4.3 Article

The insecure future of Bulgarian refugial mires: economic progress versus Natura 2000

期刊

ORYX
卷 44, 期 4, 页码 539-546

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0030605310000530

关键词

Bulgaria; diversity; mire; Natura 2000; peatland; rare species; refugia; wetland

资金

  1. Grant Agency of the Czech Academy of Sciences [B6163302, B601630803]
  2. Masaryk University (Czech Ministry of Education) [MSM 0021622416]
  3. Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences [AVZ0Z60050516]
  4. Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
  5. GACR [526/09/H025]
  6. Czech Academy of Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many mires of high conservation value occur in Bulgaria. These mires acted as refugia during the dry phases of ice ages and therefore contain a high number of rare and disjunct species. The mires harbour specific ecotypes and genotypes of plants and animals, and thus provide an opportunity to test biogeographical hypotheses, and they also contain important information about the history of European mires. In this study we ranked all known mire and spring complexes in Bulgaria according to the occurrence of rare and threatened plant and mollusc species. This analysis shows a conspicuous concentration of rare species at several sites, and no correspondence between the importance of individual mires for biodiversity and their legal protection. Of the 10 mire complexes of highest priority only one is effectively protected. The remaining unprotected mires have either been destroyed or are threatened by ongoing development. Having joined the European Union, Bulgaria has built a Natura 2000 network that could provide an opportunity for mire conservation. However, destruction of mire habitats proceeds faster than the approval of Natura 2000 sites. There is thus a possibility that unique Bulgarian mires will be lost before the Natura 2000 system begins to perform its role. Only effective and timely protection of the mire remnants, together with appropriate management, will ensure the future of these unique habitats.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据