1. Andreaea rothii F.Weber & D.Mohr subsp. rothiiContributors: J. Csiky, D. Kovács, D. Purger, A. Alegro, V. Segota and J. DemeCroatia: Papuk Mountains, Sokolina, Stražemanka stream at Doljanci vil...

(2017). New national and regional bryophyte records, 52. Journal of Bryology: Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 285-304.

The geographical and ecological features of Transylvania enable the wide ethnobotanical use of pine species. The aim of this study was to survey the current ethnomedicinal and other traditional use of pine species of Hungarian-speaking ethnic groups in Transylvania and to compare them with earlier reports performed in Transylvania and from other countries related to the Carpathian Basin. Information on pine species was obtained using semi-structured interviews with 515 Transylvanian informants from 18 villages in the period 2007–2019. The young shoots of Abies alba Mill., Picea abies (L.) H. Karst., Pinus nigra J. F. Arnold, and Pinus sylvestris L. were applied to treat respiratory diseases, while the resin was used for dental problems. Syrup and decoction were made from the cones of all species, except Abies alba. Picea abies was the most frequently documented with seven preparations from different parts (even needles), and this species was mentioned in the treatment of 21 diseases. The least recorded was Abies alba, which was applied for coughs and decayed teeth. We recorded the use of the cones and needles of Picea abies for dyspnoea, thyroid glands, and kidney disorders, previously unknown in ethnomedicinal literature. Our data on the pine species confirm their current use and significance in Transylvania.

The first version of the map of the Hungarian vegetation-based landscape regions were prepared at the scale of 1: 200,000 (1 km or higher resolution). The primary goal of the map was to provide an exact background for the presentation and evaluation of the data of the MÉTA database. Secondly, we intended to give an up-to-date and detailed vegetation-based division of Hungary with a comprehensive nomenclature of the regions. Regions were primarily defined on the basis of their present zonal vegetation, or their dominant extrazonal or edaphic vegetation. Where this was not possible, abiotic factors that influence the potential vegetation, the flora were taken into consideration, thus, political and economical factors were ignored. All region borders were defined by local expert botanists, mainly based on their field knowledge. The map differs in many features from the currently used, country-wide, flora-or geography-based divisions in many features. We consider our map to be temporary (i.e. a work map), and...