Suchergebnisse

State boundaries limit human contacts in a homogenous context of a landscape and its natural features, including plants. After nine centuries of separation, finally the two territories in Slovenia share the same political history. In this paper we tried to answer the question to which extent the past political borders, geographical and cultural drivers affect today's traditional knowledge on wild plants use of Slovenians, living unified in the same political entity. Data were collected using 60 in-depth semi-structured interviews, from March to August 2019, in two municipalities: Komen at Karst and Izola in Istria concerning food, medicinal, economic use, and local customs. The results indicate a quite large divergence in ethnobotanical and ecological knowledge between the two studied areas. In the Komen area, many people still use wild plants daily for various purposes (Taraxacum officinale, Melissa officinalis, Urtica dioica, Cornus mas, and Sambucus nigra). In contrast, this is limited to fewer people in the Izola area and mainly to seasonal use of specific plants (Asparagus acutifolius, Rosa canina, Salvia officinalis, Foeniculum vulgare and Rubus caesius). Unusual for the Mediterranean is the use of young shoots of Clematis vitalba, in the Izola area prepared as omelettes. We can assume that these differences are partly due to minor differences in climatic conditions and partly due to the influence of different cultures and cuisines. In the first place, the impact of Austro-Hungarian eating habits and cuisine can be seen on the area around Komen. Moreover, temporal "layers of knowledge" across the time scale are additionally mixed by the immigration of people from other parts of Slovenia or abroad, or with the influence of local herbal specialists. At last, we conclude Komen area knowledge is alive and homogeneous, and more connected to their local identity.

Political ideologies, policies and economy affect land use which in turn may affect biodiversity patterns and future conservation targets. However, few studies have investigated biodiversity in landscapes with similar physical properties but governed by different political systems. Here we investigate land use and biodiversity patterns, and number and composition of birds and plants, in the borderland of Austria, Slovenia and Hungary. It is a physically uniform landscape but managed differently during the last 70 years as a consequence of the political "map" of Europe after World War I and II. We used a historical map from 1910 and satellite data to delineate land use within three 10-kilometre transects starting from the point where the three countries meet. There was a clear difference between countries detectable in current biodiversity patterns, which relates to land use history. Mobile species richness was associated with current land use whereas diversity of sessile species was more associated with past land use. Heterogeneous landscapes were positively and forest cover was negatively correlated to bird species richness. Our results provide insights into why landscape history is important to understand present and future biodiversity patterns, which is crucial for designing policies and conservation strategies across the world.

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10 years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now.

A large proportion of European biodiversity today depends on habitat provided by low-intensity farming practices, yet this resource is declining as European agriculture intensifies. Within the European Union, particularly the central and eastern new member states have retained relatively large areas of species-rich farmland, but despite increased investment in nature conservation here in recent years, farmland biodiversity trends appear to be worsening. Although the high biodiversity value of Central and Eastern European farmland has long been reported, the amount of research in the international literature focused on farmland biodiversity in this region remains comparatively tiny, and measures within the EU Common Agricultural Policy are relatively poorly adapted to support it. In this opinion study, we argue that, 10 years after the accession of the first eastern EU new member states, the continued under-representation of the low-intensity farmland in Central and Eastern Europe in the international literature and EU policy is impeding the development of sound, evidence-based conservation interventions. The biodiversity benefits for Europe of existing low-intensity farmland, particularly in the central and eastern states, should be harnessed before they are lost. Instead of waiting for species-rich farmland to further decline, targeted research and monitoring to create locally appropriate conservation strategies for these habitats is needed now. ; peerReviewed