Literature DB >> 26696761

Salix transect of Europe: latitudinal patterns in willow diversity from Greece to arctic Norway.

Quentin Cronk1, Enrico Ruzzier2, Irina Belyaeva3, Diana Percy2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Willows (Salix spp.) are ecosystem "foundation species" that are hosts to large numbers of associated insects. Determining their patterns of distribution across Europe is therefore of interest for understanding the spatial distribution of associated fauna. The aim of this study was to record species composition at multiple sites on a long latitudinal gradient (megatransect) across Europe as a baseline for the future detailed analysis of insect fauna at these sites. In this way we used willow stands as comparable mesocosms in which to study floristic and faunistic changes with latitude across Europe. NEW INFORMATION: To determine spatial patterning of  an ecologically important group on a latitudinal gradient across Europe, we sampled willows at the stand level in 42 sites, approximately 100 km apart, from the Aegean (38.8°N) to the Arctic Ocean (70.6°N), but at a similar longitude (21.2 to 26.1°E). The sites were predominantly lowland (elevations 1 to 556 metres amsl, median = 95 m) and wet (associated with rivers, lakes, drainage ditches or wet meadows). The median number of willow taxa (species and hybrids) per stand was four, and varied from one to nine. There is a progressive increase in willow diversity from south to north with the median number of taxa per stand in southern Europe being three, and in northern Europe six. A total of 20 willow species were recorded, along with 12 hybrids. The most widespread willow in the transect was Salix alba L. (occurring in 20 sites out of 42) followed by S. triandra L. (15 sites), S. caprea L., S. phylicifolia L. (14 sites) and S. myrsinifolia Salisb., Salix ×fragilis L. (13 sites). Voucher specimens from this study are deposited in the herbaria of the Natural History Museum (BM) and the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (K). These samples provide a "snapshot" of willow diversity along a latitudinal gradient and an indication of the geographically changing taxonomic diversity that is presented to willow-feeding herbivores across Europe. It is anticipated that further papers will examine the insect fauna collected from these sites as part of this study.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biogeography; Bulgaria; Estonia; Finland; Greece; Hungary; Latvia; Lithuania; Norway; Poland; Romania; Salicaceae; ecospace; latitudinal gradient; megatransect; salicophagy; spatial analysis; willow-feeding insects

Year:  2015        PMID: 26696761      PMCID: PMC4678804          DOI: 10.3897/BDJ.3.e6258

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biodivers Data J        ISSN: 1314-2828


Introduction

The ecological significance of the genus

Willows (the genus L.) are "foundation species" (Ellison et al. 2005) in many wet habitats in the north temperate region. By providing an abundant food-source for many willow-feeding animals (generalists and specialists) they provide the basis for characteristic ecosystems (Brändle and Brandl 2001, Nyman et al. 2007). Willow leaves frequently show signs of leaf damage resulting from herbivore feeding. Herbivores include mammals: rodents (Tahvanainen et al. 1985b), deer, elk and, in the arctic, reindeer (den Herder and Niemelä 2003) and also phytophagous insects, notably , and (sawflies) (Volf et al. 2015). Phytophagous  have, in addition to generalists that may potentially or sporadically feed on willow, several  specialists (Häggström and Larsson 1995, Volf et al. 2015) that will cue in on willow phytochemistry (Kolehmainen et al. 1995, Rowell-Rahier 1984a, Rowell-Rahier 1984b, Tahvanainen et al. 1985a). The suborder  contains a number of highly specialised willow-feeders (Leppänen et al. 2014, Roininen and Tahvanainen 1989) and are particularly abundant in Northern Europe, a fact which has been attributed to the greater number of willows in the north (Kouki et al. 1994). Willows are also host to numerous sap-sucking insects in the , especially aphids () (Blackman and Eastop 2014), psyllids ( and : Hill and Hodkinson 1995, Hill et al. 1998, Hodkinson et al. 2001, Serbina et al. 2015), leaf-hoppers () and spittle-bugs (). The abundant herbivores further support a predator trophic level, from birds (Sipura 1999), ants and predatory beetles, as well as large numbers of parasitic wasps (Callan 1940). The diversity of willow-feeding herbivores suggests that willows can be considered a "superhost". The concept of superhost is usually applied to hosts of galling insects (de Araújo et al. 2013). Willows do indeed host many galling insects, but also act as a superhost more generally for many guilds of herbivorous insects. In a survey of 25 European tree species, willows had both the greatest number of phytophages and the greatest number of specialist herbivores (Brändle and Brandl 2001).

Taxonomy of willow

The genus in Europe is usually considered to be a difficult and confusing group for classification and identification (Karrenberg et al. 2002, Meikle 1992, Rechinger 1992, Skvortsov 1999). The main reasons for this are: (1) genetically-based morphological polymorphism, (2) phenotypic plasticity (3) the prevalence of hybridization (4) differences in taxonomic opinion. Although some willows (such as L.) are rather uniform, other species are highly variable. is a good example of a species that shows extensive polymorphism: notably in leaf indumentum (hairy to glabrous) and leaf shape (narrowly to broadly elliptical). Although willow polymorphism is rarely formally tested in common garden experiments it is likely that much of this polymorphism is genetically based as different morphs can be found mixed in populations, having developed under the same environmental conditions. Willows also exhibit phenotypic plasticity, such that even different plants of the same clone can look quite different, particularly if coppiced. Coppice shoots and their leaves can be very different from those of normal branches. However, probably the most remarkable and problematic aspect of willow taxonomy is the great ability for willows to hybridize. Crosses between quite unrelated species occur and many hybrids have a high degree of fertility. A recent study has shown that widespread hybridization is sufficient for chloroplast capture to occur even when species boundaries are maintained (Percy et al. 2014). Coupled with this is the fact that many hybrids are of economic importance, due to their fast growth, and are widely planted. An example is the widespread hybrid Huds. ( L. × L.). Another case is  Rostk. ex Willd. ( I.V.Belyaeva × ) frequently planted as a more easily propagatable alternative to (Zinovjev 2011). Sometimes hybrids are so widespread they behave effectively as homoploid hybrid species. An example is the crack willow () which is a hybrid between and (Belyaeva 2009) but which constitutes a characteristic landscape feature over much of Europe and which authors have in the past considered a species (Meikle 1984). Another case where taxonomic treatment varies is Sarg. Here, we follow Skvortsov (Skvortsov 1999) in recognizing as an Eurasian as well as a North American species, despite considerable variation across the range. However, many European authors (e.g. Bennett et al. 1991, Rechinger and Akeroyd 1993) consider the European to represent a separate species, Flod. (=) is closely related to the glabrescent Pale Willow ( Willd.). However, is a comparatively rare willow.

Geography of willow and stand level sampling

Species of the genus have a long history of being mapped in Europe starting with the monumental Atlas Florae Europaeae project (Jalas and Suominen 1976). In turn, these data have been used for detailed analyses of geographic distribution using numerical methods at a continent-wide (Myklestad and Birks 1993) and regional (Myklestad 1993) scale. A more recent resource at the country level (with more up-to-date taxonomy) is that of the Euro+Med Plantbase (Uotila 2011). However, stand composition cannot be easily predicted from occurrences in large grid squares or whole countries. Willows in natural stands across Europe provide a distinctive ecospace for the willow-feeding organisms and understanding the changing stand-level taxonomic composition of the species is important for understanding the host choice and distribution of willow herbivores. It is the stand that provides the landscape unit and the ecospace within which host choice operates. Also large-scale mapping projects often exclude hybrids, which may be an important part of natural stands and particularly important as they may possibly form "hybrid bridges" (Floate and Whitham 1993) for herbivorous insects to move between hosts. Furthermore, direct observation of natural willow stands, as in this study, allows the co-collection of herbivores with the collection of voucher herbarium specimens. The collection of data over a long geogrphical distance falls into the category of studies now dubbed 'megatransects'. The power and utility of this technique has been amply demonstrated by numerous recent studies. Some recent examples include: Anstett et al. 2014, Baltensperger and Huettmann 2015, Baltensperger et al. 2015, Barrios-Garcia et al. 2014, Hernández et al. 2007, Huber 2015, Senterre et al. 2004.

Material and methods

Stand selection

Willow stands were examined during two journeys by road across Europe: Greece to Poland in April 2015 and Poland to Norway in June 2015 (Fig. 1). Sites were selected by driving approximately 100 km north of the previous site and opportunistically locating a suitable habitat in which to find willows, generally a river or low-lying ground. The spacing of sites varied according to logistic and travel constraints. In southern Europe, willows are largely restricted to riparian habitats, but northwards they become commoner in many more habitats. The sampling unit was the willow stand (willow dominated local area). The requirement for a site was that it had a stand of willows that met certain minimum size requirements (at least 100 m in longest linear dimension). A stand of willows is defined as a contiguous area where willows are the dominant vegetation for at least 100 m in linear dimension (as for instance along a river bank). Some stands are very extensive, in which case our sampling was limited to approximately 200 m in largest linear dimension. Because willow stands differ so much in size, shape and density, it was not practical to impose equal area or grid sampling. Time constraints limited entomological and botanical sampling to 1-2 hours per site. A total of 42 sites were sampled across Europe from south to north (38.8 to 70.6°N) while minimising east-west deviation to between approximately 21.2 and 26.1°E. In addition to the 42 sites, a series of "Supplemental sites" are recorded at which additional insect collections were made but the full site recording process was not carried out.
Figure 1.

Map of sampling sites with sites 10, 20, 30 and 40 arrowed.

Data collection

At each site latitude, longitude and altitude data were collected using a hand held Garmin Etrex global positioning system, accurate to within 3 m. Basic notes on the immediate environment were taken to provide a habitat profile of the sites. At each site, the willow diversity was determined and voucher specimens were made in order to validate the species present and to capture variation in species that exhibited considerable phenotypic variation. If the willows were flowering, an attempt was made to collect both male and female individuals. Willow abundance relative to abundance of other woody plants was estimated on a four-point scale: 1) abundant - 30% of individuals or more; 2) common - 10-30%; 3) occasional <10%; 4) rare - one or two individuals only were detected. Samples were processed using standard herbarium techniques and specimens are deposited at the Natural History Museum, London (BM) or at the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (K). Field identifications were made by QC and DMP. Confirmation, and critical determination of all vouchers, including hybrids, was done by IB. In addition to herbarium samples, samples of leaf tissue were dried using silica gel to permit future DNA-based studies and retained at NHM.

Climate data

As background information, climate data for three contrasting individual sites is given from publically available data sources (Table 2). These use a dataset of mean historical monthly temperature (°Celsius) and rainfall (mm), computed globally for the period 1990-2009 by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of University of East Anglia (UEA) and available through the World Bank Climate Portal (World Bank Group 2015).
Table 2.

Summary climate variables taken from publically available resources (see Methods) for three contrasting sites on the transect: 1 and 42, the most southerly and most northery sites on map (Fig. 1) together with a middle site, 20, indicated by an arrow on map. Mean monthly temperature (°C) and mean monthly precipitation (mm) are given here. This table is provided as background information on the climatic gradient represented by the megatransect.

SITE 1 (nr. Thermopylae: 38.80, 22.46) SITE 20 (Warka: 51.78, 21.20) SITE 42 (Hammerfest: 70.65, 23.67)
Temperature,°C
Jan5.31-0.53-12.51
Feb7.011.02-12.58
Mar9.93.58-10.92
Apr12.418.39-6.08
May17.814.150.21
Jun22.6516.256.96
Jul24.9919.410.14
Aug24.7618.888.73
Sep20.5313.023.99
Oct16.328.65-3.07
Nov10.762.82-9.08
Dec5.28-3.33-11.62
Precipitation, mm
Jan49.0625.2879.46
Feb28.529.776.35
Mar43.4529.4873.6
Apr52.7834.1354.42
May44.5340.1433.99
Jun15.5665.8842.68
Jul24.7679.6553.09
Aug15.4155.4255.79
Sep34.7853.6651.47
Oct42.3842.6282.58
Nov66.3442.0375.12
Dec91.1127.1787.93

Results

Sites

Table 1 shows the 42 sites recorded in this study as well as details of further "supplemental sites" where insect collections were made but without the level of sampling accorded to the main sites. The geographical distribution of sites is shown in Fig. 1. The supplemental sites will not be discussed here but their basic details are given, as subsequent papers on the insects sampled along the transect may refer to them. The latitudinal variation provides an enormous variation in climate. Table 2 shows summary climatic statistics for three sites: the most southerly, the most northerly and a central site (Poland).
Table 1.

Latitude, longitude and general details of collecting sites, transect across Europe, April-June 2015.

SITE Lat °NLong °E Alt (m asl) date country river/site habitat
1 38.80007 22.462900 3721-iv-2015GreeceRiver (R.) Asopos, west of ThermopylaeBank of fast-flowing rocky river partly shaded by Platanus and with Arundo and Tamarix along the stream bank
2 38.902000 22.310150 3321-iv-2015GreeceR. Sperchios, near Leianokladi, east of LamiaBank of wide and rocky river bed in wide floodplain with Tamarix and Rubus etc.
3 39.306694 22.528323 17722-iv-2015GreeceR. Enipeas east of FarsalaBy irrigation pumping station, bank of river flowing through agricultural area (fields of wheat). With Cercis, Populus, Rubus etc.
4 40.032685 22.175437 53422-iv-2015GreeceStream near Kokkinogeia, ThraceDamp drainage in foothills of the Olympus range with rapidly flowing stream meandering through. Rough grassy terrain with poplar and willow trees.
5 41.113317 23.273893 3123-iv-2015GreeceAt R. Struma, near LithotoposIn mud and shallow water at the edge of a broad and muddy irrigation canal through agricultural land with willows, poplar and Rubus etc.
6 41.412468 23.318609 9023-iv-2015BulgariaR. Struma, near TopolnitsaBank of river in narrow sandy grazed floodplain between the river and hills.
7 42.165622 22.998141 39224-iv-2015BulgariaR. Struma, north of BoboshevoSandy riverbank with poplar, ash, willow and elm between rocky side of gorge and sandy flat with small church/shrine.
8 42.923989 23.810563 33924-iv-2015BulgariaR. Kalnitza, near BotevgradSandy banks of small polluted river in construction area with Rubus, Urtica, Prunus spinosa etc.
9 43.739343 23.966755 3524-iv-2015BulgariaR. Danube, at OryahovoRiver bank by light industrial area at ferry port on the Danube with poplars, tree willows, Phragmites etc.
10 44.260343 23.786781 8125-iv-2015RomaniaR. Jiu, at Podari, near CraiovaClayey/sandy bank of river with white mulberry, poplar etc
11 44.961981 23.190337 17225-iv-2015RomaniaR. Jiu, north of RovinariAlong ditches in middle of ploughed fields with poplars and Phragmites etc.
12 45.510676 22.737225 55626-iv-2015RomaniaMeadow near Paucinesti, Carpathian regionAlong ditches and in fields in grazed sedgy meadows in agricultural valley. Many plum trees in blossom.
13 46.518504 21.512839 10226-iv-2015RomaniaR. Crişul Alb, at Chișineu-CrișEmbanked river through town, grassy slope with thick willow patches.
14 46.700744 21.312680 9427-iv-2015HungaryR. Fekete-Körös, near GyulaBank of 20m wide river, grassy bank with willows and nettles etc
15 47.665648 21.261768 9127-iv-2015HungaryDrainage ditches near R. Hortobagy, north-east of BalmazújvárosBroad drainage ditch between road and ploughed field with Phragmites etc.
16 48.374291 20.725264 14828-iv-2015HungaryR. Bodva, south of SzendrőBank of small river running through landscape of forest and agricultural fields. With poplars, Euonymus europaeus and Prunus spinosa etc
17 49.463447 21.697255 38528-iv-2015PolandR. Panna, at TylawaBank of small river (7-8 m wide) with stony to muddy bottom and alders, birches and blackthorns etc
18 50.470234 22.238372 15729-iv-2015PolandFields north of Rudnik nad SanemAgricultural land by E77 highway with old and young Salix viminalis plantations. Birch, alder and blackthorn common.
19 50.673994 21.823391 14129-iv-2015PolandR. Łęg, near GorzyceWet meadow near embanked river with Phragmites etc.
20 51.775039 21.197100 10130-iv-2015PolandR. Pilica, at WarkaSandy banks of large river (30m wide), banks managed for angling.
20a 51.775039 21.197100 10111-vi-2015PolandR. Pilica, at WarkaSandy banks of large river (30m wide), banks managed for angling.
21 52.693980 21.852900 9612-vi-2015PolandR. Bug, near BrokRough banks of wide muddy river used for angling with nettle, Rubus, Symphytum etc.
22 53.554830 22.302990 12812-vi-2015PolandMeadow near R. Biebrza at Wasocz, near SzczuczynWet meadow with Typha, Menyanthes, Comarum etc.
23 54.069430 23.117450 13713-vi-2015PolandR. Czarna Hańcza, near Sejny on road from SuwalkiSluggish 12m wide river with waterlilies and lined with Phragmites and Alnus, and adjacent meadow with Cirsium, Dactylorhiza etc.
24 54.925830 23.774200 2813-vi-2015LithuaniaEmbankment of River at KaunasDry sandy ridge overlooking wide muddy river
25 55.795570 24.566780 6213-vi-2015LithuaniaR. Levuo at Karsakiškis near to PanevėžysBanks of river with birch and willow thicket
26 56.711410 24.251620 2314-vi-2015LatviaNear R. Misa, between Iecava and KekanaScrubby meadow beside farm track
27 57.749630 24.402300 714-vi-2015LatviaR. Salaca short distance inland from SalacgrivaRough meadow beside river with Alnus, Acer, Prunus etc
28 58.422570 24.440630 1815-vi-2015EstoniaField near ParnuRough pasture beside road, invaded by willows
29 59.402890 24.935770 4815-vi-2015EstoniaR. Pirita at Lagedi near TallinnBanks of small shallow river with abundant aquatic macrophytes, by suspension footbridge
30 60.272990 24.658430 3316-vi-2015FinlandNear Lake Bodom, Espoo, FinlandAlong ditches near lake, in agricultural landscape of cereal fields and meadows, and aspen/birch groves
31 61.099650 25.628200 8416-vi-2015FinlandDrainage flowing into lake Vesijärvi at Paimela near LahtiBanks of small muddy river 6-7 m wide, in agricultural landscape with abundant aspen and birch
32 62.049620 26.123690 17417-vi-2015FinlandLake near ToivakkaForest and lake margin where road crosses end of lake in birch, aspen, pine and spruce forest
33 63.015890 25.804570 13917-vi-2015FinlandNear ViitasaariAlong ditches beside forest track at margin of Pinus, Betula forest
34 64.050740 25.526640 9117-vi-2015FinlandR. Pyhäjoki, at Joutenniva, south of HaapavesiBanks of fast flowing rocky river through agricultural landscape with aspens, birches, alders and willows along banks
35 64.612870 25.538050 5818-vi-2015FinlandTributary of the R. Siikajoki near MankilaBanks of small river (6m wide) and ditches, in agricultural area, with aspen and birch common
36 65.328350 25.291750 118-vi-2015FinlandR. Iijoki at mouth, near Kestilä, north of OuluBanks of very wide river
37 66.249470 23.89450 5119-vi-2015FinlandSmall river between Kainuunkylä and VäystäjäWet scrub and woodland edge (birch and spruce) with abundant Trollius and other northern herbs
38 67.212530 24.126290 16019-vi-2015FinlandNear VaattojärviBetween two small rivers flowing into lake with wet areas and ditches around birch, pine forest
39 67.911830 23.634110 23319-vi-2015FinlandR. Muonion (Muonionjoki) just south of MuonioBanks of wide (100-200m), rocky, fast-flowing river
40 68.813800 23.266580 37420-vi-2015NorwaySouth of SiebeIn birch scrub on heathy ridge above lakeshore in reindeer management area
41 69.724870 23.405810 28920-vi-2015NorwayShores of Lake TrangdalsvatnRocky slope down to clear, gravel bottomed lake, surrounded by birch and willow scrub
42 70.652340 23.665830 6721-vi-2015NorwayJansvannet Lake, HammerfestWet areas and margins of birch wood around lake
SUPPLEMENTARY SITES
i-A 46.847908 8.631778 45517-iv-2015Switzer-landR. Reuss, near ErstfeldGravel-bottomed river near motorway
i-C 39.235768 20.523075 -319-iv-2015GreeceR. Acheron, at MesopotamoDrained cultivated fields surrounded by drainage ditches in river delta
i-J 45.447181 22.228965 23626-iv-2015RomaniaNear CaransebesWet area near highway interchange [no willows collected]
i-K 52.302400 5.525235 111-v-2015Nether-landsDyke in FlevolandNear abundant drainage dykes by sea on reclaimed land.
ii-A 56.411000 24.167880 3313-vi-2015LithuaniaNear BavskaPlanted S. alba
ii-B 56.715700 24.249580 1214-vi-2015LatviaR. MisaBanks of river
ii-C 59.403880 24.932620 4315-vi-2015EstoniaLagediRough grassland invaded by shrubs near houses
ii-D 65.324430 25.315300 618-vi-2015FinlandKestiläMargins of birch wood by road
ii-E 66.229570 23.785480 8719-vi-2015FinlandNear KainuunkyläWet ditches by road at edge of birch wood
ii-F 67.934880 23.656410 23820-vi-2015FinlandMuonioBy river
ii-G 68.458680 23.425840 34620-vi-2015FinlandNorth of HettaRocky area of birch and pine scrub
ii-H 69.343310 23.601290 31720-vi-2015NorwaySouth of MasiBirch scrub with juniper
ii-I 69.881290 21.731950 722-vi-2015NorwayWest of BadderenRocky scrub by fjord
ii-J 69.512520 20.703190 1322-vi-2015NorwayNear BirtavarreRocky scrub by fjord
As can be seen from Table 1, site elevations varied from 1 m to 556 m above mean sea level (amsl), with a median of 95 m. Because the sampling was predominantly in lowlands, the diversity of mountain or upland willows was not captured in this study, nor was it intended to be. Instead we capture the diversity of large stands of willow found in wet low-lying areas, which from an "insect eye view" or "insect chemosensory perspective" represent the largest areas of willow resource in the landscape, generally associated with landscape features such as rivers, lakes, drainage ditches or poorly drained meadows.

Willows

Table 3 lists the total of 20 willow species that were recorded, together with the 12 hybrids. For each taxon the total number of sites (out of 42) is given. In this transect, the most widespread willow is , which occurs in 20 sites (out of 42). This species is followed by  (with 15 sites), ,  (with 14 sites each) and by ,  (with 13 sites).
Table 3.

 taxa (species and hybrids) on transect.

Taxon Number of sites on transect Species or hybrid Hybrid binomial (if available)
S. alba L.20sp-
S. amplexicaulis Bory & Chaub.4sp-
S. aurita L.6sp-
S. bebbiana Sarg.7sp-
S. caprea L.14sp-
S. cinerea L.9sp-
S. eleagnos Scop.1sp-
S. euxina I.V.Belyaeva4sp-
S. glauca L.5sp-
S. gmelinii Pall.1sp-
S. hastata L.5sp-
S. lanata L.1sp-
S. lapponum L.4sp-
S. myrsinifolia Salisb.13sp-
S. pentandra L.7sp-
S. phylicifolia L.14sp-
S. purpurea L.8sp-
S. silesiaca Willd.1sp-
S. triandra L.15sp-
S. viminalis L.9sp-
S. alba × S. pentandra1hS. ×ehrhartiana G.Mey
S. aurita × S. myrsinifolia1hS. ×coriacea J.Forbes
S. cinerea × S. aurita1hS. ×multinervis Döll
S. cinerea × S. triandra1hS. ×krausei Andersson
S. euxina × S. pentandra1hS. ×meyeriana Rostk. ex Willd.
S. myrtilloides × S. glauca1h-
S. phylicifolia × S. myrsinifolia2hS. ×tetrapla Walk.
S. purpurea × S. viminalis8hS. ×rubra Huds.
S. triandra × S. viminalis3hS. ×mollissima Sm.
S. viminalis × S. cinerea1hS. ×smithiana Willd.
S. alba × S. euxina13hS. ×fragilis L.
S. ×fragilis × S. triandra1hS. ×alopecuroides Tausch
Site diversity (Table 4) was modest with the overall median number of willow taxa (species and hybrids) per stand being four. However, the stands showed a progressive increase in diversity from south to north with the median number of willow taxa per stand in southern Europe (Greece, Bulgaria, Romania) being three; the median number in central Europe (Hungary, Poland) being five; and the median number in northern Europe (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland and Norway) being six.
Table 4.

collections per site, trans-Europe transect, April-June 2015. Frequency in stands is given in brackets as: A=abundant, C=common, O=occasional, R=rare (see Methods under Data Collection).

Site Country No. of taxa Willow species and hybrids
1Greece3S. alba (O), S. eleagnos (O), S. purpurea (C)
2Greece3S. alba (C), S. amplexicaulis (C), S. triandra (O)
3Greece1 S. alba (C)
4Greece3S. alba (C), S. amplexicaulis (C), S. triandra (O)
5Greece2S. alba (C), S. triandra (O)
6Bulgaria4S. alba (C), S. amplexicaulis (C), S. purpurea × S. viminalis (O), S. ×fragilis (C)
7Bulgaria4S. alba (C), S. amplexicaulis (C), S. euxina (O), S. triandra (C)
8Bulgaria2S. alba (O), S. euxina (C)
9Bulgaria1 S. alba (A)
10Romania1 S. alba (A)
11Romania3S. alba (C), S. purpurea × S. viminalis (C), S. triandra × S. viminalis (O)
12Romania3S. cinerea (C), S. silesiaca (C), S. ×fragilis (O)
13Romania4S. alba × S. pentandra (O), S. purpurea (O), S. triandra (O), S. ×fragilis (A)
14Hungary7S. alba (O), S. euxina (O), S. purpurea × S. viminalis (O), S. triandra (C), S. triandra × S. viminalis (C), S. viminalis (O), S. ×fragilis (O)
15Hungary4S. alba (O), S. cinerea (C), S. purpurea × S. viminalis (C), S. ×fragilis (C)
16Hungary5S. alba (C), S. aurita (O), S. purpurea (C), S. triandra (C), S. viminalis (O)
17Poland3S. caprea (R), S. euxina (C), S. purpurea (C)
18Poland5S. aurita (O), S. cinerea (C), S. purpurea × S. viminalis (O), S. triandra (O), S. viminalis (C)
19Poland6S. alba (O), S. cinerea (C), S. purpurea × S. viminalis (C), S. triandra × S. viminalis (C), S. viminalis (C), S. ×fragilis (C)
20Poland6S. alba (R), S. gmelinii (O), S. purpurea (C), S. triandra (C), S. viminalis (O), S. ×fragilis (A)
21Poland7S. alba (O), S. cinerea (R), S. cinerea × triandra (R), S. purpurea (C), S. triandra (A), S. viminalis (C), S. ×fragilis (C)
22Poland2S. bebbiana (A), S. ×fragilis (C)
23Poland3S. bebbiana (A), S. myrsinifolia (R), S. pentandra (O)
24Lithuania7S. alba (R), S. caprea (A), S. purpurea (C), S. triandra (C), S. viminalis (O), S. viminalis × S. cinerea (O), S. ×fragilis (O)
25Lithuania7S. alba (O), S. cinerea (O), S. myrsinifolia (A), S. pentandra (C), S. purpurea (C), S. triandra (O), S. ×fragilis (C)
26Latvia9S. alba (O), S. bebbiana (O), S. caprea (O), S. cinerea (A), S. myrsinifolia (O), S. pentandra (C), S. purpurea × S. viminalis (O), S. triandra (O), S. viminalis (O)
27Latvia5S. bebbiana (O), S. myrsinifolia (A), S. triandra (O), S. viminalis (C), S. ×fragilis (C)
28Estonia6S. caprea (C), S. cinerea x aurita (R), S. myrsinifolia (A), S. phylicifolia (C), S. triandra (O), S. ×fragilis (O)
29Estonia4S. myrsinifolia (A), S. phylicifolia × S. myrsinifolia (R), S. purpurea × S. viminalis (C), S. ×fragilis × S. triandra (R)
30Finland5S. aurita (R), S. caprea (R), S. cinerea (R), S. pentandra (R), S. phylicifolia (A)
31Finland6S. cinerea (O), S. euxina × S. pentandra (O), S. myrsinifolia (A), S. pentandra (O), S. phylicifolia (O), S. phylicifolia × S. myrsinifolia (C)
32Finland6S. aurita (C), S. bebbiana (O), S. caprea (O), S. myrsinifolia (A), S. pentandra (C), S. phylicifolia (C)
33Finland4S. aurita (O), S. caprea (C), S. myrsinifolia (C), S. phylicifolia (A)
34Finland3S. caprea (O), S. pentandra (R), S. phylicifolia (A)
35Finland4S. aurita (R), S. caprea (O), S. aurita × myrsinifolia (R), S. phylicifolia (A)
36Finland2S. myrsinifolia (O), S. phylicifolia (A)
37Finland4S. caprea (O), S. hastata (O), S. myrsinifolia (O), S. phylicifolia (A)
38Finland6S. caprea (R), S. glauca (A), S. hastata (O), S. lapponum (R), S. myrtilloides × S. glauca (R), S. phylicifolia (A)
39Finland6S. bebbiana (R), S. caprea (C), S. glauca (O), S. hastata (O), S. lapponum (A), S. phylicifolia (A)
40Norway2S. glauca (O), S. phylicifolia (A)
41Norway7S. bebbiana (O), S. caprea (C), S. glauca (C), S. hastata (O), S. lapponum (C), S. myrsinifolia (C), S. phylicifolia (C)
42Norway7S. caprea (O), S. glauca (C), S. hastata (C), S. lanata (R), S. lapponum (C), S. myrsinifolia (C), S. phylicifolia (C)
SUPPLEMENTAL SITES
A-iSwitzerland2S. eleagnos, S. purpurea × S. viminalis
C-iGreece1 S. alba
J-iRomania2S. cinerea [not collected], S. ×fragilis [not collected]
K-iNetherlands1 S. caprea
C-iiEstonia7S. bebbiana, S. cinerea, S. euxina × S. pentandra, S. myrsinifolia, S. phylicifolia, S. ×fragilis, S. ×fragilis × S. triandra
D-iiFinland3S. aurita × S. cinerea, S. caprea, S. myrsinifolia × S. phylicifolia
E-iiFinland2S. bebbiana, S. lapponum
H-iiNorway5S. glauca, S. hastata, S. lapponum, S. myrsinifolia, S. phylicifolia
I-iiNorway3S. caprea, S. hastata, S. myrsinifolia
Three stands (in Greece and Bulgaria) had just one willow taxon and in all cases this was . One stand (site 26 in Latvia) had the maximum recorded number of taxa, nine per stand, while six sites (in Hungary, Poland, Lithuania and Norway) had seven taxa. Finally, Table 5 lists the voucher specimens collected.
Table 5.

 collections (collectors: Quentin Cronk and Diana Percy), trans-Europe transect, April-June 2015. Accession number is collector-site-number (e.g. QCDP-A-1; QCDP-19-2). Sex is recorded as m=male, f=female, v=vegetative, b=in bud.

Site No. Country Sex Name Notes
11Greecef S. purpurea To 6m
12Greecem S. eleagnos To 2m
13Greecem S. cf. alba River-side shrubs to 2m
14Greecef S. alba River-side shrubs to 2m
21Greecef S. amplexicaulis Shrub to 5m, opposite leaves
22Greecef S. triandra Pale bracts and stipules
23Greecef S. alba Large tree willow to 20m
31Greecem S. cf. alba Large tree to 20 m with fissured bark, 2 stamens per flower
32Greecef S. cf. alba Female flowers pedicillate, bracts relatively narrow, not very hairy, brown tipped
33Greecem S. cf. alba Small tree to 4m, 1 stamen per flower
34Greecef S. cf. alba Female flowers sessile, bracts relatively wide, very hairy
41aGreecem S. cf. alba Tall tree to 20m with fissured bark
41bGreecef S. cf. alba Tall tree to 20m with fissured bark
42aGreecem S. amplexicaulis Shrub to 4m
42bGreecef S. amplexicaulis Shrub to 4m
43GreecemS. triandra (var.)Shrub to 4m
51aGreecem S. alba Grey-barked tree to 10m
51bGreecef S. alba Grey-barked tree to 10m
52aGreecemS. triandra (var.)Small shrub to 4m
52bGreecef S. triandra Small shrub to 4m
61aBulgariam S. alba Tall grey barked tree to 15m
61bBulgariaf S. alba Tall grey barked tree to 15m
62Bulgariaf S. ×fragilis Small tree to 6m
63BulgariamS. purpurea × S. viminalisSmall shrub with reddish twigs, 2m
64Bulgariaf S. amplexicaulis Small shrub 2m
71aBulgariam S. amplexicaulis
71bBulgariaf S. amplexicaulis
72aBulgariam S. triandra
72bBulgariaf S. triandra
73aBulgariam S. alba
73bBulgariaf S. triandra
74aBulgariam S. euxina
74bBulgariaf S. euxina
81aBulgariam S. euxina
81bBulgariaf S. euxina
82Bulgariam S. alba
91aBulgariam S. alba Tall trees to 30m and possibly planted. Similar trees are very common along the banks of the Danube.
91bBulgariaf S. alba Tall trees to 30m and possibly planted. Similar trees are very common along the banks of the Danube.
101aRomaniam S. alba Large tree to 20m
101bRomaniaf S. alba Large tree to 20m
111Romaniam S. alba
112RomaniafS. purpurea × S. viminalis
113RomaniafS. triandra × S. viminalis
121aRomaniam S. silesiaca Shrub, twigs ridged under bark
121bRomaniaf S. cinerea Tree to 10m, twigs ridged under bark
122RomaniamS. ×fragilis (towards S. euxina?)Glabrous tree to 10m
131aRomaniam S. ×fragilis Small coppiced growth by river
131bRomaniafS. alba × S. pentandraSmall coppiced growth by river
132Romaniaf S. triandra
133Romaniaf S. purpurea
141aHungarymS. triandra × S. viminalisTo 5m
141bHungaryf S. triandra To 5m
142aHungarym S. euxina To 8m
142bHungaryf S. ×fragilis To 8m
143Hungaryf S. viminalis To 6m
144HungaryfS. purpurea × S. viminalisTo 2m
145Hungaryf S. alba To 10m
151aHungarym S. cinerea Shrub to 4m with striae
151bHungaryf S. cinerea Shrub to 4m with striae
152HungarymS. purpurea × S. viminalis
153Hungaryf S. ×fragilis
154aHungarym S. alba Small tree
154bHungaryf S. alba Large tree, branches weeping
161Hungarym S. alba
162Hungarym S. triandra
163Hungaryf S. purpurea
164Hungaryv S. viminalis
165Hungaryf S. aurita
166Hungarym S. alba
171aPolandm S. euxina
171bPolandf S. euxina
172Polandf S. purpurea
173Polandf S. caprea
181Polandf S. viminalis Young coppice plantation
182aPolandm S. aurita Shrub to 4m weakly striate
182bPolandf S. cinerea Shrub to 4m
183PolandfS. purpurea × S. viminalis
185Polandf S. triandra
186PolandfS. purpurea × S. viminalis
191Polandm S. ×fragilis Abundant at this site
192PolandfS. purpurea × S. viminalis
193Polandf S. viminalis
194PolandfS. triandra × S. viminalis
195Polandm S. alba Occasional at this site
196Polandf S. cinerea
201Polandm S. ×fragilis
202Polandf S. purpurea
203aPolandm S. triandra
203bPolandf S. triandra
204Polandf S. viminalis
205Polandf S. gmelinii
20a1aPolandf S. triandra small tree/shrub to 4m
20a1bPolandf S. triandra small tree/shrub to 4m
20a2Polandf S. ×fragilis to 40m
20a3Polandf S. alba to 30m
20a4Polandf S. ×fragilis
20a5Polandv S. gmelinii large open sprawling shrubs to 5m
20a6Polandv S. viminalis shrub to 5m
20a7Polandv S. purpurea shrub to 4m
20a8Polandv S. triandra
20a9Polandv S. ×fragilis very glossy green upper sides to leaves
211aPolandm S. triandra small trees or multi-stemmed shrubs to 10m high ×20m across
211bPolandf S. triandra
212Polandf S. ×fragilis small bush to large tree to 20m
213Polandv S. ×fragilis
214Polandf S. purpurea shrub to 4m
215Polandf S. cinerea
215aPolandfS. cinerea × S. triandrashrub to 3m
215bPolandv S. purpurea
216Polandf S. viminalis bush to 6m
217Polandf S. alba tree to 30m
218Polandf S. ×fragilis
219Polandf S. triandra
2110Polandv S. purpurea
221Polandf S. ×fragilis 15m medium tree
222Polandv S. bebbiana low bushes 2-3m with abundant cercopid spittle bugs and willow feeding scaraboid beetle
223Polandv S. ×fragilis shrub to 3m
224Polandv S. ×fragilis sapling 1.5m
225Polandv S. bebbiana
231Polandv S. bebbiana blue/grey-green foliage, 2-5m high
232Polandf S. pentandra trees all multistemmed (c. 4), to 15m, rugged bark, foliage with somewhat weeping habit
233Polandv S. myrsinifolia a few low bushes in the meadow with yellow-green foliage and some red pigmentation on stems, 1-1.5m
234Polandv S. bebbiana
235Polandv S. bebbiana
241Lithuaniav S. caprea large shrub to 10m, planted?
242Lithuaniav S. purpurea bushes to 2m
243LithuaniavS. viminalis × S. cinereasmall sapling, no striae
244Lithuaniaf S. ×fragilis medium tree to 20m
245Lithuaniav S. viminalis
246Lithuaniav S. purpurea
247Lithuaniam S. triandra
248Lithuaniaf S. triandra
249Lithuaniaf S. ×fragilis
2412Lithuaniaf S. alba
251Lithuaniav S. purpurea
252Lithuaniaf S. alba
253aLithuaniam S. pentandra
253bLithuaniaf S. pentandra
254Lithuaniaf S. triandra
255Lithuaniav S. myrsinifolia
256Lithuaniav S. myrsinifolia
257Lithuaniav S. myrsinifolia
258Lithuaniav S. myrsinifolia
259Lithuaniaf S. cinerea
2510Lithuaniav S. triandra
2511Lithuaniav S. ×fragilis
261Latviav S. cinerea 5m h ×6m w
262Latviam S. triandra
263Latviam S. pentandra small trees to 8m
264Latviav S. bebbiana
265Latviav S. purpurea × viminalis
266Latviav S. bebbiana
267Latviav S. viminalis
268Latviav S. myrsinifolia
269Latviaf S. myrsinifolia
2610Latviav S. caprea
2611Latviav S. alba
2612LatviavS. purpurea × S. viminalis
2613Latviaf S. triandra
2614Latviaf S. triandra
271Latviaf S. myrsinifolia subglabrous shrubs to 5m
272Latviav S. bebbiana small bush with striae
273Latviav S. viminalis
274Latviaf S. triandra
275Latviav S. ×fragilis
281aEstoniam S. triandra wide bush, 3m h ×4m w
281bEstoniaf S. triandra
282Estoniav S. ×fragilis young plants to 4m
283Estoniav S. ×fragilis
284EstoniafS. cinerea × S. auritabush 3 ×4m, with striae
285Estoniav S. caprea vigorous bush to 4m, no striae
286Estoniaf S. myrsinifolia bush to 2m
287Estoniaf S. myrsinifolia
288Estoniav S. phylicifolia
289Estoniav S. myrsinifolia
291EstoniavS. purpurea × S. viminalis
292EstoniavS. ×fragilis × S. triandra
293Estoniaf S. myrsinifolia
294Estoniav S. myrsinifolia
295EstoniavS. phylicifolia × S. myrsinifolia
296Estoniaf S. myrsinifolia
301aFinlandb S. phylicifolia shrub to 4m
301bFinlandf S. phylicifolia
302Finlandf S. pentandra
303Finlandv S. aurita shrub to 4m, weakly striate
304Finlandv S. caprea tree straight-trunked to 15m
305aFinlandb S. phylicifolia
305bFinlandf S. phylicifolia
306Finlandv S. cinerea large shrub, no striae
307aFinlandb S. phylicifolia
307bFinlandv S. phylicifolia
311Finlandf S. myrsinifolia small shrub to 2m
312FinlandvS. phylicifolia × S. myrsinifolia
313Finlandf S. myrsinifolia
314Finlandv S. phylicifolia
315FinlandvS. euxina × S. pentandravery small plants 1-2m
316Finlandv S. myrsinifolia
317Finlandf S. cinerea
318Finlandf S. myrsinifolia small plants 1-2m
319Finlandf S. myrsinifolia
3110Finlandf S. myrsinifolia
3111Finlandm S. pentandra
321Finlandf S. pentandra to 4m
322Finlandv S. aurita to 2m
323Finlandf S. myrsinifolia to 2m
324Finlandf S. phylicifolia to 2m
325Finlandf S. myrsinifolia to 4m
326Finlandf S. phylicifolia to 3m
327Finlandf S. myrsinifolia
328Finlandf S. myrsinifolia
329Finlandv S. bebbiana
3210Finlandv S. caprea
331Finlandv S. caprea small shrubs to 3m
332Finlandf S. aurita to 2m
333Finlandf S. myrsinifolia to 4m
334Finlandf S. phylicifolia to 3m
341Finlandf S. phylicifolia to 3m
342Finlandv S. caprea to 3m
343Finlandm S. pentandra c. 4m
344Finlandf S. phylicifolia
345Finlandf S. phylicifolia
351Finlandv S. caprea small tree to 4m
352FinlandvS. aurita × S. myrsinifoliashrub to 1.5m
353Finlandf S. aurita old tree, 8m high
354Finlandf S. phylicifolia bushes to 6m
355Finlandf S. phylicifolia
356Finlandf S. phylicifolia
357Finlandf S. phylicifolia
361Finlandf S. phylicifolia to 4m
362Finlandf S. myrsinifolia to 6m
363Finlandf S. phylicifolia
371Finlandf S. phylicifolia shrub 1-3m
372Finlandm S. hastata 5m high spindly tree
373Finlandv S. caprea 3-4m high
374aFinlandm S. hastata in wet heathy scrub, less than 75cm
374bFinlandf S. hastata
375Finlandf S. myrsinifolia
381Finlandf S. phylicifolia to 3m
382Finlandf S. glauca to 1.5m
383Finlandf S. glauca
384Finlandf S. hastata 1-1.5m
385Finlandm S. phylicifolia
386Finlandv S. caprea
387Finlandf S. hastata
388FinlandfS. myrtilloides × S. glauca
389Finlandv S. caprea
3810Finlandf S. lapponum
391Finlandf S. phylicifolia bushes to 2m
392Finlandf S. hastata shrub to 1.5m
393Finlandf S. hastata
394Finlandf S. phylicifolia
395Finlandf S. bebbiana
396Finlandf S. hastata
397Finlandm S. phylicifolia
398Finlandm S. hastata
399Finlandm S. hastata
3910Finlandv S. caprea
3911Finlandv S. caprea
3912Finlandf S. glauca
3913aFinlandm S. glauca
3913bFinlandf S. glauca
3914Finlandf S. lapponum
3915Finlandf S. lapponum
401aNorwaym S. phylicifolia
401bNorwayf S. phylicifolia
402Norwayb S. glauca
404Norwaym/f S. phylicifolia catkins bisexual
405Norwayf S. phylicifolia
406Norwayf S. phylicifolia
411Norwayf S. lapponum grey bush willow 1-1.5m
412Norwayb S. glauca
413Norwayf S. glauca
414Norwayf S. phylicifolia green bush willow 1-2m
415Norwayf S. phylicifolia
416Norwayv S. hastata dwarf willow
417Norwayv S. glauca
418Norwayf S. myrsinifolia
419Norwayf S. myrsinifolia 5m high with slender dark grey stems
4110Norwaym S. myrsinifolia
4111Norwayf S. bebbiana
4112Norwayv S. caprea 5m high with slender pale grey stems
421aNorwayv S. lapponum
421bNorwayf S. lapponum shrub 1-1.5m
422Norwaym S. glauca shrub c. 1m
423aNorwaym S. glauca dwarf shrub
423bNorwayf S. lanata dwarf shrub
424Norwayv S. caprea to 5m
425Norwayf S. lanata shrub less than 75cm
426aNorwaym S. myrsinifolia shrub to 4m
426bNorwayf S. phylicifolia
427Norwayf S. myrsinifolia shrub 5m
429aNorwaym S. myrsinifolia
429bNorwayf S. myrsinifolia
4210Norwayf S. hastata
4211Norwayf S. hastata
4213Norwayf S. lapponum
4214Norwayf S. glauca
4215Norwayf S. glauca
A-i1Switzerlandf S. eleagnos
A-i2Switzerlandm S. eleagnos
A-i3SwitzerlandfS. purpurea × S. viminalis
A-14SwitzerlandmS. purpurea × S. viminalis
C-i1Greecem S. alba
J-i1Romania-S. cinerea [Not collected]
J-i2Romania-S. fragilis [Not collected]
K-i1Hollandf S. caprea
C-ii1EstoniafS. euxina × S. pentandra
C-ii2Estoniav S. ×fragilis
C-ii3EstoniavS. ×fragilis × S. triandra
C-ii4Estoniab S. phylicifolia
C-ii5Estoniav S. myrsinifolia
C-ii6Estoniaf S. cinerea
C-ii7Estoniaf S. cinerea
C-ii8Estoniav S. bebbiana
C-ii9Estoniaf S. bebbiana
C-ii10Estoniaf S. phylicifolia
C-ii11Estoniaf S. myrsinifolia
C-ii12Estoniaf S. myrsinifolia
D1FinlandfS. aurita × S. cinerea
D2Finlandv S. caprea
D3FinlandfS. myrsinifolia × S. phylicifolia
E1aFinlandm S. lapponum
E1bFinlandf S. lapponum
E2aFinlandm S. bebbiana
E2bFinlandf S. bebbiana
H1Norwaym S. hastata
H2Norwaym S. hastata
H3Norwaym S. hastata
H4Norwayf S. phylicifolia
H5Norwayf S. phylicifolia
H6Norwayf S. myrsinifolia
H7Norwayf S. hastata
H8Norwayf S. phylicifolia
H9Norwaym S. glauca
H10Norwayf S. phylicifolia
H11Norwayf S. hastata
H12Norwayf S. glauca
H13Norwayf S. glauca
H14Norwayf S. lapponum
H15Norwayf S. glauca
H16Norwayf S. phylicifolia
I1aNorwaym S. myrsinifolia
I1bNorwayf S. caprea
I1cNorwayv S. caprea
I2aNorwayf S. myrsinifolia
I2bNorwayf S. myrsinifolia
I2cNorwayf S. myrsinifolia
I2dNorwayf S. myrsinifolia
I2eNorwayf S. myrsinifolia
I3aNorwayfS. hastat a
I3bNorwayf S. hastata
I3cNorwayf S. hastata
I3dNorwayf S. hastata
I3eNorwayf S. hastata

Discussion

These samples provide a "snapshot" of willow diversity along a latitudinal gradient and an indication of the geographically changing taxonomic diversity that is presented to willow-feeding herbivores across Europe. What is particularly noticeable is the role in taxic diversity of hybrids. One third (10 out of 30) of the total taxa recorded were hybrids. This highlights the importance of recording hybrids, which are often inadequately reported in surveys. hybrids are notable for their frequency in nature but comparative rarity in the literature on willows. Also worthy of comment is the general increase in willow diversity from south to north (Table 4). This is the opposite of a common biogeographical pattern that species diversity is higher in warmer regions nearer the tropics, and lower nearer the poles. The genus has undergone a major radiation in boreal regions which may go some way towards explaining this inversion of the norm. Finally, it should be noted that these willows formed the background for a major sampling of insects and it is anticipated that further papers forming part of this study will examine the insect fauna collected.
  6 in total

1.  The "hybrid bridge" hypothesis: host shifting via plant hybrid swarms.

Authors:  K D Floate; T G Whitham
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 3.926

2.  Small scale endemism in Brazil's Atlantic Forest: 14 new species of Mesabolivar (Araneae, Pholcidae), each known from a single locality.

Authors:  Bernhard A Huber
Journal:  Zootaxa       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 1.091

3.  To each its own: differential response of specialist and generalist herbivores to plant defence in willows.

Authors:  Martin Volf; Jan Hrcek; Riitta Julkunen-Tiitto; Vojtech Novotny
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 5.091

4.  Understanding the spectacular failure of DNA barcoding in willows (Salix): does this result from a trans-specific selective sweep?

Authors:  Diana M Percy; George W Argus; Quentin C Cronk; Aron J Fazekas; Prasad R Kesanakurti; Kevin S Burgess; Brian C Husband; Steven G Newmaster; Spencer C H Barrett; Sean W Graham
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 6.185

5.  A comparative analysis of genetic differentiation across six shared willow host species in leaf- and bud-galling sawflies.

Authors:  Sanna A Leppänen; Tobias Malm; Kaisa Värri; Tommi Nyman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Reciprocal diversification in a complex plant-herbivore-parasitoid food web.

Authors:  Tommi Nyman; Folmer Bokma; Jens-Peter Kopelke
Journal:  BMC Biol       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 7.431

  6 in total
  8 in total

1.  A Seven-Year Study of Phenolic Concentrations of the Dioecious Salix myrsinifolia.

Authors:  Katri Nissinen; Virpi Virjamo; Lauri Mehtätalo; Anu Lavola; Anu Valtonen; Line Nybakken; Riitta Julkunen-Tiitto
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 2.626

2.  Salix transect of Europe: structured genetic variation and isolation-by-distance in the nettle psyllid, Trioza urticae (Psylloidea, Hemiptera), from Greece to Arctic Norway.

Authors:  Rungtip Wonglersak; Quentin Cronk; Diana Percy
Journal:  Biodivers Data J       Date:  2017-01-13

3.  Salix transect of Europe: additional leaf beetle (Chrysomelidae) records and insights from chrysomelid DNA barcoding.

Authors:  Roy Canty; Enrico Ruzzier; Quentin C Cronk; Diana M Percy
Journal:  Biodivers Data J       Date:  2019-11-04

4.  Pollen morphology and variability of Polish native species from genus Salix L.

Authors:  Irmina Maciejewska-Rutkowska; Jan Bocianowski; Dorota Wrońska-Pilarek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Salix transect of Europe: variation in ploidy and genome size in willow-associated common nettle, Urtica dioica L. sens. lat., from Greece to arctic Norway.

Authors:  Quentin Cronk; Oriane Hidalgo; Jaume Pellicer; Diana Percy; Ilia J Leitch
Journal:  Biodivers Data J       Date:  2016-09-27

6.  Salix transect of Europe: patterns in the most abundant chrysomelid beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) herbivores of willow from Greece to Arctic Norway.

Authors:  Roy Canty; Enrico Ruzzier; Quentin Cronk; Diana Percy
Journal:  Biodivers Data J       Date:  2016-09-28

7.  Salix transect of Europe: records of willow-associated weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionoidea) from Greece to Arctic Norway, with insights from DNA barcoding.

Authors:  Roy Canty; Enrico Ruzzier; Quentin C Cronk; Diana M Percy
Journal:  Biodivers Data J       Date:  2020-06-03

8.  RAD sequencing resolved phylogenetic relationships in European shrub willows (Salix L. subg. Chamaetia and subg. Vetrix) and revealed multiple evolution of dwarf shrubs.

Authors:  Natascha Dorothea Wagner; Susanne Gramlich; Elvira Hörandl
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2018-07-22       Impact factor: 2.912

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.