II . 1 I 43 II Festuca altissima 110 I 12 II 1 I 24 I 3 II . . . 20 I 1 I 37 II . 2 II . . . . 1 I 625 II Leucojum vernum 31 I . . . . . 317 IV . . . . . . . . . . 4 III 584 II Galium laevigatum 3 I 1 I . 2 II 75 III . . 2 I 2 I 24 I . . 52 II 282 III 6 IV 2 II 1 I . . Impatiens noli-tangere 1 I . 27 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 III 22 II Phyteuma spicatum 1 I 49 III 2 I 30 IV 79 V 92 IV . 4 II 2 I 25 II 110 III 3 II 6 IV . . 2 I 19 I 5 III 63 I M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 119 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Phyllitis scolopendrium 1 I . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . 63 I . . . . . Poa nemoralis 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . 8 V 3 II . . . . . Symphytum nodosum subsp. tuberosum 1 I 48 III 161 IV 3 II 4 III 143 V 181 V 252 IV 43 III 76 III 2 II 4 III 58 V . . 2 I 1 I 410 V 574 IV Galeobdolon flavidum . 168 V* 229 V* 51 III* 4 III 37 II 78 III 217 IV* 159 V* 100 IV 40 III 8 V . . - I 19 III* 147 IV* . . Euphorbia amygdaloides . 64 IV 29 II 30 IV 6 IV 2 II 57 IV 315 IV 159 V 78 V 41 IV 7 IV 2 II . . 129 IV 95 IV . . Lonicera alpigena II . 3 II 2 I 3 II 6 IV 109 V . 29 III 2 II 29 III 39 III 4 III 204 V 346 IV 9 V 17 I 3 II . . Allium ursinum III . 493 I . . . 276 I 751 I 214 II 1221 II . . . . . . . . . . Carex pilosa . 235 I . 383 II 36 I 18 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Allium victorialis . 1 I . 83 I . 477 III . . . . . . . . . . . . . Campanula trachelium . 1 I . 1 I . . . 2 I 2 II 5 III 3 II . 1 I . . 2 II . . . Euphorbia dulcis . 1 I . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hordelymus europaeus . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melica nutans . 1 I . . . 1 I . . 2 I . . 2 II 1 I 5 III 5 III 91 III 58 III . 94 I Neottia nidus-avis . 1 I . . . . . . 2 I . 1 I 2 II . . . 5 III 4 II . . Veronica montana . . 3 II . . . 4 II 27 II . . . . . . . . . . 136 II Arum maculatum . . 1 I . . . . . 2 I . . . . . . . . . . Aquilegia nigricans . . . . 1 I . . . . 1 I . 2 II . . . . . . . Ranunculus ficaria . . . . . . 29 III . . . . . . . . . . . . Primula vulgaris . . . . . . . 26 I 21 II 27 III 2 II 2 II 1 I . . 2 II . 1 I . Epipactis helleborine . . . . . . . 2 I 1 I 2 II . . . . 4 III 50 III . . . Polygonatum multiflorum . . . . . . . 2 I 60 II 28 III 2 II . . . . 2 I . . . Stachys sylvatica . . . . . . . 2 I . . . . . . . . . . 1 I Gagea lutea . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . Sambucus nigra II . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . 3 II Ulmus glabra I . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . II . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . - - . - - - - - - . 5 IV - - - - . . Laburnum alpinum II . . . . . . . . 1 I . 1 I 2 II 1 I . 3 II 17 I 2 II . . III . . . . . . . . - - . - - - - - - . 5 IV - - - - . . I . . . . . . . . - I - I . . . . . . . . . Fraxinus excelsior II . . . . . . . . - I - - . . . . . . . . . III . . . . . . . . - - 1 I . . . . . . . . . Cephalanthera rubra . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . 81 III . . . Cephalanthera damasonium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 II 1 I . . Asarum europaeum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 I . . . Brachypodium sylvaticum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . Circaea lutetiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 I Q 2 QUERCETALIA PUBESCENTIS Br.-Bl. (1931) 1932 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Camptothecium lutescens IV 424 III . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . 64 II . . . . . I . 1 I . . - - 1 I . . . . - - . . . 5 IV 16 I 1 I . . Sorbus aria IIa . - I . . 4 II 2 I . . . . 39 III . . . 5 IV 52 III 1 I . . IIb . - - . . - - - - . . . . - - . . . 3 III - - - - . . III . - - . . - - - - . . . . - - . . . 3 II - - - I . . Melittis melissophyllum . . . 1 I . . . . . 1 I . . . . 1 I 2 II . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 120 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Hypericum montanum . . . . . 3 II . . 2 I 1 I . . 5 III . . . . . . Ostrya carpinifolia I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - 16 I . . . Fraxinus ornus II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I 33 II . . . III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II - - . . . RP 2 QUERCETALIA ROBORIS Br.-Bl. 1932 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Polypodium vulgare III . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . . . . 1 I . . . Betula verrucosa I . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . Festuca heterophylla III . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II . . . . . . Frangula alnus II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . Pteridium aquilinum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I 74 III . . . Melampyrum pratense subsp. vulgatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 II . . . Veronica officinalis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I 2 I . 23 II PS PRUNETALIA SPINOSAE R. Tx. 1952 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Berberis vulgaris II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . Clematis vitalba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . Crataegus monogyna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . Ribes uva-crispa subsp. lasiocarpum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 I C CARPINION Issler 1931 em. Oberd. 1957 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Stellaria nemorum III - I . 778 V . . 96 II 28II 289 III . . . . 54 III 751 V . . . 1235 V . Galium aristatum . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . 103 III . . . . . . Stellaria holostea . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Anemone ranunculoides . . . . . . 3 II 26 I . . . . . . . . . . . Scilla bifolia . . . . . . 2 II . . . . . . . . . . . . Galium schultesii . . . . . . . . . 2 II 1 I . . 126 III . . . . . F 3 QUERCO-FAGETEA Br.-Bl. & Vlieger in Vlieger 1937 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Ctenidium molluscum IV 440 V . 31 III . 215 III . 53 III 78 III 63 IV 76 IV 629 V 204 V 9 V 69 V 54 V . . . . Isothecium myosuroides 394 IV . 30 III . 40 III . 55 III . . . . . 3 II 1 I . . . . . Anemone nemorosa III 34 II . 568 V 467 V 324 V 2846 V 726 IV 441 V 42 III 230 IV 324 III 56 IV 720 V . 49 III . . 3 II 708 V Lonicera xylosteum II 2 II 144 V . . . . . . 2 I 2 II 38 II . . 1 I . 2 II 2 I . 21 I Carex digitata III 1 I . . 2 II . . . . 3 II 26 II 40 III 53 III 3 II 1 I 4 III 38 IV 6 IV . . Helleborus odorus . 1 I . . . . 2 II . 1 I 25 I . . . . . . . . . Convallaria majalis III . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . 5 III . . . . Hepatica nobilis . . . . . . . 3 II 4 III 5 III 201 IV 54 III . . 187 V 50 III 41 IV . . Corylus avellana II . . . . . . . 1 I . 24 I 2 II . . . . 2 II 1 I . . Platanthera bifolia III . . . . . . . . 2 I . . . . . . 2 II 1 I . . Melica uniflora . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 121 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 LF Luzula nivea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 I . . . Quercus petraea I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . LF Pulmonaria stiriaca III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 I Moehringia trinervia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 I Fragaria moschata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I VP 3 VACCINIO-PICEETEA Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1939 em. Zupančič 2000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Oxalis acetosella III 846 V 201 V 764 V 180 III 112 IV 73 III 714 V 952 V 252 III 264 III 181 IV 576 V 206 V 4 III 3 II 36 III 502 V 1567 V 1855 V Gentiana asclepiadea 68 IV 4 III 2 II 6 III 7 IV 5 III 7 IV 30 III 3 II 7 IV 41 IV 5 III 7 IV 9 V 53 V 2 I 20 II 9 V 86 III Adenostyles glabra 393 III 554 IV 54 II 1143 IV 556 V 124 III 728 V 367 IV 45 IV 348 III 414 IV 1579 V 504 V 8 V 141 V 17 I 19 I 3 II 305 III I 360 III 16 I 34 II 50 III 39 III 1 I 32 IV 29 III 435 III 228 II 184 V 704 V 352 III 65 III - II 1189 IV 646 V 2032 V 275 IV Picea abies II 2 II 5 III 2 I 3 II 2 II -1 82 V 3 II 243 III 134 III 75 III 53 III 2 II 4 III - II 394 V 183 IV 224 V 5 III III - - 1 I - - - - - - - - 29 I - - 1 I 1 I - - 2 II - - - - - I 2 II 1 I 4 III - I Dryopteris expansa ? D. dilatata 5 III 1 I . . . 19 I 2 II 4 II . . 36 I . 3 II 3 II . . . 8 V 94 I Calamagrostis arundinacea 110 II . . 464 II . . . . . . . . . 68 IV 297 III . . 66 III 21 I I 32 II 16 I 2 I 1 I 2 II . . 1 I 22 II 26 II 36 I 53 III . . 45 II 18 II 3 II 252 V 879 V Abies alba II 1 I 3 II 1 I 1 I 1 I . . - - 2 I 24 I 1 I 51 II . . 1 I 32 II 21 II 68 V 86 III III - - 2 II 1 I 1 I 1 I . . 2 I 1 I - - - - 2 II . . 1 I - - 1 I 128 III 44 II Luzula sylvatica subsp. sylvatica III 32 II 113 II 29 II 75 III 504 IV 305 V 25 I 25 I 1 I 25 I 73 II 57 V 503 V 1 I 1 I . 109 III 69 V 189 II Mnium spinosum IV 3 II . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 III . . . . . Peltigera leucophlebia 3 II . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 III . . . 1 I . Lonicera nigra II 2 II 1 I . . . 35 I . . . . . . 1 I 3 II 1 I . . 1 II - I Rosa pendulina 2 II 2 II . 6 IV 109 IV 90 III . 1 I 2 I 2 II 40 III 3 II 4 III 132 V 101 IV 18 II 3 II . - I Aposeris foetida III 110 I 111 I 119 III 682 IV 1 I 121 V 217 IV 6 IV 102 IV 218 V 556 III 478 V 2175 V 69 V 93 III 35 III 343 IV . . Gymnocarpium dryopteris 1 I . . . . 19 II 43 III 1 I . . 2 II 104 IV 3 II . 51 III . 38 II 3 II 220 III Phegopteris connectilis 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I 139 III 2 I 22 III 3 II 42 I Valeriana tripteris 1 I 2 II . 3 II 27 V 76 V . 51 I 2 II 51 V 169 V 230 IV 204 V 8 V 233 V 18 II 40 III . . Veronica urticifolia 1 I 3 II . 5 III 44 V 7 III 2 I 29 III . 4 III 78 V 156 V 107 V 66 III 6 IV 51 III 42 IV . . Maianthemum bifolium . 18 II 27I 27II 40 III 3 II 3 II 5 III . . 3 II 3 II 2 II . 6 IV 3 II 3 II . . Laserpitium krapfii . 16 I . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dryopteris carthusiana . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . 109 IV Homogyne sylvestris . 1 I . 108 II 769 V 141 III 1 I . . . 1340 V 102 III 277 III . 142 V 1 I 315 IV . . Luzula luzuloides . 1 I 2 I 1 I . . 3 II 2 I 71 III 29 III 1 I 5 III 6 IV . 1 II 32 I . 1 I . Polystichum lonchitis . 1 I 1 I 3 II 76 IV 160 V . 129 IV . 1 I 37 II 9 V 157 V 129 IV 1 III 2 II 76 III . . Rubus hirtus II . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 II Solidago virgaurea III . 1 I . 2 II . 2 II . . . 1 I 1 I . 3 II 1 I 7 IV 19 II 1 I 3 II 21 I Vaccinium myrtillus . 1 I 1 I 3 II 38 II 183 II . . 2 I . 36 I 4 III 6 IV 3 II 345 V 35 IV 42 IV 1 I . Grimmia pulvinata IV . . 1 I . . . . . . . . 2 II . . 2 II . . . . Rubus saxatilis II . . . 2 II 3 II 38 III . . . . 2 II . 7 IV 64 III 186 V 19 II 2 II . . Clematis alpina II . . . 1 I 4 III 20 II . . 1 I - I 4 III 3 II 1 I . 139 IV 1 I 3 II . . Huperzia selago III . . . . 2 II 1 I . . . . . . 1 I . 140 IV . 1 I . . Hieracium sylvaticum . . . . 1 I 1 I . 1 I . 27 III 16 IV 54 III 5 III . 6 IV 375 IV 94 IV . 43 II Rhododendron hirsutum II . . . . 1 I 191 III . . . - I . 1 I 7 IV . 3296 V . 1 I . . Pinus mugo . . . . . 3 II . . . . . . . . - II . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 122 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Sorbus chamaemespilus . . . . . 18 I . . . . . . . 68 IV . . . . . Lonicera caerulea . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vaccinium vitis-idaea III . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . 1 I . 5 III 63 II 2 II . . Saxifraga cuneifolia . . . . . . . 2 II . . 2 II 154 IV 3 II . . 33 II 40 III . . Luzula pilosa . . . . . . . 1 I 1 I . . . . . . 1 I 1 I 5 IV 139 III Hypnum cupressiforme IV . . . . . . . . 2 I 2 II . . 3 II . 2 II . . . . Larix decidua I . . . . . . . . 2 I . 36 I 1400 V . . . 64 II 1903 V . . II . . . . . . . . - - . - - 1 I . . . - - - - . . Senecio abrotanifolius III . . . . . . . . - I . . 1 I . . - I . 21 II . . Polytrichum formosum IV . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . 345 V . . . . Dicranum scoparium . . . . . . . . . - I . 2 II 3 II . 5 III . . . . Homogyne alpina III . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . . . . Pyrola minor . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II . . . . . . Sorbus aucuparia var. glabrata II . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 III . . . . . III . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . Laserpitium peucedanoides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 IV . . . . Leucobryum glaucum IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 III . . . . Rhodothamnus chamaecistus II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 III . . . . Calamagrostis villosa III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Atrichum undulatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Hylocomium splendens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Lycopodium annotinum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Rhizomnium punctatum IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Monotropa hypophegea III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . Melampyrum sylvaticum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 II 20 II 4 III - I Orthilia secunda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 II 3 II . . Circaea alpina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 I Galium rotundifolium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I Hieracium rotundatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I Moneses uniflora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I Solidago virgaurea subsp. minuta (=S. alpestris) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I EP 3 ERICO-PINETEA Ht. 1959 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Calamagrostis varia III 174 III 32 II . . 644 V 537 V . 89 II 70 II 919 IV 1057 IV 477 III 225 IV 4 III 503 V 509 III 146 III . . Cirsium erisithales 1 I 33 II 1060 III 29 III 8 V 23 IV . . . 3 II 1 I . 1 I 131 V 97 V 3 II 1 I . . Carex alba . . . 24 I 1 I . . . 20 I 73 II 163 II 100 II . . 50 III 700 III 65 II . . Erica carnea . . . . . . . . . 357 I . 3 II . . 143 V 33 II . . . Buphthalmum salicifolium . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . 4 III 5 III 18 II . . . Epipactis atrorubens . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . 1 I . . Polygala chamaebuxus III . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . 4 III 66 III . . . Allium ochroleucum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 III . . . . Cotoneaster tomentosus II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II 1 I . . . Pinus nigra I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - II . . . . II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - II . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 123 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Amelanchier ovalis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . Pinus sylvestris I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 II . . . Pyrola chlorantha III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 II . . A 3 BETULO-ADENOSTYLETEA Br.-Bl. & R. Tx. 1943 s. lat. (=MULGEDIO-ACONITETEA Klika 1944) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Dryopteris filix-mas III 1675 V 64 IV 938 V 3 II 39 II 82 III 131 V 131 V 82 IV 112 IV 40 III 6 IV 57 IV . 1635 V 18 II 5 III 473 V 387 IV Senecio ovatus 879 V 313 V 522 V 28 III 3 II 122 II 396 V 293 V 225 IV 254 IV 13 II 7 IV 605 V 1844 IV 2 II 1 I 1 I 973 V 388 IV Athyrium filix-femina 877 V 6 IV 109 III 30 IV 3 II 37 II 380 V 392 V 82 IV 27 II 2 II 231 V 103 III 532 V 50 III 35 III 24 IV 1564 V 897 V Rubus idaeus II 348 V 4 III 335 IV 2 II 4 II . 92 III 139 II 21 II 27 III . 2 II 52 II 348 V 1 I 1 I . 349 V 440 IV Polygonatum verticillatum III 68 IV 196 V 110 IV 103 V 43 V 76 V 81 IV 366 V 84 V 149 V 147 IV 253 V 104 IV 252 V 4 III 2 II 23 III 8 V 253 IV Saxifraga rotundifolia 34 IV 2 II 29 II - I 3 II 72 III 3 II 28 II 1 I . 38 III 228 III 402 V 194 V . 16 I 1 I 63 I . Adenostyles alliariae 455 III 31 I 1370 III 25 II . 17 I 754 V . 20 I - I . 2 II 850 III 422 IV . . . 473 III . Chrysosplenium alternifolium 253 III . 28 II . . . 3 II 2 I . . . . . 65 III . . . 1 I 1 I Veratrum album subsp. lobelianum 134 III 167 V* . . . . . . . . . . 2 II 129 IV . . 19 I . 398 III* Myosotis sylvatica 67 III 1 I 4 III . . . . . . 2 II . . 5 III 131 III . . . . - I Doronicum austriacum 34 III 16 I 3 II . 1 I 142 III . . . 1 I . . 5 III 845 V . . . 349 V 63 II Cicerbita alpina 34 II 2 II 3 II 1 I 1 I 36 II 1 I 2 II . . 1 I 2 II 2 I 754 V . . . 346 IV 200 IV Heracleum sphondylium subsp. sphondylium 34 II 18 II 2 I 4 III 2 II 22 III . 2 I 2 II 2 II . . 3 II 282 II . . . . . Ranunculus platanifolius 3 II 106 III 5 III 30 IV 76 IV 108 IV 55 IV 4 II 5 III 51 III 109 III 53 III 7 IV 68 IV . . . 4 III 115 II Deschampsia caespitosa 2 II . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I 1 I . . . 286 V 4 II Veratrum album subsp. album 2 II 167 V* 280 IV 385 V 254 V 529 V 268 V 428 IV 4 II 160 IV 39 II 10 V 251 V . 3 III . . 4 III 398 III* Aconitum lycoctonum subsp. ranunculifolium III 32 I 1 I 1 I . . 5 III . . . . . . . 656 III . . 19 I . . Aconitum degenii subsp. paniculatum 1 I . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . 846 V . . . . . Aconitum lycoctonum subsp. vulparia 1 I . . . 2 II . . . . . . . 6 IV 66 III 1 I . . . - I Crepis paludosa 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . 102 III 131 V . . . - I 9 I Heracleum montanum subsp. montanum 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ribes alpinum II 1 I 1 I . . . 20 II 1 I . . . . . 2 II 4 III . . . . . Geranium sylvaticum III . . 1 I . . 4 III . . . . . . 2 II 8 V . . 1 I . . Anthriscus nitida . . . 2 II . 2 I 77 II 115 II . 2 II . . 154 IV . . . . . . Salix appendiculata II . . . . . 2 II . . . . . . . 69 V 2 II . . . . Ribes petraeum . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Viola biflora III . . . . . 1 I . . - I . . 2 II 58 V 128 III 3 II 19 I . 65 III . Salix waldsteiniana II . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 III . . . . . . Salix glabra . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . 1 II . . . . Rumex alpestris (=R. arifolius) III . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 V . . . 4 III . Senecio cacaliaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 III . . . . . Phyteuma ovatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 III . . . . . E EPILOBIETEA ANGUSTIFOLII R. Tx. & Prsg. 1950 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Galeopsis speciosa III 38 II . . . . . . 2 I . . . . . . . . . . 116 I Fragaria vesca . 4 II 1 I 2 II . 1 I 6 III . 22 II 3 II . . 3 II . 1 I 6 III 23 III . - I Bromus ramosus . . . . . . . 1 I 3 II 1 I . . . . . . . . . Digitalis grandiflora . . . . . . . . 2 I 1 I 2 II . 4 III . . 2 II 20 II . . Verbascum densiflorum (=V. thapsiforme) . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 124 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Verbascum nigrum . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 II . . . . . . Eupatorium cannabinum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I 1 I . . . Salix caprea I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . TG TRIFOLIO-GERANIETEA SANGUINEI Th. Müller 1961 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Cruciata glabra . . 44 I . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 III . . . Campanula persicifolia . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 III . . . . . . Laserpitium latifolium . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 III . . . . . Vincetoxicum hirundinaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . Brachypodium rupestre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 I . . . Clinopodium vulgare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 I . . . Hypericum perforatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I S SESLERIETEA Br.-Bl. 1948 em. Oberdorfer 1978 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Carex ferruginea III . . . 1 I . 29 III . . - I . . . 57 IV . 188 V . . . . Allium victorialis . 1 I . 83 I . 477 III . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sesleria albicans . . . . . . . . . 24 I . . . . 301 V . . . . Astrantia major . . . . . . . . . 1 I . 3 II . . . . . . . Astrantia carniolica . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . 2 III . . . . Centaurea montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 IV . . . . . . Betonica alopecuros . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 III 19 II . . . Aster bellidiastrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II . . . . Carex firma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II . . . . Campanula scheuchzeri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I 1 I . . . Hieracium villosum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Gentiana clusii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . FB FESTUCO-BROMETEA Br.-Bl. & R. Tx. 1943 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Orchis mascula III . . . . . . . . . . . 51 II . . . . . . . Galium lucidum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Carex humilis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Lotus corniculatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I 1 I . . . Cirsium acaule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . Pimpinella saxifraga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . Teucrium chamaedrys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . MA MOLINIO-ARRHENATHERETEA R. Tx. 1937 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Chaerophyllum villarsii (=C. hirsutum) III 174 III . . . . 69 I 2 I . . . . . 52 III 505 V . . . 5 III - I Geum rivale 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . 56 IV 131 V . . . . . Thalictrum aquilegiifolium 1 I . . . 2 II 3 II . . . 1 I 3 II . 4 III 132 V 1 I . . 66 III - I Angelica sylvestris . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 125 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Trollius europaeus . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . Crocus vernus . . . . . . 489 IV . . . . . . . . . . . . Ajuga reptans . . . . . . . 2 I 2 I . . . . . . 2 II . . - I Carex flacca . . . . . . . . 1 I 1 I . . . . . 18 II . . . Poa annua . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II . . . . . . . Molinia arundinacea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 III . . . . Carex brizoides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I SC SCHEUCHZERIO-CARICETEA FUSCAE (Nordh. 1936) R. Tx. 1937 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Dactylorhiza maculata III . . 1 I 1 I 2 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 I Parnassia palustris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Pinguicula alpina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . ART ARTEMISIETEA Lohm., Prsg. & R. Tx. in R. Tx. 1950 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Urtica dioica III 389 V . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I 190 IV . . . 65 III . Myrrhis odorata 33 II . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 V . . . . . Silene dioica (=Mulgedium rubrum) 2 II . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 V . . . 6 IV 1 I Aegopodium podagraria . 1 I . . . . . 1 I . 1 I . . . . . . . . . Galeopsis pubescens . . 27 I . . . . . . . . . . 6 IV . . . 4 III 22 I Lamium maculatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 I TH THLASPIETEA ROTUNDIFOLII Br.-Bl. et al. 1947 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Gymnocarpium robertianum III . . . . . . . . - I . . . . . 9 V 1 I . . . Campanula cespitosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 IV . . . . Aquilegia bertolonii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II . . . . Carduus crassifolius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Campanula cochleariifolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . Hieracium bifidum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . AS ASPLENIETEA TRICHOMANIS Br.-Bl. in Meier & Br.-Bl. 1934 corr. Oberd. 1977 s. lat. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Cystopteris fragilis III 4 III 1 I 1 I . 1 I 4 III 3 II 1 I . . . 4 III 5 III 69 V - I 1 I . . . Asplenium trichomanes . 1 I . . 4 II . . 1 I 2 I 1 I . . . . - I 1 I . . . Asplenium viride . 1 I 1 I . 5 III 4 III . . . 1 I . 7 IV 7 IV . 9 V 2 II 5 III . . Moehringia muscosa . . . . 3 II 2 I . . . . 1 I . . . . 4 II 5 III . . Asplenium ruta-muraria . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . 4 III . . . . Paederota lutea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 V . . . . Phyteuma scheuchzeri subsp. columnae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 V . . . . Valeriana saxatilis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 III . . . . Primula carniolica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 III . . . . Athamanta turbith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . Cystopteris montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . Potentilla caulescens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 126 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 Primula auricula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . Saxifraga crustata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - I . . . . O OTHER SPECIES (Ostale vrste) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Ia 33 II - - - - - - . 2 I - - - - . . - - - - . - - 1 I - - - - 473 IV 1 I Sorbus aucuparia subsp. aucuparia Ib - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - . . - - - - . - - 2 I - - - - - - - - II 36 III 4 III 29 II 3 II . 3 II 2 II 2 II . . 40 III 2 II . 63 II 4 III 33 II 1 I 129 IV 87 III III - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - . . - - - - . - - 6 V - - - - 63 I - - Rumex acetosella s.lat. - I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Campanula rotundifolia . . . . 1 I 3 II . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rubus sp. II . . . . . . . . 2 I 2 II . . . . . . . . . Potentilla erecta III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 I . . . Ajuga pyramidalis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . Poa sp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . ML MOSSES AND LICHENS (Mahovi in lišaji) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Taxiphyllum depressum IV 6 IV . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 II . . . 3 II . Plagiochila asplenioides 97 III . . . . . 2 II 2 II . 2 II 4 II 52 II 3 II 4 III 4 III . . 4 III . Anomodon attenuatus 67 III . . . . . . . . . . . . 743 V . . . . . Tortella tortuosa . 16 I 1 I . 4 II . . 1 I 20 I 1 I 1 I 4 III 6 IV . 98 V . . . . Fissidens taxifolius . . 1 I . 3 II . . 3 II . 1 I 39 III 56 IV 3 II . . . . . . Isothecium alopecuroides . . . . . . . 29 III 2 I 25 II 3 II 3 II . . 1 I . . . . Neckera crispa . . . . . . . 1 I . . 36 I . . . 52 IV . . . . Metzgeria furcata . . . . . . . . . 1 I 37 II . . . . . . . . Brachythecium rutabulum . . . . . . . . . . 36 I . . . . . . . . Mnium undulatum . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . . . Fissidens cristatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 IV . . . . Bartramia sp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Conocephalum conicum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Dicranum sp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Mnium sp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Orthothecium rufescens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Paraleucobryum sauteri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II . . . . Peltigera canina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II . . . . Bryum sp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Encalypta sp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Hookeria lucens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Marchantia polymorpha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . Metzgeria sp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I . . . . M. ZUPANČIČ: SYNTAXONOMIC PROBLEMS OF ALTIMONTANE BEECH FORESTS OF THE ALLIANCE AREMONIO-FAGION 127 FOLIA BIOLOGICA ET GEOLOGICA 53/1-2 – 2012 LEGEND (Legenda) Analitical table (Analitična tabela) 1 STELLARIO MONTANAE-FAGETUM (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1993 RANUNCULO PLATANIFOLII-FAGETUM Marinček 1993 corr. Zupančič & Žagar 2011 var. geogr. CALAMINTHA GRANDIFLORA Marinček 1996 TYPICUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 STELLARIETOSUM NEMORUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 CALAMAGROSTIDETOSUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 & HACQUETIETOSUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 HOMOGYNETOSUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 var. ALLIUM VICTORIALIS (Marinček 1995), POLYSTICHETOSUM (Marinček 1992) Zupančič & Žagar 2011 (Polysticho lonchitis-Fagetum Marinček 1992) var. geogr. ISOPYRUM THALICTROIDES (Košir 1979) Marinček 2004, TYPICUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 & STELLARIETOSUM MONTANAE Marinček & Čarni 2010 var. geogr. TYPICA Marinček & Čarni 2010 TYPICUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 & STELLARIETOSUM MONTANAE Marinček & Čarni 2010 HELLEBORETOSUM NIGRAE Marinček & Čarni 2010 CALAMAGROSTIDETOSUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 & HACQUETIETOSUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 HOMOGYNETOSUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 LARICETOSUM Marinček & Čarni 2010 var. SALIX WALDSTEINIANA (Marinček 1985) Zupančič & Žagar 2011, POLYSTICHETOSUM (Marinček 1992) Zupančič & Žagar 2011 (Polysticho-Fagetum Marinček 1992) ACONITO PANICULATI-FAGETUM (Zupančič 1969) Marinček et al. 1992 RHODODENDRO HIRSUTI-FAGETUM Dakskobler 1998 var. geogr. Anemone trifolia Dakskobler 1998 subvar. geogr. Omphalodes verna Dakskobler 1998 ANEMONO-FAGETUM Tregubov 1962 var. geogr. HELLEBORUS NIGER Marinček et al. 1989 & TYPICUM Marinček et al. 1989 HOMOGYNETOSUM (Košir 1957) Marinček et al. 1989 & LARICETOSUM (Tregubov 1962) Marinček et al. 1989 CARDAMINE WALDSTEINII-FAGETUM Ž. Košir 1962 var. ABIES ALBA (Zupančič 1969) Ž. Košir 1979 (Aceri-Fagetum pohoricum Zupančič 1969) (Savensi-Fagetum Ž. Košir 1962 ) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Bedrock (Geološka podlaga) a amphibolite (amfibolit) apn limestone (apnenec) b micashist (blestnik) da dolomitic limestone (dolomitni apnenec) dol dolomíte (dolomit) gd granodiorite (granodiorit) m m metamorphic and igneous rock (metamorfne in magmatske kamnine) apn r limestone with cherts (apnenec z roženci) Sinsistematical characteristic (Sinsistematska pripadnost) LF Luzulo-Fagenion