Fig. 16.2 (a–e) Impressions from the BR: (a) Near-natural forests with
a mixture of beech and spruce and (b) old-growth forests
in the degradation phase offer valuable habitats
and micro-structures, particularly in gaps and at the highly
structured edges. The BR offers a (c) diverse landscape
mosaic and (d, e) adequate infrastructures for tourism
and nature recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
Fig. 16.3 Ecogram for the mesotrophic (left) and oligotrophic (right)
nutritional classes of sandstone and silicate soils . ................. 249
Fig. 16.4 Decision-making scheme for selecting options during
the forest conversion process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Fig. 16.5 Classification of the area of the BR according to the degree
of exposure to storms from indeterminate directions
in relation to the BR zones and the distribution of forest
habitat types ........................................................... 252
Fig. 16.6 Predicted survival probability (red ¼ low, green ¼ very high)
for key species of the habitat types Luzulo-Fagetum,
Asperulo-Fagetum and Vaccinio-Piceetea for the BR
using specific soil conditions and SRES-A1B, ECHAM5
and WETTREG-regionalisation following the approach of
Schlutow and Huebener (2004) employed by Profft and
Frischbier (2009) . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . 253
Fig. 16.7 Current agreement on structure and site-adapted forest
conversion of single-layer pure coniferous forest stands within
the BR. Classes of forest conversion priority (immediately,
until 2020, after 2020) were assigned according to the initial
situation and general consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 255
Fig. 17.1 Natural Park Bucegi, alpine grasslands on the plateau
of the Bucegi mountains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Fig. 17.2 Potential climate change effects and induced threats
on the alpine plants and habitats from Bucegi Natural Park ...... 262
Fig. 17.3 Natural Park Bucegi, Festuca supina grassland
(Natura 2000 code 6150) ............................................. 263
Fig. 18.1 Spreading potential of invasive plant species in DDBR . . . . . . . . . . 272
Fig. 18.2 Mean annual precipitation amounts in the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve (1961–2007) . . . ....... ....... ....... ....... ..... 273
Fig. 18.3 Mean annual air temperatures in the Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve (1961–2007) . . ............................................... 273
Fig. 18.4 Mean annual soil temperature parameters in the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve (1961–2007) . . . ....... ....... ....... ....... ..... 274
Fig. 19.1 Relation between plant height and number of flower
heads of Aster squamatus (equation of logarithmic
fit is given) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
List of Figures
xxi
a mixture of beech and spruce and (b) old-growth forests
in the degradation phase offer valuable habitats
and micro-structures, particularly in gaps and at the highly
structured edges. The BR offers a (c) diverse landscape
mosaic and (d, e) adequate infrastructures for tourism
and nature recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
Fig. 16.3 Ecogram for the mesotrophic (left) and oligotrophic (right)
nutritional classes of sandstone and silicate soils . ................. 249
Fig. 16.4 Decision-making scheme for selecting options during
the forest conversion process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Fig. 16.5 Classification of the area of the BR according to the degree
of exposure to storms from indeterminate directions
in relation to the BR zones and the distribution of forest
habitat types ........................................................... 252
Fig. 16.6 Predicted survival probability (red ¼ low, green ¼ very high)
for key species of the habitat types Luzulo-Fagetum,
Asperulo-Fagetum and Vaccinio-Piceetea for the BR
using specific soil conditions and SRES-A1B, ECHAM5
and WETTREG-regionalisation following the approach of
Schlutow and Huebener (2004) employed by Profft and
Frischbier (2009) . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . 253
Fig. 16.7 Current agreement on structure and site-adapted forest
conversion of single-layer pure coniferous forest stands within
the BR. Classes of forest conversion priority (immediately,
until 2020, after 2020) were assigned according to the initial
situation and general consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 255
Fig. 17.1 Natural Park Bucegi, alpine grasslands on the plateau
of the Bucegi mountains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Fig. 17.2 Potential climate change effects and induced threats
on the alpine plants and habitats from Bucegi Natural Park ...... 262
Fig. 17.3 Natural Park Bucegi, Festuca supina grassland
(Natura 2000 code 6150) ............................................. 263
Fig. 18.1 Spreading potential of invasive plant species in DDBR . . . . . . . . . . 272
Fig. 18.2 Mean annual precipitation amounts in the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve (1961–2007) . . . ....... ....... ....... ....... ..... 273
Fig. 18.3 Mean annual air temperatures in the Danube Delta Biosphere
Reserve (1961–2007) . . ............................................... 273
Fig. 18.4 Mean annual soil temperature parameters in the Danube Delta
Biosphere Reserve (1961–2007) . . . ....... ....... ....... ....... ..... 274
Fig. 19.1 Relation between plant height and number of flower
heads of Aster squamatus (equation of logarithmic
fit is given) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
List of Figures
xxi