Kiril Vassilev

Dr. Kiril Vassilev

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
31 December 2019 in Global Change Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JKJens Kattge
Jens Kattge
GBGerhard Bönisch
Gerhard Bönisch
SDSandra Díaz
Sandra Díaz
SLSandra Lavorel
Sandra Lavorel
IPIain Colin Prentice
Iain Colin Prentice
CWChristian Wirth
Christian Wirth
Plant traits—the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants—determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait‐based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits—almost complete coverage for ‘plant growth form’. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait–environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects. We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives.

26 July 2020 in Applied Vegetation Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MCMilan Chytrý
Milan Chytrý
LTLubomír Tichý
Lubomír Tichý
SHStephan M. Hennekens
Stephan M. Hennekens
IKIlona Knollová
Ilona Knollová
JJJohn A. M. Janssen
John A. M. Janssen
JSJoop H. J. Schaminée
Joop H. J. Schaminée
Aim: The EUNIS Habitat Classification is a widely used reference framework for European habitat types (habitats), but it lacks formal definitions of individual habitats that would enable their unequivocal identification. Our goal was to develop a tool for assigning vegetation‐plot records to the habitats of the EUNIS system, use it to classify a European vegetation‐plot database, and compile statistically‐derived characteristic species combinations and distribution maps for these habitats.Location: Europe.Methods: We developed the classification expert system EUNIS‐ESy, which contains definitions of individual EUNIS habitats based on their species composition and geographic location. Each habitat was formally defined as a formula in a computer language combining algebraic and set‐theoretic concepts with formal logical operators. We applied this expert system to classify 1,261,373 vegetation plots from the European Vegetation Archive (EVA) and other databases. Then we determined diagnostic, constant and dominant species for each habitat by calculating species‐to‐habitat fidelity and constancy (occurrence frequency) in the classified data set. Finally, we mapped the plot locations for each habitat.Results: Formal definitions were developed for 199 habitats at Level 3 of the EUNIS hierarchy, including 25 coastal, 18 wetland, 55 grassland, 43 shrubland, 46 forest and 12 man‐made habitats. The expert system classified 1,125,121 vegetation plots to these habitat groups and 73,188 to other habitats, while 63,064 plots remained unclassified or were classified to more than one habitat. Data on each habitat were summarized in factsheets containing habitat description, distribution map, corresponding syntaxa and characteristic species combination.Conclusions: EUNIS habitats were characterized for the first time in terms of their species composition and distribution, based on a classification of a European database of vegetation plots using the newly developed electronic expert system EUNIS‐ESy. The data provided and the expert system have considerable potential for future use in European nature conservation planning, monitoring and assessment.

20 August 2015 in Applied Vegetation Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MCMilan Chytrý
Milan Chytrý
SHStephan M. Hennekens
Stephan M. Hennekens
BJBorja Jiménez-Alfaro
Borja Jiménez-Alfaro
IKIlona Knollová
Ilona Knollová
JDJürgen Dengler
Jürgen Dengler
SYSergey Yamalov
Sergey Yamalov
The European Vegetation Archive (EVA) is a centralized database of European vegetation plots developed by the IAVS Working Group European Vegetation Survey. It has been in development since 2012 and first made available for use in research projects in 2014. It stores copies of national and regional vegetation‐ plot databases on a single software platform. Data storage in EVA does not affect on‐going independent development of the contributing databases, which remain the property of the data contributors. EVA uses a prototype of the database management software TURBOVEG 3 developed for joint management of multiple databases that use different species lists. This is facilitated by the SynBioSys Taxon Database, a system of taxon names and concepts used in the individual European databases and their corresponding names on a unified list of European flora. TURBOVEG 3 also includes procedures for handling data requests, selections and provisions according to the approved EVA Data Property and Governance Rules. By 30 June 2015, 61 databases from all European regions have joined EVA, contributing in total 1 027 376 vegetation plots, 82% of them with geographic coordinates, from 57 countries. EVA provides a unique data source for large‐scale analyses of European vegetation diversity both for fundamental research and nature conservation applications. Updated information on EVA is available online at http://euroveg.org/eva-database.

29 January 2022 in Applied Vegetation Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ZPZdenka Preislerová
Zdenka Preislerová
BJBorja Jiménez‐Alfaro
Borja Jiménez‐Alfaro
LMLadislav Mucina
Ladislav Mucina
CBChristian Berg
Christian Berg
GBGianmaria Bonari
Gianmaria Bonari
MCMilan Chytrý
Milan Chytrý
Aim: The first comprehensive checklist of European phytosociological alliances, orders and classes (EuroVegChecklist) was published by Mucina et al. (2016, Applied Vegetation Science, 19 (Suppl. 1), 3–264). However, this checklist did not contain detailed information on the distribution of individual vegetation types. Here we provide the first maps of all alliances in Europe.Location: Europe, Greenland, Canary Islands, Madeira, Azores, Cyprus and the Caucasus countries.Methods: We collected data on the occurrence of phytosociological alliances in European countries and regions from literature and vegetation‐plot databases. We interpreted and complemented these data using the expert knowledge of an international team of vegetation scientists and matched all the previously reported alliance names and concepts with those of the EuroVegChecklist. We then mapped the occurrence of the EuroVegChecklist alliances in 82 territorial units corresponding to countries, large islands, archipelagos and peninsulas. We subdivided the mainland parts of large or biogeographically heterogeneous countries based on the European biogeographical regions. Specialized alliances of coastal habitats were mapped only for the coastal section of each territorial unit.Results: Distribution maps were prepared for 1,105 alliances of vascular‐plant dominated vegetation reported in the EuroVegChecklist. For each territorial unit, three levels of occurrence probability were plotted on the maps: (a) verified occurrence; (b) uncertain occurrence; and (c) absence. The maps of individual alliances were complemented by summary maps of the number of alliances and the alliance–area relationship. Distribution data are also provided in a spreadsheet.Conclusions: The new map series represents the first attempt to characterize the distribution of all vegetation types at the alliance level across Europe. There are still many knowledge gaps, partly due to a lack of data for some regions and partly due to uncertainties in the definition of some alliances. The maps presented here provide a basis for future research aimed at filling these gaps.

31 March 2021 in Global Ecology and Biogeography
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RTRiccardo Testolin
Riccardo Testolin
FAFabio Attorre
Fabio Attorre
PBPeter Borchardt
Peter Borchardt
RBRobert F. Brand
Robert F. Brand
HBHelge Bruelheide
Helge Bruelheide
BJBorja Jiménez‐Alfaro
Borja Jiménez‐Alfaro
Aim: Alpine ecosystems differ in area, macroenvironment and biogeographical history across the Earth, but the relationship between these factors and plant species richness is still unexplored. Here, we assess the global patterns of plant species richness in alpine ecosystems and their association with environmental, geographical and historical factors at regional and community scales.Location: Global.Time period: Data collected between 1923 and 2019.Major taxa studied: Vascular plants.Methods: We used a dataset representative of global alpine vegetation, consisting of 8,928 plots sampled within 26 ecoregions and six biogeographical realms, to estimate regional richness using sample‐based rarefaction and extrapolation. Then, we evaluated latitudinal patterns of regional and community richness with generalized additive models. Using environmental, geographical and historical predictors from global raster layers, we modelled regional and community richness in a mixed‐effect modelling framework.Results: The latitudinal pattern of regional richness peaked around the equator and at mid‐latitudes, in response to current and past alpine area, isolation and the variation in soil pH among regions. At the community level, species richness peaked at mid‐latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, despite a considerable within‐region variation. Community richness was related to macroclimate and historical predictors, with strong effects of other spatially structured factors.Main conclusions: In contrast to the well‐known latitudinal diversity gradient, the alpine plant species richness of some temperate regions in Eurasia was comparable to that of hyperdiverse tropical ecosystems, such as the páramo. The species richness of these putative hotspot regions is explained mainly by the extent of alpine area and their glacial history, whereas community richness depends on local environmental factors. Our results highlight hotspots of species richness at mid‐latitudes, indicating that the diversity of alpine plants is linked to regional idiosyncrasies and to the historical prevalence of alpine ecosystems, rather than current macroclimatic gradients.

1 March 2024 in Journal of Vegetation Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
IKIlona Knollová
Ilona Knollová
MCMilan Chytrý
Milan Chytrý
HBHelge Bruelheide
Helge Bruelheide
SDStefan Dullinger
Stefan Dullinger
UJUte Jandt
Ute Jandt
FEFranz Essl
Franz Essl
Aims: We introduce ReSurveyEurope — a new data source of resurveyed vegetation plots in Europe, compiled by a collaborative network of vegetation scientists. We describe the scope of this initiative, provide an overview of currently available data, governance, data contribution rules, and accessibility. In addition, we outline further steps, including potential research questions.Results: ReSurveyEurope includes resurveyed vegetation plots from all habitats. Version 1.0 of ReSurveyEurope contains 283,135 observations (i.e., individual surveys of each plot) from 79,190 plots sampled in 449 independent resurvey projects. Of these, 62,139 (78%) are permanent plots, that is, marked in situ, or located with GPS, which allow for high spatial accuracy in resurvey. The remaining 17,051 (22%) plots are from studies in which plots from the initial survey could not be exactly relocated. Four data sets, which together account for 28,470 (36%) plots, provide only presence/absence information on plant species, while the remaining 50,720 (64%) plots contain abundance information (e.g., percentage cover or cover–abundance classes such as variants of the Braun‐Blanquet scale). The oldest plots were sampled in 1911 in the Swiss Alps, while most plots were sampled between 1950 and 2020.Conclusions: ReSurveyEurope is a new resource to address a wide range of research questions on fine‐scale changes in European vegetation. The initiative is devoted to an inclusive and transparent governance and data usage approach, based on slightly adapted rules of the well‐established European Vegetation Archive (EVA). ReSurveyEurope data are ready for use, and proposals for analyses of the data set can be submitted at any time to the coordinators. Still, further data contributions are highly welcome.