Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 17, Issue 10, pp 2371–2381 | Cite as

Large-scale occurrence patterns of red-listed lichens and fungi on old oaks are influenced both by current and historical habitat density

  • Thomas Ranius
  • Per Eliasson
  • Per Johansson
Original Paper


Current occurrence patterns of species associated with ancient trees may reflect higher historical habitat densities, because the dynamics of the habitat and the colonisation-extinction processes for many inhabiting species are expected to be slow. We tested this hypothesis in southeast Sweden by analysing species occurrence per parish for twelve redlisted lichen species and nine redlisted fungus species in relation with current density of big oaks, the density of oaks in the 1830s and connectivity with parishes with the species present. For most species, the occurrence was positively related with current density of habitat (for 18 species out of 21) and parish area (for 16 species). Historical habitat density was positively related with occurrence for 11 species, while connectivity with current occurrences in the surroundings was positive for the occurrence of 12 species and negative for the occurrence of two. For lichen species the connectivity measure that best explained the variation was at a larger spatial scale as compared to fungus species. Even if the density of old oaks remains in the future, inhabiting species will most likely decline because their distribution patterns are not in equilibrium with the current habitat density. Therefore, to allow long-term persistence of inhabiting species the number of old oaks should be increased. Areas where such an increase is most urgent could be identified based on species occurrence data and current habitat density, but because species data will always be incomplete data on the historical habitat distribution is valuable.


Connectivity Epiphytic lichens Extinction debt Habitat history Habitat loss Quercus robur Saproxylic fungi 



Erik Öckinger has provided valuable comments to the manuscript. This study is based on data provided by The County Administration Board of Östergötland, The Swedish Board of Agriculture, and Swedish Species Information Centre. It has been done within Ranius’ project “Predicting extinction risks for threatened wood-living insects in dynamic landscapes” financed by The Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (Formas), and has also been funded through a grant from the Swedish Board of Agriculture for further developing environmental monitoring and assessment at SLU.


  1. Anonymous (1876) Sveriges areal beräknad af Generalstabens topografiska afdelning. Kungl. Statistiska centralbyrån, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  2. Anonymous (2006) Väder och Vatten nr 13. SMHI, Norrköping (In Swedish)Google Scholar
  3. Berg Å, Ehnström B, Gustafsson L, Hallingbäck T, Jonsell M, Weslien J (1994) Threatened plant, animal, and fungus species in Swedish forests: distribution and habitat associations. Conserv Biol 8:718–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berg Å, Gärdenfors U, Hallingbäck T, Norén M (2002) Habitat preferences of red-listed fungi and bryophytes in woodland key habitats in southern Sweden—analyses of data from a national survey. Biodivers Conserv 11:1479–1503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berglund H, Jonsson BG (2005) Verifying an extinction debt among lichens and fungi in Northern Swedish boreal forests. Conserv Biol 19:338–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cousins SAO, Eriksson O (2002) The influence of management history and habitat on plant species richness in a rural hemi-boreal landscape, Sweden. Landscape Ecol 17:517–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edman M, Kruys N, Jonsson BG (2004) Local dispersal sources strongly affect colonization patterns of wood-decaying fungi on spruce logs. Ecol Appl 14:893–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eliasson P (2002) Skog, makt och människor. En miljöhistoria om svensk skog 1800–1875. Kungliga Skogs-och Lantbruksakademien, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  9. Eliasson P, Nilsson SG (1999) Rättat efter Skogarnes aftagande – en miljöhistorisk undersökning av den svenska eken under 1700- och 1800-talen. Bebyggelsehistorisk tidskrift 37:33–64Google Scholar
  10. Ellis CJ, Coppins BJ (2007) 19th century woodland structure controls stand-scale epiphyte diversity in present-day Scotland. Diversity Distrib 13:84–91Google Scholar
  11. Gu W, Heikkilä R, Hanski I (2002) Estimating the consequences of habitat fragmentation on extinction risk in dynamic landscapes. Landscape Ecol 17:699–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gärdenfors U (2005) The 2005 red list of Swedish species. ArtDatabanken, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  13. Gustavsson E, Lennartsson T, Emanuelsson M (2007) Land use more than 200 years ago explains current grassland plant diversity in a Swedish agricultural landscape. Biol Conserv 138:47–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanski I (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanski I, Ovaskainen O (2002) Extinction debt at extinction thresholds. Conserv Biol 16:666–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hanski I, Moilanen A, Gyllenberg M (1996) Minimum viable metapopulation size. Am Nat 147:527–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004) Historical landscape connectivity affects the present plant species diversity. Ecology 85:1840–1845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Löbel S, Snäll T, Rydin H (2006) Species richness patterns and metapopulation processes—evidence from epiphyte communities in boreo-nemoral forests. Ecography 29:169–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nilsson SG (1997) Forests in the temperate-boreal transition: natural and man-made features. Ecol Bull 46:61–71Google Scholar
  20. Nilsson SG, Niklasson M, Hedin J, Aronsson G, Gutowski JM, Linder P, Ljungberg H, Mikusiński G, Ranius T (2002) Densities of large living and dead trees in old-growth temperate and boreal forests. For Ecol Manag 161:189–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nitare J (2000) Signalarter—indikatorer på skyddsvärd skog. Skogsstyrelsen, Jönköping [Indicator species for assessing the nature conservation value of woodland sites: a flora of selected cryptogams. In Swedish, with an English summary]Google Scholar
  22. Paltto H, Nordén B, Götmark F, Franc N (2006) At which spatial and temporal scales does landscape context affect local density of Red Data Book and indicator species? Biol Conserv 133:442–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Petit S, Burel F (1998) Effects of landscape dynamics on the metapopulation of a ground beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in a hedgerow network. Agric Ecosyst Environ 69:243–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ranius T, Johansson P, Berg N, Niklasson M (2008) The influence of tree age and microhabitat quality on the occurrence of crustose lichens associated with old oaks. J Veg Sci. doi: 10.3170/2008-8-18433.
  25. Rose F (1976) Lichenological indicators of age and environmental continuity in woodlands. In: Brown DH, Hawksworth DL, Bailey RH (eds) Lichenology: progress and problems. Academic Press, London, United Kingdom, pp 279–307Google Scholar
  26. Schroeder LM, Ranius T, Ekbom B, Larsson S (2007) Spatial occurrence of a habitat-tracking saproxylic beetle inhabiting a managed forest landscape. Ecol Appl 17:900–909PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thor L, Arvidsson G (eds) (1999) Rödlistade lavar i Sverige. Artfakta. Artdatabanken, SLU, Uppsala [Swedish Red Data book of lichens]Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EcologySwedish University of Agricultural SciencesUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Malmö UniversityMalmöSweden
  3. 3.Swedish Environmental Protection AgencyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations